From emeleel at juno.com  Fri Sep 19 01:28:18 2003
From: emeleel at juno.com (Melanie L Ellis)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 20:28:18 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Which house for which wizard?
Message-ID: <20030918.202818.-87006413.2.emeleel@juno.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 58147

On Sun, 18 May 2003 21:31:52 -0000 "darrin_burnett" <bard7696 at aol.com>
writes:
> Arthur and Molly - Most likely Gryffindor, simply because they've 
> produced seven Gryffs.

Molly was definitely in Gryffindor, because when she came to be Harry's
"family" on the day of the third task in GoF, she reminisces about the
talking-to that the Fat Lady gave her when she got back at 4 in the
morning. I get the sense that the whole family has been Gryffs, not just
the kids, so I *think* Arthur was most likely a Gryff, too, although I
don't know why he wouldn't have gotten scolded by the Fat Lady, too.
Unless the injury he got from the caretaker that night (the one he still
has a mark from) was bad enough to send him to the hospital wing.


Melanie Ellis
Alabama Homeschool Message Board
http://pub77.ezboard.com/balabamahomeschoolmessageboard

________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!



From lily_paige_delaney at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 00:24:21 2003
From: lily_paige_delaney at yahoo.com (lily_paige_delaney)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 00:24:21 -0000
Subject: Draco's taunt about Lily's pigsty house 
Message-ID: <biu3jl+qia9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79379

Something I find interesting is that Draco always seems to have very 
good information - no doubt thanks to that scheming father of his.

For example:

In PS/SS he knows who the Weasley's are and that they are poor.
In CoS he knows about the girl who died the last time the Chamber was 
opened.
In PoA he knew what Sirius was in Azkaban for and taunted Harry about 
getting revenge.
In GoF he already knew all about the tri-wizard tournament before it 
was announced.

What I'm getting to here is that in OoP he makes two interesting 
comments.

1. On the train he spooks Harry and Hermoine with his "dogging your 
footsteps" comment which they attribute to his knowledge of Sirius 
being an animagus (which he probably did as we later find out that 
the Death Eaters knew).

2. He makes a very interesting comment which is responsible for the 
fight after the Quidditch match when George and Harry attack him.  
Draco talks about the Weasley's house smelling like a pigsty and says 
to Harry that perhaps he remembers what his own mother's house smelt 
like and so feels at home at the Weasley's.

To me this brings forth a range of questions.  Does Draco know 
anything about Lily? (I bet he does). Was Lily's family as poor as 
the Weasley's? and if so, is this the reason why Petunia has such an 
ultra clean house with all mod cons - is she trying to make up for 
the house she grew up in?

Something to ponder.

LPD









From xpectopatronum at yahoo.com.au  Mon Sep  1 00:53:32 2003
From: xpectopatronum at yahoo.com.au (Cindy)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 00:53:32 -0000
Subject: Let It Be Known
In-Reply-To: <3F4E7870.6010301@btopenworld.com>
Message-ID: <biu5ac+38tv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79387

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Irene Mikhlin 
<irene_mikhlin at b...> wrote:
> 
> 
> > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "severusbook4" 
> > <severusbook4 at y...> wrote:
> > 
> >>ADD IN:
> >>book 7: Harry wakes up at the Dursleys, still 11 years old.
> >>
> >>Severus
> > 
> 
> If she does it, I'll burn my books, all seven of them. I'm serious.
> Anything would be better than that. To have the entire Hogwarts
> population killed in the last battle would be better than that.
> 
> Irene

Cindy replies:

I agree - anything would be better then that! That would be the worst 
ending imaginable, but I don't think that jkr will do it. It isn't 
very original, and she has said in a couple of interviews that the 
last chapter will be a epilogue, describing to us what happens to all 
the survivors after.

-Cindy 




From yswahl at stis.net  Mon Sep  1 02:29:10 2003
From: yswahl at stis.net (samnanya)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 02:29:10 -0000
Subject: What happens to body after dementor kiss ? 
In-Reply-To: <bitl72+g9lr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <biuatm+bgcu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79388


Erin: 
Just want to say that yes, there IS a death penalty, the 
dementor's kiss.  Though what they'll use now that the dementors have 
gone over to Voldy, I don't know...

Geoff:
In a sense, that's not a death penalty because we're told it's 
worse than death, it is existence without a soul.......


Me: 
Sorry if this was asked before but what happens to the bodies of 
those who have received the dementor's kiss ? are they dead? are they 
buried ? are they organ donors ? soylent green ?  couldnt find a cite 
on this in canon ...
Sam




From jdr0918 at hotmail.com  Mon Sep  1 04:34:02 2003
From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 04:34:02 -0000
Subject: Harry's Sexual Preference
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.51.0308311331450.26785@mail1.sas.upenn.edu>
Message-ID: <biui7q+1j7v@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79393

<<<Jen Faulkner wrote:
(1)...that personality, interests, and interactional style ("sissy 
boys" and "tomboy girls") are quite different from sexual 
orientation... 
(2)Besides, it's obviously McGonagall, Tonks, Justin Finch-Fletchley, 
Lupin, Hooch, and Grubbly-Plank who are gay.>>>

The Sergeant Majorette says

(1) I still say you can't have sexual orientation unless and until 
you have sex. Then you have to have different kinds of sex, and then 
you have to decide which you prefer. (I did say it was 
controversial.) That's why I say if you go strictly by canon, nobody 
is gay, but nobody is *straight* either, because nobody actually 
engages in sexual intercourse. A large part of the target demographic 
for these books is at an age where the appropriate response to the 
physical reality of sex is "eewww!" 

However, since this is a grownup forum:  
(2) I think we all agree on Justin F-F, Lupin and Tonks. Draco Malfoy 
and Snape: the thought of either of them actually *doing it* with a 
female squicks me out completely. McGonagall is strictly a spinster 
lady (celibate). Hooch, yeah, maybe, but it's too obvious; and 
Grubbly-Plank --well, why not just hang a sign on her? I think JKR is 
above such a cheap shot. Then there's Ginny. Wild girls like that can 
go either way, or both.

--JDR




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 02:05:43 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 02:05:43 -0000
Subject: Inside Dumbledore's Head (was:re: Prophets without  Honour)
In-Reply-To: <3013CB5B-DBF3-11D7-9030-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <biu9hn+enkj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79394

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
<snip> DD may well have deduced what Voldy planned, even to the extent
> of using the PS//SS as bait in book one. But knowing V's  aims does
> not reveal his means. I think he was a bit miffed by the Portkey!
Cup.
> He could not have foreseen the events in the graveyard and the
> method of Harry's escape. He's in the game of reacting to  events.
> The Order doesn't seem to do much, a bit of recruitment here, a
> spot of guarding there, all to little effect. V didn't get the 
prophesy,
> in the Ministry but DD could not have planned the means of his
> eventual failure.
> 
> What does  V want? We're told  world domination-  a likely story.
> He definitely hasn't read the Evil Overlord List of Rules. He wants
> the prophecy - why? What does he think it says? He can't believe
> it gives him a blueprint for victory; maybe a hint or two but not
> anything critical beyond the fact that there's a little toe-rag to 
be
> eliminated before he can polish his throne and call  for the
> interior decorators. That, he already knows. <snip> 
> A while ago I theorised that DD was using Harry as bait. Let him
> wander off, he's bound to attract Voldy, bring him out into the open
> and - zap! Gotcha! But DD doesn't take his chances. In the MoM,
> not only does V get away, but he rescues his chief hench-witch
> too. Not what one would expect from the most powerful wizard in
> the world.  DD seems remarkably ineffectual except when it  comes
> to words, those he's good at. It's no good saying that he's giving
> Harry on-the-job training, four times Harry has met Voldy!Riddle
> and he should have been toast every  time.  Very like saying
> "Just play with this nitroglycerine and one day you'll be an 
expert."
> But DD carries on in his own sweet way, "Oh, and now I'll tell you
> what it's all about." The prophecy.
> No it isn't. The prophecy is a minor distraction. Even if it is
> complete, it lets Harry know that V is after him, something I'm sure
> he'd guessed already. He's not  concerned with beating Voldy,
> he's much more interested in surviving, and he's having enough
> trouble doing that already, thank you very much. It tells  him that
> there'll be a showdown, High Noon in Hogsmeade. You mean the
> previous four times don't count? No, DD is using the prophecy to
> justify his own agenda. Wish I knew what it is.
> 
Laura:

I wonder if it's not so much that DD is ineffectual as that we're 
seeing him through Harry's eyes.  And as kids grow up, they perceive 
the shortcomings of adults in a painfully clear way.  So we don't 
know what DD has done wrong earlier (or what he may have done right 
in OoP that Harry is unaware of).  

I was also struck by your observation that DD doesn't do much in the 
way of powerful magic in the 5 books we have so far.  He controls his 
domain with his words and his force of personality-you're quite right 
about that.  But that could be for 2 reasons.  One, DD has already 
proven many times over that he has enormous magical powers-you don't 
get to be on a Chocolate Frog card for your witty repartee.  And I 
wonder if DD feels his role at this point in his life is to mentor, 
to facilitate, to help others realize their own potential.  So he's 
willing to leave the fireworks to others-literal or otherwise.  *bows 
to Fred and George*  You know, Daddy can't always solve your problems 
for you.  Eventually you have to do it yourself-or not.

You seem to be propounding a pretty cold view of DD.  Your 
implication is that to further his agenda, whatever it is, he's 
willing to risk Harry's life and the lives of other people he acts 
like he cares about (okay, you know who I mean-I won't go on).  Do 
you then think that he was lying at the end of OoP when he toldto 
Harry why he hadn't explained years earlier about the prophecy?  I'm 
none too happy with him at the moment either (where is the SAD DENIAL 
docking next?) but I hope he isn't as bad as that.  Sirius's death 
would be nothing for Harry next to a betrayal by DD of that magnitude.




From sues0101 at hotmail.com  Mon Sep  1 00:40:32 2003
From: sues0101 at hotmail.com (Sue Porter)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 00:40:32 +0000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's Sexual Preference
Message-ID: <BAY2-F23lCPx33E1ioW00004860@hotmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79395




>Jen wrote:
>
>Being gay isn't a curse or an affliction, so I wouldn't see JKR as
>particularly 'doing anything' to "poor Harry" if she were to make the
>character gay or bi.  Gayness isn't a "problem" one has to solve; the
>bigotry you refer to is the problem.
>
Sue:

Well, that was the point I was trying to make, albeit not put very well. I 
am not gay myself, but neither do I see it as an affliction or problem. I 
don't think you can help who you fall in love with, and I don't think you 
chose to prefer one sex over another. As you rightly say, the problem would 
be in the bigotry.

The depiction of Lockhart as a flamboyantly dressed character makes many of 
us, myself included, assume he is gay, and the reaction of the men is almost 
universal - they think he's a poncy git (don't have the book here to find a 
quote sorry). The women seem to be the ones who like him.
He is made ineffectual, ridulous and sidelined by Harry almost from the 
start just from his appearance. Judged and found wanting. Of course the fact 
that he IS ineffectual, and ridulous ability wise, we don't find out until 
later. Is he a stereotype? Maybe. Probably. Another generalisation - women 
love gay men, they are always the best looking! A Robbie Willams song - 'all 
the handsome men are gay'.

So, maybe not overt bigotry, not yet, but I wonder if Lockhart had his 
memory back and 'came out' so to speak what the reaction would be?

Sue

_________________________________________________________________
ninemsn Extra Storage is now available. Get five times more storage - 10MB 
in your Hotmail account. Click here  http://join.msn.com/




From yellows at aol.com  Mon Sep  1 05:07:34 2003
From: yellows at aol.com (yellows at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 01:07:34 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: SILK GOWNS
Message-ID: <18b.1ee85555.2c842e16@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79396

In a message dated 8/31/2003 9:26:10 PM Eastern Standard Time, Erin writes:

>  It occurs to me in reading this that perhaps Dumbledore's being the 
> only other adult interested in candy is significant.  Maybe there is 
> a clue to a connection here.  Just what kind of connection it would 
> be I'm not certain... but I'm sure everyone who's in favor of the 
> ColdheartedSpymaster!Dumbledore (MAGIC DISHWASHER) theory will want 
> to take note.

Has anyone ever read the book Sophie's World (not to be confused with 
Sophie's Choice)? It's a great piece of fiction/nonfiction about the history of 
philosophy, basically, but I bring it up right now because this post reminded me of 
one of the key messages of the book: Children are the best philosophers. They 
are wisest because, to them, anything is still possible. When we age, we 
become jaded and we learn that certain things (like your dinner cooking itself or 
your dog flying around the room) just aren't possible. But children are still 
capable of really, truly thinking anything is possible. I sort of view DD this 
way, partially because of his love of children and candy, etc. I wonder if 
the fact that DD and the Longbottoms *are* the only adults to have been put 
together with sweets shows that these people are especially wise and have 
extraordinary knowledge. It would certainly go along with the theory that the 
Longbottoms are being kept insane because they are a real threat to the DEs.

Brief Chronicles


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 05:40:02 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 05:40:02 -0000
Subject: Puzzles: Wormtail's finger and Shrieking Shack tunnel
In-Reply-To: <biu09v+k8s1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bium3i+d6j2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79399

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" <foxmoth at q...> wrote:
...in response to Bboy-

> 
> 
> ... The way I imagine it, before leaving the Shack became routine, 
> the three of them  entered the Tunnel under the I-cloak  and slipped
> down the  tunnel to join Lupin while he was still in human form. 
> They then transformed when he did. 
> 
> ..., there wouldn't be any reason for James  to go down the tunnel
> at all. Scabbers and Padfoot could go in, ... Moony could follow 
> them back outside where Prongs would be waiting. 
> 
> Pippin

bboy_mn:
Well, as I stated in my post, my philosophy in solving seeming
inconsistencies is to assume that the event is true, then search for a
likely solution. One must be careful not to be diverted by what is
possible, and concentrate on what is most likely.

I would say, what you suggest is VERY LIKELY. Good thinking.

bboy_mn






From sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 03:26:24 2003
From: sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com (sevenhundredandthirteen)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 03:26:24 -0000
Subject: Trelawney picking up the prophecy (was: Re: Dumbledore's integrity)
In-Reply-To: <biqj78+uri7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <biue90+6vou@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79400


Kirstini wrote:

> (who, incidentally, would like to point out that Dumbledore 
keeping 
> Trelawny at Hogwarts after her sacking does not in itself prove 
that 
> she keeps knowledge of her real prophecies in her 
subconscious. 
> Trelawny is one of the other people able to pick the prophecy 
up from 
> the Dpt of Mysteries.


Actually, only the people who the prophecies are about can pick 
them up. There was never any mention that the people who 
made the prophecies can pick them up. It was either 'The Dark 
Lord' or 'Harry Potter (?).' 

I know I'm being picky, but this is a pretty significant point. 

Another point- Sybill's second prophecy (end of PoA) is therefore 
acessable only to Voldemort and Wormtail, so they should 
therefore have no issues retrieving it and having a great sense of 
confidence instilled inside themselves. (The Dark Lord will rise 
more terrible than before). Talk about a self-esteem boost! That 
would make poor little Voldy who has been once again thwarted 
by that Potter boy feel much happier.

~<(Laurasia)>~




From uncmark at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 05:21:29 2003
From: uncmark at yahoo.com (Mark D.)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 05:21:29 -0000
Subject: Sirius' wand
In-Reply-To: <birqlp+abs6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <biul0p+sgss@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79403

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tuck668" <tuck668 at y...> wrote:
> While rereading OOP, I had this sudden revelation about Sirius. 
> When a wizard goes to Azkaban, especially for a life sentence, I 
> assumed that their wand was broken, or at least confiscated in 
> some way. Yet, in OOP, Sirius has a wand and it is never mentioned 
> how he got it.
> 
As we saw increasingly in the Potter series, many wizards use 
borrowed wands (ie Ron's first hand-me-down wand, Neville using his 
dad's wand). Despite Olivander's speech in SSt, it seems that not 
all wizards are personally matched to their wands. (Draco mentioned 
in SSt that his mother was picking out his wand)

I think the average wizard's first wand is not top of the line like 
Olivander's. I'm guessing that along with second-hand wand stores, 
Diagon Alley probably has budget line stores.(If Olivanders is a 
Rolls Royce, they probably have Chevys & Fords all the way down to 
Hyindais and Kias) You remember that Harry was brought to 
Olivander's by Hagrid who had (a) a lot of money & (b) the desire to 
get Harry the 'best wand'.

Going back to Sirius' situation IMHO it's probable that among all 
the magical artifacts there was at least one wand.




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Mon Sep  1 06:42:48 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 06:42:48 -0000
Subject: Why Harry Potter "cannot" be set in 1991-?
In-Reply-To: <bitnfe+smra@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <biupp8+p6ue@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79404

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" 
<catlady at w...> wrote:

<previous notes snipped>

> 
> Dudley chucked his Playstation out the window, thus was no longer 
> able to play Mega-Mutilation III, in GOBLET OF FIRE, set in 1994, 
> when (the list has agreed) Playstations were not yet available in 
UK 
> or US, but had been test-marketted in Japan.
> 
> I am not aware of any reference to a Playstation in HARRY POTTER 
AND 
> THE PHILOSOPHER'S STONE. Please give me a quote with enough context 
> that I can find where in the book to look it up and see if 
Scholastic 
> changed it.

Geoff:
The only reference I can see in PS (p.21 Bloomsbury UK edition) 
is "..watched Dudley unwrap the racing bike, a cine-camera, a remote-
control aeroplane, sixteen new computer games and a video 
recorder...."




From PhoenixCharms at Aol.com  Mon Sep  1 01:42:15 2003
From: PhoenixCharms at Aol.com (PhoenixCharms at Aol.com)
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2003 21:42:15 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Drooble's, Neville's Gran, St. Mungo's
Message-ID: <103.3529f735.2c83fdf7@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79405

In a message dated 8/31/2003 8:09:55 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
hermionegallo at yahoo.com writes:
>>definitely think Neville's being affected too, but I also think 
Healer Strout was affected.  I don't think it's poison on the 
wrappers or gum because of that.  Also someone (sorry, don't recall 
who) pointed out that there are no bluebell colored bubbles floating 
around ward 49, and since drooble's makes those bubbles and they last 
for days, we can assume that the gum may not be being chewed.
>>

I've been following this thread and, that makes a lot of sense, doesn't it? 
And then, I was reading OOTP, and, in Chapter 18, Luna is talking about what 
her father says about Fudge and she says "...And of course, he uses the 
Department of Mysteries to develop terrible poisons,which he feeds secretly to anybody who disagrees with him..."


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 07:04:59 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 07:04:59 -0000
Subject: Side note: St.Mungos
In-Reply-To: <bitmgd+5eji@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <biur2r+slib@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79406

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mochajava13" <mochajava13 at y...>
wrote:
> Geoff:
> > St.Mungo was leader of a 6th century ecclesiatical community on
> > the site of the present day Glasgow and is considered to be the 
> > city's founder.
> 
> 
> But still, why would wizards name a hospital after a religious
> figure? The ones that do that here in the US are usually connected 
> to a church of some sort.  

bboy_mn:
If you look at my post on St Mungo's you will see several references
to organizations named 'St. Mungo's'; many churches, charity
organizations,  museums, etc...
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/79363

Typing 'St Mungo' into a search engine (Google) brings up 38,500 matches. 

So, I think this is just another case of JKR providing things that are
familiar to us. She uses a lot of muggle world icons and stereotypes,
and she uses alot of magical/wizard/witch icons and stereotypes, to
give us points of reference, and points of comfortable familiarity in
her writing. Since St. Mungo's seems a very common institutional name
in Britian, I think this just another point of familiarity, as well as
a bit of a subtle joke on her part. 



> Plus, St. Mungo's is in London.  My geography of Britain isn't too
> good anymore, but isn't Glasgow nowhere near London?  Just curious 
> about it!

bboy_mn:
No, London is in England, and Glasgow is in Scotland. Glasgow and
Edinburgh, Scotland are roughly equally far north, and both located in
 somewhat southern Scotland, but Edinburgh in on the East coast (North
Sea), and Glasgow is on the West coast (Firth of Clyde; near the North
Channel of the Irish Sea).

For maps, see...
http://www.homestead.com/BlueMoonMarket/Files/Hogwarts/hogwarts1.htm

Just a thought.

bboy_mn




From journalisto at hotmail.com  Mon Sep  1 05:32:35 2003
From: journalisto at hotmail.com (The Journalist)
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2003 22:32:35 -0700
Subject: Drooble Delivery
Message-ID: <BAY9-DAV56atao8KK8Z00029986@hotmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79407

I was just getting ready for bed, and thought to myself, "People on the list are going on about Droobles, and the mysterious message Missus Longbottom must be trying to get across to Neville-poo... now, I hope this hasn't beens aid before, as that would pop my originality bubble, but who in the name of Uric the Oddball is getting the Longbottoms their gum? The stuff makes big, long-lasting blue bubbles that bounce around, so not only would the bubbles need to be removed by a nurse making things quite a hassle, but costs money."

It just seems a bit weird to me... who's running off to buy them their gum? That mysterious someone who's trying to keep them seeming insane--is (s)he giving them some wacky potion instead of the gum the nurses might think it is (hence the lack of bubbles)? 

-Dan, who's off to the showers after a long day of essay writing and Quidditch

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From jacksontm at chartermi.net  Mon Sep  1 01:56:23 2003
From: jacksontm at chartermi.net (jackson_tm2000)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 01:56:23 -0000
Subject: Aiming Wand at Bellatrix Lestrange:  CRUCIO!
In-Reply-To: <bit1aa+dle9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <biu907+stvs@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79408

> The fact that he used Crucio! must be important.  It's not 
something 
> she should lightly throw around, especially since she stressed 
that 
> you get a lifetime sentence in Azkaban for trying it.  Was it to 
> show us that he's not like the deatheaters?  or is it to show us 
he 
> reached his breaking point?  


Harry's failure with the Crucio curse does help explain some of 
the "childish" curses used by the DE on Harry and the others at the 
MOM.  If the unforgivable curses require hate/sadism/loathing on the 
part of the user towards the recipient, then it is likely that the 
DE would be ineffective at using these curses against Harry, et al, 
since they really didn't know the kids, and were only there for the 
prophecy(with the exception, perhaps of Lucius and Bellatrix).  Is 
this why Voldemort was more involved with certain killings and left 
others to his DE? (i.e. killing baby Harry)

Tom





From princesspeaette at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 07:50:26 2003
From: princesspeaette at yahoo.com (princesspeaette)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 07:50:26 -0000
Subject: Harry's Sexual Preference
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.51.0308311331450.26785@mail1.sas.upenn.edu>
Message-ID: <biuto2+717t@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79409

> On Sun, 31 Aug 2003, jdr0918 wrote:
> 
> > Maybe the 'closet' metaphor for Harry is deliberate.



I have avoided this discussion altogether because I don't have any 
particular thoughts about it now, and I can see myself taking it far 
too seriously, but I know other people enjoy it and don't want to be 
the rain on their parade. 

However my reply here doesn't rain on anyone's parade, just offers 
another idea, so I'm posting it.

I always thought the closet was deliberate, but I so do not think it 
was implying he was gay.  I always thought it was the Dursleys psyche 
at work putting Harry in the closet (literaly, not metaphorically).

They detest anything remotely related to magic, and since I at least 
believe that Dumbledore filled Petunia in on a lot more than she's 
been admitting, she knows Harry is *very* magical.  Even before he 
came to live with them, they did everything they could to distance 
themselves from Lily and "her kind".  Then they got stuck with Harry 
after the attack in Godric's Hollow, and there was no avoiding it, 
they came face to face with the reality that magic exists and is 
connected to them.  What do you do with things you have to keep, but 
don't want to see? 

No, not under the bed. 

I don't know about you, but my closet is filled to the brim with 
things I've been ignoring for years.  But my Clueless-era mini 
backpack isn't walking around and talking to *gasp* the neighbors. 


Harry is the ultimate personification of the skeleton in their 
closet. 


Of course, that's just how I read it.

~Margaret





From uncmark at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 06:20:40 2003
From: uncmark at yahoo.com (Mark D.)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 06:20:40 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter is a CHILDREN'S BOOK re: rape sexual preference
Message-ID: <biuofo+d5gm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79410

I've just read about 20 posts regarding Umbridge's possible rape at 
the hands of centaurs as well as Harry's sexual preference.

EXCUSE ME Harry Potter is a Children's Book!!!
There are plenty of SLASH websites if you wand. I personally feel 
you're giving JKR a great insult by thinking she'd put it in her 
books.

Also I think you have a strange view of the Centaurs. They strike me 
a bound by honor. They will not harm a child and I don't believe 
they would act without full consensus of their tribe (herd, whatever 
they call it).

The Centaurs may very well might have killed Umbridge, but I would 
never believe they'd rape her. That would more repulsive to them 
than Firenze's crime of serving humans. But to kill Umbrige, the 
centaurs would have to agree on one punishment and carry it out.
But they were sort of busy (I'm guessing for most of the night) with 
a angry giant that they had shot with arrows trying to stomp them.

I suppose just being carrried off by a centaur while being chased by 
a giant could emomionally scar anyone.

As for guessing on Harry's sexual preference, again Harry Potter is 
a Children's Book!!!

Also Harry is now only 15. He has never had friends before Hogwarts. 
and there was only one described crush in the Potterverse... Cho. As 
for Harry not understanding girls, what male does?
 




From princesspeaette at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 08:07:11 2003
From: princesspeaette at yahoo.com (princesspeaette)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 08:07:11 -0000
Subject: What happens to body after dementor kiss ?
In-Reply-To: <biuatm+bgcu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <biuunf+ek7g@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79412

Sam:
>Sorry if this was asked before but what happens to the bodies of 
>those who have received the dementor's kiss ? are they dead? are 
>they buried ? are they organ donors ? soylent green ?  couldnt find 
>a cite on this in canon ...



PoA pg 247 US hardcover:

"They call it the Dementor's Kiss, " said Lupin, with a slightly 
twisted smile. "It's what the dementors do to those they wish to 
destroy utterly.  I suppose there must be some kind of mouth under 
there, because they clamp their jaws upon the mouth of the victim - 
and suck out his soul."

Harry accidentally spat out a bit of butterbeer.

"What - they kill- ?"

"Oh no," said Lupin.  "Much worse than that.  You can exist without 
your soul, you know, as long as your brain and heart are still 
working.  But you'll have no sense of self anymore, no memory, no... 
anything. There's no chance at all of recovery.  You'll just - 
exist.  As an empty shell.  And your soul is gone forever... lost."


Sounds pretty awful to me.

~Margaret





From naama_gat at hotmail.com  Mon Sep  1 06:45:01 2003
From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 06:45:01 -0000
Subject: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity (was Prophecy problems)
In-Reply-To: <bitrc3+qavj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <biuptd+as1t@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79413

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bluesqueak" <pipdowns at e...> 
wrote:
<snip>
> 
> 
> Dumbledore does lie (mainly by misdirection). In the last chapter 
of PS/SS, *before* he gives Harry his 'no lies' promise, he tells 
Harry that preventing Voldemort's return 'will merely take *someone 
else* who is prepared to fight what seems a losing battle next 
time ...  [my emphasis].
> 
> So, there is a choice. Choice one: Dumbledore is lying by 
> misdirection in PS/SS. He tells Harry that he does not bear the 
> burden of defeating Voldemort, *someone else* can also fight 
> Voldemort and delay if not defeat him. 
> 
> This line is said in what we are told in OOP is Dumbledore's full 
> knowledge of the prophecy. If Dumbledore truly believes that Harry 
> is 'the one' of the prophecy, he's lying when he tells Harry that 
> (by implication) Voldemort can be defeated by continual delay, and 
> you don't have to worry about it.

Delaying Voldemort's arrival indefinitely is *not* defeating him, and 
this implication is clear in PS. That's the whole point Dumbledore is 
trying to make. In light of the prophecy, I'd say that Dumbledore was 
saying that to himself, as much as to Harry. It made it possible for 
*him* (DD) to ignore the fact that only Harry can truly defeat 
Voldemort. By postulating a whole array of potential Voldemort 
fighters, Dumbledore is distancing into an infinite future Harry's 
inevitable showdown with Voldemort. It is another symptom of 
Dumbledore's great difficulty in accepting Harry's destiny (as he 
understands it).

> 
> Or he is lying directly in OOP. Harry may or may not be 'the one'. 
> Or the fact that the date is repeated twice means that there *are* 
> two people who have the power to vanquish Voldemort. So in PS/SS 
> Dumbledore may have known that there might be *someone else* who 
can 
> fight Voldemort, and eleven year old Harry really could go 
> unworriedly to sleep that night. 

He did want, very much, for Harry to go to sleep unworriedly. That's 
the "original sin" he confesses in OoP. My interpretation, however, 
is that he did not lie in either places. See above. 

> 
> And a final possibility (for the Dumbledore is the epitome of 
> goodness fans) is that Dumbledore is simply wrong in his 
> interpretation. He's made the best guess he can about the 
prophecy's 
> meaning. But it is only a guess. 

I would say, definitely. But not because I have a problem with the 
inconsistency you find between PS and OoP (since I don't see it as an 
inconsistency). Dumbledore is somehow wrong because the books simply 
cannot end with Harry either dead or a murderer. My belief is that 
this will be the crux of the whole series. I don't know how she will 
do it, but it's going to be a major, the major, point or message of 
HP. 

> 
> And in PS/SS he was just hoping like heck that the prophecy was 
> talking about a long, long time in the future, and maybe Harry was 
> going to beat Voldemort to death with his walking stick ;-)

You say it as a joke, but yes, that's what I think. He was hoping 
that the prophecy's fulfillment could be indefinitely postponed. You 
see, like you, I see Dumbledore as fallible, but *not* morally 
fallible. He makes mistakes because he is not omniscient, but his 
intentions are pure. 


Naama




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Mon Sep  1 10:04:49 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 10:04:49 -0000
Subject: Side note: St.Mungos
In-Reply-To: <biur2r+slib@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <biv5k1+7qn4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79414

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mochajava13" 
<mochajava13 at y...>
> wrote:
> > Geoff:
> > > St.Mungo was leader of a 6th century ecclesiatical community on
> > > the site of the present day Glasgow and is considered to be the 
> > > city's founder.
> > 
> > 
> > But still, why would wizards name a hospital after a religious
> > figure? The ones that do that here in the US are usually 
connected 
> > to a church of some sort.  
> 
> bboy_mn:
> If you look at my post on St Mungo's you will see several references
> to organizations named 'St. Mungo's'; many churches, charity
> organizations,  museums, etc...
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/79363
> 
> Typing 'St Mungo' into a search engine (Google) brings up 38,500 
matches. 
> 
> So, I think this is just another case of JKR providing things that 
are
> familiar to us. She uses a lot of muggle world icons and 
stereotypes,
> and she uses alot of magical/wizard/witch icons and stereotypes, to
> give us points of reference, and points of comfortable familiarity 
in
> her writing. Since St. Mungo's seems a very common institutional 
name
> in Britian, I think this just another point of familiarity, as well 
as
> a bit of a subtle joke on her part. 
> 
> 
> 
> > Plus, St. Mungo's is in London.  My geography of Britain isn't too
> > good anymore, but isn't Glasgow nowhere near London?  Just 
curious 
> > about it!
> 
> bboy_mn:
> No, London is in England, and Glasgow is in Scotland. Glasgow and
> Edinburgh, Scotland are roughly equally far north, and both located 
in
>  somewhat southern Scotland, but Edinburgh in on the East coast 
(North
> Sea), and Glasgow is on the West coast (Firth of Clyde; near the 
North
> Channel of the Irish Sea).
> 
> For maps, see...
> http://www.homestead.com/BlueMoonMarket/Files/Hogwarts/hogwarts1.htm
> 
> Just a thought.
> 

Geoff:
JKR was, I believe, in Edinburgh when she started writing HP. There 
are "tips of the hat" to Scotland - St.Mungo's being one. The other, 
which I commented on a few weeks ago was "Grimmauld Place = grim old 
place". Auld is a Scots word for "old" as in "Auld Lang Syne" and the 
nickname for Edinburgh of "Auld Reekie". 

As a side track, looking at the homestead website mentioned above, 
one of the film rail locations is the well-known Glenfinnan Visduct 
on the West Highland line to Mallaig, west of Fort William, where the 
train caught up with the flying Ford Anglia.




From jujupoet29 at hotmail.com  Mon Sep  1 09:04:40 2003
From: jujupoet29 at hotmail.com (sienna291973)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 09:04:40 -0000
Subject: Percy question
In-Reply-To: <bitrvv+e2o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <biv238+b24n@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79416

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mochajava13" 
<mochajava13 at y...> wrote:
> Percy is gone for good, in my opinion.  JKR's been foreshadowing 
> Percy's split from the family since the first book.> 

Sienna:

I also agree that JKR has been foreshadowing Percy's split with his 
family from the very beginning, but I'm not sure that I agree that he 
won't be coming back.  In fact, I think it would make for a very 
interesting development in Percy's character if he did swallow his 
pride and try and make his way back into the fold.

I personally don't see Percy as evil but more as someone whose 
insecurity and need to stand out from his brothers led him to be 
corrupted by the promise of power and prestige.  We often talk of 
Ron's self-image problems and how growing up in a big family has 
impacted him.  I think much the same can be said for Percy although 
he obviously deals with it very differently.

This is not to say that his return to the family will be an easy one 
and nor should it be IMO, but it would be very interesting indeed to 
see how humility and repentence force Percy to reexamine the things 
that have thus far been most important to him.

Remember too, that the one time prior to OoTP that Percy was actually 
faced with the fear of losing someone in his family (in GOF in the 
second task when Harry returns last from the lake), he reacted very 
much the way someone who cares deeply about his family would, losing 
all pretence of maturity and suddenly seeming `much younger' (to 
paraphrase).

Of course, one could argue that at face value his response to his 
father's attack demonstrated the exact opposite and I can't disagree 
there.  However, I'm wondering whether that was a case of his pride 
not allowing him to acknowledge to himself that his father was ever 
in any real danger once it was clear that he would survive (I have no 
evidence for this of course).  We don't really know how Percy reacted 
to his father's attack other than that he didn't at any point visit 
him at the hospital.  This doesn't mean that he might not at some 
point have enquired after his father's wellbeing from the Healers at 
St. Mungo's.

Just some thoughts but I think a redemptive arc for Percy could lead 
to some good story possibilities.

Sienna (who come to think of it doesn't really like Percy very much 
at all and wouldn't be too upset if she turned out to be wrong and 
the twins spent all of Book 6 throwing Dungbombs at him)






From gbannister10 at aol.com  Mon Sep  1 10:24:24 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 10:24:24 -0000
Subject: Things that will come into play later.
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20030831135331.00a873e0@localhost>
Message-ID: <biv6oo+eq9a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79417

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Fred Uloth <prof_uloth at h...> 
wrote:

 
> Hmm...I'm led to believe a woman wrote this post. I think JKR 
nailed male 
> relationships very well with this one. For women, a good friend is 
someone 
> with whom they can cry, share emotions, discuss whatever. To a man 
(at 
> least in Teens and Tweens) a good friend is someone who is there, 
shows 
> loyalty and doesn't pry into emotional issues. The girls (Hermy, 
Cho, 
> Jenny) are the one that keeps bringing up the topics Harry wants to 
avoid 
> (death, dreams, etc). Nevilles comment after Sirius dies is as 
intimate a 
> question as any guy would get with another guy. If Ron were asking 
the 
> questions that Hermione asks and Harry didn't blow his top, then 
I'd say 
> the people who think Harry is light in the loafers may have a leg 
to stand 
> on. JKR has a VERY good handle on relationship dynamics of teenage 
boys. 
> Guys don't want to talk about it...not when the wounds are still 
fresh 
> anyway...if they do, it will only be with a female that they really 
trust. 
> I don't think we should be slighting Ron for being a typical 
teenage 
> boy...when push comes to shove, Ron is always on Harry's side.


She has indeed handled male relations well. I feel that I relate to 
HP because I can see myself at that age. I was considered something 
of a "boffin" (probably a geek in modern speech!, something like 
Hermione even in having my nose in books and more interested in 
intellectual things. Being at an all-male school (the UK norm at that 
time) didn't help my contact with girls and, like HP, I had a number 
of disasters a la Cho Chang.

One of the things which I always dislike is the "big boys don't cry" 
attitude often drummed into our heads. Looking at Harry's responses 
to some of the deep emotional moments, I can recall when my eldest 
son was born and there was a medical crisis which threatened both 
mother and baby. I was left out on a limb feeling absolutely 
devastated waiting for news and wishing that I could go and have a 
good bawl on someone's shoulder - and I couldn't. There wasn't a 
shoulder handy and I couldn't break through the conditioning.

There is also the male bonding which I recently mentioned in 
connection wih CS Lewis' "Four Loves" - friends together just to 
enjoy each other's company. My wife often berates me because in phone 
conversations with our two sons, who are still in London, she gets 
involved in their "relationship" lives - particularly the younger one 
who has had a couple of relationship crash-landings but, when I get 
to the phone, we discuss DVDs, politics, computers et al. Fred is 
right, that's the way male dynamics often work -and not only teens 
and tweens.

Geoff




From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Mon Sep  1 10:30:47 2003
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 10:30:47 -0000
Subject: Percy question
In-Reply-To: <bitrvv+e2o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <biv74n+f7r7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79418

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mochajava13" 
<mochajava13 at y...> wrote:
> Percy is gone for good, in my opinion.

I must admit, I have not the slightest idea, which direction my 
second favorite Weasley will take. Or better, I have several ideas, 
but I'm not sure which to believe. But I want to comment on this. 
First of all, Albus Dumbledore, who is sort of a voice for JKR, seems 
to be a strict believer in second chances. He gives nearly everybody 
a second chance, including Severus Snape, who, as much as I like him, 
as a Death Eater, has very probably done far more evil things than 
Percy right now.

> JKR's been foreshadowing 

True, but
 
> Again, at Christmas, the twins had to get Percy and 
> force him to spend the time with the family.  They immediately 
> thought he would spend the time with the prefects.  The twins 
played 
> pranks on him, but they also tried to include him.  They stopped 
> trying once it was pretty clear that Percy didn't want to be 
> included.

Are you sure he didn't? I haven't read PS for a pretty long time (and 
I lent it to a friend months ago, and he still hasn't returned it), 
but if I recall right, Percy seemed to enjoy Christmas with his 
brothers. He was forced in the jumper by George and Fred, that's 
true. But later, he seemed to have fun, trying everything to help 
Harry in chess and all. 
> 
> He tells off 
> Ron for being in a girl's bathroom because of what it would look 
> like to other people.

Well, if my little brother came out of a girls bathroom, I would 
probably be stunned, too. But I think Percy didn't tell him off 
because Ron came out of a girl's bathroom, but because the girl's 
bathroom was at the place, where the first attack had happened. And 
Percy (as well as Snape) is IMO right, of course it is entertaining 
to read about Harry's adventures, but from the point of view from the 
characters in the books, Harry and his friends of course shouldn't 
play detective.

<I snipped a lot of points, with which I agree> 

> He's portrayed as a brown noser in 
> GoF, and loyal to the ministry: he argues with his father over Ludo 
> Bagman's ability to lead the sports department.

So what? Percy was absolutely right. Ludo Bagman is incompetent. And 
I think Arthur knows this, too, as well as Harry and most other 
characters in the book. 

And now you have mentioned every scene, that shows, that Percy is a 
pompous prat. But you didn't mention the scenes, that show, that he 
still cares for his family. The most obvious is IMO the second task 
in the Triwizard Tournament, where he really cared for Ron's safety. 
He was also the only Weasley brother in COS, who recognised, that 
something was wrong with Ginny. 
 
> He made it quite clear that he wants nothing to do 
> with his family, even his brothers that work for Gringotts (and was 
> also an ex-head boy) and with dragons.

Well, he wrote something different in his letter to Ron. The letter 
alone, prooves, IMO, that he still cares for his family, or at least 
for Ron. It was a totally horible letter and the advice he gave to 
Ron was wrong, but he didn't need to give him any advice at all. But 
obviously he hoped to remain in contact with at least one Weasley 
member. I do agree, however, that his behaviour, especially around 
Christmas, was absolutely horrible and that he has a lot to do, to 
win the trust of his family back, if he ever comes back to 
apologize.  
> 
> Nope, Percy's gone from the family.  If he even tries to come back, 
only Molly would tolerate him.  None of his brothers or Ginny would 
welcome him back, 
> especially not the twins.  The twins dropped out of school but 
still 
> see their parents, even though Mrs. Weasley probably argues with 
> them about it non-stop.  And they came to get the family members at 
> Kings Cross.  The twins think their family is important; they're 
not 
> going to forgive Percy easily.

If they think family is important, they should forgive Percy, because 
Percy is their family, too. I agree, however, that it isn't that 
easy, and I have no idea, how I would react, if I were one of Percy's 
silblings and he came back to apologize. I do think, however, that 
they will at least try to tolerate him, if only, to make Molly happy. 
But as I already said, I have no idea, why Percy should be an 
exception, in a series of books, in which the wisest and least evil 
of all characters, believes that everyone deserves a second chance.
> 
> Also, Percy just didn't care that Voldemort could be back; he 
> latched onto the official position.

Or he really didn't believe it. Of course he has known Harry for 
years, and shouldn't believe the DP article about him. But even Molly 
believed the DP article about Hermione. 

Hickengruendler, who thinks it is amusing, that the twins, whom I 
also like, joked about Percy's behaviour to apparate all the time in 
GOF, did exactly the same in OOTP. 




From lunalarea at hotmail.com  Mon Sep  1 10:35:24 2003
From: lunalarea at hotmail.com (Verin Haley)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 10:35:24 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter is a CHILDREN'S BOOK
In-Reply-To: <biuofo+d5gm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <biv7dc+7l3t@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79419

Harry's sexual preference:

<Mark D.>
EXCUSE ME Harry Potter is a Children's Book!!! There are plenty of
SLASH websites if you [want]. I personally feel you're giving JKR a
great insult by thinking she'd put it in her books.

<snip>
As for guessing on Harry's sexual preference, again Harry Potter is a
Children's Book!!!

<Verin>
1. Why is homosexuality an invalid discussion?  We are a discussion
list.  We theorize.  We argue our points.  We occasionally believe our
peers are just plain wrong.  It is not invalid to bring up a
character's *theorized* sexual orientation so long as the argument is
based in canon.  You may think that this particular view on Harry's
(or anyone's) sexuality is incorrect, but please argue the point, not
the morality.

2. Why is homosexuality an insult?  I don't feel it is.  I don't think
it's insulting to say that in a cast as large as JKR's there's
probably one or two people who aren't straight.  Whether or not she's
choosing to represent that is her choice, but we should still have the
opportunity to speculate whether she is.

3. Why do you think the status of these books as "for children" makes
showing a homosexual relationship impossible?  From the tone of your
e-mail, it sounds as if you believe it's wrong to show children any
relationship but a straight one.  I'm sorry if I've misconstrued what
you meant, but while you have a right to feel that way, please
understand that not all of us share those opinions.  Leslea Newman
wrote "Heather Has Two Mommies".  While I can't remember the names of
them off the top of my head, I know I read a few aimed at a 12-16 year
old audience.  The point is: there are children's books that address
this issue.  There are people like me out there who feel children
should be educated about this.

4. These are children's books: children's books that have gotten
substantially darker and more complex as they have proceeded.  This
has been argued by far better orators than I, but look at the trend
from SS/PS to OoTP, at the crux of which Harry, the protagonist,
attempts to torture Bellatrix Lestrange.  Hermione, his close friend,
with apparently very little remorse beforehand, lures Umbridge to what
may be her death.

"Around fifty centaurs were emerging on every side, their bows raised
and loaded, pointed at Harry, Hermione, and Umbridge, who backed
slowly into the center of the clearing, Umbridge uttering odd little
whimpers of terror.  Harry looked sideways at Hermione.  She was
wearing a triumphant smile."  (Pg. 753 US hardcover)

I honestly didn't expect to see Umbridge again.  I thought Hermione
had willfully and knowingly brought her to her death.

<Mark D.>
Also Harry is now only 15. He has never had friends before Hogwarts. 
and there was only one described crush in the Potterverse...  Cho.

<Verin>
This is your argument.  The best "Harry isn't gay" argument is that
he's shown with an interest in girls.  I'm not entirely sure why you
feel it's relevant that he never hand friends before Hogwarts -- aside
from the chronically unadressed fact of the Issues he probably has
from being raised in a neglectful and, on Dudley's part, abusive
household -- but Harry's conscious sexual focus at this point through
books four and five has been on Cho.

<Mark D.>
As for Harry not understanding girls, what male does?

<Verin>
I'm not sure what you're getting at here.  Are you arguing that
because Harry doesn't understand girls, he's obviously straight? 
<shrugs>  I personally don't think that argument would hold a grain of
salt, but I do admit that a number of my male friends bemoan that
they'll never understand women.  I think it's as much of a cop-out as
me replying, "What male tries?"  JKR gives the reader precisely what
Cho is thinking via Hermione.

"...you were a bit tactless...  You shouldn't have told her that you
wanted to meed me halfway through your date.  ...You should have told
her differently.  ...You should have said it was really annoying, but
I'd *made* you promise to come along to the Three Broomstick, adn you
really didn't want to go, you'd much rather spend the whole day with
her, but unfortunately you thought you really ought to meet me and
would she please, please come along with you, and hopefully you'd be
able to get away more quickly?  And it might have been a good idea to
mention how ugly you think I am, too.  ...Look, you ypset Cho when you
said you were going to meet me, so she tried to make you jealous.  It
was her way of trying to find out how much you liked her."  (Pg. 572
US hardcover)

The whole scene is quite brilliantly done, IMO, and explicates quite
clearly how some girls act.  I say it's not impossible to understand
why a person is doing what she is.  You may not *agree* with what she
does, but that doesn't mean you can't understand why she's doing it. 
I think Cho's method is completely rediculous, but so does Hermione. 
"I'm not saying what she did was sensible... I'm just trying to make
you see how she was feeling at the time."  Every person is not going
to act and react in the same way, and that is implicit in the scene
between Ron, Hermione, and Harry.

The theorized rape of Umbridge:

<Mark D.>
Also I think you have a strange view of the Centaurs. They strike me a
bound by honor. They will not harm a child and I don't believe they
would act without full consensus of their tribe (herd, whatever they
call it).

<Verin>
They are bound by their own version of honor.  They did not consider
Harry and Hermione to fall into the category "child" after they
discovered how Hermione had manipulated the situation.  "'[Harry and
Hermione] came here unasked, they must pay the consequences!'  A roar
of approval met these words and a dun-colored centaur shouted, 'They
can join the woman!'"  They were full ready to deal out to children
the same penalty as to an adult woman.  This sense of honor applies to
other centaurs, not humans.  If anything, they are actively willing to
hurt humans.

<Mark D.>
The Centaurs may very well might have killed Umbridge, but I would
never believe they'd rape her. That would more repulsive to them than
Firenze's crime of serving humans.

<Verin>
That depends entirely on how heavily JKR is drawing on mythology for
her sources, which isn't something we can know.  Like you, I came to
the conclusion she'd be killed, but I can see an argument for the
rape.  I don't buy it, necessarily, but I can see where it comes from.
 Centaurs don't have a perfect mythological record, here.

If you're interested, check out:
http://www.theoi.com/Okeanos/Kentauroi.htm (which is what I'm quoting)

It notes historical references to centaurs, or "kentauroi", in the
original Greek mythology and subsequent works.  Some relevant points:

"When she was grown Atalante guarded her virginity, and when she went
hunting in the wilderness she was always fulling armed. The Kentauroi
[centaurs] Rhoikos and Hylaios tired to rape her, but she killed them
with her bow and arrows." -Apollodorus 3.106

"Theseus fought with Peirithous when he was waging his war against the
Kentauroi. For when Peirithous was courting Hippodameia, he gave a
banquet for the Kentauroi because they were related to her; but they,
unused to wine, drank too much too fast and got drunk, and when the
bride was ushered in they tried to rape her. So Peirthous put on full
armor and with Gheseus' help started a battle, and Theseus slew many
of them." -Apollodorus E1.21  (also recounted in Plutarch Theseus 30.3)

"At another marriage, when Pirithous was taking Hippodamia, daughter
of Adrastus, Centauri, full of wine, attempted to carry off the wives
of the Lapithae. The Centauri killed many of them, but by them
perished." ?Hyginus Fabulae 33

"For Eurytus, the fiercest of the fierce Centauri, was fired by wine
and by the sight of that fair girl, and drink was in command, double
by lust. Tables were overturned, the banquet in confusion, and the
bride, held by her hair, was seized and carried off. Hippodame was
seized by Eurytus; the others seized what girl each would or could." 
-Metamorphoses 12.112-544

There is a cultural link between centaurs and rape that, while it may
not fit your interpretation of what happened, provides evidence for an
equally valid interpretation that says she was.  While this is a
children's book, the rape -- if such it was -- was no more than
alluded to.  JKR is perfectly capable of making references an adult
would catch but a child would read at face value.  For a perfect
example of this, see the movie "Shrek", which manages the most perfect
blend of "over the kiddie's head" humor I've seen in a long time.  It
can be done.  Whether she's done it is another issue.

-Verin




From princesspeaette at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 10:39:16 2003
From: princesspeaette at yahoo.com (princesspeaette)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 10:39:16 -0000
Subject: Trelawney picking up the prophecy (was: Re: Dumbledore's integrity)
In-Reply-To: <biue90+6vou@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <biv7kk+oamt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79420

> Kirstini wrote:
> 
>(who, incidentally, would like to point out that Dumbledore 
>keeping Trelawny at Hogwarts after her sacking does not in itself 
>prove that she keeps knowledge of her real prophecies in her 
>subconscious.) Trelawny is one of the other people able to pick the 
>prophecy up from the Dpt of Mysteries.
 
 
~<(Laurasia)>~ :
>Actually, only the people who the prophecies are about can pick 
>them up. There was never any mention that the people who 
>made the prophecies can pick them up. It was either 'The Dark 
>Lord' or 'Harry Potter (?).' 
> 
>I know I'm being picky, but this is a pretty significant point. 
> 
>Another point- Sybill's second prophecy (end of PoA) is therefore 
>acessable only to Voldemort and Wormtail, so they should 
>therefore have no issues retrieving it and having a great sense of 
>confidence instilled inside themselves. (The Dark Lord will rise 
>more terrible than before). Talk about a self-esteem boost! That 
>would make poor little Voldy who has been once again thwarted 
>by that Potter boy feel much happier.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>



I don't think Trelawney's second prophecy is accessable to anyone but 
Harry (with help from a Pensieve).  He didn't report the actual 
prophecy word for word to anyone, only an abridged form to 
Dumbledore.  I think they have to be reported to the DoM to be 
catalogued with the others.  And someone here (sorry, can't remember 
who, and Yahoomort is not behaving today) said that they have to be 
interpreted by someone at the DoM to be labeled.  Which brings up an 
interesting idea: If they had never relabeled the prophecy 
with "Harry Potter(?)" could that have been used as a sort of test 
later to see if it was supposed to be Neville or Harry?

And I don't think the phrase "poor little" and "Voldemort" should 
ever be used in the same sentence.  However the confidence thing is 
already in play, I think Voldemort's initial destruction was caused 
by pure and simple overconfidence.  That's when people start making 
mistakes. 

Of course it is too bad for him that he keeps getting thwarted by the 
magical Scooby gang. *weg*


~Margaret







From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Mon Sep  1 10:44:43 2003
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 10:44:43 -0000
Subject: Percy question
In-Reply-To: <bit81g+lhfm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <biv7ur+hgsk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79421

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vecseytj" <vecseytj at t...> 
wrote:
 
> 2.  Ginny was going to confess about Tom Riddle, and her actions in
> CoS.  Percy made her move from the table, because he wanted to sit
> with ?Harry? ,  so before Ginny could tell Ron and Harry what was
> going on Percy kicked her out.

I read the scene that way, that Percy thought, Ginny wanted to tell 
the others about Penelope, and he wanted to stop her. Of course the 
result is the same. But I don't think he just kicked her out, because 
he wanted to sit with the famous Harry. If this were the reason, he 
would have done something like this regularly during the three years, 
he and Harry were together at Hogwarts.

> 3.  Percy hid that his boss was never coming into the office.  Or 
that
> he was acting weird.  Percy just covered it all up so that he could 
be
> in power.

He didn't know that Crouch was acting weird. He knew Crouch for a few 
months, so it is unlikely, that he knew, that Crouch is never ill. 
But I agree, that he enjoyed the situation, to be the boss, very 
much. On the other hand, it really was Mr. Crouch's handwriting.

> 4.  I've also thought that Percy turned on Harry because, Percy 
wanted
> to be *best* buddies with Harry.  But, Harry bonded with Ron... So
> once again Percy is under valued.  
> 
 
It wouldn't be out of character for Percy. But I see it a bit 
different. I think that Percy a.) really believed the DP and Fudge 
and b.) wasn't unhappy, that it was him, who was liked by the 
minister, instead of "The boy who lived". He seemed to be jealous, 
when Fudge was greeting Harry, during the Quidditch Worldcup.

Hickengruendler




From deemarie1a at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 11:16:39 2003
From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 11:16:39 -0000
Subject: What happens to body after dementor kiss ?
In-Reply-To: <biuunf+ek7g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <biv9qn+289o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79422

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "princesspeaette" 
<princesspeaette at y...> wrote:
> Sam:
> >Sorry if this was asked before but what happens to the bodies of 
> >those who have received the dementor's kiss ? are they dead? are 
> >they buried ? are they organ donors ? soylent green ?  couldnt 
find 
> >a cite on this in canon ...
> 
> 
> 
> PoA pg 247 US hardcover:
> 
> "They call it the Dementor's Kiss, " said Lupin, with a slightly 
> twisted smile. "It's what the dementors do to those they wish to 
> destroy utterly.  I suppose there must be some kind of mouth under 
> there, because they clamp their jaws upon the mouth of the victim - 
> and suck out his soul."
> 
> Harry accidentally spat out a bit of butterbeer.
> 
> "What - they kill- ?"
> 
> "Oh no," said Lupin.  "Much worse than that.  You can exist without 
> your soul, you know, as long as your brain and heart are still 
> working.  But you'll have no sense of self anymore, no memory, 
no... 
> anything. There's no chance at all of recovery.  You'll just - 
> exist.  As an empty shell.  And your soul is gone forever... lost."
> 
> 
> Sounds pretty awful to me.
> 
> ~Margaret

I got the impression that these souless people became dementors 
themselves.  It would make sense.  Dememtors feed off the emotions of 
others.  Being souless themselves, they would want to retrieve that 
from others, feed off it to nourish their own lack of emotions now 
that they are incapable of feeling.  That would also be the reason 
that they suck the souls of others.  IMO, when the dementors first 
came into being, the "kiss" was an attempt to regain a soul.  Over 
time, it had become the punishment that is appears to be.  Though a 
dementor still has a brain, I don't think they have a vast 
intelligence.  They can communicate, and take orders, but I think 
they react on an instinctive level.  Thus their appearance at 
Quidditch match.  So much raw emotion drew them to feed.

As to their physical appearance, isn't the expression "the eyes are 
the windows to the soul" of some significance.  Since they no longer 
have a soul, wouldn't their eyes be useless?  Losing 
their "humanity", their physical appearance deteriorates.  They begin 
to decay.  The description of the dementor's hand in PoA certainly 
reminded me of decaying flesh.

Well, that's just my opinion...
D




From princesspeaette at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 11:42:39 2003
From: princesspeaette at yahoo.com (princesspeaette)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 11:42:39 -0000
Subject: What happens to body after dementor kiss ?
In-Reply-To: <biv9qn+289o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bivbbf+is96@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79423

>Sam:
>Sorry if this was asked before but what happens to the bodies of 
>those who have received the dementor's kiss ? are they dead? are 
>they buried ? are they organ donors ? soylent green ?  couldnt 
>find a cite on this in canon ...
> > 
Margaret:
> > PoA pg 247 US hardcover:
> > 
>"They call it the Dementor's Kiss, " said Lupin, with a slightly 
>twisted smile. "It's what the dementors do to those they wish to 
>destroy utterly.  I suppose there must be some kind of mouth under 
>there, because they clamp their jaws upon the mouth of the victim - 
>and suck out his soul."
> > 
>Harry accidentally spat out a bit of butterbeer.
> > 
>"What - they kill- ?"
> > 
>"Oh no," said Lupin.  "Much worse than that.  You can exist without 
>your soul, you know, as long as your brain and heart are still 
>working.  But you'll have no sense of self anymore, no memory, 
>no... anything. There's no chance at all of recovery.  You'll just - 
>exist.  As an empty shell.  And your soul is gone forever... lost."
>
Sounds pretty awful to me.


>D: 
>I got the impression that these souless people became dementors 
>themselves.  It would make sense.  Dememtors feed off the emotions 
>of others.  Being souless themselves, they would want to retrieve 
>that from others, feed off it to nourish their own lack of emotions 
>now that they are incapable of feeling.  That would also be the 
>reason that they suck the souls of others.  IMO, when the dementors 
>first came into being, the "kiss" was an attempt to regain a soul.  
>Over time, it had become the punishment that is appears to be.  
>Though a dementor still has a brain, I don't think they have a vast 
>intelligence.  They can communicate, and take orders, but I think 
>they react on an instinctive level.  Thus their appearance at 
>Quidditch match.  So much raw emotion drew them to feed.
> 
>As to their physical appearance, isn't the expression "the eyes are 
>the windows to the soul" of some significance.  Since they no longer 
>have a soul, wouldn't their eyes be useless?  Losing 
>their "humanity", their physical appearance deteriorates.  They 
>begin to decay.  The description of the dementor's hand in PoA 
>certainly reminded me of decaying flesh.
> 
> Well, that's just my opinion...



Margaret again :-) 

I really really really like this idea!  I can't believe that nothing 
like this ever occured to me!  It never occured to me to consider how 
dementors propogate their species.  But this is perfect! I especially 
like the 'eyes are the windows to the soul' part.

Dementors being attracted to people's souls to replenish their 
own "humanity" (if you can use that word and dementors in the same 
sentence).  It would explain Fudge's comment at the end of PoA "Never 
dreamed they'd try to administer the Kiss to an innocent boy" (or 
something like that)  That boy was not just any boy, it was Harry 
Potter, who Dumbledore at least, thinks will destroy Voldemort with 
love (or something like that).  Wouldn't someone with that kind of 
emotion in their heart have a particularly tempting soul for the 
dementors? Perhaps they are attracted to the strength of one's soul, 
in direct opposition to their own soulessness, like magnets with 
opposite polarities.

The frightening thing is, that if you are right (and I really think 
you are) and the dementors are now working for Voldemort, he can 
build an army.  I always assumed there was a finite number of 
dementors out there to draw from, but this would mean that Voldemort 
gets the satisfaction of (essentially) killing good guys while 
turning them into the bad guys.

 
~Margaret




From sylviablundell at aol.com  Mon Sep  1 11:55:30 2003
From: sylviablundell at aol.com (sylviablundell2001)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 11:55:30 -0000
Subject: Patronus
Message-ID: <bivc3i+j9d6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79424

Joj mom31 wrote:
"thinking of how popular and admired his father was makes him feel 
valuable and the stag represents his father."
Would the fact that Harry's opinion of his father has now taken quite 
a battering have any influence on his Patronus, either in producing 
it or the form it takes? I have always wondered why it wasn't his 
mother who became the Patronus.




From saraandra at whsmithnet.co.uk  Mon Sep  1 13:00:46 2003
From: saraandra at whsmithnet.co.uk (amanitamuscaria1)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 13:00:46 -0000
Subject: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity (was Prophecy problems)
In-Reply-To: <biuptd+as1t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bivftu+4o2g@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79425

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "naamagatus" <naama_gat at h...> 
wrote:
> SNIPSNIP
 Dumbledore is somehow wrong because the books simply 
> cannot end with Harry either dead or a murderer. > 
SNIP
> Naama

Now Me : Why?
I can see the series ending. in the last book, in the last, or last 
but one chapter, with both Harry and Lord V dying.
It doesn't necessarily HAVE to happen, but it's one way (let's hope 
not the A.Conan Doyle way) of truly ending the series..
Cheers. AmanitaMuscaria




From leef at comcast.net  Mon Sep  1 13:13:34 2003
From: leef at comcast.net (marephraim)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 13:13:34 -0000
Subject: Harry's Sexual Preference -- the closet - alternative explanation
In-Reply-To: <biui7q+1j7v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bivglu+hq2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79426

Just a general comment about the closet at Number Four, Privet 
Drive. I always assumed Harry slept in the closet because, as JKR 
notes in the opening paragraphs the Dursleys have a dirty little 
secret. Harry is the proverbial "skeliton in the closet" that they 
don't want the world to know about. They can't hide him from society 
completely so keeping him in the closet is metaphorical for their 
embarassament at his wizarding ability and heritage. 

If you're going to discuss topics of sexual preference, ISTM that 
PoA is the earliest real canon source with the major (so far) fodder 
coming in GoF and OoP.

A side note: This harkens back to the disucssion (and fury) over 
that article in some NY paper that interpreted the whole of HP as 
about gay life.

M.E.




From odilefalaise at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 13:26:46 2003
From: odilefalaise at yahoo.com (Odile Falaise)
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 06:26:46 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why Harry Potter "cannot" be set in 1991-?
In-Reply-To: <biupp8+p6ue@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030901132646.39891.qmail@web13114.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79427


--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita
Prince Winston)" <catlady at w...> and others wrote
about: 

<previous notes snipped>

<<<Dudley chucked his Playstation out the window, thus
was no longer able to play Mega-Mutilation III, in
GOBLET OF FIRE, set in 1994, when (the list has
agreed) Playstations were not yet available in UK or
US, but had been test-marketted in Japan. I am not
aware of any reference to a Playstation in HARRY
POTTER AND THE PHILOSOPHER'S STONE. Please give me a
quote with enough context that I can find where in the
book to look it up and see if Scholastic changed
it.>>>

Odile chiming in:

Ummm... regarding Playstations, and setting them in
the HP timeline?  With all due respect, umm, er
*shuffles feet* - I don't play videogames.  I have no
idea what the difference is between a Playstation, an
X-Box, a Gameboy, etc. etc. (and no, that is not an
invitation for anyone to enlighten me).  I don't know,
and it is not really important to me - I do know,
however, that a spoiled couch potato boy like Dudley
Dursley is likely to have way too many videogames and
other gadgets.  I wonder if JKR is so schooled in the
history and release dates of certain videogame systems
that she would know enough to insert the correct
versions into her stories, which, though set in the
early '90s, were written later?

I don't mean to be snerky - it's just an observation. 
^_^

Odile



From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 13:35:23 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 13:35:23 -0000
Subject: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity (was Prophecy problems)
In-Reply-To: <bitrc3+qavj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bivhur+3uao@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79428

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bluesqueak" <pipdowns at e...> 
wrote:
<snip> Dumbledore does lie (mainly by misdirection). In the last 
chapter of 
> PS/SS, *before* he gives Harry his 'no lies' promise, he tells 
Harry 
> that preventing Voldemort's return 'will merely take *someone else* 
> who is prepared to fight what seems a losing battle next time ...  
> [my emphasis].
> 
> So, there is a choice. Choice one: Dumbledore is lying by 
> misdirection in PS/SS. He tells Harry that he does not bear the 
> burden of defeating Voldemort, *someone else* can also fight 
> Voldemort and delay if not defeat him. 
> 
> This line is said in what we are told in OOP is Dumbledore's full 
> knowledge of the prophecy. If Dumbledore truly believes that Harry 
> is 'the one' of the prophecy, he's lying when he tells Harry that 
> (by implication) Voldemort can be defeated by continual delay, and 
> you don't have to worry about it.
> 
> Or he is lying directly in OOP. Harry may or may not be 'the one'. 
> Or the fact that the date is repeated twice means that there *are* 
> two people who have the power to vanquish Voldemort. So in PS/SS 
> Dumbledore may have known that there might be *someone else* who 
can 
> fight Voldemort, and eleven year old Harry really could go 
> unworriedly to sleep that night. 
> 
> And a final possibility (for the Dumbledore is the epitome of 
> goodness fans) is that Dumbledore is simply wrong in his 
> interpretation. He's made the best guess he can about the 
prophecy's 
> meaning. But it is only a guess. 
>

Laura:

DD tells Harry in OoP that he did indeed mislead him in PS/SS and 
later, because he wanted to spare Harry the pain that would come with 
knowing the prophecy.  Are you (and Kirstini) suggesting that that 
isn't true?  That DD lied to Harry about why he didn't tell him 
earlier about the prophecy?  What motivation would he have other than 
the one he explained?  Sorry about being slow here-maybe I just hope 
that DD simply miscalculated rather than that he is so Machiavellian. 
It would be exceptionally cruel to tell Harry that he (DD) acted out 
of love for Harry when it isn't the case, and Harry is likely to 
figure that out sooner or later.




From saraandra at whsmithnet.co.uk  Mon Sep  1 13:45:45 2003
From: saraandra at whsmithnet.co.uk (amanitamuscaria1)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 13:45:45 -0000
Subject: The Riddle House
In-Reply-To: <bit6sh+a495@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bivii9+gm80@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79429

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...   
> BIG SNIP
>(And *I* want to know who the rich 
> man is who's been keeping Riddle House "for tax purposes")
> 
> "msbeadsley"
Now Me :
Lucius Malfoy, perchance?
Equivalent of Grimmauld Place for DEs?
Cheers. AmanitaMuscaria




From wsherratt3338 at rogers.com  Mon Sep  1 13:47:49 2003
From: wsherratt3338 at rogers.com (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 13:47:49 -0000
Subject: green eyes and the killing curse
In-Reply-To: <bit4be+qvfo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bivim5+em6e@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79430

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nionetinuviel" <athenaq at e...> 
wrote:
> I have to disagree. I think Lily is the key to the whole thing. 
The 
> only reason Harry survived Avada Kedavra was because of Lily. SHE 
> made the choice to sacrifice herself and give Harry a future.
> 
> Which is why this idea of V'mort marking anyone as an equal is 
> bugging me. Without Lily, both Neville and Harry would have simply 
> died. Lily changed all that when she saved Harry. Lily made the 
> choice, not V'mort. The only choice V'mort made was to target the 
> boys to be killed. (Which is why I think the prophecy is bogus & I 
> dont trust Dumbeldores interpretation of it.)
> 

I'm not perfectly convinced that Lily's sacrifice is the reason why 
Harry survived AK.  I think it did *something*, but I'm not sure it 
did that.  Dumbledore tells Harry that her death provided him with a 
lingering protection, so he is safe as long as he lives with the 
Dursleys.  That is one definite consequence of Lily's death.  Harry 
attributes his survival of Voldemort's attack to that as well, when 
he confronts Tom Riddle in CoS, but this is just his conjecture.  He 
even says that nobody really knows what happened at that moment.   
Tom is looking for information too, so he doesn't understand what 
happened, and Dumbledore doesn't confirm Harry's words.  They're 
just left there, as the only explanation offered so far.  But I 
think there was more to it than that, which we'll discover in the 
next two books. (My own time travel theory is in message 76998, if 
you're interested!)  I just don't believe that giving one's life is 
enough to block an AK - there are too many other instances where we 
would have heard of it before.  Why didn't James's sacrifice protect 
Lily, in that case?

Wanda





From quigonginger at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 13:49:06 2003
From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 13:49:06 -0000
Subject: Side note: St.Mungos
In-Reply-To: <bitmgd+5eji@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bivioi+4em4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79431

> Geoff:
> > St.Mungo was leader of a 6th century ecclesiatical community on 
> the 
> > site of the present day Glasgow and is considered to be the 
city's 
> > founder.
> 
Mochajava13 replied: 
> Thanks for the answer!  But still, why would wizards name a 
hospital 
> after a religious figure?  The ones that do that here in the US are 
> usually connected to a church of some sort.  Plus, St. Mungo's is 
in 
> London.  My geography of Britain isn't too good anymore, but isn't 
> Glasgow nowhere near London?  Just curious about it!

Now Ginger:
A few thoughts popped into my head. Take your pick or add on as you 
wish:
1)  We know it runs on donations, so it may have been started (and 
thus, named) by a wizarding family who were Christian and/or Scottish.

2)  St. Mungo may have been kind to wizards, so they named it in his 
honour.

3)  It may just be a good cover for conversation.  Two witches are in 
Muggle London and one asks how little Elmer is doing.  The other 
replies that he is not well and is in St. Mungo's.  They don't have 
to worry so much about being overheard as the average muggle would 
just think that St. Mungo's is in another city and think nothing of 
it unless the details were revealed.  

Ginger, off to dreamland




From purrlygirlie at wildmail.com  Mon Sep  1 11:25:09 2003
From: purrlygirlie at wildmail.com (purrlygirlie)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 11:25:09 -0000
Subject: Minor Hermione Rant ( Was Re: Things that will come into play later.)
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20030831135331.00a873e0@localhost>
Message-ID: <bivaal+e2s0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79432

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Fred Uloth <prof_uloth at h...> 
wrote:
> At 07:14 AM 8/31/2003 -0400, mom31 wrote:
> 
> >4.  Why was Ron's role somewhat weakened in this book and Hermione's 
> >elevated?  I'm not talking about shipping here.  Yes, Ron was off doing 
> >his own stuff, which has to be important later.  Why couldn't he have 
> >succeeded on his own, and still contributed more with Harry and everyone 
> >else.  He was at the MoM, but he was put with Ginny and Luna, not Harry 
> >and Hermione.  Plus, JKR had him acting all stupid there.  He also kept 
> >himself distant from Harry by refusing to offer his opinion several times, 
> >even when Harry was about to do something dangerous.  Hermione and 
Harry 
> >were very close in this book.  Why did JKR need to strengthen their bond 
> >even more?  It makes me worry for Hermione in the next book!
> 
Purrly (who can't seem to keep her opinions to herself tonight...today..darn 
insomnia):
   Hermione might have had more "screen time" in this book, but what was 
done with it.  Ron need to go off on his own, that was important for his 
developement as a character.  And he did grow.
  Hermione on the other hand...well I don't think you could say anything about 
her at the end of OotP that wouldn't've also been true at the end of GoF.  Okay, 
she's now a prefect (as expected) and can say LV's name.  But she has 
learned nothing about how to better appraoch her activism, she still may or 
may not be romantically interested  Victor, Ron, or Harry, and in general she 
added nothing to the story but exposition, and the example of what everyone 
"should" have been doing or thinking.  Okay, she trapped Umbridge, but she 
trapped the evil female (Rita Skeeter) in GoF, too.  We already knew she 
could be cunning and tough in dealing with baddies.
  True, she was more mature, and self-assured than Ron to begin and more 
fully developed than Ginny and Neville.  And I'm glad that they all got a 
chance to shine.  Still, I hope that in book 6 Hermione will finally be wrong so 
that she can learn from her own mistakes instead of pointing out others.
  Don't get me wrong, I love Hermione.  That's why I'm so disappointed that 
she seemed to remain stagnat while everyone else had such wonderful 
growth.







From userdqc at terracom.net  Mon Sep  1 13:44:38 2003
From: userdqc at terracom.net (malior)
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 08:44:38 -0500
Subject: Neville and Snape
In-Reply-To: <1062402163.21717.50239.m10@yahoogroups.com>
References: <1062402163.21717.50239.m10@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <a05111b01bb78fd3ad554@[10.0.1.2]>

No: HPFGUIDX 79433

<waves from the back of the room>
Unlurking to ask...

If Neville is gaining in importance and strength (and I do believe 
that), what to make of the fact that his boggart assumes the form of 
Snape? Is Neville wrong (I hope), is Neville right (I wonder), or is 
this just a red herring?

malior, slinking back to the dungeon




From purrlygirlie at wildmail.com  Mon Sep  1 10:47:19 2003
From: purrlygirlie at wildmail.com (purrlygirlie)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 10:47:19 -0000
Subject: Weasley cousin/ShriekingTunnel/Wands,wands,wands/Patronus/Slide/St Mungo
In-Reply-To: <bitlci+g27f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <biv83n+97fe@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79434

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" <
catlady at w...> wrote:
> 
> 
> Joj mom31 wrote in 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/79342 :
> 
> << Cho's swan patronus. (snip) Was it to show us that Cho is a 
> powerful witch or was it just a personality match? (Swans are 
> beautiful from afar, but not very friendly and even a little
> dangerous up close). Was Hermione's otter a clue like Sirius's code 
> name "snuffles" (snuffed out)? >>
> 
> John Granger, who wrote a book about Alchemy and the Rowling oeuvre, 
> said in his Nimbus 2003 talk that the swan appears at that point in 
> OoP because the swan is a traditional alchemical symbol (whose 
> meaning I forget, sorry), and assigning it as Cho's Patronus was just 
> a way to stick a swan in.
> 
Purrly now:
   From what I remember, Mr. Granger said that the swan, as well as the lily 
and the moon, was a symbol associated with the white stage of the 
alchemical process, the stage between the breaking down of the black stage 
and the firey transformation of the red stage.  He believed that the sixth 
book would be th"White" book, as OotP had been the "Black" and the final 
book will be the "Red" book.  Following this theory, anything associated with 
the color white (Albus) or it's symbols (Cho, Lily, Luna, Moony) should be 
significant in the next book.





From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Mon Sep  1 14:44:02 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 15:44:02 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: Hermione SHIP question
References: <bivaal+e2s0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F535B32.000003.29535@monica>

No: HPFGUIDX 79435

 
 Can one of the Hermione/Harry SHIPpers out there explain it to me? I don't
see any clues towards it in the books at all. I've always thought that it
was 'obvious' that the Viktor thing was a brief fling brought on because she
was flattered at the way he was paying her attention while Ron takes her for
granted and that eventually she and Ron will end up together. It seemed to
me that that ship was obvious and that there are *no* hints at all of Harry
liking Hermione as more than a friend or Hermione liking him.

I'm not trying to put the people who like this ship down - I just want
someone to explain it to me - what is it that makes you think this is a
possibility?

K



From owlery2003 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 14:46:48 2003
From: owlery2003 at yahoo.com (Scott Santangelo)
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 07:46:48 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Side note: St.Mungos
In-Reply-To: <bivioi+4em4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030901144648.30292.qmail@web20714.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79436



quigonginger <quigonginger at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Geoff said:
 St.Mungo was leader of a 6th century ecclesiatical community on the  site of the present day Glasgow and is considered to be the city's founder.
> 
Mochajava13 replied: 
> Thanks for the answer!  But still, why would wizards name a hospital after a religious figure?  ,<snip>

Now Ginger:
<snip> it may have been started (and thus, named) by a wizarding family who were Christian and/or Scottish.
2)  St. Mungo may have been kind to wizards, so they named it in his honour.

----------------

More likely "St. Mungo" was really a wizard. Of course the muggles *thought* he was a "saint" . . . Mungo really sounds more wizardish (Mundungus, etc.).

owlery2003



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From margdean at erols.com  Mon Sep  1 14:26:57 2003
From: margdean at erols.com (Margaret Dean)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 10:26:57 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Things that will come into play later.
References: <bitovq+3ugc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F535731.CE8F040D@erols.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79437

mochajava13 wrote:

> Also, I thought Hermione and Cho's patronuses (however you pluralize
> that word) were so girly and cutesy.  Not that a stag strikes fear
> into the heart of anyone, but at least it's got big antlers to be,
> well, pointy an look menacing.  Harry's stag did charge at the
> dementors.  What's so threatening about a swan?  

Oh ho ho, try tangling with one and you'll find out right quick. 
They are big, strong birds -- five feet long with a seven-foot
wingspan.  From what I understand, a full-grown swan can break a
man's arm with a blow of its wing.  And they can definitely get
aggressive.  Last summer I carried around a quarter-sized bruise
on my arm for several weeks where I got pecked by an impatient
swan who thought I wasn't handing out the swan food fast enough. 
Being seriously attacked by one would be no joke.

Cutesy, my eye...speaking of which, if Cho has a swan Patronus,
she's definitely worth keeping an eye on.


--Margaret Dean
  <margdean at erols.com>



From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 15:48:30 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 15:48:30 -0000
Subject: Neville and Snape
In-Reply-To: <a05111b01bb78fd3ad554@[10.0.1.2]>
Message-ID: <bivpoe+jr4f@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79438

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, malior <userdqc at t...> wrote:
> <waves from the back of the room>
> Unlurking to ask...
> 
> If Neville is gaining in importance and strength (and I do believe 
> that), what to make of the fact that his boggart assumes the form 
of 
> Snape? Is Neville wrong (I hope), is Neville right (I wonder), or 
is 
> this just a red herring?
> 
> malior, slinking back to the dungeon

Laura:

Wouldn't it make sense that your boggart could change over time?  
Mummies and spiders and stuff like that are pretty child-like fears 
compared to those of Harry or Molly-or Remus, come to that.  




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 15:59:14 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 15:59:14 -0000
Subject: Minor Hermione Rant ( Was Re: Things that will come into play later.)
In-Reply-To: <bivaal+e2s0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bivqci+8lcl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79439

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "purrlygirlie" 
<purrlygirlie at w...> wrote:
well I don't think you could say anything about 
> her at the end of OotP that wouldn't've also been true at the end 
of GoF.  Okay, 
> she's now a prefect (as expected) and can say LV's name.  But she 
has 
> learned nothing about how to better appraoch her activism, she 
still may or 
> may not be romantically interested  Victor, Ron, or Harry, and in 
general she 
> added nothing to the story but exposition, and the example of what 
everyone 
> "should" have been doing or thinking.  Okay, she trapped Umbridge, 
but she 
> trapped the evil female (Rita Skeeter) in GoF, too.  We already 
knew she 
> could be cunning and tough in dealing with baddies.
>   True, she was more mature, and self-assured than Ron to begin and 
more 
> fully developed than Ginny and Neville.  And I'm glad that they all 
got a 
> chance to shine.  Still, I hope that in book 6 Hermione will 
finally be wrong so 
> that she can learn from her own mistakes instead of pointing out 
others.
>   Don't get me wrong, I love Hermione.  That's why I'm so 
disappointed that 
> she seemed to remain stagnat while everyone else had such wonderful 
> growth.

Laura:

She clearly has a lot to learn about tact, though.  Everything she 
said about or to the centaurs made me cringe.  So there's definitely 
room for improvement.

Hermione may be suffering from substitute parent syndrome-that is, of 
the trio, she has had to be the smartest, most self-controlled, most 
thoughtful and generally most grown-up, because Harry and Ron are 
still likely to act like a couple of goofballs.  Once she sees that 
they are growing up and can be trusted to behave a little more 
reliably, she may feel able to relax and open herself up a bit more.  




From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Mon Sep  1 16:12:14 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 16:12:14 -0000
Subject: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity 
In-Reply-To: <bitrc3+qavj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bivr4u+th7t@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79440

Naama wrote:

>> To assume that Dumbledore has edited the prophecy, or lied to 
Harry in some other way, makes for a very difficult *storytelling* 
problem, IMO. 
Dumbledore serves at least two narrative functions at the "end of the 
year talks" . One as himself. One as the narrator's voice. At the end 
of OoP, we learn a lot from Dumbledore about his own motivations, 
thoughts, regrets, etc. We learn from him about himself. But also he 
functions as the mystery-unravelling narrator.>>

Yes, but only within a plot of his own composing. Dumbledore is not 
affiliated, as Harry is, with the actual narration of the books. 
Dumbledore unravels the mysteries of the plot events of each book in 
as far as he has been involved in the mechanations of said events.
>> In addition, even within the story Dumbledore is the only one who 
knows the full 
content of the prophecy (we know from the second prophecy that 
Trellawney doesn't remember a thing after she wakes from a true 
trance). So, if he is lying to Harry, neither Harry nor the reader 
can ever realize it. <snip>To have Dumbledore lying to Harry and 
then "taking it back", is just really lame story telling. It's too 
easy a trick for an author to do, because then she can always take 
anything back, right? So, we can count on nothing. Quirrel is still 
alive, Harry staying alive has nothing to do with Lily's love, the 
prophecy never happened?>>

No, we know the prophecy happened because we see the image of Sybil 
Trelawny rising from the smashed shards of the globe. There's proof 
within the story outside of Dumbledore's own, highly subjective 
narrative. Lily's love-sacrifice is borne out by LV's acknowledgement 
of it. I'm not saying that *everything* DD has told Harry is false, 
just advocating that we read it all with a pinch of salt. I said in 
my initial post that the pauses in the prophecy as we have it offer 
the *possibility* that DD is editing it. Which brings me briefly to 
Pip:

>>*However*, the evidence that Pensieves provide objective evidence 
is 
becoming very strong. Both in GoF and OOP Harry is able to wander 
around in the scene and observe things that the person whose memory 
it is could not have seen.
<snip>
In both cases, the Pensieve appears to not so much store the 
person's *memory* as use the memory to access the actual event. <snip>
So, given the evidence that Pensieves provide an objective account 
of the event the 'trigger memory' is evoking; we can almost 
certainly trust the prophecy to be accurate in its wording.>>

Mm, but, as with Bertha Jorkins, DD has not entered the Pensieve, but 
summoned a piece of information appropriate to the point he is 
illustrating *from* the Pensieve. I'm not sure quite how he'd do it, 
but there's still a possibility that what Harry sees *could* be an 
edited version. Anyway, back to Naama, and I'll requote:

>> So, if [DD] is lying to Harry, neither Harry nor the reader can 
ever realize it. <snip>To have Dumbledore lying to Harry and 
then "taking it back", is just really lame story telling.>>
But I was arguing for a situation where Harry *could* realise it, not 
by being told by Dumbledore, but by working it out for himself. I 
predict that over the course of the next two books we'll see him 
becoming increasingly independent of Dumbledore, and perhaps a huge 
test of his loyalties occur when he realises, as we've done, that DD 
isn't working with his own best interests at heart. (I'm getting 
increasingly fond of Ever So Fallible!Dumbledore at the moment, 
spymaster or no spymaster.) The thing about mentor-pupil storylines 
is that there inevitably comes a point where the pupil overtakes, or 
at least is able to function without, the aid of a mentor.  What I 
was trying to get towards was a state where DD's end-of-term 
explanations no longer explain everything satisfactorily either to 
Harry or to the reader, and Harry constructs a new version of the 
narrative for himself, rather than simply allowing himself to be 
written the way DD wants. (I'm working on a chapter about The Prime 
of Miss Jean Brodie and writing oneself into authority at the moment, 
and there may be lots of overspill onto the list. Sorry) 

Naama again:
>>I think that when a thing is told that is obviously part of the 
story's bone structure (if you know what I mean), we can count on 
JKR  to not take it away it later on. In fact, I challenge you to 
look back at the story that we have, and see whether she has done 
anything like that before. I.e., established something as a fact and 
then demolished it later on.>>

Okay
prefect badges are silver ? no! prefect badges are scarlet and 
gold
?
I think there are lots of cases of similar occurrences. Perhaps not 
the absolute plot turnabout you suggest, but in the WW things 
frequently turn out to be other than Harry/reader initially 
understood them as. For example ? "there wasn't a wizard that didn't 
go bad who wasn't in Slytherin", but then we have Gryffindor Peter 
Pettigrew able to betray his best friends (Lexicon Steve says that 
Sirius was a Gryffindor; and Lupin got "the badge". Of course Peter 
was a Gryff too.). Dolores Umbridge is mean and evil and Harry's scar 
burns around her, but she's not a DE. Our expectations are 
consistently turned on their heads, and JKR was certainly setting us 
up for *something* like this when she had Firenze stress to Harry's 
class that nothing is completely predictable/knowable (sorry, no 
texts). While I don't think that we're going to find out that Lily's 
protection was absolutely irrelevant after all, or that Sirius isn't 
really dead, I'm still not convinced that the OoP denoument was a 
completely straight telling. Pip pointed out areas where DD has 
already mislead Harry, and we have also been offered up evidence that 
DD's version is not necessarily always the most 
authoritative/authentic. Look how different his and Snape's versions 
of the Prank are, and how they each convey their point to Harry by 
shifting emphasis as they describe events. Both are valid versions, 
neither objective.  

Ooh, one more thing.
Pip:
>>When I get to produce my post on MAGIC DISHWASHER with new, 
improved Order of the Phoenix (which at the rate I'm going will be 
about two months before Book Six comes out), I will not be taking 
Dumbledore at face value. >>

Woohoo! That's the best news I've had in quite a wee while.
Kirstini











From cressida_tt at hotmail.com  Mon Sep  1 16:23:16 2003
From: cressida_tt at hotmail.com (cressida_tt)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 16:23:16 -0000
Subject: Hermione SHIP question
In-Reply-To: <3F535B32.000003.29535@monica>
Message-ID: <bivrpk+lr08@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79441

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" <kcawte at b...> 
wrote:
>  
>  Can one of the Hermione/Harry SHIPpers out there explain it to me? 
I don't
> see any clues towards it in the books at all. I've always thought 
that it
> was 'obvious' that the Viktor thing was a brief fling brought on 
because she
> was flattered at the way he was paying her attention while Ron 
takes her for
> granted and that eventually she and Ron will end up together. It 
seemed to
> me that that ship was obvious and that there are *no* hints at all 
of Harry
> liking Hermione as more than a friend or Hermione liking him.
> 
> I'm not trying to put the people who like this ship down - I just 
want
> someone to explain it to me - what is it that makes you think this 
is a
> possibility?
> 
Cressida replies: It is certainly a valid question but I am afraid 
one which I can't answer for you. I am afraid I agree that I have 
been unable to seewhere H/Hr in canon comes from. I can however point 
you to this thread at Fiction Alley where those people who DO see 
where it comes from like to post:

http://www.fictionalley.org/fictionalleypark/forums/showthread.php?
s=8a578f29112bea3ae6a92ad818566293&threadid=42914




From wsherratt3338 at rogers.com  Mon Sep  1 16:51:23 2003
From: wsherratt3338 at rogers.com (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 16:51:23 -0000
Subject: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bivr4u+th7t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bivteb+f0p3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79442

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kirstini" <kirst_inn at y...> 
wrote:
I'm not saying that *everything* DD has told Harry is false, 
> just advocating that we read it all with a pinch of salt. I said 
in 
> my initial post that the pauses in the prophecy as we have it 
offer 
> the *possibility* that DD is editing it. (SNIP)
> But I was arguing for a situation where Harry *could* realise it, 
not 
> by being told by Dumbledore, but by working it out for himself. I 
> predict that over the course of the next two books we'll see him 
> becoming increasingly independent of Dumbledore, and perhaps a 
huge 
> test of his loyalties occur when he realises, as we've done, that 
DD 
> isn't working with his own best interests at heart. (I'm getting 
> increasingly fond of Ever So Fallible!Dumbledore at the moment, 
> spymaster or no spymaster.) The thing about mentor-pupil 
storylines 
> is that there inevitably comes a point where the pupil overtakes, 
or 
> at least is able to function without, the aid of a mentor.  What I 
> was trying to get towards was a state where DD's end-of-term 
> explanations no longer explain everything satisfactorily either to 
> Harry or to the reader, and Harry constructs a new version of the 
> narrative for himself, rather than simply allowing himself to be 
> written the way DD wants.

I have to say, I think that this interpretation of Dumbledore cannot 
be right.  It's one thing for adults to read these books, and read 
intricate possibilities into them.  But they are still children's 
books, and I think it would be bad, even immoral, for Rowling to set 
up children to think that Dumbledore is good and trustworthy, and 
then to knock that down.  He is the primary "father figure" in 
Harry's world, whether Harry overtly acknowledges it or not.  For 
more than half the series, there has been no hint that Dumbledore is 
anything but a good character, on the side of good, and working for 
good.  A child would especially recognize the father-archetype being 
depicted:  old, wise, protecting, full of information, loving, 
concerned, etc.  To seriously start undermining this picture would 
be almost cruel; it would be telling children, "You can't trust 
anyone.  People who tell you they're acting for your own good never 
are, they're just lying and using you."  I would call that immoral, 
not to mention false, and I don't see any sign that Rowling is 
heading that way.

My reasoning is that Rowling is not really all that subtle when 
she's conveying a message.  An example of where she did do a sort 
of "debunking" is in the way she describes the MoM, and by 
extension, politicians and government in general.  In PS the issue 
hardly arises, but by CoS we start hearing about the MoM, and from 
the start it comes across as seemingly efficient and well-meaning, 
but rule-bound and troublesome.  Harry gets an automatic reprimand 
for Dobby's magic-doing, and there's no way to explain or fix what's 
happened.  Arthur Weasley is harrassed by petty problems.  Mr. Fudge 
is weak and easily cowed by important people like Lucius Malfoy.  
Even though Harry later on has a more positive experience with Fudge 
in PoA, the view of government and "officialdom" is chequered and 
shaded; it's not such a big surprise when the MoM becomes actively 
antagonistic later on - we were never led to expect that much from 
such a quarter anyway.  This is not at all the case with 
Dumbledore.  By now, to find that he's a cold calculator, a 
Richelieu, a manipulator and a liar would be almost as shocking as 
finding out that he's really been a DE all along.

What I think Rowling IS doing is showing us how growing older does 
not mean just getting bigger, stronger, more independent and 
happier.  It can lead to a lot of misunderstanding and trouble; 
after all, have we really learned something new about Dumbledore or 
about Harry?  Harry is the one who changed in book 5 - everyone has 
noticed it.  Why are we to suppose that all his changes are for the 
better, that his changing opinion of Dumbledore is now the true 
one?  Isn't it possible that Harry is mistaken, and that his 
problems and angst are interfering with a realistic view of 
Dumbledore and other characters?

Wanda




From distractedone at comcast.net  Mon Sep  1 16:06:42 2003
From: distractedone at comcast.net (Merlin)
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 12:06:42 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Was:  Voldemort Will Win; Harry's Viewpoint Necessary?
References: <bit6sh+a495@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <006601c370a3$08c3dda0$7e302b44@ao.lop.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79443

"msbeadsley" wrote:
> I really like this thread of thought, and it would really be great 
> for the plot to have such an outstanding twist, Harry dying, but 
> there's a slight problem to this. You see, from the very first moment 
> of Harry's eleventh birthday up  to this point, the whole story was 
> told from Harry's own, individual point of view. 

The biggest problem with this train of thought though is the fact that if Trelawny's prediction is true and Harry is the only one who can defeat Voldemort, and Voldemort is basicly imortal now if Harry dies Voldemort takes over the Wizarding world and then Muggle world for ever.  No writer would ever create such a scenario if they wanted to be beleived.

> (And *I* want to know who the rich 
> man is who's been keeping Riddle House "for tax purposes")

No cannon for this has ever been written. 

Merlin







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From t.forch at mail.dk  Mon Sep  1 17:18:23 2003
From: t.forch at mail.dk (Troels Forchhammer)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 19:18:23 +0200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why Harry Potter "cannot" be set in
  1991-?
In-Reply-To: <bitnfe+smra@eGroups.com>
References: <4.3.2.7.2.20030831180339.024d9500@pop3.norton.antivirus>
Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20030901191558.0212ff00@pop3.norton.antivirus>

No: HPFGUIDX 79444

At 20:57 31-08-03 +0000, you wrote:
>--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Troels Forchhammer
><t.forch at m...> wrote:
>
> > The quotation most specifically /does/ say PlayStation.
>
>I am not aware of any reference to a Playstation in HARRY POTTER AND
>THE PHILOSOPHER'S STONE.

My bad - I thought it referred to the quotation in book 4 - I never
imagined that the use of PlayStation could refer to anything else, so
I never bothered to check the context - I apologise.
(I have never seen anyone discuss any other references to a PlayStation
in Harry Potter, so I just reacted - bad form.)

/Troels




From fc26det at aol.com  Mon Sep  1 17:43:20 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 17:43:20 -0000
Subject: The Riddle House
In-Reply-To: <bivii9+gm80@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj00fo+ajcm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79445

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "amanitamuscaria1" 
<saraandra at w...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" 
<msbeadsley at y...   
> > BIG SNIP
> >(And *I* want to know who the rich 
> > man is who's been keeping Riddle House "for tax purposes")
> > 
> > "msbeadsley"
> Now Me :
> Lucius Malfoy, perchance?
> Equivalent of Grimmauld Place for DEs?
> Cheers. AmanitaMuscaria

My thoughts exactly.  Remember that Lucius Malfoy also is the one who 
had TR's diary and stated that he had other items hidden in his 
mansion.  Maybe that was his value to LV.  Keeper of the Keepsakes.
Susan




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 18:09:06 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 18:09:06 -0000
Subject: Why Harry Potter "cannot" be set in 1991-?
In-Reply-To: <20030901132646.39891.qmail@web13114.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bj0202+kps0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79446

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Odile Falaise
<odilefalaise at y...> wrote:
> 
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita
> Prince Winston)" <catlady at w...> and others wrote
> about: 
> 
> <previous notes snipped>
> 
> <<<Dudley chucked his Playstation out the window, thus was no longer
able to play Mega-Mutilation III, in GOBLET OF FIRE, set in 1994, when
... Playstations were not yet available in UK or US, but had been
test-marketted in Japan. ...>>>

> 
> Odile chiming in:
> 
> ... re... Playstations, and setting them in the HP timeline? 
> ... I have no idea what the difference is between a Playstation, an
> X-Box, a Gameboy, etc. etc. ....  ... it is not really important to 
> me - I do know, however, that a spoiled couch potato boy like Dudley
> Dursley is likely to have way too many videogames and other gadgets. 
> I wonder if JKR is so schooled in the history ... of ... videogame 
> systems that she would know ... the correct versions into her 
> stories, ... set in the ... '90s, ...written later?
> 
> Odile

bboy_mn:
I think you are closer to seeing this issue clearly than most. I see
the Playstation as a sort of familiar icon. One of the reasons both
the muggle and wizard worlds are so comfortable, familiar, and
immediately accepted by us, is that JKR builds both worlds around
familiar icons, images, and stereotypes. We readily accept these
unlikely worlds because they are so familiar to us. 

Wizards and witches are just the way we always imagined wizards and
witches would be with promenent noses, pointed hats, and flowing
robes, and broomsticks, and while familiar, JKR manages to add her own
personal twist to it. The same with the muggle world; muggle are
exactly as normal, bland, hopelessly conformist, oblivious, and
lacking in imagination as we would expect muggles to be (...any
muggles living in your neighorhood? ..lurking around the place where
you work? ...I thought so.), and yet, are slightly twisted in a way
that is most delicious to read.

I think the Playstation was simply one of those familiar things that
made the Dursley's life, which you must admit is a bit odd, seem
common, normal, typical, and most of all familiar and comfortable to
us. Also, it, amoung other things, helps establish that Dudley is
hopelessly spoiled and Harry is hopelessly deprived.

It's entirely possible when JKR decided to put a video game in the
story, she used the only video game she could think of. Or to her,
perhaps, Playstation is the generic name for all video game machines.

Now we come to the true and only test of effective story writing. I
doesn't matter if JKR's story stands up to intense timeline analysis;
the only thing that matters is, did you believe it when you read it?
If you were so captivated by the story that the Playstation release
date was the farthest thing from your mind, and what happens next in
the story was the most important thing on your mind, then JKR
succeeded totally as a writer. 

The fact that the timeline doesn't add up is nothing more than a bit
of side trivia of obssessed HP nuts like us.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn




From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Mon Sep  1 18:30:03 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 18:30:03 -0000
Subject: TBAY: Two Little Boys
In-Reply-To: <bipdnm+pmun@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj037b+e1nq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79447

On board the Narrative Ark, Kirstini and Hayes were polishing their 
most recently acquired can(n)on.

"Ever So Fallible!Dumbledore has become a favourite  theory of mine 
recently." Kirstini said, happily. " If we're right about this shift 
towards realism, then Ever So Fallible!DD's relevance is traceable in 
Harry's increasing frustration with DD in OoP. The parts of the 
narrative that focalise through Harry (which I think we could 
describe as the parts which pass explicit moral judgement) have never 
so much as questioned DD's actions before, let alone judged them 
anything other than absolutely right. OotP  sets DD up for potential 
fallibility, and offers Harry the beginnings of a survival instinct 
independant of him. Ever So Fallible!Dumbledore is VERY...um...grey."
She put down her duster, disconsolately.  

"Oh Hayes, we really need some sort of acronym! Anyway, I think it's 
going to ultimately lead to his death."

"Ooh, blood?" Hayes breathed, a worrying gleam in her eye. 

"Yup. Lots and lots of blood ? Dursley blood, wizard blood - all 
those lives that would be lost by him caring about Harry too much may 
ultimately end up endangered anyway, perhaps because he attempts to 
stick too rigidly to his master-plan." She paused, tilting her head 
as she rubbed a particularly sticky spot off the flank of the canon.

"You know," said Hayes "We should think about getting ourselves some 
natty grey FEATHERBOAS to go with our uniforms...just for 
evening/occasional wear
I mean, blood can still be realistic, 
right...WHAT?"

Kirstini had jumped up in alarm. A voice in her ear had begun to 
whisper:

"The connection I'm making is that the boy that wasn't marked is 
integral to the success of the boy that was. Quite a few of the 
events that give Harry the tools or information he needs have 
stemmed in some way from Neville. There's loads of canon to support 
it..."

Kirstini flailed around deck, bewildered. "Whaasss? Wha?"

"I think this might be your problem," Hayes observed, pulling a piece 
of flesh-coloured string off Kirstini's hat.

"Oh, it's one of those faulty Extendable Ears I took a delivery of in 
July," Kirstini said.

"Want me to chuck it?"

"Naah, hang on. That sounded interesting."

Kirstini held the string up to her ear again: 
"...PoA was actually easier to work with than COS," the little voice 
continued. "Neville is much more involved in the main body of the 
story. For instance, Harry using Neville's name on the Knight bus. 
Harry is not especially close to Neville. Why would it be the first 
name that pops into his head? Another example is the boggart 
incident. For the first time we see Neville succed at a spell, not 
once but twice in the same class. Is it coincidence that that same 
class leads Harry to achieving the patronus and therefore being able 
to save himself, Sirius and Hermione? I don't think so. Neville is 
also the key to the first inkling we get that Sirius is not after 
Harry at all. When Ron awa...ccckkrrr..."

"Darn reception's mucked up," Kirstini muttered, and began to wander 
about the deck, bobbing her head about through the static until the 
voice returned.

"...Only two students are dramatically affected by the 
demonstration of the Unforgivables- Harry and Neville. I know this 
is because of what they each have in their past but I think it is 
significant that they are the only two in their Gryffindors in their 
year to share that level of past horror. Of course, it could be 
argued that each of their experiences are direct results of the 
prophecy but that's another theory...ccrrrxxxxx..."

"Oh, for Merlin's sake!" shouted Kirstini, shaking the Extendable Ear 
in frustration. The voice continued, suddenly.

"Neville's character changes purpose. In fact, IMO, he becomes more 
instrumental to Harry than he had previously been. Harry's choices, 
in fact his very personality, precluded the Neville 
connection...rrkbeeeeooo...This aspect of the relationship has been 
around since SS/PS. Neville is and is Harry's moral compass, leading 
him toward the maturity he'll need to continue to fight 
Voldemort...beeeoooophhsst...the never ending connection between 
Harry and Neville...Neville is responsible for Harry's moral 
development. At the same time Harry is responsible for Neville's rise 
in confidence-especially in OOP. Their paths are always circling each 
other, occasionally becoming twisted and crossing, but always 
connected in the end."

"Interesting," Kirstini muttered. She pulled a little notebook out of 
her hatband and scribbled a couple of entries in it. 

"Hayes, would you mind having a flick through the archives for me?" 
she said, handing Hayes the notebook.

"Yeah, those aren't a problem at all," Hayes said, tucking her arm 
back into her jacket. Kirstini descended to the cabin, and marched 
purposefully past Talisman's empty portrait to the fireplace. She 
picked up a handful of glittering powder from a small pot on the 
mantlepiece, and threw it in the fire. "Linda, I want a word!" she 
shouted.
There was a flash, and Linda stepped out onto the hearth, dusting her 
trousers down.

"Nice place you've got here," she said, conversationally. MC!James, 
who had been skulking in a corner contemplating making a large 
donation to charity, jumped up and ushered her into a chair.
Kirstini perched on the table next to her, beside the large plate of 
tapas MC!James had set in front of Linda, and began.
"Right. About this connection between Neville and Harry. You said 
that you wondered why Neville's was the first name that popped into 
Harry's head when he was on the Knight bus ? and it put me in mind of 
something else."

Hayes came clomping up the stairs and handed some books and a pile of 
what looked like junk to Kirstini. She was covered in dust. 
"Hmmm...ah! Here we go," Kirstini cleared her throat and began to 
read.
	"By the time they were sixteen and had reached the fourth 
form...they remained unmistakably Brodie, and were all famous in the 
school, which is to say they were held in suspicion and not much 
liking...Along came Mary Macgregor, the last member of the set, whose 
fame rested on her being a silent lump, a nobody whom everybody could 
blame" (1) The same character is later described as "officially the 
faulty one."

"I don't remember a Mary Macgregor in canon..." said Linda, confused.

"It's not canon. It's a quotation from "The Prime of Miss Jean 
Brodie" by Muriel Spark, said Hayes. "You see, in addition to the 
fine theorising work we conduct, the Ark is also a place for archival 
research. We've got thousands of shelves of reference 
material...would you like a cough drop, Kirstini?"

"No, but I'd like to get on with the can(n)on I found for Linda," 
said Kirstini.

"I'll show you later," Hayes mouthed to Linda. Kirstini continued, 
picking up the second archive Hayes had brought her.

"Here's some more:
>>>
>Gen made the point that writing Neville off is easy because of the
way he's usually portrayed. I agree. We see Neville from Harry's
perspective, and Harry tends to write Neville off most of the time.>

That's an excellent point -- Harry (pre-GoF) wrote off Neville, 
because it's easier to ignore/feel-sorry-for the helpless or clueless 
types when you're busy saving the world.>>>(2)

"That was a listie called Matt, writing way back when the messages 
were only in quadruple figures. I just felt that it backed up what 
I'm getting at ? Neville has been bred into a particular attitude 
which makes him secondary to Harry. He's not really got any 
especially good friends, and this is something constant through all 
five books, although he does appear to have developed a bit of an 
(unrequited) crush on Ginny. Harry, meanwhile, discovers himself 
famous and popular for the very first time ? his social trajectory 
moves upward on entry to Hogwarts where Neville, the pureblood, moves 
downwards, partly because he's been taught he's inferior, partly 
because he instinctively shies away to prevent the truth about his 
parents from coming out. The truth about Harry's parents, of course, 
is widely known. 

"Until Harry finds out about the Longbottoms, and begins to empathise 
with Neville, Neville has been "officially the faulty one." Not that 
HRH are as mean as the girls in this book, but they don't really tend 
to take him into account. There's that awful scene after Moody has 
demonstrated the Unforgivables, when Harry is too wrapped up in 
himself..."

"As per usual," Hayes muttered.

"Hem *hem*...when Harry is too wrapped up in himself to realise that 
only a few beds away there's someone else still awake who is 
suffering, and who understands exactly what is going through his 
mind. Neville's is the first name he thinks of on the Knight Bus 
because Neville has been trained up ? by his family, by Snape, even 
by the releative exclusion he exists in in Gryffindor Tower ? to be 
an all-purpose scapegoat, much as Harry was at the Dursleys.

"However, for Harry to identify to any degree with Neville involves, 
at first, an identification against social type. Harry (much like 
Draco)is a leader who has been suppressed. Neville has also been 
suppressed, but his place in the social dynamic takes on a different 
form. We've got a lovely canon upstairs based on the premise that 
Neville finally develops past the inevitable description "a round-
faced forgetful boy" in OoP because Harry is finally beginning to 
realise that people are hugely complex, and not easily labelled. It's 
a nice counterpart to all the Mudblood-ing that the baddies indulge 
in. 

"Anyway, the step that Harry makes in beginning to include Neville in 
his esteem is a big one in his development into an appropriate hero. 
He's not there yet ? remember that on the train he's hugely 
embarrassed, not just because Cho sees him covered in Stinksap, but 
because he's sitting with Neville and Luna at the time.
But I digress. I called you here to point out to you that someone 
else besides your good self and Dumbledore has made a connection 
between Harry and Neville."

Here she paused to hand Linda the last thing that Hayes had brought 
up from the bowels of the Ark. It was a miniscule can(n)on 
labelled "PS ? `The Potions Master'" Linda raised it to her face, and 
a tinny voice snapped at her.
" `You, Potter, why didn't you tell Longbottom not to add the quills? 
Thought he'd make you look good if he failed, did you? A point from 
Gryffindor!'"(3)

"Yes, it's Snape again," Kirstini said wearily. "Anyway, this got me 
thinking. This is taken from Harry's very first Potions lesson, when 
Snape has only just met Harry and is reacting so strongly because of 
his resemblance to James. Now, this sort of thing causes big problems 
for the Snapeologists, because they have to spend a lot of time 
defending the fact that they fancy someone who is so utterly mean to 
poor little Neville, with apparently no provocation, bless `em. A lot 
of the time, however, they protest that Snape is actually trying to 
toughen Neville and Harry up to prepare them for the big bad world. 
Apart from the fact that you've got another example of the N-H 
connection right there ? not only are they victims of Voldemort, 
they're both victims of Snape, and respond differently, interestingly.

 "I re-read this scene slightly diffently knowing that Harry has an 
extraordinary physical resemblance to James, and that James and Snape 
were rather less like "yourself and Mr Malfoy", and rather more like 
Mr Malfoy and Mr Longbottom. Now, we know that Snape looks at Harry 
and sees James. James probably would have acted in the manner Snape 
accuses Harry of ? oh, stop snivelling, MC!James! We've already 
agreed that this doesn't refer to you ? and therefore Snape, now in a 
position to do something about it, takes a point from Gryffindor in 
order to teach James MarkII to behave differently. Not a great 
teaching method, but still... 

"Anyway, Snape instinctively makes this particular connection between 
Neville and Harry, perhaps because Neville is vaguely reminiscent of 
Peter Pettigrew, who James continually used to make himself look 
good. Remember, much of Snape's bile is reserved for 
James's "admirers", too. I don't really think even Snape would call 
Sirius an admirer, when he's clearly an equal. Peter, however, isn't. 
If Snape looks at Harry and (mis)reads H=J, then he's also reading 
N=P. Harry and Neville haven't been particularly involved with each 
other up until this point, so Snape's connection isn't based on any 
factual evidence of the lives of the two boys in frot of him. Whether 
he makes this connection simply because he's aware of the original 
prophecy and connects the two boys this way, or because he's aware of 
some greater connection between the two of them, I don't know, but 
that's definitely the connection he makes... I'm not trying to say 
that Neville is a reincarnated Pettigrew or anything ? remember, the 
H=J equation is a mistake on Snape's part.

"However, I'm not sure what he's up to, if this is the case. I can 
understand removing all those points from Harry in a misguided 
attempt to teach him not to be his father, but surely knocking all 
the confidence out of Neville would be more likely to encourage, 
rather than squash Pettigrewism. Anyway, this can(n)on's yours if you 
want it. I thought you might be able to build it up...?"

Linda was still catching her breath from this verbal onslaught when 
Kirstini jumped off the table.

"Got an idea!" she muttered, running downstairs to the archives.

"Phew!" said Linda. "I thought she was going to tell me off or 
something. Is she usually this ? forceful?" 

"Nah," said Hayes, through a mouthful of aibondijas. "It's just a 
phase she's been going through since she got her rear-admiral's hat. 
I reckon she's just been reading too many Captain Cindy back posts. 
Are you going to eat those?"

        <"((>< <"((>< <"((>< <"((>< <"((>< <"((><
 

1)Muriel Spark, The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie, (Penguin, pp6-8)
2) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/6013
3) As I'm not actually on board a massive ocean-faring 
research/reference vessel, but in my office surrounded by the 
complete works of Muriel Spark and none of the works of JK Rowling, 
I've no way of verifying this quote. I noticed it and tried to 
memorise it last night, though, so it should be fairly accurate.





From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 18:36:17 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 18:36:17 -0000
Subject: Neville and Snape
In-Reply-To: <a05111b01bb78fd3ad554@[10.0.1.2]>
Message-ID: <bj03j1+ft03@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79448

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, malior <userdqc at t...> wrote:
> <waves from the back of the room>
> Unlurking to ask...
> 
> If Neville is gaining in importance and strength (and I do believe 
> that), what to make of the fact that his boggart assumes the form of 
> Snape? Is Neville wrong (I hope), is Neville right (I wonder), or is 
> this just a red herring?
> 
> malior, slinking back to the dungeon

bboy_mn:

Not sure what you mean by 'wrong' and 'right'. Are you referring to
whether Snape should be feared?

As far as Neville, I have been a Neville fan and promotor for years. I
have been telling anyone who would listen that Neville is an important
character in the story, and that he is a great and powerful wizard.

It's common knowledge that Neville is a bit timid and lacking in
confidence, and that makes him the perfect target for Snape's bullying
and intimidation. It's easy to see why Neville would dread Snape's
classes and fear Snape. But you will notice that he continued to go
and continued to struggle with the fear and intimidation on his own.
He did go running for help or looking for a shoulder to cry on, and
from what I recall, has never outwardly complained about it. I think
that says some pretty positive things about Neville's true strength.

Now in the latest book, Neville faced 10 Death Eaters in heated
battle, and instead of cowering in the corner, time and time again,
charged right into the thick of that battle fighting furiously with
everything he had. Finally, we see Neville as Neville was meant to be.

So, how scary do you think Snape is going to look now that Neville has
bravely and courageously fought against 10 Death Eaters? Suddenly, I
don't think Snape is going to look all that scary. In fact, I'm kind
of hoping for some kind of confrontation between Snape and Neville in
the next book. A confrontation where Neville makes it clear in no
uncertain terms that Snape is a great bullying git, and that Neville
isn't falling for that act any more.

What I would like to see, amoung many other fantasy scenarios, is
Snape brutally bully Neville in class, then walk away with a satisfied
smile. Oddly, instead of looking fearful, Neville is smiling.
Suddenly, Neville cast a huge golden Gryphon Patronus at Snape,
causing Snape to fall over backwards recoiling in fear. Then, still
smiling, Neville says, 'Oh sorry, my mistake, thought you were a
Dementor for a second there'.

Or some equally smartass remark.

bboy_mn, who will never ever resign from the N.I.N.E club.




From hebrideanblack at earthlink.net  Mon Sep  1 19:27:30 2003
From: hebrideanblack at earthlink.net (Wendy St. John)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 19:27:30 -0000
Subject: Animagus
In-Reply-To: <3F508945.2000905@pacificpuma.com>
Message-ID: <bj06j2+4eva@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79449

 jazmyn <jazmyn at p...> wrote:

> I have a theory on animagus.  I believe a wizard with any 
reasonable > skill in transfiguration can turn into any animal they 
have practiced > at.  What defines an Animagus is the ability to 
turn into an animal AT > WILL, meaning without a wand.   With a 
wand, they could turn into other > kinds of animals, but the animal 
form they are most specialized in, is > their 'animagus form' and 
they can switch back and forth between this > form at will, with or 
without a wand.

Now me (Wendy):

The only problem with this theory is that we have canon which 
indicates that someone transfigured into an animal does not retain 
his or her human mental faculties. Whereas, it seems clear that 
someone in their animagus form does, at least to great degree 
(McGonagall reading the map, for example, as well as various 
comments made by Sirius). Sirius did say that his emotions were 
different in his animagus form, but he still appears to be able to 
think as a human.

Here's what "Quiddich Through the Ages" says about animal 
transfigurations:

"Those few Animagi who transform into winged creatures may enjoy 
flight, but they are a rarity. The witch or wizard who finds him- or 
herself transfigured into a bat may take to the air, but, having a 
bat's brain, they are sure to forget where they want to go the 
moment they take flight."

This indicates to me that there is a substantive difference between 
Animagi transformation and transfiguration more than just the 
ability to do it with or without a wand.

Having said that, I will admit to being confused by Krums' partially 
successful shark transfiguration during the second task in GoF. If 
transfigured humans have the brains of their animal forms, why 
didn't the transfigured Krum go on a feeding frenzy? This is 
contradictory with what we're told in QTA. Maybe the fact that the 
transfiguration *was* incomplete allowed Krum to retain his capacity 
for human thought. Perhaps if he'd transfigured completely into a 
shark, this would not have been the case? 

Hopefully we'll learn a bit more about this later, but for now I 
lean towards the conclusion that transfiguration into an animal is 
not actually a useful thing that wizards and witches would want to 
perform upon themselves in most cases. 

Hmnh. In trying to answer a question, I've only brought up a new 
question, haven't I? Funny how often that happens around here! ;-)

Wendy





From conshydot at email.com  Mon Sep  1 19:29:12 2003
From: conshydot at email.com (dasienko)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 19:29:12 -0000
Subject: Why Harry Potter CAN be set in 1991-? was Why Harry Potter cannot be...
In-Reply-To: <20030901132646.39891.qmail@web13114.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bj06m8+k8ho@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79450

Okay, the playstation thing may be an icon out of time, 

 The time line in HP is usually centered on Nearly Headless Nick's 
Deathday. -92

There is even better proof that  OoP is set on the correct muggle  
time line. Remember the hosepipe ban? 
( I found this referenced on another board and decided to see if it 
were true)

>From another board:

There was a hosepipe ban in 1995-96


The Drought of 1995-1996

1995 and 1996 were the two driest consecutive years for over 200 
years.

Despite the experiences of 1975 water authorities were still 
unprepared for the hot dry summer of 1995. By August many rivers were 
flowing at less than half their average for the time of year. Low 
water levels meant less water could be extracted by water companies 
and so there was less water to dilute pollutants.

1996 was wetter than the previous year but the irregular outbreaks of 
rain were still insufficient to fill reservoirs or replenish 
aquifers. from www.landau-forte.org.uk/g...severe.htm 
******************************

My Independent Research.


>From the House of Commons records.
 Water companies are not legally required to provide an unrestricted 
supply of water.[3] Their main duty is to provide water for domestic 
purposes (e.g. drinking and sanitation). Their obligation to provide 
water for other purposes is more limited and OFWAT consider it 
reasonable for companies to use occasional restrictions on the non-
domestic use of water, such as hose-pipe bans, to help balance supply 
and demand in very dry weather. Such restrictions have been 
widespread in recent years (Figure 1They affected 40 per cent of the 
population in England and Wales in 1995-96, and 31 per cent in 1996-
97. Problems in maintaining water supplies were particularly serious 
in parts of West Yorkshire in 1995, where for a time the threat of 
cuts in domestic supplies was averted only with the help of a large 
operation to bring water into the area in road tankers.[5] 


Or an article at:http://www.yhua.ac.uk/review/pdf%
20files/volume6/rr6_1-4.McDonald.pdf

This is proof that JKR is on a real MUGGLE time line.





From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Mon Sep  1 19:38:56 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 19:38:56 -0000
Subject: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bivteb+f0p3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj078g+p7ng@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79451

Wanda wrote, in a very well thought out and heartfelt post, which I 
felt the need to respond to:

>>It's one thing for adults to read these books, and read intricate 
possibilities into them.  But they are still children's books, and I 
think it would be bad, even immoral, for Rowling to set up children 
to think that Dumbledore is good and trustworthy, and then to knock 
that down.>>

But it happens in life. And I remember JKR saying once that she was 
writing books which children would enjoy, not trying to preach moral 
examples at them. Personally, I think that Lily having Harry at such 
a young age is a terrible example to set to little girls (oops, my 
Affective Fallacy is showing again <g>), but JKR's own personal 
morality is not mine, and this makes me reconsider a bit. Yes, they 
are children's books, but, as someone pointed out today, they contain 
scenes of murder, torture, child abuse, distressing deaths and 
extreme grief, and sadism. Ooh, and muckle great creatures which can 
suck your soul out and leave you as nothing but a husk of person. I 
don't think any of the parents on list would be able to claim that 
OoP is the sort of book you'd pick to read to your five year old, and 
I don't think a five year old reader would be able to understand or 
even enjoy OoP for more than the naughty twins, or Vernon Dursley's 
bluster.
<steels herself for barrage of flamers from indignant parents with 
exceptionally bright toddlers> 
JKR's ideal reader grows up at a speed roughly similar to Harry 
himself. 

 >> [DD] is the primary "father figure" in Harry's world, whether 
Harry overtly acknowledges it or not.>>

Mm, and look at what's happened to all of Harry's other father-
figures. Harry became aware of James and Sirius's failings, and they 
receded in their influence over him, until he was able to make moral 
judgements which over-ruled theirs. Dumbledore is also a mentor-
figure, don't forget.
 
>>For more than half the series, there has been no hint that 
Dumbledore is anything but a good character, on the side of good, and 
working for good.>>

Pip and I have both highlighted areas where DD's actions have been 
ambiguous. During the "gleam of triumph" bit in GoF, Harry catches a 
glimpse of another, altogether more frightenting side of DD. There 
must have been hints, if so many people on the list *have* picked up 
on them. They might not have appeared to be hints to you, but I think 
something which has been increasingly obvious in recent 
daltogetheriscussion (thinking about all the "Harry's sexual 
preference" posts) is that every reader interprets the subtleties of 
canon for themself. 
Also, we aren't denying for a moment that he's working for good. Just 
questioning his methods.

>> My reasoning is that Rowling is not really all that subtle when 
she's conveying a message.  An example of where she did do a sort 
of "debunking" is in the way she describes the MoM, and by 
extension, politicians and government in general.  <big snip>
It's not such a big surprise when the MoM becomes actively 
antagonistic later on - we were never led to expect that much from 
such a quarter anyway.  This is not at all the case with 
Dumbledore.  By now, to find that he's a cold calculator, a 
Richelieu, a manipulator and a liar would be almost as shocking as 
finding out that he's really been a DE all along.>>

But I was trying to point out that she may very well be creating a 
situation where this sort of realisation is possible. The 
destabilising of the MoM as a trustworthy force working for Harry's 
protection was fairly gradual - we may never have warmed to him, but 
Fudge intervenes immediatly for Harry's protection in PoA. And, as 
Pip pointed out, DD has already revealed that he is at least mildly 
calculating. By telling Harry "I cared more about your life than the 
other lives which would be lost", DD implies that he is *now* putting 
those lives before Harry's. Manipulation is inevitable in the 
position he's in, which is that of the head of an army at war. War 
isn't a very nice thing for children to read about either - there are 
lots of random deaths, and generals inevitably have to make judgement 
calls which occasionally turn out to have been mistakes and lose 
lives. Which is what DD admits happened to Sirius. We've also got to 
a state where loss of life as battle casualty is something which all 
the members of the Order prepare themselves for, a concept which 
children may find hard to understand, but it's still mentioned, in a 
children's book. This is a realistically depicted war. And the 
generals of real wars don't tend to be twinkly-eyed eccentrics with 
no agendas or strategies for victory (it would explain a lot, though).

>>What I think Rowling IS doing is showing us how growing older does 
not mean just getting bigger, stronger, more independent and 
happier.  It can lead to a lot of misunderstanding and trouble; 
after all, have we really learned something new about Dumbledore or 
about Harry?  Harry is the one who changed in book 5 - everyone has 
noticed it.  Why are we to suppose that all his changes are for the 
better, that his changing opinion of Dumbledore is now the true 
one?  Isn't it possible that Harry is mistaken, and that his 
problems and angst are interfering with a realistic view of 
Dumbledore and other characters?>>

This was a really interesting point. Of course, Harry has a long way 
to go yet, and I for one really hope he's snapped out of the whining 
and shouting by Book 6. Although I doubt it. The thing is that his 
assesments of all the other characters *are* getting more realistic - 
look at the way he sees Neville towards the end of OoP. He may be a 
stroppy little adolescant, and many of his assesments may very well 
be off-base, but you can't deny that his view towards DD *is* more 
realistic. Perhaps not true, but more realistic than the idea that DD 
is infallible, which is just as much of a false hope to give 
children. It's what children *do* as they enter adolescence - they 
discover that their parents aren't perfect, are fallible, and they 
react by going over to the opposite side for a while before (usually) 
reaching some area of compromise in their feelings.

Kirstini, who though Wanda's post was really interesting, even if she 
didn't agree with it.




From Ali at zymurgy.org  Mon Sep  1 19:38:11 2003
From: Ali at zymurgy.org (Ali)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 19:38:11 -0000
Subject: Side note: St.Mungos
In-Reply-To: <bitmgd+5eji@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj0773+ke6u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79452


 Geoff wrote:-

> > St.Mungo was leader of a 6th century ecclesiatical community on 
 the site of the present day Glasgow and is considered to be the 
city's  founder.<<<
 

Mochajava13:

<<<<why would wizards name a hospital after a religious figure?  The 
ones that do that here in the US are usually connected to a church 
of some sort.  Plus, St. Mungo's is in London<<<

Many hospitals in Britain are named after saints. They were often 
founded by religious orders hundreds of years ago, and the names 
have lived on despite the fact that they are now part of our 
National Health Service. Examples in London include "Barts": St 
Bartholomew's and St Thomas's.

I think you would have to see the use of the saint's name in much 
the same way as the usage of "Christmas" and "Easter" holidays. They 
are mirroring the Muggle culture around them. The Fat Friar is proof 
that religious figures of wizarding stock did exist. It is not then 
a stretch to suggest that wizarding brethren of St Mungo could have 
founded a wizarding hospital.

>From my point of view, I do not have a problem with the wizarding 
world being superfically, but not overtly Christian as this 
parellels the society I see around me today. If the schism between 
wizards and Muggles occurred sometime around the 14th Century, then 
it is at least wholly possible that the wizarding community of that 
time *were* Christians. It would then not be unfeasible to suppose 
that their 20th century descendants also are; albeit in the same 
kind of secular way as their Muggle neighbours. 

Although the average Briton may not be very religious, England 
itself is officially a Christian country. The Queen, our Head of 
State is also the "Supreme Head" of the Church of England. We don't 
have the religious and secular divide that exists in the US. I think 
that JKR uses religious terminology to reflect British society. 

Religion isn't however mentioned specifically as JKR has choosen to 
concentrate on her own purety of blood issue to show prejudice. We 
are given pointers that religion exists in the Wizarding World just 
as we have evidence that different races exist. We are not given an 
opportunity to dwell upon these issues though as that would draw our 
attention away from the Blood issue which is so important to Harry's 
world.

Ali
 




From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Mon Sep  1 20:15:58 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 20:15:58 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bivteb+f0p3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj09dv+n844@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79453


> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kirstini" <kirst_inn at y...> 
> wrote:
> I'm not saying that *everything* DD has told Harry is false, 
> > just advocating that we read it all with a pinch of salt<Snip>. 
> > I predict that over the course of the next two books we'll see 
> > him [Harry] becoming increasingly independent of Dumbledore, and 
> > perhaps a huge test of his loyalties occur when he realises, as 
> > we've done, that DD isn't working with his own best interests 
> > at heart. (I'm getting increasingly fond of Ever So Fallible!
> > Dumbledore at the moment, spymaster or no spymaster.)
?	<Snip>
> 
Wanda Sherratt:
> I have to say, I think that this interpretation of Dumbledore 
> cannot be right.  It's one thing for adults to read these books, 
> and read intricate possibilities into them.  But they are still 
> children's books, and I think it would be bad, even immoral, for 
> Rowling to set up children to think that Dumbledore is good and 
> trustworthy, and then to knock that down.  He is the 
> primary "father figure" in Harry's world, whether Harry overtly 
> acknowledges it or not.  For more than half the series, there has 
> been no hint that Dumbledore is anything but a good character, on 
> the side of good, and working for good.  

Pip!Squeak:	
Ah, Dumbledore as wise, twinkly father image. Good argument ? the 
only problem is that there is more than a hint that Dumbledore is 
not just good and twinkly. Or rather, that JK Rowling has her 
Dumbledore operating according to a `good' that acknowledges the 
idea of `greater good'.

Kind, twinkly Dumbledore doesn't survive Chamber of Secrets. Or 
rather he does ? but only because Harry sees events from the 
viewpoint of a child, not that of an adult.

Consider Dumbledore's behaviour in Chamber of Secrets from the adult 
viewpoint.  Colin Creevey gets Petrified. And the school stays open. 
Justin Finch Fetchley is Petrified. And the school stays open. 
Hermione, Penelope Clearwater. Same thing. There's a mythical 
monster roving Hogwarts, and our twinkly eyed father image appears 
quite happy to let his students drop like rather stiff flies. ;-)

Wanda:
> A child would especially recognize the father-archetype being 
> depicted:  old, wise, protecting, full of information, loving, 
> concerned, etc.  

Pip!Squeak:
Also willing to dump you with abusive relatives, let you face 
horrific monsters, allow teachers to poison you (hopefully 
Dumbledore at least insisted that Snape had antidotes on hand) and 
not tell you vital information `for your own good'.

This father archetype certainly believes in `Tough Love', doesn't he?

Wanda:
> To seriously start undermining this picture would 
> be almost cruel; it would be telling children, "You can't trust 
> anyone.  People who tell you they're acting for your own good 
> never are, they're just lying and using you."  I would call that 
> immoral, not to mention false, and I don't see any sign that      
> Rowling is heading that way.

Pip!Squeak:
An examination of some of the father images in the books to date:

Uncle Vernon ? Harry's foster father. Abusive, bullying and bigoted. 
Snape ? cold, belittling, apparently sadistic and unfair. Strangely 
protective when Harry's life is threatened.
Sirius ? impulsive, genuinely protective, inclined to see Harry as 
another James and to criticise him when Harry shows he *isn't* James 
re-born.
James. Ah, yes, he *was* the perfect father image, wasn't he? Until 
we hit OOP. ;-)

None of these father figures present a picture of a perfect father 
image. Further, JKR most certainly *is* examining father-child 
relationships. The Crouches have a father who imprisons his son, and 
a son who murders his father. Neville Longbottom has a father he's 
told he can't live up to. Tom Riddle despises the father who 
abandoned him. The Weasley's have a son who refuses to visit his 
critically ill father. Harry idolises his safely dead father ? and 
is distinctly shocked by the real-life version.

If Dumbledore is being set up to be the primary father figure, the 
list above makes it very unlikely that anything other than a human 
fallibility is on the menu. It also strongly sets up the possibility 
of future hatred between Harry and Dumbledore.

We just haven't quite got there yet. Nearly, when Dumbledore 
admitted his mistakes. But it would not surprise me at all if Harry 
spent a period of Book 6 or 7 deeply opposed to Dumbledore.  More 
deeply angry than in OOP, because he has discovered that Dumbledore 
*does* consider some things more important than Harry's life.

 
<Snip> 
Wanda: 
> Even though Harry later on has a more positive experience with 
> Fudge in PoA, the view of government and "officialdom" is 
> chequered and shaded; it's not such a big surprise when the MoM 
> becomes actively antagonistic later on - we were never led to 
> expect that much from such a quarter anyway.  This is not at all 
> the case with Dumbledore.  By now, to find that he's a cold 
> calculator, a Richelieu, a manipulator and a liar would be almost 
> as shocking as finding out that he's really been a DE all along.

Pip!Squeak:
But, as I hope I've shown above, there *are* signs that Dumbledore 
is capable of calculation. He risks his students in CoS. Presumably 
in the hope that Harry can defeat Voldemort and put a final end to 
the Basilisk. I think it's been said by JKR that CoS is more 
important than people realise. That is one of the clues, IMO. 
Dumbledore will risk the lives of innocents if the stakes are high 
enough.

Dumbledore admits in OOP to knowingly abandoning Harry to years of 
abuse `I knew I was condemning you to ten dark and difficult years.'

That is cold calculation. Ten years of child abuse is worth it. If 
it's the only way to ensure that the child stays alive.

Ten years of neglect, deprivation, violence. That is not a *nice* 
thing for a twinkly eyed father image to do. A *nice* thing to do 
would have been to find a family who would have loved to take Harry, 
and then guard him night and day.

But Dumbledore calculates that ten years with foster parents who 
loathe him is an absolute protection, so off Harry goes to his dark 
and difficult years.

And he is absolutely right. Dumbledore took the right course, not 
the easy one. Dumbledore will ruin the innocent Harry's early 
childhood if the stakes are high enough. If it's a choice between 
neglect and murder, you pick neglect.

> 
> What I think Rowling IS doing is showing us how growing older does 
> not mean just getting bigger, stronger, more independent and 
> happier.  It can lead to a lot of misunderstanding and trouble; 
> after all, have we really learned something new about Dumbledore 
> or about Harry?  Harry is the one who changed in book 5 - everyone 
> has noticed it.  Why are we to suppose that all his changes are  
> for the better, that his changing opinion of Dumbledore is now the 
> true one?  Isn't it possible that Harry is mistaken, and that his 
> problems and angst are interfering with a realistic view of 
> Dumbledore and other characters?

More likely is that the readers image of `good' is being confused 
with `nice'. Good is not the same thing as nice. Nice is simple; 
good is complex.

It is not nice to lie. If a Death Eater asks you where Hermione the 
muggle born is, what does the good person do? 

It is not nice to steal. If Harry needs to rescue Ron, and the only 
available Gillyweed belongs to Snape, what does he do?

It is not nice to kill people.  If the person is a Death Eater about 
to kill your family, what does Mr Weasley do?

It is not nice to construct a plan where innocent people will die. 
If the alternative is the victory of a faction whose policy includes 
slaughtering those of mixed blood (and any pure-blood opponents) ? 
what does Dumbledore do?


Is Harry's life worth the death of Hermione? Of the Creevey 
brothers? Dean Thomas? Penelope Clearwater? Of all the other 
muggleborns in the WW?  Of the `muggle-loving' Weasley's?

It is not, and Dumbledore knows that it is not. He describes 
caring `more for your life than the lives that might be lost if the 
plan fails' as a *trap*.

Kirstini is absolutely right. Dumbledore does not have Harry's best 
interests at heart. He *tells* him that in OOP Ch. 37. Having 
Harry's best interests at heart is a terrible mistake. Having 
Harry's best interests at heart is *not* in the best interest of the 
world.

The choice between good and evil is not the same as the choice 
between the nice path and the nasty one. Sometimes it's the choice 
between the nasty path, and the nastiER. Britain went to war against 
Hitler in the absolute and certain knowledge that innocents would 
die. The alternative was worse. 

Winning was terrible: Britain ended up bombed, bankrupt, and 
mourning its dead. 

Losing would have been more terrible.

Part of growing older is becoming aware of greater moral complexity. 
In OOP we were explicitly told that the world is not divided into 
good people and Death Eaters. And we were implicitly introduced to 
the idea that life is not a simple choice between good and evil. 
Sometimes the decision we have to make is between the lesser and the 
greater evil.

This is something that a child has to learn. It is an entirely fit 
subject to examine in a series of books that are marketed for 
children. 

Sometimes your father figure may not have your best interests at 
heart. Because sometimes your father figure may have to consider 
more than just you.

There *are* times when a good person lies.

Pip!Squeak





From wsherratt3338 at rogers.com  Mon Sep  1 20:35:33 2003
From: wsherratt3338 at rogers.com (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 20:35:33 -0000
Subject: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj078g+p7ng@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj0ail+542o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79454

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kirstini" <kirst_inn at y...> 
wrote:
 He may be a 
> stroppy little adolescant, and many of his assesments may very 
well 
> be off-base, but you can't deny that his view towards DD *is* more 
> realistic. Perhaps not true, but more realistic than the idea that 
DD 
> is infallible, which is just as much of a false hope to give 
> children. It's what children *do* as they enter adolescence - they 
> discover that their parents aren't perfect, are fallible, and they 
> react by going over to the opposite side for a while before 
(usually) 
> reaching some area of compromise in their feelings.
> 
This reminds me so much of that quote by Mark Twain!  "When I was a 
boy of 14, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have 
the old man around. But when I got to be 21, I was astonished at how 
much the old man had learned in 7 years." ;)

Wanda






From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Mon Sep  1 20:53:46 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (B Arrowsmith)
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 21:53:46 +0100
Subject: Inside Dumbledore's Head (was Re: Prophets without Honour)
Message-ID: <6189A428-DCBE-11D7-B995-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79455

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith
 > <arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
 > > > But DD carries on in his own sweet way, "Oh, and now I'll tell you
 > > what it's all about." The prophecy.
 > > No it isn't. The prophecy is a minor distraction. Even if it is
 > > complete, it lets Harry know that V is after him, something I'm sure
 > > he'd guessed already. He's not  concerned with beating Voldy,
 > > he's much more interested in surviving, and he's having enough
 > > trouble doing that already, thank you very much. It tells  him that
 > > there'll be a showdown, High Noon in Hogsmeade. You mean the
 > > previous four times don't count? No, DD is using the prophecy to
 > > justify his own agenda. Wish I knew what it is.
 > >
 > Laura:
 > clipped
 >
 > I was also struck by your observation that DD doesn't do much in the
 > way of powerful magic in the 5 books we have so far.  He controls his
 > domain with his words and his force of personality-you're quite right
 > about that.  But that could be for 2 reasons.  One, DD has already
 > proven many times over that he has enormous magical powers-you don't
 > get to be on a Chocolate Frog card for your witty repartee.  >
 > You seem to be propounding a pretty cold view of DD.  Your
 > implication is that to further his agenda, whatever it is, he's
 > willing to risk Harry's life and the lives of other people he acts
 > like he cares about (okay, you know who I mean-I won't go on).  Do
 > you then think that he was lying at the end of OoP when he toldto
 > Harry why he hadn't explained years earlier about the prophecy?  I'm
 > none too happy with him at the moment either (where is the SAD DENIAL
 > docking next?) but I hope he isn't as bad as that.  Sirius's death
 > would be nothing for Harry next to a betrayal by DD of that magnitude.

I'll have to restrain myself, or I'll be off on wings of overblown 
rhetoric
on the perceived failings and flailings of Dumbledore A.P.W.B.D., Prof
of this Parish. There are a  lot of questions in this post, a sign that 
I suspect,
but that proof is thin. Welcome to my  paranoia!

I've been a bit leery of DD for years. I started reading the books back 
in '99,
but I only joined the site a few weeks before OoP, so I'm not steeped 
in the
wisdom of the sages, as some are. When I started posting, there seemed
to be a preponderance of views that equated DD with Gandalf. Old, wise,
powerful, unbending integrity, etc. I was surprised. I couldn't match 
this up
  with, for example, his (in)action towards Lucius Malfoy at the end of 
CoS.
DD's own suspension, kidnapping, petrifications, mayhem, everything
except murder.  With Malfoy as the prime mover, palming the diary onto
Ginny. And all he gets from DD is a veiled threat as to future 
behaviour.
Does not compute. Not for a character supposedly vehemently, implacably
anti-evil.

My  thoughts at the time were that it was all a game of Wizards Chess, 
with
the children as pieces. So I bided my time, re-read the books (again!) 
and
still came to the same conclusion. DD is up to something.

So I posted FLOOZY No.1, The Dumbledore Papers. (65696). Even though
it was couched in a humorous, tongue in cheek vein, it got some out-
spoken reaction (on site and by e-mail). How dare you! DD is wonderful!
DD is perfect!  Oh, dear. Didn't stop  me posting the same opinions, 
though.
Fortunately, the site caters for all types and there is a bunch of case-
hardened cynics among us who also express doubts. Pip, Kirstini, plus a
few others, kept the flag of suspicion flying. Now, I think the tide is 
turning.
More fans are expressing surprise, puzzlement and scepticism at D's 
actions.

You mention the chocolate frog card. Interesting item.
"...particularly  famous for his defeat of the Dark Wizard Grindelwald 
in 1945.."
Apart from the card, are there any other mentions of this cause for 
celebrity?
Defeated Grindelwald how? Duel? Battle? Snap? Talk him to death? And it
specifies defeat, not destruction. What happened to Grindelwald? Where 
is
he? What or perhaps *who* is he?

"...and his work on alchemy with his partner Nicolas Flamel."
His *partner* Nicolas Flamel. Partners share the results of their work. 
What
does DD want with a  Philosphers Stone? He's getting older, frailer,  
more
tired as the books progress. Just what has been keeping him going?
Essence of PS, perhaps? Maybe supplies are running low.

He tells  Voldemort that there are worse things than death. What? An 
inter-
miable life, perhaps. Dragging on year after year.  Only 150 years old.
Maybe so, in this incarnation. There might be a clue in the fact that 
his
familiar is a phoenix, constantly being reborn. In classical legend, 
there is
only one phoenix and it is reborn every 100 years, yet DD hints that 
he's
seen Fawkes reborn often.

Has JKR dropped us into one episode of an on-going, ages long battle
of good vs evil?

You query my cold view of DD, that I think he will do anything to 
further
his agenda. In a war, you need someone like this to make the hard
decisions. Warm-hearted compassion doesn't cut it when you're up
against a murderous antagonist. That attitude engenders casualties. The
famous phrase is "Magnanimity in victory", not in conflict.. Fair 
judgement
and possibly forgiveness when it's all over, not during the fighting.

I don't doubt but that he wants to defeat Voldemort, but I feel there's 
more
to it. To go back to the chess analogy, Harry is a pawn, maybe a knight,
no more. DD is the player. He will sacrifice a knight, if he has to.

One of the joys of the books and the site is the chance to express any
opinion, guess, hope or suspicion. Most of us will be wrong at the
conclusion. But I keep harking back to that JKR statement - the one to
the effect that there's something more; something no-one has got to the
heart of. That means it's open season for just about anything you fancy.
I fancy Dumbledore is the one to watch.

Kneasy




From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Mon Sep  1 21:05:13 2003
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 21:05:13 -0000
Subject: SILK GOWNS and sticky treats
In-Reply-To: <bir55s+g10e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj0ca9+rnu3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79456

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003" 
<carolynwhite2 at a...> wrote:
> (snip) a point of curiosity: why would two 
> adults want to chew such a lot of bubblegum ?? Ok, they have been 
> tortured, and are not in their right minds, but it seems a curious 
> sort of sweet for them to choose. DD likes his sweets, but I can't 
> remember any other incidence of adult wizards eating them in any 
> quantity...
> 
> (snip) Is there more to Droobles gum than we have been told, apart 
from the possibility that it has been tampered with in some way ? 
Perhaps it is a recognised soft drug in the WW, routinely given to 
mental patients to keep them quiet and easy to handle. It would fit 
with the somewhat gormless image that gum-chewing tends to convey.

Further comment from CW:

The point of my post was really that it was a bit odd for adults to 
monotonously chew so much gum (its a bit of a teenage rebel thing to 
my mind). But then Erin (79369 & 79381) said:

'Something about this message struck me... Dumbledore IS the only 
other adult who is shown as appreciating candy. Could this be a clue 
of some sort? Are we supposed to connct something about the 
Longbottoms to DD? ....It occurs to me in reading this that perhaps 
Dumbledore's being the only other adult interested in candy is 
significant. Maybe there is a clue to a connection here. Just what 
kind of connection it would be I'm not certain... but I'm sure 
everyone who's in favor of the ColdheartedSpymaster!Dumbledore (MAGIC 
DISHWASHER) theory will want to take note.

And Entropy added (79392): 'Don't forget: the password to 
Dumbledore's office is always some kind of candy or sweet! (lemon 
drops, sherbet, etc.) In fact, Harry guesses correctly at one point 
(not sure which book!) just by naming all of the sweets he can think 
of.'

Then Brief Chronicles commented (79396): Has anyone ever read the 
book Sophie's World (snip) ..this post reminded me of one of the key 
messages of the book: Children are the best philosophers. 
(snip)...children are still capable of really, truly thinking 
anything is possible. I sort of view DD this way, partially because 
of his love of children and candy, etc. I wonder if the fact that DD 
and the Longbottoms *are* the only adults to have been put 
together with sweets shows that these people are especially wise and 
have extraordinary knowledge. It would certainly go along with the 
theory that the Longbottoms are being kept insane because they are a 
real threat to the DEs.

Back to me (CW): 

Out of curiosity, on a recent re-read through the series I have been 
keeping a list of the sweets and treats mentioned in the books, and 
so far (up to mid-way through GoF), there have been a quite 
extraordinary number: 

Bertie Bott's Every Flavour Beans; Droobles Best Blowing Gum; 
Chocolate Frogs; Pumpkin Pasties; Cauldron Cakes: Liquorice wands: 
Fudge flies; Acid pops; Cockroach clusters; Pepper imps; Chocoballs; 
Sugar quills; Sherbert balls; Tooth-flossing stringmints; Blood-
flavoured lollipops; Exploding bon-bons; Jelly slugs; Ice mice; 
Peppermint toads; ton-tongue toffees; Honeydukes chocolate

Quite a few of them also either play a part in the plots (eg the gum, 
the toffees, the chocolate frogs, the bars of choc), or are 
explicitly mentioned as part of a character's back history (Bertie 
Bott's beans, acid pops) as well, so maybe there is much more to them 
than simply JKR having some fun with WW food, as I first thought.




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Mon Sep  1 21:31:13 2003
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 21:31:13 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's integrity (was Prophecy problems)
In-Reply-To: <biqj78+uri7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj0dr1+si09@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79457

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kirstini" 
<kirst_inn at y...> wrote:

 >The fact that Sirius describes Harry as "the last of the Potters"
suggests to me that he has some sort of information about the 
 bloodline of the family and its importance to Voldemort that 
Harry  and the reader still don't.  And would Order member Sirius 
really  have kept this information from his boss? If we can 
assume that DD  has this information, and Harry doesn't, then 
it's not to big a step  to get to the assumption that he *hasn't*
told 
him everything. <

Just because Sirius thinks Harry's descent is important to 
Voldemort doesn't mean that Dumbledore thinks it is. 
Dumbledore, in fact, specifically dismissed the importance of 
Harry's bloodline to Voldemort; he says that even though 
Neville's lineage is purer, Voldemort picked Harry as his equal.

 If Dumbledore believes what he says, that Voldemort chose to 
go after Harry because of his Muggleborn mother, then Harry's 
wizarding ancestry *is * irrelevant. Harry could be descended 
from Merlin himself and Dumbledore still wouldn't be  keeping 
back anything that he thinks is instrumental to Harry's 
understanding his position vis a vis Voldemort.  

As far as Dumbledore the manipulator, one of his titles is 
Supreme Mugwump. I came across a description of the 
historical Mugwumps today. They were "New England reformers 
who had no political base and shrank from direct political 
combat."  This, I think, is how we are meant to regard 
Dumbledore. 

Dumbledore is not trying to build the  Order  into a political force 
(this is what Umbridge cannot understand) and therefore does 
not try to usurp control from the Ministry.  Rather he wishes to 
see that the Ministry officials make  decisions based on 
good information rather than Malfoy's lies or Fudge's denials. 

In the same way, Dumbledore does not want to usurp control of 
Harry's life, he wants to empower Harry to make good decisions. 
His mistake was to persuade himself that Harry would not need 
to make decisions about his own destiny for a long time yet, and 
so did not   need to know about the Prophecy, or about the full 
implications of the connection to Voldemort.

IMO, Dumbledore always expected he would have a chance to 
teach Harry Occlumency before Voldemort's return, while 
Voldemort was still too weak to penetrate Harry's mind unless 
he was at close range.  At that point , it would have become safe 
for Dumbledore to reveal the entire prophecy without risk that 
Voldemort would glean it from Harry's mind.  The flaw in the plan 
was that  Dumbledore could not bring himself to make Harry 
deal with the knowledge that he, Harry, carried part of Voldemort 
inside him. 
 
Pippin






From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Mon Sep  1 21:49:17 2003
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 21:49:17 -0000
Subject: Puzzles: Wormtail's finger and Shrieking Shack tunnel
In-Reply-To: <bis8a4+jshm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj0est+98f2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79458

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003"
> <carolynwhite2 at a...> wrote:
> > I have just been re-reading PoA and two logistics problems 
occurred 
> > to me:
> > 
> > (1) How did Wormtail simultaneously cut off his finger and blow a 
> > hole in the ground whilst he was holding his wand with both hands 
> > behind his back ?? (snip)> 

> bboy_mn:
> (snip)
> I can picture several ways in which he could have cut off his finger
> and blasted the street. As a simple test, take a pen or a pencil and
> hold it in one hand behind your back with the point pointing down at
> the floor. ...there, that wasn't so hard, was it? Now put your other
> hand behind your back and put a pen mark at the base of you index
> finger. ...again, not so hard, was it? 
> 
> He could have cut his finger off behind his back and let the severed
> finger fall to the ground, then pointed his wand a few feet to the
> side and blasted the hole in the street. 

CW comments (tied up in knots having followed instructions):

I think there is a difference between marking your finger with a pen 
and slicing it off with a knife.. for a start there is a bone to cut 
through, which actually needs a sharp chop rather than a quick slice 
(don't try it at home...), and it would HURT, wouldn't it ? Judging 
by his agony as he rolled around having cut off his hand for Voldy, 
he doesn't seem too good in the Madame Pomfrey dept. He's got to 
simultaneously hold a very sharp knife behind his back in one hand, 
and his wand in the other (?)and do a powerful street-busting spell 
whilst reeling with pain and transform into a rat at the same time. 

I brought it up because it seems to me all very difficult and 
suggests someone else was involved. You commented:

> And, you are right, Peter wasn't willingly there for the purpose of
> meeting Sirius. Sirius caught up to Peter, as Peter moved through 
the muggle world thereby hoping to avoid detection by wizards. It's
> possible that Peter was in an area where he had friends, or perhaps 
it was several blocks from where his mother's or uncle's wizard's 
house was hidden in London. There are lots of possible speculations 
about how Sirius could have found Peter in a big city like London. 
Either way, the way I read it is that Peter was moving through muggle 
London to avoid detection by wizards, and Sirius was still able to 
track him down and confront him on a muggle street.
> 

(CW again): Surely all this took place at Godric's Hollow, which 
although we admittedly don't know where this is, is probably not in 
London ? Anyway, I raised in an earlier post how odd it was that 
Peter should return to the scene of the crime the day after, and 
especially, apparently to confront Sirius, who was much better at 
duelling than him, and extremely angry. I felt that Peter was forced 
to return for some reason, or by somebody, and this would more fully 
explain his actions when Sirius 'cornered him'.

By the way, loved your explanation of my question (2) about the 
Shrieking Shack tunnel ! I actually think it was just careless 
writing on JKR's part, but we are so loyal in finding explanations 
for what she might have meant !




From linlou43 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 21:50:15 2003
From: linlou43 at yahoo.com (linlou43)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 21:50:15 -0000
Subject: Inside Dumbledore's Head (was Re: Prophets without Honour)
In-Reply-To: <6189A428-DCBE-11D7-B995-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bj0eun+g7pl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79459



 Kneasy wrote re. Dumbledore:

> I don't doubt but that he wants to defeat Voldemort, but I feel 
there's 
> more
> to it. To go back to the chess analogy, Harry is a pawn, maybe a 
knight,
> no more. DD is the player. He will sacrifice a knight, if he has 
to.
> 
> One of the joys of the books and the site is the chance to express 
any
> opinion, guess, hope or suspicion. Most of us will be wrong at the
> conclusion. But I keep harking back to that JKR statement - the 
one to
> the effect that there's something more; something no-one has got 
to the
> heart of. That means it's open season for just about anything you 
fancy.
> I fancy Dumbledore is the one to watch.

     Excellent post Kneasy but I snipped most of it because the 
ending caused a new thought to pop into my head. If, as many on the 
list speculate, Dumbledore is to die in either book 6 or at the 
beginning of book seven, does that mean that the role of chess 
master would fall to Harry? Will he need to become calculating as 
well, regadless of the outcoming for those he loves?

  just a thought, lionlou 





From lbiles at flash.net  Mon Sep  1 22:22:38 2003
From: lbiles at flash.net (leb2323)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 22:22:38 -0000
Subject: The smoke serpent
In-Reply-To: <bionmn+i465@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj0gre+qmme@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79460

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "corinthum" <kkearney at s...> 
wrote:
>The fact that Voldemort is still capable of possessing animals (and, 
as we later see, people) makes him a much more dangerous foe. 
Indeed, the only time Dumbledore shows any fear during the final 
battle is when Voldemort disappears, preparing to possess Harry.
> 
> I'm not quite sure how this possession ability is going to come 
into play, but I am certain that it's going to be extremely
important. 
> -Corinth



I tried to post this reply a couple days ago but for reasons unknown 
it never made it to the list.  I'll try again and apologize if this
is a double post -- just because I never found it doesn't mean it 
isn't out there somewhere!

This idea falls somewhere between sacrilege and heresy but . . . what 
if during the throes of the final battle LV possesses DD and Harry
has to kill DD to vanquish LV?  LV may be trying to save his hide by 
possessing DD thinking that Harry would never in a million years kill 
him just as DD did not zap Harry while possessed by LV in the MoM 
blowout.  Hmmmmm what do y'all think?

leb





From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Mon Sep  1 22:23:58 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 22:23:58 -0000
Subject: Aiming Wand at Bellatrix Lestrange:  CRUCIO!
In-Reply-To: <bit73t+22r1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj0gtu+2jjq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79461

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> But we only know what's needed to effectively cast Crucio because 
> Bella told Harry.  And I, for one, don't trust anything that comes 
> out of a DE's mouth to be truth.
> 
> "msbeadsley"


Bellatrix is obviously very proud of her abilities, and mentions at 
least once that she learned the dark arts from Voldemort himself.  In 
the scene where she tells Harry about Crucio, she has just been 
momentarily stunned by his failed curse, and is preparing to show 
Hary how to REALLY perform Crucio. Why, at that moment, would she 
take the time to invent a lie when she wants to torture Harry 
the "right" way, thus proving to him how powerful she is?

She strikes me as completely egotistic and would use this as one more 
opportunity to taunt Harry with how much more she knows than "baby 
Potter."  Just an opinion. Surely Harry will relate that incident 
with Belltrix to someone in Book 6, and we will get to know even more 
about casting unforgivable curses.   Jen




From wsherratt3338 at rogers.com  Mon Sep  1 22:36:51 2003
From: wsherratt3338 at rogers.com (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 22:36:51 -0000
Subject: Snape the Occlumens
Message-ID: <bj0hm3+slaj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79462

When Harry had to learn Occlumency, it seems as if there were only 
two choices when it came to a teacher:  Dumbledore and Snape.  It's 
no surprise that Dumbledore would know Occlumency, but has it been 
discussed just how Snape knows the skill and is so good at it?  Of 
course, it's very useful for him, but where did HE learn it?  I 
suspect that Dumbledore taught him himself, and AFTER Snape turned 
against Voldemort.  I believe that Snape went to Dumbledore without 
any guarantees of safety or protection, and then Dumbledore 
undertook to teach him Occlumency, in order to keep his treachery 
secret from Voldemort (for his own protection) and enable him to be 
an effective spy.

Wanda





From sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 22:37:26 2003
From: sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com (sarcasticmuppet)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 22:37:26 -0000
Subject: Inside Dumbledore's Head (was Re: Prophets without Honour)
In-Reply-To: <bj0eun+g7pl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj0hn6+9bd1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79463

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "linlou43" <linlou43 at y...> 
wrote:
> 
> 
>  Kneasy wrote re. Dumbledore:
> 
> > I don't doubt but that he wants to defeat Voldemort, but I feel 
> there's 
> > more
> > to it. To go back to the chess analogy, Harry is a pawn, maybe a 
> knight,
> > no more. DD is the player. He will sacrifice a knight, if he has 
> to.
> > 
> > One of the joys of the books and the site is the chance to 
express 
> any
> > opinion, guess, hope or suspicion. Most of us will be wrong at the
> > conclusion. But I keep harking back to that JKR statement - the 
> one to
> > the effect that there's something more; something no-one has got 
> to the
> > heart of. That means it's open season for just about anything you 
> fancy.
> > I fancy Dumbledore is the one to watch.
> 
>      Excellent post Kneasy but I snipped most of it because the 
> ending caused a new thought to pop into my head. If, as many on the 
> list speculate, Dumbledore is to die in either book 6 or at the 
> beginning of book seven, does that mean that the role of chess 
> master would fall to Harry? Will he need to become calculating as 
> well, regadless of the outcoming for those he loves?
> 
>   just a thought, lionlou

Now me (Sarcasticmuppet):
I suspect that Dumbledore is already shifting the reins in Harry's 
direction.  He as good as told him that the Voldemort showdown is 
Harry's fight, not his.  And this might or might not fit in with the 
PuppetmasterDumbledore! theory but only Jo knows what Dumbledore will 
do next.  I sort of imagine a final showdown scene in which Harry and 
Dumbledore burst into a room containing Voldemort and some DEs, 
Dumbledore does an "after you" gesture, takes care of the DEs, and 
leaves the room.




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 23:00:31 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 23:00:31 -0000
Subject: Puzzles: Wormtail's finger and Shrieking Shack tunnel
In-Reply-To: <bj0est+98f2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj0j2f+in25@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79464

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003"
<carolynwhite2 at a...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003"
> > <carolynwhite2 at a...> wrote:

> > > 
> > > (1) How did Wormtail simultaneously cut off his finger and blow
> > > a > hole in the ground ...?? (snip)> 
> 
> > bboy_mn:
> > (snip)
> > ..., take a pen ...and hold it in one hand behind your 
> > back with the point pointing down at the floor. ..put your other 
> > hand behind your back and put a pen mark at the base of you index 
> > finger. ...
> > 

 
> CW comments (tied up in knots having followed instructions):
> 
> I think there is a difference between marking your finger with a pen 
> and slicing it off with a knife. ...edited...
> 

bboy_mn:

Why would he using anything as mundane and muggle as a knife when he
has a wand in his hand? Certainly, he used some highly effective
Severing Charm to quickly and cleanly cut off his finger. Why us a
knife when you have a wand?

> CW:
> I brought it up because it seems to me all very difficult and 
> suggests someone else was involved. 

bboy_mn:
Humm... I'm not exactly sure how or why, but now that you mention it,
I am intrigued by the idea of someone else being there and helping
Peter escape.

> >bboy_mn org commented:
> 
> > ... There are lots of possible speculations about how Sirius could
> > have found Peter in a big city like London. 
> > ...edited...
> > 
 
> (CW again): 
> Surely all this took place at Godric's Hollow, which although we 
> admittedly don't know where this is, is probably not in London? 

bboy_mn:
I could have sworn I read 'London' somewhere, but I can't find a
reference to it now. All the references I find refer to a 'muggle
street'. 


> CW:
> 
> Anyway, I raised in an earlier post how odd it was that 
> Peter should return to the scene of the crime the day after, ...
> 

bboy_mn:
Although, I may have gotten the city wrong (any confirmations?), I
think I got the situation right. Peter was fleeing and avoiding
detection by all wizards, but somehow, probably with knowledge of
Peter's habits and haunts, Sirius tracked Peter down in some muggle
town where the confrontation happened.

I can't think of any reason for them to be back at Godric's Hollow. It
sure would be nice to have a more detailed account of the night Harry
first met Voldemort and the aftermath. In any event, I still say
Sirius found Peter as Peter moved through the muggle world, avoiding
wizard detection, and trying to decide what he was going to do. 


> CW:
>
> By the way, loved your explanation of my question (2) about the 
> Shrieking Shack tunnel! I actually think it was just careless 
> writing on JKR's part, but we are so loyal in finding explanations 
> for what she might have meant!

bboy_mn:
Someone actually responded to my post with a much simpler
explaination, and that was, if they were going out for an adventure,
there would have been no need for James/Prongs to even go into the
Shrieking Shack. Sirius/Padfoot probably went in to get Remus/Moony,
and they all met in the forest.

However, your question was more long the line of not understanding how
a horned stag could get through the tunnel, so I tried to come up with
a scenerio that let James go through the tunnel without needing to be
a stag. 

Just a thought.

bboy_mn




From fc26det at aol.com  Mon Sep  1 23:21:09 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 23:21:09 -0000
Subject: Aiming Wand at Bellatrix Lestrange:  CRUCIO!
In-Reply-To: <bit73t+22r1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj0k95+63e6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79465

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> But we only know what's needed to effectively cast Crucio because 
> Bella told Harry.  And I, for one, don't trust anything that comes 
> out of a DE's mouth to be truth.
> 
> "msbeadsley"

Barty/Moody verified this in GOF when he told the class that the 
entire class could cast the spell on him and it would not do much.  
It requires and powerful wizard to cast the spells.  I believe that 
part of that power is derived from evil.
Susan




From sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 23:36:40 2003
From: sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com (sarcasticmuppet)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 23:36:40 -0000
Subject: Snape the Occlumens
In-Reply-To: <bj0hm3+slaj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj0l68+k3rf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79466

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Wanda Sherratt" 
<wsherratt3338 at r...> wrote:
> When Harry had to learn Occlumency, it seems as if there were only 
> two choices when it came to a teacher:  Dumbledore and Snape.  It's 
> no surprise that Dumbledore would know Occlumency, but has it been 
> discussed just how Snape knows the skill and is so good at it?  Of 
> course, it's very useful for him, but where did HE learn it?  I 
> suspect that Dumbledore taught him himself, and AFTER Snape turned 
> against Voldemort.  I believe that Snape went to Dumbledore without 
> any guarantees of safety or protection, and then Dumbledore 
> undertook to teach him Occlumency, in order to keep his treachery 
> secret from Voldemort (for his own protection) and enable him to be 
> an effective spy.
> 
> Wanda

That's a good theory.  Both Sirius and Lupin admit that Snape is a 
top-rate Occlumens/Legilimens.  It would make sense that that skill 
would make him a usefull spy in Voldemort's inner circle.  The only 
thing I could possibly see wrong with it is this:  Would Voldemort 
know that his Legillimency is being blocked?  If he looked inside 
Snape's head and constantly found it empty, would he suspect 
Occlumency or stupidity?  If he knew Snape was hiding memories from 
him, would he suspect that Snape is a spy?  If so, what game was Mr. 
V. playing before his downfall?




From pinoypartygal at aol.com  Mon Sep  1 18:41:52 2003
From: pinoypartygal at aol.com (Emily)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 18:41:52 -0000
Subject: Hermione SHIP question
In-Reply-To: <3F535B32.000003.29535@monica>
Message-ID: <bj03tg+2t3v@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79467

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" <kcawte at b...> 
wrote:
>  
>  Can one of the Hermione/Harry SHIPpers out there explain it to 
me? I don't see any clues towards it in the books at all. I've 
always thought that it was 'obvious' that the Viktor thing was a 
brief fling brought on because she was flattered at the way he was 
paying her attention while Ron takes her for granted and that 
eventually she and Ron will end up together. It seemed to me that 
that ship was obvious and that there are *no* hints at all of Harry
liking Hermione as more than a friend or Hermione liking him.
> 
> I'm not trying to put the people who like this ship down - I just 
want someone to explain it to me - what is it that makes you think 
this is a possibility? >>>


Emily (that's me) says (kind of long):

Well, I would consider myself very much a H/Hr shipper. And it's 
often hard for me to admit, though I have always admitted it, that 
Ron and Hermione are more obviously attracted to each other and I'm 
pretty sure that they will get together. But, hey, a girl can dream 
right? Now, while Ron and Hermione are the obvious couple, I believe 
(doesn't mean that it's true) that there are very, very subtle hints 
in the series that point to the possibility of Harry and Hermione as 
a couple. Bear with me, however, as I tend to stretch possibilities 
and clues, take it as you will. But please lets not make this into 
an argument over who should end up with who, in fact I'd be fine if 
Ron and Hermione get together. 

But...on with the clues.

One thing that I noticed most throughout the books are the gifts 
that Hermione gives to both Harry and Ron. So far, she has given 
Harry pretty wonderful gifts, while she has given Ron rather simple 
ones of candy and what not. Specific examples:

In their second year, Hermione gives Harry a luxury eagle-feather 
quill. From that point on throughout the books it seems to be that 
JK Rowling has made it a point to mention Harry pulling out that 
same eagle feather quill at least once to write with it. In PoA, 
it's used in the beginning (sorry can't remember what page) In GoF 
it's also in the beginning on p 22 of the American hardback edition. 
It's mentioned somewhere in OotP I think though I'm not sure exactly 
where, also somewhere near the beginning of the book.

Now I know that you can argue against this,I may not be be saying 
much. But why does Harry always pull out the eagle-feather quill. He 
could just as easily use some non-specific,non-sequiter quill.

Other gifts of note that Hermione has given Harry include his Broom 
Servicing Kit, which he uses to this day. And the Quidditch Teams of 
Ireland and Britain. Basically, she has given him gifts that are in 
a word, perfect, for Harry. And he still uses all of them. What she 
is offering him and giving him is lasting.

Moving on, another clue that I found that is extremely, extremely 
subtle occurs in Book 4. This is in Charms class when they are 
practicing Banishing Charms. On p 481 of the American Hardback ed of 
GoF it goes as follows: 

["I just want to know what Snape did with his first chance if he's 
on his second one," said Harry grimly, and his cushion, to his very 
great surprise, flew straight across the room and landed neatly on 
top of Hermione's.]

Here, JK Rowling (without knowing?) uses the cushions in a rather 
interesting way. It is almost Shakespearean in nature. As I read it, 
it could be taken as a sexual symbol. You could say that here the 
cushions could representative of Harry being on top of Hermione. 
Now, I'm not saying that they're going to go out and have sex or 
anything, they're too young for heaven's sake, but the symbolism is 
there. Rowling is not one to waste details and I think that this 
particular instance is one of those times that she didn't waste 
them. Again she should have just as easily said, Harry's cushion 
landed perfectly in the box at the front of the classroom, but she 
didn't.Could it be her attempt at making us think that if Harry 
falls in love with Hermione it will take him completely by surprise? 
(An aside: Ron's cushion sent his cushion soaring into the window.)

Another clue to Harry and Hermione's possible (yes only possible, 
not inevitable) romantic relationship is presented in Buckbeak the 
Hippogriff. In Greek mythology, hippogriffs are representative of 
romantic love. In relation to PoA we can possibly take Harry and 
Hermione's flight on Buckbeak's back as the beginning of their 
romantic journey. However, Buckbeak's role in hinting at a H/Hr 
relationship does not end their. In fact, it comes back in OotP. 
When Harry is at Number 12 Grimmauld Place, locked away in another 
room, Hermione is the only one who is able to coax him to open the 
door. Appropriately enough, Buckbeak is present in the room while 
they are talking. Perhaps Rowling is trying to hint at a 
relationship beyond friendship again here.

There are some little things to look at as well, like when Hermione 
wrapped Harry's 
bleeding hand in one of her handkerchiefs after the bowtruckle 
stabbed him.(p 261 OotP American Ed.)

Or it could even as been as simple as when Hermione told Harry that 
he could help her with her knitting, "her eyes shining with glee" (p 
278 OotP American Ed). Harry however left her "looking slightly 
disappointed after him." (also on p 278)

Those little gestures, ironically, I think, are harder to prove as 
clues to their possible romantic future.

There are other ones, that I think that most people have caught up 
on like when Harry is practicing occulemency he sees some events in 
his life that he hated and even feared at times

1)His jealousy of Dudley getting a bike
2)Ripper chasing him up a tree
3)The sorting hat almost placing him in Slytherin
4)Hermione in the hospital wing after she had the polyjuice potion 
(why did he see this and not Ron's stint in the hospital?)
5)Dementors
6)Kissing Cho Chang (as it was an unpleasant experience for him)

There's much more and many things I'm sure I didn't catch up on, 
that I'm still looking for. But I think the thing that I want to 
emphasize most is that JK Rowling is never obvious, so there will be 
no obvious clues in canon that Harry and Hermione are going to be 
together. This is why can't speculate about anything. Even her clues 
about Ron and Hermione being together aren't absolutely obvious, 
though they are certainly more obvious than H/Hr clues. That in 
large part is why I don't think Ron and Hermione are going to get 
together, because she's making it too obvious. For all we know, 
Hermione could be really madly in love with Viktor Krum to which we 
have no subtle clues or allusions to at all and then Rowling will 
have definitely not have gone with the obvious. 

Right now, none of the Ships are wrong or right...yet. Until we have 
a definitive in your face answer (no not from Rowling's lips, 
themselves, b/c I've learned NEVER to trust what she says in an 
interview)in the TEXT, I mean, is the only time we will truly know 
who is to be with whom. And until then, I'm still gladly lounging on 
the HMS Pumpkin Pie and I have a feeling that I always will! :-P


~Emily~ 

P.S. Sorry for the incredible length.






From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 18:46:35 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 18:46:35 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's integrity (was Prophecy problems)
In-Reply-To: <biqj78+uri7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj046b+fu3h@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79468

"Kirstini" <kirst_inn at y...> wrote:
> > The fact that Sirius describes Harry as "the last of the 
Potters" suggests to me that he has some sort of information 
about the bloodline of the family and its importance to Voldemort 
that Harry and the reader still don't.  And would Order member 
Sirius really have kept this information from his boss? If we can 
assume that DD has this information, and Harry doesn't, then it's 
not too big a step to get to the assumption that he *hasn't* told 
him everything. And I'm not sure about that "proved himself an 
honourable man" bit, either. Remember, in the same scene, DD admits 
that while not actually *lying* to Harry previously, he has been 
somewhat economical with the truth. >>>
 

Now me (Sarah):
Sirius didn't describe Harry as the last of the Potters; he 
described James, Lily, and Harry as the last of the Potters.  
Remember, Lily was also a Potter.  I didn't believe Voldemort for a 
second when he said that Lily did not have to die.  (And even if he 
was telling the truth, Voldemort might have just not mentioned the 
fact that James didn't have to die either.)  Sirius told us in OoP 
that James always hated everything about the dark arts.  He used 
this as an explanation for why James hated Snape during their 
entire 
time at Hogwarts; Snape was well known for an obsession of the dark 
arts (from PoA) and for knowing more curses in his first year than 
most seventh years.  Part of James' hatred for Snape was because of 
Snape's obsession/fascination with the dark arts in school.  (In 
the 
books, Dumbledore said that Snape/James hatred was like the 
Draco/Harry hatred: they hated each other, argue all the time, and 
are completly willing to hex each other.  Harry even thinks that 
the 
only person he would treat like James treated Snape is Draco.)  We 
also know that James' parents were alive and well when James was at 
Hogwarts, since they practically adopted Sirius.  Which begs the 
question: what happened to the other Potters, and why did James 
always hate everything to do with the dark arts, even during 
school?  My thoughts on it are that James came from a family that 
was well known for fighting against the dark arts, and were a 
general annoyance to any dark wizard.  The last of the Potters 
line, 
combined with the fact that we know almost nothing of Harry's 
grandparents on his dad's side, seem to mean that Voldemort finally 
got rid of a pesky family that kept getting in his way.  Who 
knows?  
Maybe Harry's grandfather went to school with Voldemort and hated 
Voldemort like the Draco/Harry, Snape/James.  Voldemort's personal 
vendetta against someone he hated in school.  And we now know that 
the Potters (James and Lily) escaped Voldemort three times before 
they actually died.  That's got to bug Voldemort; every time 
Voldemort sees Harry, Voldemort says something to the effect 
of "you've escaped me for the last time, you annoying pest; you've 
ruined my plans for the last time."

As to the whole prophecy thing, I think that Dumbledore told Harry 
all of it.  But, I think that Dumbledore's, and Harry's 
interpretation is wrong.  Dumbledore thinks that the power that 
Voldemort doesn't know about is love.  But is it?  Voldemort knows 
about love, he's just never experienced it (to our knowledge) and 
always discounts it.  That doesn't mean that he doesn't know about 
it.  Voldemort expects people who love to behave in certain ways.  
That shows that he at least knows about it.  And Harry thinks that 
he has to murder Voldemort or be murdered by Voldemort.  But 
Dumbledore says to Voldemort that there are other ways to destroy 
someone aside from murder.  Could one of these ways be how Harry 
defeats Voldemort?  Maybe the fact that Harry doesn't seem to fear 
death but Voldemort does could be the power Harry has that 
Voldemort 
doesn't.  Voldemort is terrified of death; Harry at times seems to 
embrace it.  Harry didn't defend himself in OoP when Voldemort cast 
the Adava Kedavra curse.  Harry thought that death would be better 
that the pain he felt while possessed by Voldemort.  Maybe this, as 
well as his thought that he could be with Sirius, was what 
disallowed Voldemort from possessing Harry.  
Sarah






From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 18:49:15 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 18:49:15 -0000
Subject: Harry's Sexual Preference
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.51.0308311331450.26785@mail1.sas.upenn.edu>
Message-ID: <bj04bb+bmgk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79469


On Sun, 31 Aug 2003, jdr0918 wrote:
> > Maybe the 'closet' metaphor for Harry is deliberate.

Jen Faulkner <jfaulkne at s...> wrote:
> Without getting into the question of authorial intent (that is, 
> whether JKR deliberately intended to do anything in her writing), 
> I think one can safely say that the closet metaphors in the book 
> are not coincidental.  Even without JKR's meaning to (or perhaps 
> she did; it's quite irrelevant), the books definitely tap into 
> our cultural fascination with the closet; that is the structuring 
> metaphor for any type of secret.  Knowledge is fetishized to the 
> extent that it is regarded as a state of being, so that one either 
> is knowledgeable (possesses a certain knowledge) or is not.  One 
> is 'in the dark' or not. The closet is a place of unknowns.


Now me (Sarah):
Hm, I think this metaphor of Harry being in a closet and his 
relatives hiding his true nature from himself and the neighbors is 
very close to cultural acceptance of a person who is of mixed 
ethnic heritage.  Harry is a "half-breed"; his mother muggle-born, 
his father a "pure-blood".  Harry's mixed.  Very metaphorical for a 
family trying to deny any type of blood connection to a mutt.  
Either deny the person exists or try and have the person "pass" for 
something they're not.  (Someone who is light enought to "pass" for 
being white, for example.)  

Plus, mixed marriages and the like, while generally accepted now 
(although mixed couples still get stared at a lot), were not the 
cultural norm in the 1980 when Harry was born.  That's what I've 
always thought, but that's probably because I'm a mutt myself, and 
each side of my family doesn't acknowledge the fact that I'm mixed.  (Especially since I can "pass" for either one.)  

I never actually thought of Harry's cupboard life as a metaphor for 
his sexuality; I always saw it as trying to deny Harry's cultural 
origins.  Here, trying to pretend that Harry really is a muggle.  The 
Dursleys still try and pretend that Harry is a muggle, because they hate 
the magical half of Harry so much (reminiscent of one side of the family pretending that one family member isn't really mixed).  They even tell 
the neighbors that he goes to a school for the criminally insane!  Odd, 
that they don't care if people think they raised a criminal, but can't 
bear the thought that people know he's not 100% muggle.  (Effectively 
forcing him to "pass" for something he's not.)

Sarah
 






From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 18:51:45 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 18:51:45 -0000
Subject: Society for the Practice of Elvish Warfare
In-Reply-To: <bitn4d+o0op@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj04g1+b91b@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79470

bboy_mn:
> I will touch briefly on my Elf Theory here. I think Hermione is
completely misguided in her efforts toward house-elves. It's true, 
a house-elfs greatest joy is to have masters to serve, and to serve 
them honorably. All they really want in return is the same sense of 
honor and commitment from their master. They don't want pay, they 
want honor, dignity, respect, and appreciation. To genuinely respect 
and appreciate a house-elve is the highest reward you could ever 
give them. > > 


Sarah: 
Joining the house elf fray:
I like the idea that Dobby will have a part in the fight.  But 
that might just be because I really like Dobby.  I think that 
Hermione's views on elves are right on, but she's going about it 
in a completely wrong way.  She accidentally offends the elves, 
instead of befriending them or complimenting them.  She doesn't 
realize that elves, like some people, enjoy their work and take pride 
in it.  But, they should be able to choose who to serve, and not be 
forced to serve someone they hate.  They're like serfs of the middle 
ages; tied to the land and aren't allowed their freedom to do other 
things.  Just my opinion.

Sarah





From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 00:17:36 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 00:17:36 -0000
Subject: Inside Dumbledore's Head (was Re: Prophets without Honour)
In-Reply-To: <bj0hn6+9bd1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj0nj0+bftq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79471

Wanda:

I have to say, I think that this interpretation of Dumbledore cannot 
be right. <snip> I think it would be bad, even immoral, for Rowling 
to set up children to think that Dumbledore is good and trustworthy, 
and then to knock that down.

Kirstini-

Pip and I have both highlighted areas where DD's actions have been 
ambiguous. During the "gleam of triumph" bit in GoF, Harry catches a 
glimpse of another, altogether more frightening side of DD. There 
must have been hints, if so many people on the list *have* picked up 
on them. <snip>Also, we aren't denying for a moment that he's working 
for good. Just questioning his methods.  <snip>
But I was trying to point out that she may very well be creating a 
situation where this sort of realisation is possible. <snip>DD has 
already revealed that he is at least mildly calculating. By telling 
Harry "I cared more about your life than the other lives which would 
be lost", DD implies that he is *now* putting those lives before 
Harry's. Manipulation is inevitable in the position he's in, which is 
that of the head of an army at war. War isn't a very nice thing for 
children to read about either - there are lots of random deaths, and 
generals inevitably have to make judgement calls which occasionally 
turn out to have been mistakes and lose lives. Which is what DD 
admits happened to Sirius. 

Kneasy-

I've been a bit leery of DD for years. <snip>When I started posting, 
there seemed to be a preponderance of views that equated DD with 
Gandalf. Old, wise, powerful, unbending integrity, etc. I was 
surprised. I couldn't match this up with, for example, his (in)action 
towards Lucius Malfoy at the end of CoS. DD's own suspension, 
kidnapping, petrifications, mayhem, everything except murder. With 
Malfoy as the prime mover, palming the diary onto Ginny. And all he 
gets from DD is a veiled threat as to future 
behaviour. Does not compute. Not for a character supposedly 
vehemently, implacably anti-evil. <snip>I don't doubt but that he 
wants to defeat Voldemort, but I feel there's more to it.

Laura-

Okay, okay, I'm beginning to come around to the suspicious!DD side.  
There's evidence that JKR wants us to start distancing ourselves from 
him as well-the couple of incidents in which Harry sees him become a 
fear-inspiring figure in OoP.  Those just confirm what we have known 
for a while-that DD can be pretty tough-minded if he wants to be.  He 
had no problem hanging Snape out to dry in front of Fudge in PoA, and 
doing the same to Fudge in the last 2 books.  

But if I'm reading all the posts correctly, Kneasy is a lot more 
hostile to DD than either Pip or Kirstini.  The latter 2 think he's 
fundamentally on the good side but that he makes some decisions that 
are either poorly thought out or just plain cruel.  But Kneasy thinks 
there's something else going on with DD altogether.  

I don't have any problem with the idea that JRK is showing us how 
Harry begins to see the adults in his life more realistically as he 
gets older.  Kids have to do that if they're to be able to manage 
themselves in the world.  It wouldn't be surprising for Harry to feel 
and act alienated from DD for a while, and goodness knows he has lots 
of valid reasons for doing so.  DD is a complex character trying to 
deal with a crisis of extreme proportions.  Harry can't possibly 
grasp the position DD is in at the age of 15.  But he can begin to 
understand that in DD's position, he, Harry, might make different 
decisions.  That would be a frightening and alienating experience for 
Harry, but an inevitable one. If we can project Harry into adulthood, 
I would guess that he will continue re-evaluating DD for most of his 
life.   Most kids just have to deal with not getting the car when 
they want it or parental disapproval of their boy/girlfriends.  Harry 
has to take in the reality that DD's mishandling of both himself and 
Sirius cost Sirius his life.  

I still can't decide, though, whether Kirstini and Pip are right or 
whether Kneasy is (if I'm understanding everyone correctly).  Clearly 
DD has the big picture to deal with.  Clearly he has to make 
decisions that might hurt individuals in order to save society.  
(Although it would have been better for Harry and Sirius if DD had 
cared about Harry just a little less-then DD would have been able to 
tell Harry what he needed to know.)  Whether his behavior toward 
Harry will change is still an open question; I think his remarks in 
OoP simply suggest that he's called himself on his own behavior and 
intends to be honest with himself from now on. 

But Kneasy thinks there's something deeper going on with DD.  A 
personal vendetta against LV?  A drive to dominate the world 
himself?  Is he really only fighting LV for pride or ego?  I defer to 
my superiors on the list for further explanation.   




From wsherratt3338 at rogers.com  Tue Sep  2 00:17:34 2003
From: wsherratt3338 at rogers.com (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 00:17:34 -0000
Subject: Snape the Occlumens
In-Reply-To: <bj0l68+k3rf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj0niu+e33s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79472

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sarcasticmuppet" 
<sarcasticmuppet at y...> wrote:
  The only 
> thing I could possibly see wrong with it is this:  Would Voldemort 
> know that his Legillimency is being blocked?  If he looked inside 
> Snape's head and constantly found it empty, would he suspect 
> Occlumency or stupidity?  If he knew Snape was hiding memories 
from 
> him, would he suspect that Snape is a spy?  If so, what game was 
Mr. 
> V. playing before his downfall?

This I don't know.  We never got a good look at *successful* 
Occlumency, except in flashes.  Harry was obviously just a beginner, 
and his ability to repulse Snape was intermittent.  Maybe the 
difference between this and what a really accomplished Occlumens can 
do is as great as Harry's first fizzy Patronus and the complete one 
he was eventually able to produce.  Perhaps Snape is so skilled, he 
can hide his thoughts seamlessly, so Voldemort thinks he is seeing 
everything there is to see, instead of encountering obstructions or 
blanks.

Wanda




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 00:20:54 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 00:20:54 -0000
Subject: a question about secret-keeping
Message-ID: <bj0np6+muf3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79473

If you're a secret keeper and you decide to transfer the secret to 
someone else, do you still remember the secret?  Or do you just 
remember who you gave it to?  We know that Sirius went to Godric's 
Hollow after becoming suspicious of Peter, but he might have known 
about that place before they went into hiding.  Just wondering.




From sues0101 at hotmail.com  Tue Sep  2 00:35:04 2003
From: sues0101 at hotmail.com (Sue Porter)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 00:35:04 +0000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
Message-ID: <BAY2-F61hA9QRmzeyNt00007908@hotmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79474




>From: "Kirstini" <kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk>
>Reply-To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com
>To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's 
>integrity
>Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 19:38:56 -0000
>
>Wanda wrote, in a very well thought out and heartfelt post, which I
>felt the need to respond to:
>
> >>It's one thing for adults to read these books, and read intricate
>possibilities into them.  But they are still children's books, and I
>think it would be bad, even immoral, for Rowling to set up children
>to think that Dumbledore is good and trustworthy, and then to knock
>that down.>>
>
>But it happens in life. And I remember JKR saying once that she was
>writing books which children would enjoy, not trying to preach moral
>examples at them.

Sue:

But it doesn't always happen in life. For every kid that has a bad 
childhood, there are millions that don't. There can be evil in Harry's life, 
but to take away Dumbledore I think would be to take away Harry's hope. Hope 
is something we have discussed here before, about it being something along 
with love and faith even, that Harry has in abundance. I think DD might die 
in Book 7, but I don't think he'll die having betrayed Harry in anyway.

_________________________________________________________________
ninemsn Premium transforms your e-mail with colours, photos and animated 
text. Click here  http://ninemsn.com.au/premium/landing.asp




From Zarleycat at aol.com  Tue Sep  2 00:36:20 2003
From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 00:36:20 -0000
Subject: Ghost Voldemort?
Message-ID: <bj0om4+a4vs@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79475

If Nearly Headless Nick is correct, in that those who fear death are 
the beings that become ghosts, and if Voldemort's greatest fear is 
death, does that mean Vmort is destined for Ghosthood, should he meet 
his death at the end of the series?

If so, could he be contained somewhere, or would he delight in 
following Harry around (assuming Harry lives) for the rest of Harry's 
life?  Imagine, just when you think you've finally defeated the 
biggest of the evil overlords, he becomes a ghost! How annoying would 
that be?

Marianne




From ellyn337 at earthlink.net  Mon Sep  1 20:30:05 2003
From: ellyn337 at earthlink.net (L Ellyn)
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 16:30:05 -0400
Subject: Dumbledore dislodged
Message-ID: <001601c370c7$d5179080$0d60bd3f@oemcomputer>

No: HPFGUIDX 79476

I'm fairly new to the group.  First I discovered the Leaky Cauldron, which led me to Nimbus 2003, and that led me to HPFGU.  I've been reading the posts for the past month, and the rules, and think I'm getting the hang of it enough to try my first post.  A special hello to Dicey - my house elf.

I did search for this topic and didn't find it.  I was talking to a friend about what we liked about the book.  I loved Chapter 26 of  Order of the Phoenix where Dumbledore took credit for creating DD's Army.   After that conversation, I re-read that chapter alone and literally gasped out loud - "This was never resolved!"  Understand that I have read this book twice thus far and did not see it.  I think it is a credit to JKR's writing that we get so involved with Sirius's death and the prophecy that we missed this.  

It reminds me of a passing comment by Dumbledore that leads to the Room of Requirement.  I have a gut feeling that this little comment will be important in the next two books.  It is after Dumbledore has knocked the MOM folks out that McGonagall says on page 622 of OoP, 

    "Where will you go Dumbledore?", whispered Professor McGonagall, " "Grimmauld Place?"

    "Oh no," said Dumbledore with a grim smile, "I am not leaving to go into hiding.  Fudge will soon wish he'd never dislodged me from Hogwarts, I promise you ....."

This sounds pretty threatening to me.  Notice the grim smile and the ominous "I promise you...."  Nor have I found any other hints or resolutions in the rest of the book.  Hence why I am posting it to see if some of the other sharp-eyed readers can thread together what this means.

My first thought was that it had something to do with the Goblins as the MOM has such a dismal history with them.  They are mentioned often, but we don't quite get the full story.  My gut feeling is that this will segue into an in-depth story regarding the Goblins.

Secondly, I jumped to the 'Ron as Seer' posts in my mind.  Could Dumbledore dislodge Fudge and make Arthur Weasley Minister of Magic?   Fun thought.


Gadfly McLellyn

Gadfly = a stinging insect that annoys domesticated animals.  I hope I am stinging you into putting your thinking caps on. 





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From phluxist at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 20:26:45 2003
From: phluxist at yahoo.com (phluxist)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 20:26:45 -0000
Subject: Apparating/ Disapparating
Message-ID: <bj0a25+2euh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79477

Theres something that has been bothering me about the series ever 
since CoS, and the errors seem to keep surfacing in OotP, too.

Whenever JKR describes someone apparating/disapparating, she always 
remarks that there is a loud popping or cracking noise. Even Dobby, 
who can perform his own type of apparation (unlike wizard apparation 
because it obviously is not effected by preventive charms such like 
those at Hogwarts)is described accompanied with a loud noise. 
However, there seem to be many times where JKR describes 
people 'disappearing' but without a sound. Are we to believe that 
these *stealth* disappearences are not related to apparation? Or 
perhaps some wizards have mastered the ability to apparate/ 
disapparate without making a noise?

It sounds like there are a lot of people in the WW can quietly 
disappear without drawing attention...

Whats the deal?

-Phluxist





From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  1 21:33:11 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 21:33:11 -0000
Subject: Harry's Mistake: CRUCIO-> Bellatrix Lestrange
In-Reply-To: <bitjdn+761t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj0dun+577f@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79478

"msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> wrote: Bellatrix recovers very quickly 
from Harry's attempt to Crucio! her and then taunts him that he can't 
do it because he didn't hate 
enough....

"Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:  I accept that Harry did not have the 
intensity of hate and intent to effectively Crucio Bellatrix, but he 
also made another big mistake when he attempted the curse.  The 
Crucio is a 'sustained' curse, not an 'event' curse like most <edit>

--->"msbeadsley" _realtime_:  which goes back to what I said before:

"msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> wrote: Harry has never cast this spell 
before; don't most major spells have to be learned and practiced in 
order to pack any punch?

--->"msbeadsley"_realtime_:  So, if Harry *had* practiced this, he 
would know about the whole " `sustained' curse" thing (which I think 
is probably bullseye on the mark, BTW).  So?how much of the spell's 
failure is a lack of hate and how much is lack of familiarity?

Maybe...thinking, thinking...the two are tied together:  maybe 
righteous (or any other kind of) anger isn't sufficient because it's 
ephemeral, chemical; generally, people don't stay angry and they get 
that way as a consequence of an event.  Hate is always with you, once 
you create that context (make that decision) where you store the 
things/people you hate.

"Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote: I do believe that Bellatrix statement 
is true, you do need a vicious cruel intent to cause vicious cruel 
pain; something that is not in Harry's nature. But I also think, even 
though the book doesn't directly explain this, that the curse failed 
because Harry did not maintain a sustained focused intent. 

--->"msbeadsley" _realtime_: So, Harry could have caused her pain as 
long as he had held focus; but it just might not have been sufficient 
to be disabling, anyway.

"msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> wrote: If Harry does believe her, and 
if he is bothered by his inability to deal with her effectively, will 
he work very hard on learning how to hate effectively enough to hurt 
her/DE's in general next time?  While the power Harry has that is 
beyond the Dark Lord's ken is very likely *love*...

"James Redmont" <jamesredmont at h...> wrote: Very interesting, even 
probable.  However, I believe he'll abandon the hate thing (I hope, 
I'm sick of pissed-off!Harry...how terrible would hate!Harry be?) and 
come up with a new way to fight them.  The fact that he used Crucio! 
must be important.  It's not something she should lightly throw 
around, especially since she stressed that you get a lifetime 
sentence in Azkaban for trying it.  Was it to show us that he's not 
like the deatheaters?  or is it to show us he reached his breaking 
point?

--->"msbeadsley"_realtime_:  I, too, am (already) sick of pissed-off!
Harry.  While I heartily agree with his *right* to be just as he is, 
it's wearying for some of us (fictional and real world) who care 
about him.  I think Harry's decision to use an unforgivable will turn 
out to be an illustration of how anybody, even the best people, even 
Our Boy Harry, can sometimes made really really bad choices (there's 
that word again).  It may come into play later as he remembers, and 
considers how somebody, like Snape, might have started down a path 
feeling utterly justified, only to find out they'd made a badly wrong 
turn.

"Jen Reese" <stevejjen at e...> wrote:  That makes me wonder, could DD 
really have killed Voldemort at the MOM? The AK must work like 
Crucio, requiring a force of wanting the person dead.  Dumbledore 
tells LV, "merely taking your life would not satisfy me, I admit--", 
so the feeling wouldn't be behind an AK. 

--->"msbeadsley"_realtime_:   I think Dumbledore has something "worse 
than death" in mind for Voldemort; I suspect he has redemption, or at 
least repentance, in mind.  I imagine that being forced to face and 
regret the worst things you have done after a lifetime like 
Voldemort's would be an agony much deeper and greater than a mere 
(physically excruciating) CRUCIO!  I don't see Dumbledore as one to 
pass out punishment.  I also think that the key to the end is here.  
Voldemort will be trapped in a hell of his own making, somehow 
awakened to the flip side of all the harm he has done.  Sometimes I 
even wonder if Harry himself isn't Voldemort rewound in time to come 
around and do battle with himself from the defender's side.  It's the 
kind of final, devastating twist I could see JKR going for.

"msbeadsley"





From slytherin501 at yahoo.es  Mon Sep  1 21:46:53 2003
From: slytherin501 at yahoo.es (Sembei Grindelwald)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 21:46:53 -0000
Subject: Percy question
Message-ID: <bj0eod+nihb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79479

Creo que Percy es un esp?a de DD en el Ministerio, y por eso 
necesita alejarse de su familia, aunque tambi?n podr?a ser que 
estuviera bajo la maldici?n Imperius.

Su novia se llama Penelope. Me parece que este Ulisses pasar? 
tambi?n por alg?n infierno antes de volver a su Itaca familiar.

"Sembei Grindelwald" 




From ellyn337 at earthlink.net  Mon Sep  1 22:57:41 2003
From: ellyn337 at earthlink.net (mclellyn)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 22:57:41 -0000
Subject: Why the Veil? & Harry's Power
In-Reply-To: <bhqmoa+59i5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj0it5+a063@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79480

>  Hickengruendler wrote:
> My opinion: JKR wanted to make it clear, that she believes in life 
> after Death. Therefore she created the veil, as the barrier between 
> the life and the afterlife, and let Harry hear the voices. herefore 
> he has a strong reason to believe Luna, when she later said, that 
> Sirius and the others are just lurking out of sight. This would be 
> much more difficult, if Sirius died in another way.

Gadfly McLellyn now:

This seems to be backed up by canon.  See P 858 of OoP, Chapter 38 
The Second War Begins
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"He wiped the mirror clear again and said, so that every syllable 
rang clearly through the room, "Sirius Black!"

Nothing happened.  The frustrated face looking back out of the mirror 
was still definitely, his own ....

Sirius didn't have his mirror on him when he went through the 
archway, said a small voice in Harry's head.  That's why it's not 
working....."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That small voice is from the other side of the veil, IMO.  There is 
no body so there is no other way to know if Sirius had it on him or 
not.  I don't remember anyone finding the other mirror after Sirius 
goes through the veil.  Sirius or some other spirit from the beyond 
the veil is telling Harry this.  

See also GOF, US paperback version Chapter 34 Priori Incantatem p 664
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"It was the sound of hope to Harry (phoenix song).....the most 
beautiful and welcome thing he had ever heard in his life.....He felt 
as though the song were inside him instead of just around him.....It 
was the sound he connected with Dumbledore, and it was almost as 
though a friend were speaking in his ear.....

Don't break the connection."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
These are the only two examples where Harry seems to get help from an 
unspecified voice I can think of at the moment, perhaps others 
will think of more and I am sure there were more.  In the US versions 
at least, this voice seems always to be in italics.  

I think this will be Harry's power too.  Voldemort is afraid of death 
and therefore cannot connect to the spirits who have "Crossed Over", 
if you will.  Harry can connect to the infinite wisdom of the 
spirits beyond the veil as he is not afraid and has such heart.

Gadfly "hoping JKR is a Crossing Over with John Edward fan" McLellyn



 





From jones.r.h.j at worldnet.att.net  Mon Sep  1 22:04:57 2003
From: jones.r.h.j at worldnet.att.net (Robert Jones)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 22:04:57 -0000
Subject: Hogwarts' Dorms
Message-ID: <bj0fq9+ghj9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79481

The students keep their same dorm room for all seven years.  I think 
it was in the GOF that Harry says he was glad to see his old room 
again when he arrived September 1.  Each year the new class just 
takes over for the previous seventh years.  I assume the rooms can 
be adjusted the size of the room each year to accommodate the number 
of students in that class since the Room of Requirement can change 
its size, Arthur Weasley could make his Ford Anglia bigger inside to 
hold more than it looked outside, and the tents at the World Cup 
were bigger inside than outside.  

This brings up a previously discussed issue of how many students are 
there at Hogwarts?  I don't think each house has a new class consisting 
of exactly 5 boys and 5 girls each year -- part of the humor in the 
books is JKR using odd numbers where we would expect nice round numbers 
and that would apply here.  (Are there more than 3 Gryffindor girls in 
Harry's class?  Only three are mentioned.) 

Also, if the school had to admit exactly five boys and five girls for 
each class they would have to find them during the admission process 
before the school year began, and so what would the Sorting Hat have to 
do?  The students' houses would already have been determined before they 
got to the Sorting Hat.  Also, it would odd to say "There is a muggle boy 
in Cornwall who would be perfect for Gryffindor, but we have already 
determined our five for this year, so we will have to skip him."

Boris the Bewildered





From InesitaSimpson at hotmail.com  Tue Sep  2 00:18:35 2003
From: InesitaSimpson at hotmail.com (yvonne_davies2002)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 00:18:35 -0000
Subject: Snape the Occlumens
Message-ID: <bj0nkr+evb6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79482

I think that it is entirely possible that Snape was already a 
profficient Leglimens, and that is why his hatred of James and Sirius 
runs so deep. Imagine knowing all that they were thinking about him.  
It would drive him crazy with bitterness and resentment.

"yvonne_davies2002"




From sollecks970 at aol.com  Tue Sep  2 00:17:20 2003
From: sollecks970 at aol.com (fawkes970)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 00:17:20 -0000
Subject: Aiming Wand at Bellatrix Lestrange:  CRUCIO!
In-Reply-To: <bj0k95+63e6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj0nig+jiri@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79483

Susan wrote:
> Barty/Moody verified this in GOF when he told the class that the 
entire class could cast the spell on him and it would not do much. 
It requires and powerful wizard to cast the spells.  I believe that 
part of that power is derived from evil. >>>


Well: It's not so much that they are powerful, so much that they are 
evil. It's Voldemort's evil that makes him such a threat. Of course 
he's skilled, because he's been practicing the Dark Arts tirelessly 
since he was in Hogwarts. They need to want and like to cause pain in 
order for the spell to work properly. Harry is going to need more 
than the Avada Kedavra to kill Voldemort. Cause as much as Harry 
wants Voldemort to die, Harry doesn't take pleasure in doing so, like 
the DE and LV do...any suggestions on what this might be!?

fawkes(pat)





From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 00:30:54 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 00:30:54 -0000
Subject: Aiming Wand at Bellatrix Lestrange:  CRUCIO!
In-Reply-To: <bj0gtu+2jjq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj0obu+fmdi@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79484

"Jen Reese" <stevejjen at e...> wrote:

> Surely Harry will relate that incident with Belltrix to 
> someone in Book 6, and we will get to know even 
> more about casting unforgivable curses.   

Harry:  "Oh, by the way, I used an unforgivable curse on Bellatrix 
Lestrange; it didn't do much good, but I tried."

I just can't see Harry telling anyone.  Of course, since the aurors 
will likely be gearing up against the DE, there may be some tolerance 
of the unforgivables if used against a member of LV's camp.  I 
consider all the members of the DA like junior aurors; maybe parts of 
the WW will, too.

"msbeadsley"





From ellyn337 at earthlink.net  Mon Sep  1 23:57:14 2003
From: ellyn337 at earthlink.net (mclellyn)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 23:57:14 -0000
Subject: Snape Vampire Theory 
In-Reply-To: <200308191312.59588.silmariel@telefonica.net>
Message-ID: <bj0mcq+joub@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79485

- Carolina <silmariel at t...> wrote:
> subrosax99:
> > Me: Surely you aren't implying that I lack all subtlety and
> > imagination? I am more than capable of deducing that Snape is a
> > vampire without him prancing around like Bela Lugosi. My 
conclusions
> > are based on the assumption that vampires are categorically 
undead,
> > and must drink the blood of the living to survive. Snape does not
> > appear to meet either of these criteria. The fact that he goes 
out in
> > daylight or sleeps in a bed does not prove or disprove anything.

Gadfly McLellyn writes:

Everytime I see that Snape doesn't drink blood, all I can think of is 
the miriad of dead creatures that line his office.  I'm thinking that 
he takes some kind of potion so that it doesn't have to be human 
blood.  It can be the blood of any other creature.  

And now I will fill my cannon with canon:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
SS/PS Chapter 8 The Potions Master page 136 of US paperback

"Potions lessons took place down in one of the dungeons.  It was 
colder here than up in the main castle, and would have been quite 
creepy enough without the pickled animals floating in glass jars all 
around the walls."
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Could be Vampire!Snape's prior meals?

--------------------------------------------------------------------
SS/PS Chapter 8 The Potions Master Page 137 of US paperback, Snapes 
famous introductory speech....

"I can teach you how to bottle fame, brew glory, even stopper 
death....."  
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Stoppering death kind of sounds vampirish to me.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
SS/PS Chapter 13 Nicholas Flamel page 225 of US paperback 

"And speaking of Snape ...

A hooded figure came swiftly down the front steps of the castle.  
Clearly not wanting to be seen, it walked as fast as possible toward 
the forbidden forest.  Harry's victory faded from his mind as he 
watched.  He recognized the figure's prowling walk.  Snape, sneaking 
into the forest while everyone else was at dinner -- what was going 
on?

CoS Chapter 3 The Whomping Willow, page 78 of US paperback

"Follow me", said Snape.

Not daring even to look at each other, Harry and Ron followed Snape 
up the steps into the vast, echoing entrance hall, which was lit with 
flaming torches.  A delicious smell of food was wafting from the 
Great Hall, but Snape led them away from the warmth and light, down a 
narrow stone staircase that led into the dungeons."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Soooooo Snape isn't always eating at dinner time!
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I accidentally found this passage that kind of backs up my Snape 
drinks the blood of creatures instead of humans.  Snape can't even 
look at a creature.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
PoA  Chapter 8 Flight of the Fat Lady, page 156 of US paperback

"Snape set down the smoking goblet, his eyes wandering between Harry 
and Lupin.

"I was just showing Harry my grindylow," said Lupin pleasantly, 
pointing to the tank.

"Fascinating," said Snape, without looking at it."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Kind of sounds like Lupin to tempt Snape into showing his vampirish 
side.


I swear I remember something about Harry noticing there were even 
more jars at one point.  More meals?  Unfortunately I can't find the 
canon regarding that.  I also thought that somewhere it was said that 
Snape often goes into the Forbidden Forest, but I can't find that 
canon either right now.  But I'm sure I have annoyingly stung enough 
of you now to move on.

Gadfly 'off to watch the History Detectives' McLellyn







From sollecks970 at aol.com  Tue Sep  2 00:32:53 2003
From: sollecks970 at aol.com (fawkes970)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 00:32:53 -0000
Subject: Secret-keeping
Message-ID: <bj0ofl+brj8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79486

I don't think the secret can be transferred...If it can, the spell 
wouldn't be nearly as effective. Plus, it couldn't have been in 
Sirius because he convinced the Potters to go for Peter Pettigrew 
instead... However, just because Sirius didn't want to have it doesn't 
mean that if he was given it, then knew that LV was looking for him 
as well, could he transfer it then? Another ?: can the secret keeper 
hold two or more locations? And another question is: can two people 
use each other as a scret keeper so that Voldemort can never find 
either of them? If so...why did Dumbledore not do this...?

fawkes(pat)





From InesitaSimpson at hotmail.com  Tue Sep  2 00:40:45 2003
From: InesitaSimpson at hotmail.com (yvonne_davies2002)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 00:40:45 -0000
Subject: a question about secret-keeping
In-Reply-To: <bj0np6+muf3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj0oud+te0j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79487

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
> If you're a secret keeper and you decide to transfer the secret to 
> someone else, do you still remember the secret?  Or do you just 
> remember who you gave it to?  We know that Sirius went to Godric's 
> Hollow after becoming suspicious of Peter, but he might have known 
> about that place before they went into hiding.  Just wondering.

Sirius didn't transfer the secret to Peter, he persuaded James to 
make Peter his Secret Keeper.  Presumably, James called Sirius to 
Godric's Hollow when he realised they were under attack.  Did Sirius 
not say in book five that they communicated via a mirror when in 
detention.  We know Sirius still had his mirror, because he gave it 
to Harry, therefore it is possible that James had his and was able to 
shout for help. He would certainly call for his closest friend, which 
Sirius was. So close in fact, that we learn in book 5, that Sirius 
went to live with James' parents when he left home. 

"yvonne_davies2002"




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 00:45:04 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 00:45:04 -0000
Subject: What Harry had to hide, Was: Hermione SHIP question
In-Reply-To: <bj03tg+2t3v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj0p6g+ecb5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79488

"Emily" <pinoypartygal at a...> wrote:
> Those little gestures, ironically, I think, are harder to prove as 
> clues to their possible romantic future.
> 
> There are other ones, that I think that most people have caught up 
> on like when Harry is practicing occulemency he sees some events in 
> his life that he hated and even feared at times
> 
> 1)His jealousy of Dudley getting a bike
> 2)Ripper chasing him up a tree
> 3)The sorting hat almost placing him in Slytherin
> 4)Hermione in the hospital wing after she had the polyjuice potion 
> (why did he see this and not Ron's stint in the hospital?)
> 5)Dementors
> 6)Kissing Cho Chang (as it was an unpleasant experience for him)

I didn't think that the kissing scene showed up because Harry found 
it unpleasant.  I thought it was because it was something Harry would 
much, much rather keep hidden, along with the information that the 
trio brewed and used polyjuice potion in their third year.  As a 
matter of fact, that could apply to most of the above, couldn't it?  
Even with the dementors, although Harry might not want to hide that 
they had come after him, he very likely wouldn't want to reveal what 
he experienced when they did.  Maybe there's some "don't think of a 
purple cow" going on here; faced with the possibility that Snape 
might see into his mind, everything he'd rather hide automatically 
occurs to him.  Hhhmmmmmmmmm?

"msbeadsley"





From sollecks970 at aol.com  Mon Sep  1 23:54:43 2003
From: sollecks970 at aol.com (fawkes970)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 23:54:43 -0000
Subject: Patronus
In-Reply-To: <bivc3i+j9d6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj0m83+np02@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79489

"sylviablundell2001" wrote:
> Would the fact that Harry's opinion of his father has now taken 
quite a battering have any influence on his Patronus, either in 
producing it or the form it takes? I have always wondered why it 
wasn't his mother who became the Patronus. >>>


Well, I think that the Patronus is a form of something happy, that 
at the same time defends Harry: and I do not think that after his 
talk with Lupin, that Harry believes his father would be any less 
powerful, and the fact is that he still loves his father even though 
he knows that he wasn't perfect. So I believe that it won't change 
as a stag. If it did however, maybe it would be some other 
creature...like a big black dog...just a brain teaser. 

fawkes(pat)





From elbarad at aol.com  Mon Sep  1 20:29:06 2003
From: elbarad at aol.com (Rebecca Hoskins)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 20:29:06 -0000
Subject: Patronus
In-Reply-To: <bivc3i+j9d6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj0a6i+seoe@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79490


Joj mom31 wrote:
> "thinking of how popular and admired his father was makes him feel 
> valuable and the stag represents his father."

"sylviablundell2001" <sylviablundell at a...> wrote:
> Would the fact that Harry's opinion of his father has now taken 
> quite a battering have any influence on his Patronus, either in 
> producing it or the form it takes? I have always wondered why it 
> wasn't his mother who became the Patronus.

I'd guess that Harry knows a lot less about his mother. I don't think 
his Patronus will change. Certainly, when he produced his Patronus in 
front of Umbridge in the OWLS chapter, it was still a stag, and that 
was after he'd seen Snape's memory...

"Rebecca Hoskins"




From elbarad at aol.com  Mon Sep  1 20:38:15 2003
From: elbarad at aol.com (Rebecca Hoskins)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 20:38:15 -0000
Subject: green eyes and the killing curse
In-Reply-To: <bivim5+em6e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj0ann+ifk4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79491

Wanda wrote:
> I just don't believe that giving one's life is enough to 
> block an AK - there are too many other instances where we 
> would have heard of it before.  Why didn't James's sacrifice 
> protect Lily, in that case?


Well, maybe the protection was not given passively by Lily dying. 
Maybe Lily did some sort of spell or incantation before her death 
that caused this protection to happen. Remember that we are told that 
this is very old magic, so Lily could have looked it up. She would 
have had reason to find some way of protecting Harry, as she knew 
Voldemort was after him because of the prophecy.

"Rebecca Hoskins" 




From elbarad at aol.com  Mon Sep  1 20:56:57 2003
From: elbarad at aol.com (Rebecca Hoskins)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 20:56:57 -0000
Subject: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj078g+p7ng@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj0bqp+df2f@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79492

Wanda:
>>It's one thing for adults to read these books, and read intricate
>possibilities into them. But they are still children's books, and I
>think it would be bad, even immoral, for Rowling to set up children
>to think that Dumbledore is good and trustworthy, and then to knock
>that down.>>

Kirstini:
>But it happens in life. And I remember JKR saying once that she was
>writing books which children would enjoy, not trying to preach moral
>examples at them. >>

Well, I have just read OoP to my 6 yr old, and so long as you talk 
through the more distressing scenes it's not a problem. The parts 
that adults will find nastiest tend to go right over the heads of 
children who are too young to deal with them. Maybe Lily was only in 
her early 20s when she had Harry - but I was 23 when I had my first, 
so I can't see anything morally wrong with that.

"Rebecca Hoskins" 




From jones.r.h.j at worldnet.att.net  Tue Sep  2 02:02:09 2003
From: jones.r.h.j at worldnet.att.net (Robert Jones)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 02:02:09 -0000
Subject: Hermione SHIP question
Message-ID: <bj0tn1+rrbd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79493

I agree that there is no strong hint of a romantic relationship 
between Harry and Hermione.  Emily does a good job in finding some 
evidence, but I think she would admit that there isn't much.  I 
thought after GOF that Hermione and Ron would obviously get together 
in Book 5, but in OOTP Hermione only seemed annoyed with Ron -- he 
is a friend (and he seems to have a crush on her), but there is no 
sign of attraction or affection towards him in her annoyance.  (JKR 
may change the kids' emotions in Book 6 again -- perhaps we cannot 
make any predictions based on the past books on relationships.) 
Hermione seems to be getting closer to Harry in each book but only 
as a friend so far.  I don't know if Harry is going to end up with 
anyone in Book 6 -- he seems pretty messed up psychologically and I 
don't know if any girl is going to want to think of him as boyfriend 
material.
Boris the Bewildered






From jillily3g at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 02:14:35 2003
From: jillily3g at yahoo.com (Beth)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 02:14:35 -0000
Subject: Why Harry Potter "cannot" be set in 1991-?
In-Reply-To: <bj0202+kps0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj0ueb+m2if@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79494

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Odile Falaise
> <odilefalaise at y...> wrote:
> > 
> > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita
> > Prince Winston)" <catlady at w...> and others wrote
> > about: 
> > 
> > <previous notes snipped>
> > 
> > <<<Dudley chucked his Playstation out the window, thus was no 
longer
> able to play Mega-Mutilation III, in GOBLET OF FIRE, set in 1994, 
when
> ... Playstations were not yet available in UK or US, but had been
> test-marketted in Japan. ...>>>
> 
> > 
> 
> bboy_mn:
[snip]
> 
> Now we come to the true and only test of effective story writing. I
> doesn't matter if JKR's story stands up to intense timeline 
analysis;
> the only thing that matters is, did you believe it when you read 
it?
> If you were so captivated by the story that the Playstation release
> date was the farthest thing from your mind, and what happens next 
in
> the story was the most important thing on your mind, then JKR
> succeeded totally as a writer. 
> 
> The fact that the timeline doesn't add up is nothing more than a 
bit
> of side trivia of obssessed HP nuts like us.
> 
> Just a thought.
> 
> bboy_mn

Being completely ignorant in a lot of things, including when each 
non-Atari video game player became available, I found the scene 
believable when I read it. However, I've read this argument before, 
and perhaps I've read a similar response here, too: Why couldn't the 
Dursleys, who feel compelled to surpass themselves every year in the 
number of birthday gifts they give their son, possibly obtain a 
state-of-the-art video game player available only in Japan? Or maybe 
Marge decided to try Japanese whelks (I know, I know) and picked up 
a gift for her favorite nephew? 

Beth




From yswahl at stis.net  Tue Sep  2 02:33:49 2003
From: yswahl at stis.net (samnanya)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 02:33:49 -0000
Subject: Hermione SHIP question
In-Reply-To: <bj03tg+2t3v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj0vid+7r3e@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79495

Emily says in message 79467
----------------------------
{Sam - My apologies for the heavy snipping here but her original post 
is well worth the read .... }
Well, I would consider myself very much a H/Hr shipper. And it's 
often hard for me to admit, though I have always admitted it, that 
Ron and Hermione are more obviously attracted to each other and I'm 
pretty sure that they will get together. But, hey, a girl can dream 
right? Now, while Ron and Hermione are the obvious couple, I believe 
(doesn't mean that it's true) that there are very, very subtle hints 
in the series that point to the possibility of Harry and Hermione as 
a couple. Bear with me, however, as I tend to stretch possibilities 
and clues, take it as you will. But please lets not make this into 
an argument over who should end up with who, in fact I'd be fine if 
Ron and Hermione get together. 
One thing that I noticed most throughout the books are the gifts 
that Hermione gives to both Harry and Ron. So far, she has given 
Harry pretty wonderful gifts, while she has given Ron rather simple 
ones of candy and what not. Specific examples:
In their second year, Hermione gives Harry a luxury eagle-feather 
quill. From that point on throughout the books it seems to be that 
JK Rowling has made it a point to mention Harry pulling out that 
same eagle feather quill at least once to write with it. In PoA, 
it's used in the beginning (sorry can't remember what page) In GoF 
it's also in the beginning on p 22 of the American hardback edition. 
It's mentioned somewhere in OotP I think though I'm not sure exactly 
where, also somewhere near the beginning of the book.
Other gifts of note that Hermione has given Harry include his Broom 
Servicing Kit, which he uses to this day. And the Quidditch Teams of 
Ireland and Britain. Basically, she has given him gifts that are in 
a word, perfect, for Harry. And he still uses all of them. What she 
is offering him and giving him is lasting.
Moving on, another clue that I found that is extremely, extremely 
subtle occurs in Book 4. This is in Charms class when they are 
practicing Banishing Charms. On p 481 of the American Hardback ed of 
GoF it goes as follows: 
"I just want to know what Snape did with his first chance if he's 
on his second one," said Harry grimly, and his cushion, to his very 
great surprise, flew straight across the room and landed neatly on 
top of Hermione's.]

Me {Sam} -
-----------------
Didnt catch the quill gift but did notice the broom.. Points well 
made... The cushions ..... wellll  I caught that too -- she just might 
have thrown that in there to tease the adult readers -- but as you 
say, you never know with JKR {what a trickster! lol}
When reading what follows, try to visualize the scene in your mind's 
eye and get the emotions behind the words -- JKR does use adverbs and 
adjectives very effectively.
First somewhat subtle clue, even though most guys are kind of thick in 
the way of relationships, Viktor Krum expresses maajor concern about 
Harry's relationship with Hermione during his walk with Harry (GoF 
552-553 am ed)before they are interrupted by Crouch. Viktor - greatest 
quidditch player with young ladies fawning all over him - would NEVER 
have been so concerned about Harry if he hadn't noticed something in 
Hermione's manner. He also doesn't believe Harry's initial denial
and is almost threatening towards him before Harry issues his firm 
denial. Even then, Krum only looked slightly happier. Nothing major 
but very very subtle...
Second clue, though it happened earlier in GoF, is more telling. Look 
at the description of Hermione after she and Ron see Harry after the 
first task -  (GoF 358)  "there were fingernail marks on her face 
where she had been clutching it in fear"  - thats a pretty strong 
reaction -- then when he is focusing on Ron's aplogy - "Hermione burst 
into tears. "Theres nothing to cry about!" Harry told her, bewildered. 
"Yoou two are so stupid!" she shouted, stanping her foot on the 
ground, tears splashing down her front. Then, before either of them 
could stop her, she had given both of them a hug and dashed away, now 
positively howling." 
Pretty severe emotional reaction for someone who is only a freind...
but once again, nothing specific, to indicate a SHIP potential, not on 
Harry's part anyway.
Finally, there is Hermione's ecstatic reaction from her erroneous 
belief that Harry had become prefect {instead of Ron} - look at the 
wording carefully - "The door banged open. Hermione came tearing into 
the room, her cheeks flushed and her hair flying. There was an 
envelope in her hand. {emphasis mine} Did YOU get -  did YOU get -"
She spotted the badge in Harry's hand and let out a shriek. "I knew 
it!" she said excitedly, brandishing her letter." ME TOO, HARRY, ME 
TOO!"   Her first thought is of Harry not herself. Their both being 
prefects is a recognition of their accomplishments and a SHARED joy...
.. which of course is dashed when she finds out that it was really 
Ron...

Those are the ones that come to mind, although there are more ....
but that being said ..... Luna Lovegood is introduced in the next 
chapter, and the meeting of Harry and Luna most probably never would 
have happened if Harry was made prefect....  


In the end, Emily put it best ...

Right now, none of the Ships are wrong or right...yet. Until we have 
a definitive in your face answer (no not from Rowling's lips, 
themselves, b/c I've learned NEVER to trust what she says in an 
interview)in the TEXT, I mean, is the only time we will truly know 
who is to be with whom. And until then, I'm still gladly lounging on 
the HMS Pumpkin Pie and I have a feeling that I always will! :-P
Emily~ 

Me again -
I always had a feeling that Harry would end up with Hermione {if he 
survives} but think that at least in the short term his destiny is 
with Luna ....... and of course similar arguments can be made for 
Ginny as well...
And that is of course why JKR is so brilliant of a writer and plotter 
-- the story can take many turns, all of them satisfying if she 
follows through with her convictions, whatever they may be.
Happy writing JK ! &
Happy shipping !
Samnanya




From yswahl at stis.net  Tue Sep  2 02:44:53 2003
From: yswahl at stis.net (samnanya)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 02:44:53 -0000
Subject: Why Harry Potter "cannot" be set in 1991-?  Puhleeeeze
In-Reply-To: <bj0ueb+m2if@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj1075+pthv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79496

> > bboy_mn:
> [snip]
> > 
Now we come to the true and only test of effective story writing. It 
doesn't matter if JKR's story stands up to intense timeline 
analysis; The only thing that matters is, did you believe it when you 
read it?
If you were so captivated by the story that the Playstation release
date was the farthest thing from your mind, and what happens next 
in the story was the most important thing on your mind, then JKR
succeeded totally as a writer. 
The fact that the timeline doesn't add up is nothing more than a 
bit of side trivia of obssessed HP nuts like us.
Just a thought.
bboy_mn

samnanya -
Thanks bboy for putting that so eloquently -- the time line does stand 
up in the most reliable source of canon of all - the text of the 
books. There is no doubt that Harry was born in 1980 unless Hagrid was 
lying and/or Nearly Headless Nick's cake decorator got his deathday 
wrong -- that is canon -- and a very well placed clue for book 5 
sleuths as well ..... 777
samnanya





From siskiou at earthlink.net  Tue Sep  2 02:53:04 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 19:53:04 -0700
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione SHIP question
In-Reply-To: <bj0vid+7r3e@eGroups.com>
References: <bj0vid+7r3e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <2131842160.20030901195304@earthlink.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 79497



Hi,

Monday, September 01, 2003, 7:33:49 PM, samnanya wrote:

> First somewhat subtle clue, even though most guys are kind of thick
> in 
> the way of relationships, Viktor Krum expresses maajor concern about 
> Harry's relationship with Hermione during his walk with Harry (GoF 
> 552-553 am ed)before they are interrupted by Crouch. Viktor -
> greatest 
> quidditch player with young ladies fawning all over him - would NEVER 
> have been so concerned about Harry if he hadn't noticed something in 
> Hermione's manner.

I think the main reason for Viktor to become concerned,
was the Rita Skeeter article, which basically told the world that Hermione and
Harry were an item.
After that he may have been looking for proof ;)

> Second clue, though it happened earlier in GoF, is more telling. Look 
> at the description of Hermione after she and Ron see Harry after the 
> first task -  (GoF 358)  "there were fingernail marks on her face 
> where she had been clutching it in fear"  - thats a pretty strong 
> reaction -- then when he is focusing on Ron's aplogy - "Hermione
> burst 
> into tears. "Theres nothing to cry about!" Harry told her,
> bewildered. 
> "Yoou two are so stupid!" she shouted, stanping her foot on the 
> ground, tears splashing down her front. Then, before either of them 
> could stop her, she had given both of them a hug and dashed away, now 
> positively howling." 
> Pretty severe emotional reaction for someone who is only a freind...
> but once again, nothing specific, to indicate a SHIP potential, not
> on 
> Harry's part anyway.

I don't have the book handy right now, but I seem to
remember she was emotional about Ron's and Harry's reunion,
after not talking for weeks.
Both Ron and Hermione were scared for Harry's life during
the first task, and it led to Ron's realization that Harry
could die...

IIRC, Hermione tends to be very emotional any time the trio
friendship is in peril.
Didn't she start crying in PoA, when Ron and she reconciled
after their falling out?

Some of the points mentioned to support ships seem a bit far
fetched to me, but maybe I'm just not able to understand the
subtleties well enough ;)

I just don't see Harry's pillow landing on top of Hermione's as
ship related (truthfully, it would make me feel a bit
uncomfortable to see her sneaking in sexual references in this
manner), but am willing to be proven wrong if JKR ever
admits that she intended this as a subtle shipping clue.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net

Visit our two pet bunnies: http://home.earthlink.net/~siskiou/




From editor at texas.net  Tue Sep  2 02:47:08 2003
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 21:47:08 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] a question about secret-keeping
References: <bj0np6+muf3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001901c370fc$82891fc0$2304a6d8@texas.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 79498

Someone unpronounceable (jwcpgh) asked:

> If you're a secret keeper and you decide to transfer the secret to
> someone else, do you still remember the secret?  Or do you just
> remember who you gave it to?  We know that Sirius went to Godric's
> Hollow after becoming suspicious of Peter, but he might have known
> about that place before they went into hiding.  Just wondering.

Is there any canon that has an established secret-keeper "transferring" the
secret? Or do you mean simply "telling" someone? Because you clearly *can*
reveal it without losing knowledge of it--Dumbledore told Harry, and all the
other members of the Order, where the headquarters was, without forgetting
it himself.

As to whether you can give the place you, as secret-keeper, hold in the
spell to another secret-keeper, I'd say it's not possible without recasting
the spell. Just my opinion.

~Amandageist, who is prepared to offer House points to the most creative
pronunciation offered for the name above










From trinity61us at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 04:51:34 2003
From: trinity61us at yahoo.com (alex fox)
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 21:51:34 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why Harry Potter "cannot" be set in 1991 (Question)
In-Reply-To: <bj1075+pthv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030902045134.43592.qmail@web14902.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79499

Ok, this is a silly thing to ask, but my friend wants to know just exactly how everyone KNOWS that HP started in 1991. I would look in the archives, but i haven't the ability to do that right now, as I am using someone else's computer, and barely getting my mail. Thank you, for understanding. If I could get an answer quickly, it would avoid a fight. I, personally, know that fact.
 
Thanks again,
Alex Fox 

samnanya <yswahl at stis.net> wrote:
> > bboy_mn:
> [snip]
> > 
Now we come to the true and only test of effective story writing. It 
doesn't matter if JKR's story stands up to intense timeline 
analysis; The only thing that matters is, did you believe it when you 
read it?
If you were so captivated by the story that the Playstation release
date was the farthest thing from your mind, and what happens next 
in the story was the most important thing on your mind, then JKR
succeeded totally as a writer. 
The fact that the timeline doesn't add up is nothing more than a 
bit of side trivia of obssessed HP nuts like us.
Just a thought.
bboy_mn

samnanya -
Thanks bboy for putting that so eloquently -- the time line does stand 
up in the most reliable source of canon of all - the text of the 
books. There is no doubt that Harry was born in 1980 unless Hagrid was 
lying and/or Nearly Headless Nick's cake decorator got his deathday 
wrong -- that is canon -- and a very well placed clue for book 5 
sleuths as well ..... 777
samnanya



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!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From ellyn337 at earthlink.net  Tue Sep  2 03:46:50 2003
From: ellyn337 at earthlink.net (mclellyn)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 03:46:50 -0000
Subject: Gadfly theory 101: Why DD trust SS & SS hates Harry
Message-ID: <bj13ra+nvhh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79500

I've been mulling this theory for sometime now.  I think it is time 
to let her fly (pun intended).  I am loading my stinging gadfly 
cannon with more canon to annoy the domesticated masses.


JKR seems to split what happened on Halloween night regarding 
Voldemort attacking Harry into two parts:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
CoS Chapter 17 The Heir of Slytherin, US paperback page 316

"No one knows why you lost your powers when you attacked me," said 
Harry abruptly.  "I don't know myself.  But I know why you couldn't 
kill me.  Because my mother died to save me.  My common Muggle-born 
mother," he added, shaking with suppressed rage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

JKR seems to hint here that one spell saved Harry's life and another 
made Voldemort lose his powers.  What if Snape brewed a potion for 
Harry or put a charm on Harry that would make the AK curse backfire?  
After all it is plausible as Sirius says in GoF:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

GoF Chapter 27 Padfoot Returns, US paperback page 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.  <snip> Snape knew more curses 
when he arrived at school than half the kids in seventh year....<snip>
----------------------------------------------------------------------

That would explain why he resents Harry's fame so much BECAUSE IT 
REALLY SHOULD BE SNAPE THAT IS FAMOUS FOR COMING UP WITH THE 
BACKFIRING SPELL.  That is why Snape sees Harry as "just a nasty 
little boy" (GoF Ch 27 Padfoot returns, US paperback page 516)who has 
no right to be famous.

If Snape is responsible for Voldemort's AK curse backfiring, then you 
can understand why Dumbledore trusts him so.

You can also understand that Snape cannot let anyone know he did this 
or he would be the intense target of the DEs and Voldemort.

Then there is the problem of motivation.  Hmmmmmmm.  Well the 
L.O.L.L.I.P.O.P.S. help me out some there, but I am a much darker 
creature than they are.  I think Snape the Slytherin loner has a 
vampire thirst <vbg> for knowledge.  He studied under Voldemort to 
learn all he could, and now he is studying under Dumbledore to learn 
all he can.  If this story goes the way of the Hero's Journey in 
mythology, then the hero always has another foe that comes to fore.  
To me that would be Snape.   I think Snape wants to be the greatest 
wizard there ever was and is laying in wait until he sees some 
vulnerable spot to move in with all his knowledge.

OK, get out your flyswatters.

Gadfly "saying thanks to the spirits behind the veil that I found 
HPFGU where I can get these things off my chest and have a good 
discussion about HP theories"  McLellyn







From tuck668 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 04:01:59 2003
From: tuck668 at yahoo.com (tuck668)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 04:01:59 -0000
Subject: Lily's Sacrifice, James' Sacrifice, was Re: green eyes and the curse
In-Reply-To: <bj0ann+ifk4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj14nn+assd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79501

Wanda wrote:
> > I just don't believe that giving one's life is enough to 
> > block an AK - there are too many other instances where we 
> > would have heard of it before.  Why didn't James's sacrifice 
> > protect Lily, in that case?
> 
> (snip)

Well, James didn't know that Voldemort was definitely going to kill 
Lily. Lily, however, knew that Voldemort wanted to kill Harry 
because of the prophecy. Therefore, I don't think that James'       
was a sacrifice to protect Lily, persay.

-Anna





From sollecks970 at aol.com  Tue Sep  2 04:38:06 2003
From: sollecks970 at aol.com (fawkes970)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 04:38:06 -0000
Subject: Snape the Occlumens
In-Reply-To: <bj0nkr+evb6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj16re+t7sf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79502

"yvonne_davies2002" <InesitaSimpson at h...> wrote:
> I think that it is entirely possible that Snape was already a 
profficient Leglimens, and that is why his hatred of James and 
Sirius runs so deep. Imagine knowing all that they were thinking 
about him. It would drive him crazy with bitterness and resentment. >>>

Yes, but 1: if Snape did know it, he couldn't have been very skilled 
at it, or powerful for that, because he is too young. Therefore, 
wouldn't he need to like have eye contact. Plus, you need to use an 
enchantment and wand as well.....

fawkes(pat)




From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com  Tue Sep  2 05:10:21 2003
From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 05:10:21 -0000
Subject: Out of the Flame (filk)
Message-ID: <bj18nt+u5uo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79503

Out of the Flame (GoF, Chap. 16)

The Seventh A!Kedavra filk to the tune of Out Of My Dreams from 
Rodgers and Hammerstein's Oklahoma!

Dedicated to Debbie aka elfundeb

THE SCENE: The Great Hall. DUMBLEDORE announces that the TriWizard 
games, dormant for over a century, are to be resumed, and introduces 
Book Four's eponymous goblet.

DUMBLEDORE 
Out of the flame and into my hand 
Three names will fly
For each school a champion it picks in the games will vie
We'll have three games spaced throughout the year
Of magic prowess
If you're underage
My Line you can't break through

But if you're the proper age
Enter your name, please do, oh!

(Segue to the next day, as GEORGE & FRED try to place their names in 
the Goblet)

CHORUS OF GRYFFINDOR STUDENTS
They're gonna try, they're gonna try, easily, 
Weasley twins,
Super psy ops, put single drop aging 
Potion in!
Old Dumbledore, he just can not tell you what to do
Your names in, but sever your debut, two beards grew 
Oh... Ooh ooh oh!

(Segue to the next day, back to the Great Hall, with Durmstrang & 
Beauxbatons in attendance. DUMBLEDORE presides over the Goblet's 
selection of the (HEM HEM) three champions.

DUMBLEDORE
Out of the flame tonight we will meet
Our three champions 
Who'll compete for their school's glory
And a grand in galleons.
So the first name is ? yes! ? Viktor Krum
Of dark old Durmstrang
Next Fleur Delacour
Then, Ced of Hufflepuff 
So cheer for your champ to score

Oh, see, it's sparks more stuff
..

(DUMBLEDORE catches the fourth scroll ejected by the Goblet of Fire, 
and, after some hesitation, reads off the name on the scroll ? "HARRY 
POTTER")

     - CMC

HARRY POTTER FILKS 
http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm 





From dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu  Tue Sep  2 05:20:45 2003
From: dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu (Arya)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 05:20:45 -0000
Subject: Why the Veil? & Harry's Power
In-Reply-To: <bj0it5+a063@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj19bd+10a1j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79504

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mclellyn" <ellyn337 at e...> wrote:
SNIP
> Nothing happened.  The frustrated face looking back out of the mirror 
> was still definitely, his own ....
> 
> Sirius didn't have his mirror on him when he went through the 
> archway, said a small voice in Harry's head.  That's why it's not 
> working....."
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> That small voice is from the other side of the veil, IMO.  There is 
> no body so there is no other way to know if Sirius had it on him or 
> not.  I don't remember anyone finding the other mirror after Sirius 
> goes through the veil.  Sirius or some other spirit from the beyond 
> the veil is telling Harry this.  
> 
> See also GOF, US paperback version Chapter 34 Priori Incantatem p 664
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> "It was the sound of hope to Harry (phoenix song).....the most 
> beautiful and welcome thing he had ever heard in his life.....He felt 
> as though the song were inside him instead of just around him.....It 
> was the sound he connected with Dumbledore, and it was almost as 
> though a friend were speaking in his ear.....
> 
> Don't break the connection."
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> These are the only two examples where Harry seems to get help from an 
> unspecified voice I can think of at the moment, perhaps others 
> will think of more and I am sure there were more.  In the US versions 
> at least, this voice seems always to be in italics.  
> 
>SNIP
> Gadfly "hoping JKR is a Crossing Over with John Edward fan" McLellyn
*******************************8
ARYA Says: There is also the voice in his head that urges him to resist 
Imperius.




From prof_uloth at hotmail.com  Tue Sep  2 05:30:07 2003
From: prof_uloth at hotmail.com (Fred Uloth)
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 21:30:07 -0800
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry Potter is a CHILDREN'S BOOK re: rape
  sexual preference
In-Reply-To: <biuofo+d5gm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20030901212302.00a6f730@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 79505

At 06:20 AM 9/1/2003 +0000, Mark D. wrote:
>I've just read about 20 posts regarding Umbridge's possible rape at
>the hands of centaurs as well as Harry's sexual preference.
>
>EXCUSE ME Harry Potter is a Children's Book!!!
>There are plenty of SLASH websites if you wand. I personally feel
>you're giving JKR a great insult by thinking she'd put it in her
>books.
><snip>
>As for guessing on Harry's sexual preference, again Harry Potter is
>a Children's Book!!!
>
>Also Harry is now only 15. He has never had friends before Hogwarts.
>and there was only one described crush in the Potterverse... Cho. As
>for Harry not understanding girls, what male does?

At the risk of a "me too" post I'd just like to second the above 
statements. The one thing that I liked about people going on and on about 
these two far fetched topics was that I was able to delete a LOT of 
messages with out reading them.

Now I'd like to say that *nobody* in the Harry Potter books is gay. Rest 
assured that they are all celibate until we are told otherwise. JKR is more 
likely to tackle her social issues through magical maladies a la Remus 
Lupin disease and it's parallels to children born HIV positive. This allows 
those who are ready for such topics to explore them and those that aren't 
to just enjoy the fantastic story. 




From sollecks970 at aol.com  Tue Sep  2 04:41:18 2003
From: sollecks970 at aol.com (fawkes970)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 04:41:18 -0000
Subject: Number of Students, was Re: Hogwarts' Dorms
In-Reply-To: <bj0fq9+ghj9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj171e+q3ir@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79506

Boris the Bewildered <jones.r.h.j at w...> wrote:
> Also, if the school had to admit exactly five boys and five girls 
for each class they would have to find them during the admission 
process before the school year began, and so what would the Sorting 
Hat have to do?  The students' houses would already have been 
determined before they got to the Sorting Hat.  Also, it would odd 
to say "There is a muggle boy in Cornwall who would be perfect for 
Gryffindor, but we have already determined our five for this year, so 
we will have to skip him." >>>


I think it's quite simple: there are plenty of people in each class,
not just a certain number. I think that it depends on how many are 
magically ready for Hogwarts at the age of 12...I think there's some 
sort of detector...fawkes





From purrlygirlie at wildmail.com  Tue Sep  2 05:37:40 2003
From: purrlygirlie at wildmail.com (purrlygirlie)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 05:37:40 -0000
Subject: Minor Hermione Rant ( Was Re: Things that will come into play later.)
In-Reply-To: <bivqci+8lcl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj1ab4+fpbe@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79507

Laura:
> 
> She clearly has a lot to learn about tact, though.  Everything she 
> said about or to the centaurs made me cringe.  So there's definitely 
> room for improvement.

Purrly:
Wasn't that awful?  I'm hoping that she comes back next year a little 
humbled by it, not quite so righteous in her view of others' behavior.

Laura: 
> Hermione may be suffering from substitute parent syndrome (snip)Once 
> she sees that  they are growing up and can be trusted to behave a 
> little more reliably, she may feel able to relax and open herself up 
> a bit more.

Purrly:
I am crossing my fingers.  Hermione has such great story lines attached 
to her - muggleborn in a prejudiced society, elf rights, and her on 
going friendship with Krum, who offers a great chance of showing how the 
world is reacting to what is currently Britain's problem.  But I want to 
see her react to them as a human being, as a teenage girl, no matter how 
mature and intelligent.

Harry and Ron truly got to be teenage boys in OotP, warts and all.  And 
I think Ron especially really benefitted from it.  (Harry still has some serious- no pun intended -issues to work on.  And two books in which to 
do it.)  I loved the scene when Hermione was rude after messing up on an 
exam.  I'd kind of like to see her crack under the pressure, show a little weakness.  And have Ron be the voice of reason for her for once. 






From tuck668 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 04:04:26 2003
From: tuck668 at yahoo.com (tuck668)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 04:04:26 -0000
Subject: Ghost Voldemort?
In-Reply-To: <bj0om4+a4vs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj14sa+2pt8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79508

Marianne "kiricat2001" <Zarleycat at a...> wrote:
> Imagine, just when you think you've finally 
defeated the biggest of the evil overlords, he becomes a ghost! 
How annoying would that be? >>>


Well, if Vmort does become a ghost and follows Harry around, all 
Harry needs to do is file a complaint with the MoM, like Olive 
Hornby did with Moaning Myrtle. ;)

-Anna





From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Tue Sep  2 06:05:47 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 06:05:47 -0000
Subject: green eyes and the killing curse
In-Reply-To: <bivim5+em6e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj1bvr+h0o0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79509

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Wanda Sherratt" 
<wsherratt3338 at r...> wrote:
> I'm not perfectly convinced that Lily's sacrifice is the reason 
why 
> Harry survived AK.  I think it did *something*, but I'm not sure 
it 
> did that.

Well, it has been hinted in several places, beginning with book 1
that she was very good at charms. I think she performed a charm that
required her to sacrifice her life for it to work, probably based
on that same ancient blood magic that Dumbledore mentions.

>  Why didn't James's sacrifice protect 
> Lily, in that case?

Because he did not sacrifice his life for her. Voldemort tells Harry
in SS (pp 294, American edition):
"I killed your father first, and he put up a couragous fight...
but your mother needn't have died... she was trying to protect you"

In other words, Voldemort came there intending to kill James,
but he did not want to kill Lily (why we don't know yet). I think
it was the fact that she chose to die to protect her son, when
she could save her life if she did not resist, that made
the charm she performed work. James had no such choice. Recall
that when Voldemort decided to kill someone he always succeeded
(with the exception of HP of course, and perhaps Dumbledore).

Salit





From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 06:06:09 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 06:06:09 -0000
Subject: Student Detector, was Re: Number of Students
In-Reply-To: <bj171e+q3ir@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj1c0h+m17p@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79510

> "fawkes970" <sollecks970 at a...> wrote: I think it's quite simple: 
there are plenty of people in each class, not just a certain number. 
I think that it depends on how many are magically ready for Hogwarts 
at the age of 12...I think there's some sort of detector...fawkes

I thought first year was eleven-year olds.

And I can see one of those arcane devices in Dumbledore's office 
projecting something like a holographic map of the area Hogwarts 
serves, with little twinkly lights representing next year's newbies, 
growing gradually brighter, with an occasional flare as some nine or 
ten year old ><pops>< out of danger onto a school roof or vanishes a 
barrier at the zoo, as the time to mail invitations to the school 
approaches.

Something similar might be found as well in Malfalda Hopkirk's office 
at the Ministry of Magic, alerting her to things like Dobby's hover 
(oh, but maybe it was a *hoover* charm and he was just cleaning) 
charm and Harry's Patronus.

"msbeadsley"





From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 06:16:54 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 06:16:54 -0000
Subject: Apparating/ Disapparating
In-Reply-To: <bj0a25+2euh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj1ckm+lfvu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79511

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "phluxist" <phluxist at y...> wrote:
>
> ...edited...
> 
> Whenever JKR describes someone apparating/disapparating, she always 
> remarks that there is a loud popping or cracking noise. ...edited...
> However, there seem to be many times where JKR describes 
> people 'disappearing' but without a sound. ...edited...
> 
> It sounds like there are a lot of people in the WW can quietly 
> disappear without drawing attention...
> 
> Whats the deal?
> 
> -Phluxist

bboy_mn:

I posted a theory on this recently but I couldn't find it, so I'll
give it another shot.

I think the intensity of sound made by a wizard when he apparates or
disapparates is related to the amount of effort the put into it. 

Arthur Weasley apparates with a faint pop. Dumbledore makes a sound
not much louder than the swish of a cloak. Fred and George make quite
a loud noise.

If you are very experience at apparation and you are a powerful
wizard, you can apparate with ease, consequently, there is very little
effort and therefore very little sound. Conversely, if you are not
very good at apparating or being a wizard, it may take a substantial
effort, and therefore make a substantial sound. 

In the case of Fred and George, part of the intensity of sound could
be that they are intentionally putting as much effort into apparating
as they can because the want to make the loudest possible sound; they
are showing off, drawing attention to themselves. They could probably
apparate quieter if they wanted to. Also, temper this with the fact
that they just got their license and are not yet very experienced at it.

So that's my theory. In a nutshell, the intensity of sound is
proportional to the intensity of effort it took to apparate.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn





From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Tue Sep  2 06:18:47 2003
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 16:18:47 +1000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hogwarts' Dorms
In-Reply-To: <bj0fq9+ghj9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F54C2E7.14712.27478F@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 79512

On 1 Sep 2003 at 22:04, Robert Jones wrote:

> Also, if the school had to admit exactly five boys and five girls for 
> each class they would have to find them during the admission process 
> before the school year began, and so what would the Sorting Hat have to 
> do?  The students' houses would already have been determined before they 
> got to the Sorting Hat.  Also, it would odd to say "There is a muggle boy 
> in Cornwall who would be perfect for Gryffindor, but we have already 
> determined our five for this year, so we will have to skip him."

Not necessarily - though it's possible.

If *we* were trying to set up a school with a very specific balance of 
people, we would need to do what you describe and deal with it during 
the admissions process. But the world of Harry Potter has a wildcard 
that may make a difference - and that is the existence of magic. And 
possibly, of more significance, hereditary magic. And a world in which 
prophecy - the ability to predict the future - seems to be real, if 
unreliable. 

For all we know (and there is no real evidence for this - just no real 
evidence against it either that I can see) there may be some mystical 
reason that ensures there is a natural balance among young wizards 
entering Hogwarts - maybe the magic quill is enchanted to stop 
collecting names when certain quotas are filled. It's possible - it 
could happen and nobody knows about it.

I am not saying this happens - just there is the wildcard of magic in 
the Potterverse - and we do need to consider it in formulating any 
theories.

Oh - and incidentally, I went to a school with a House system - eight 
houses with 30 new boys entering each house each year. Exactly 30. And 
while they weren't quite as intent of getting precisely the right people 
into each house each year as Hogwarts seems to be, issues such as 
personality, relative talents, etc were considered - and they still 
managed to get people into them in the right numbers, with fairly good 
matches (mostly because a significant number of people had qualities 
that suited multiple houses close to equally well - which again, we see 
with Hermione (G/R) and Harry (G/S)).

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 slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Tue Sep  2 06:41:57 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 06:41:57 -0000
Subject: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj078g+p7ng@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj1e3l+nch9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79513

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kirstini" <kirst_inn at y...> 
wrote:
> I 
> don't think any of the parents on list would be able to claim that 
> OoP is the sort of book you'd pick to read to your five year old,

I don't think that SS is appropriate for most 5 year olds either,
but that's just me I guess (and I have an almost 5 yo boy).
But the problem with the serie is that the early books are
aimed at a younger audience than the later books. It was not much
of a problem when they were being published - the kids who read
SS at 8 yo were old enough to appreciate OoP when it came out.
The problem I see is with the present 7-8 year olds...

> Pip and I have both highlighted areas where DD's actions have been 
> ambiguous. During the "gleam of triumph" bit in GoF, Harry catches 
a 
> glimpse of another, altogether more frightenting side of DD. There 
> must have been hints, if so many people on the list *have* picked 
up 
> on them.

The problem for Dumbledore is that his main goal is to defeat
Voldemort. Everything else is a means to that end, including Harry
himself. Dumbledore concedes that his weakness is that he grew to
love Harry, thus not being able to use him effectively as the
tool to destroy Voldemort. In OoP Dumbledore was able to make
the switch and while he will still care for Harry very much,
I think that he is ready to sacrifice him - whether his life or
his happiness to achieve the ultimate goal.

This may seem like cold calculation to you, but when you fight
pure evil you have to make sacrifices and use whatever tools
you have, and Dumbledore is the leader in that battle.

> By telling Harry "I cared more about your life than the 
> other lives which would be lost", DD implies that he is *now* 
putting 
> those lives before Harry's.

Actually what he said was that he was willing to put other lives at
risks if that would promote Harry's happiness. I think he still cares
about Harry's *life* more than that of others (including his own)
and for good reason. Harry has to live if Voldemort is to be defeated
(at least until he is defeated - he can die after...).


> after all, have we really learned something new about Dumbledore 
or 
> about Harry?  Harry is the one who changed in book 5 - everyone 
has 
> noticed it.

Harry changed, but so did Dumbledore. He is sadder, angrier and
more willing to use and manipulate people, even those he cares
for, to reach his goal. But the change is inevitable - he is
directing an army in a war.

> I for one really hope he's snapped out of the whining 
> and shouting by Book 6. Although I doubt it.

I think he has for the most part. I believe that the next
book will show us the development of Harry as a leader, something
that we've seen the beginning of in book 5. I think that his
ability to lead and inspire loyalty of his followers will be
crucial for the final confrontation. It is also an indication
of the "equality" with Voldemort - who has his own army of
followers.

Salit




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 06:42:49 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 06:42:49 -0000
Subject: Society for the Practice of Elvish Warfare
In-Reply-To: <bj04g1+b91b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj1e59+ao6i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79514

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mochajava13" <mochajava13 at y...>
wrote:
> bboy_mn:
> > I will touch briefly on my Elf Theory here. ... All they really 
> > want in return is the same sense of honor and commitment from 
> > their master. ..., they want honor, dignity, respect, and 
> > appreciation. ... > > 
> 
> 
> Sarah: 
> Joining the house elf fray:
> ... I think that Hermione's views on elves are right on, but she's 
> going about it in a completely wrong way. But, they should be able
> to choose who to serve, and not be forced to serve someone they 
> hate. 
> Just my opinion.
> 
> Sarah


bboy_mn:
I agree that Hermione's basic intent is valid; the elves do need a
form of liberation; in addition, we seem to agree that she is
hopelessly misguided in her efforts.

I have many grand theories and posts about House-Elves, their nature,
and their plight.  

Mainly, I believe that House-Elves are bound not by rule of law or
rule of magic, but by fierce elfin honor. Wizards all, to some degree,
exploit that sense of honor unfairly. That's why I say that what Elves
really want the same level of honor and commitment from their Master
that they, the elves, bring to the arrangement.

For more insight into the late night rambling of my elfin obssessed
mind see...

Jul 19, 2003  9:01 pm
House-Elves & the Tie That Binds. (long)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/71752

May 17, 2003  3:13 pm
Re: House elves
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/58066

Mar 7, 2003  11:41 am
Re: Dobby & Elves - Bound Past, Present, & Future
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/53382


Additional Elfin thoughts-

Aug 2, 2003  10:28 pm
Treating House Elves like vermin
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/74985

Jun 29, 2003  1:57 pm
Re: house elves & laundry (trace of OoP at end)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/65744

Mar 11, 2003  1:54 pm
Re: What motivated Dobby in CoS?
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/53613

Mar 10, 2003  4:54 pm
Re: What motivated Dobby in CoS?
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/53576

These are all my posts, but they will take you to the middle of
several very interesting Elf discussion threads where you will find a
lot of other interesting opinions on the subject.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn





From gbannister10 at aol.com  Tue Sep  2 06:49:43 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 06:49:43 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's integrity (was Prophecy problems)
In-Reply-To: <bj046b+fu3h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj1ei7+jf7u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79515

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mochajava13" 
<mochajava13 at y...> wrote:

Sarah:
> Maybe the fact that Harry doesn't seem to fear 
> death but Voldemort does could be the power Harry has that 
> Voldemort 
> doesn't.  Voldemort is terrified of death; Harry at times seems to 
> embrace it.  Harry didn't defend himself in OoP when Voldemort cast 
> the Adava Kedavra curse.  Harry thought that death would be better 
> that the pain he felt while possessed by Voldemort.  Maybe this, as 
> well as his thought that he could be with Sirius, was what 
> disallowed Voldemort from possessing Harry.  

Geoff:
Personally, I don't read it that way.

"Voldemort paid no attention.
'I have nothing to say to you, Potter,' he said quietly, 'You have 
irked me too often, for too long AVADA KEVADRA!'
Harry had not even opened his mouth to resist; his mind was blank, 
his wand pointing uselessly at the floor." (OOTP p.717 UK Bloomsbury 
edition)

I think Harry has been wrong-footed and has not had time to react in 
defence of himself.

Geoff




From historygrrl1 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 06:29:57 2003
From: historygrrl1 at yahoo.com (historygrrl1)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 06:29:57 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter is a CHILDREN'S BOOK re: rape sexual preference
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20030901212302.00a6f730@localhost>
Message-ID: <bj1dd5+ocrv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79516


Fred Uloth wrote:
> Now I'd like to say that *nobody* in the Harry Potter books is gay. 
> Rest assured that they are all celibate until we are told otherwise. JKR 
> is more likely to tackle her social issues through magical maladies a la 
> Remus Lupin disease and it's parallels to children born HIV positive. 
> This allows those who are ready for such topics to explore them and those 
> that aren't to just enjoy the fantastic story.

I think the characters will basically all be celibate throughout the 
series.  Rowling is writing a story that focuses on an epic struggle 
between good and evil.  It's becoming more and more apparent with 
each book that she includes very few extraneous details.  So she 
won't give us a serious love affair or sexual relationship unless it 
reveals something that is critical to the central plot.  

But the overall celibacy of the characters within the story Rowling 
delivers doesn't mean that the characters are asexual.  Or 
heterosexual.  Or celibate in the moments when we, as readers, aren't 
watching them.  Those things don't appear to be important to the 
story right now.  Nonetheless, they are important to a number of 
readers, for a number of reasons.

There's nothing wrong with wondering about the sexuality of fictional 
characters, or forming theories about them, even in the absence of 
conclusive supporting evidence.  Some of Rowling's characters are 
sexually ambiguous, and given Rowling's attention to detail, I assume 
she made them that way on purpose.  She has also presented Harry's 
life in a way that allows some aspects to be read as a metaphor for 
coming to terms with one's sexuality.  Again, I can't imagine that 
she did this by accident.  

Literature which is intended for children has, historically, been 
meaningful literature.  Covert and overt sociopolitical commentary 
has been the norm, not the exception.  Rowling appears to be trying 
to make a point with her characters on this issue.  This space, which 
is intended to allow adults to discuss her work in exquisite and 
excruciating detail, is a terrific place to work out exactly what 
she's saying and what it means. 

There are a number of topics I regard as more interesting than the 
question of character sexuality, like parsing out the prophecies, 
figuring out how Wormtail cut off his finger, and determining the 
provenance of the Longbottom's supply of chewing gum.  But I'd hate 
to see the character sexuality discussion disappear.

-historygrrl1    

   





From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 06:54:04 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 06:54:04 -0000
Subject: Percy question -Translation Spanish to Eng.
In-Reply-To: <bj0eod+nihb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj1eqc+h3cb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79517

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sembei Grindelwald"
<slytherin501 at y...> wrote:
> Creo que Percy es un esp?a de DD en el Ministerio, y por eso 
> necesita alejarse de su familia, aunque tambi?n podr?a ser que 
> estuviera bajo la maldici?n Imperius.
> 
> Su novia se llama Penelope. Me parece que este Ulisses pasar? 
> tambi?n por alg?n infierno antes de volver a su Itaca familiar.
> 
> "Sembei Grindelwald"

For those who don't speak Spanish (like me), here is a translation of
what is posted above. Thanks to www.AltaVista.com Babel Fish
translation service.
bboy_mn


Sembei Grindelwald wrote:

I believe that Percy is a spy of DD in the Ministry, and for that
reason it needs to move away of his family, although also could be
that was under the Imperius curse. 

Her fianc?e is called Penelope. It seems that this Ulisses will also
happen through some hell before returning to its familiar Itaca.

"Sembei Grindelwald"




From yswahl at stis.net  Tue Sep  2 07:08:30 2003
From: yswahl at stis.net (samnanya)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 07:08:30 -0000
Subject: Why Harry Potter "cannot" be set in 1991 (Question)
In-Reply-To: <20030902045134.43592.qmail@web14902.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bj1flf+fkc9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79518

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, alex fox <trinity61us at y...> 
wrote:
> Ok, this is a silly thing to ask, but my friend wants to know just 
exactly how everyone KNOWS that HP started in 1991. I would look in 
the archives, but i haven't the ability to do that right now, as I am 
using someone else's computer, and barely getting my mail. Thank you, 
for understanding. If I could get an answer quickly, it would avoid a 
fight. I, personally, know that fact.
>  
> Thanks again,
> Alex Fox 
> 



Samnanya replies - 
Here is the clearest argument I can present - 
All references to the us trade paperback editions - 
 
1. CoS Chapter 8 - Deathday Party for Nearly Headless Nick
pg 129 "Well this Halloween will be my 500th deathday" said Nearly 
Headles Nick
pg 133  description on the cake  "Sir Nicholas ..... Died 31st 
October, 1492"
 
from those two clues Harry's second year at Hogwarts is [1492+500] or 
1992
Harry's first year of hogwarts is thus 1991, and the summer of 1991 is 
when Harry meets Hagrid for the first time
 
2. SS Chapter 4 - The Keeper of the Keys
pg 55 Hagrid says about Voldemort "he turned up in your village where 
you was all living on Halloween ten years ago. You was just a year 
old.
 
from this we know that Voldemort killed Harry's parents in [1991-10] 
or 1981 and therefore Harry was born in 1980.
 
In addition, 

3. PoA Chapter 21 - Hermione's Secret
pg 392 Dumbledore tells Harry and Hermione that "there is not a shred 
of proof to support Black's story, except your word, and the word of 
two thirteen year old wizards will not convince anybody ...."
 
since PoA was in year 3, and year 3 was 1993 from the above argument, 
this is further proof that Dumbledore as well says that Harry was born 
in 1980.
 
To refute this argument is to say that Dumbledore and Hagrid are lying 
[or uninformed] and the cake decorator for Nick cleverly put on the 
wrong date without anybody knowing ...... 
 
I think this carries a little more weight in "canon"  than a 
playstation ...... 
Hope this  clears it up for you.... 
Sam  
 




From Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com  Tue Sep  2 07:25:31 2003
From: Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com (arcum42)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 07:25:31 -0000
Subject: Puzzles: Wormtail's finger and Shrieking Shack tunnel
In-Reply-To: <bj0j2f+in25@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj1glb+sumt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79519

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003"
> <carolynwhite2 at a...> wrote:
>  
> > CW comments (tied up in knots having followed instructions):
> > 
> > I think there is a difference between marking your finger with a
pen 
> > and slicing it off with a knife. ...edited...
> > 
> 
> bboy_mn:
> 
> Why would he using anything as mundane and muggle as a knife when he
> has a wand in his hand? Certainly, he used some highly effective
> Severing Charm to quickly and cleanly cut off his finger. Why us a
> knife when you have a wand?
> 
I'd personally assumed he used a knife simply becuse of the canon we
already have of him cutting the entire arm off with a knife in the
graveyard. Also, it's possible that using a cutting charm may be
easier to detect later then cutting it off physically, and he
certainly wouldn't want to leave evidence behind that didn't fit the
scenario he was constructing. For similar reasons, a severing charm on
his arm may have conflicted with the spell it was being used for. The
knife may have been enchanted to cut easily, quickly, and cleanly,
though...

--Arcum




From thewierdone18 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 07:20:00 2003
From: thewierdone18 at yahoo.com (thewierdone18)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 07:20:00 -0000
Subject: Voldemort's Age
Message-ID: <bj1gb0+uhhd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79520

Does anyone know how old Voldemort is? I can't figure it out.

"the weird one"





From cressida_tt at hotmail.com  Tue Sep  2 08:02:16 2003
From: cressida_tt at hotmail.com (cressida_tt)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 08:02:16 -0000
Subject: Hermione SHIP question
In-Reply-To: <2131842160.20030901195304@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <bj1iq8+5ost@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79521

Susanne said:
> I just don't see Harry's pillow landing on top of Hermione's as
> ship related (truthfully, it would make me feel a bit
> uncomfortable to see her sneaking in sexual references in this
> manner), but am willing to be proven wrong if JKR ever
> admits that she intended this as a subtle shipping clue.


Cressida replies: Very well done on this Susanne I couldn't have put 
it better myself. With all respect to 'shippers' I have seen very 
little in reading the books to actively support any of them in a big 
way. If anything there appear to be most pointing towards Ron and 
Hermione and I can see how she would make this an important plot 
device re Harry and his possible alientation but I wouldn't like to 
stake my life on it! I do realise that Rowling is subtle but to say 
that the pillow thing is a quasi-sexual reference beggars belief. Are 
we not simply meant to infer that Harry has mastered banishing charms 
with the same ease as Hermione? That is certainly what I gathered 
from this statement but then I admit that I read the books to enjoy 
the characters and plot not to take every single reference and apply 
it to my 'chosen ship'. I think the only think it proves is that 
there are HP fans out there who, dare I say it, need to get out more.




From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Tue Sep  2 08:09:33 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 08:09:33 -0000
Subject: Voldemort's Age
In-Reply-To: <bj1gb0+uhhd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj1j7t+ge0i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79522

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "thewierdone18" 
<thewierdone18 at y...> wrote:
> Does anyone know how old Voldemort is? I can't figure it out.
> 
> "the weird one"

Well, the CoS diary was 50 years old and Riddle was 16 then, while
Harry was 12. So he is 54 years older than Harry, or 70 years old
at the end of OoP. But I don't know if the 13 years he was without
a body count, or what would the physical age of his new body would
be - it was constructed from 100 year old bone (father),
the flesh of Wormtail who should be in his late 30's and the blood
of a 14 year old boy...

Salit





From evangelina839 at yahoo.se  Tue Sep  2 10:25:55 2003
From: evangelina839 at yahoo.se (evangelina839)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 10:25:55 -0000
Subject: Snape the Occlumens
In-Reply-To: <bj0l68+k3rf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj1r7j+op98@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79523

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sarcasticmuppet" 
<sarcasticmuppet at y...> wrote:
<snip>
The only thing I could possibly see wrong with it is this:  Would Voldemort 
> know that his Legillimency is being blocked?  If he looked inside 
> Snape's head and constantly found it empty, would he suspect 
> Occlumency or stupidity?  If he knew Snape was hiding memories from 
> him, would he suspect that Snape is a spy?  If so, what game was Mr. 
> V. playing before his downfall?

I've been wondering about this too, and I guess the best explanation is that 
Occlumenses (?) don't leave their entire minds empty of thoughts. What Snape taught 
Harry were the basics: you have to begin with emptying your mind before moving on 
to the more complicated stuff. A good Occlumens is presumably able to conceal just 
the memories and emotions necessary and leave the rest in, things that are not 
dangerous to him/her. And I guess an Occlumens that is referred to as "superb" is 
also able to cover up the blocking wall that the Legilimens can't go beyond. Really 
impressive control of the mind, isn't it? I guess Snape always had to constrain himself 
not to risk blowing his cover, not only by keeping Voldemort from noticing any 
unveiling memories, but also a suspicious lack of memories.

This also brings up questions abot Legilimency; I've been wondering if Snape is just a 
less skilled Legilimens than Voldemort since he has to cast a spell, or if it's just two 
different types of Legilimency. After all, Voldemort most often uses his Legilimency to 
tell if people are lying, while Snape was extracting memories from Harry's mind.

evangelina, who hopes this post doesn't look as messy as the last ones. Whatever I 
try, it just doesn't come out right.




From evangelina839 at yahoo.se  Tue Sep  2 10:43:09 2003
From: evangelina839 at yahoo.se (evangelina839)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 10:43:09 -0000
Subject: Aiming Wand at Bellatrix Lestrange: CRUCIO!
In-Reply-To: <bj0nig+jiri@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj1s7t+e6cf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79524

Susan:
> > Barty/Moody verified this in GOF when he told the class that the 
> entire class could cast the spell on him and it would not do much. 
> It requires and powerful wizard to cast the spells.  I believe that 
> part of that power is derived from evil. >>>

Fawkes:
> Well: It's not so much that they are powerful, so much that they are 
> evil. It's Voldemort's evil that makes him such a threat. Of course 
> he's skilled, because he's been practicing the Dark Arts tirelessly 
> since he was in Hogwarts. They need to want and like to cause pain in 
> order for the spell to work properly. Harry is going to need more 
> than the Avada Kedavra to kill Voldemort. Cause as much as Harry 
> wants Voldemort to die, Harry doesn't take pleasure in doing so, like 
> the DE and LV do...any suggestions on what this might be!?
> 
> fawkes(pat)

That's true, but since Aurors were allowed to use (and consequently capable of using) 
the Unforgivables, I don't think it's all evil that makes one able to cast the spells. 
Probably the Aurors could reach the right frame of mind by focusing on all the nasty 
things the DEs had done, and building up some excessive hatred for them, though. 
But, I don't feel comfortable thinking of Aurors as people who enjoy causing pain... so 
I prefer to think enough skill and power could make the curses work. Just maybe not 
quite as "well" as if cast by someone who was enjoying it. And I don't think Harry will 
kill Voldemort with AK (or use any Unforgivable again for that matter), I'm not even 
sure he'll end up killing him - supporting myself on the ambigousness of the word 
"vanquish". But that's another discussion. :)
evangelina




From deemarie1a at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 10:57:13 2003
From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 10:57:13 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter is a CHILDREN'S BOOK re: rape sexual preference
In-Reply-To: <bj1dd5+ocrv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj1t29+oqo6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79525

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "historygrrl1" 
<historygrrl1 at y...> wrote:
 
> I think the characters will basically all be celibate throughout 
the 
> series.  Rowling is writing a story that focuses on an epic 
struggle 
> between good and evil.  It's becoming more and more apparent with 
> each book that she includes very few extraneous details.  So she 
> won't give us a serious love affair or sexual relationship unless 
it 
> reveals something that is critical to the central plot.  

Just a side note...
Yes, I agree.  JKR has put sexuality in her story.  Not overtly, no.  
In GoF, at the Yule Ball, what do you think those kids were doing in 
the rosebushes?  What were Fleur and Roger doing in their rosebush?  
I don't remember which book exactly, but Molly Weasly talked about 
getting back to her dormatory at 4am after she had been out "walking" 
with Arthur.

D





From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Tue Sep  2 10:55:48 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 11:55:48 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry Potter is a CHILDREN'S BOOK re: rape  sexual preference
References: <5.2.1.1.2.20030901212302.00a6f730@localhost>
Message-ID: <3F547734.000001.11037@monica>

No: HPFGUIDX 79526

 
 Fred Uloth said -
 
Now I'd like to say that *nobody* in the Harry Potter books is gay. Rest 
assured that they are all celibate until we are told otherwise. 

Me (K) -

OK now while I agree that 'onscreen' (so to speak) they will all remain
celibate I hardly think it's realistic to believe that all the characters
are celibate. I mean Harry and co yes quite probably because they're a
trifle busy trying to stay alive most of the time but I would bet good money
that at least some of the kids are experimenting offscreen. And what about
the adults? *especially* those in relationships, Molly & Arthur, Bill &
Fleur etc and what if we find out later some of the teachers are married as
JKR has hinted - are you going to claim that they're celibate too?

And besides that what on earth does someone's level of sexual activity have
to do with their sexuality? I personally am currently celibate (darn <g>) -
does that make me any less heterosexual than I was a couple of years ago
when I was in a serious relationship? No of course it doesn't. I am not
heterosexual only when I'm actually having sex and someone who is homosexual
is homosexual all the time even if they never have sex. With the level of
prejudice in this world towards gay people I can't understand why people
seem to think that being gay is some kind of choice.

And as for the idea that some people have suggested that putting a gay
character in the books would somehow be wrong because they're children's
books, I am always astonished when I come up against this level of prejudice
and stupidity. No one is suggesting that JKR suddenly write Hasrry Potter -
the *adult* version with hot Remus/Sirius (or whoever) sex scenes ...
although there'd certainly be a market for it <weg>. But a gay couple acting
in the same way we see the het couples acting (the obvious affection between
Molly and Arthur, the Harry/Cho kiss, the pre-ball angst and the dancing at
the ball etc) wouldn't in any way make the books less suitable for children.
I *hate* this idea that gay people are something that should be hidden away
from children in some way. Love and affection between people are (imo) a
blessing and should be celebrated whatever form they take.

K



From evangelina839 at yahoo.se  Tue Sep  2 11:19:17 2003
From: evangelina839 at yahoo.se (evangelina839)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 11:19:17 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter is a CHILDREN'S BOOK re: rape  sexual preference
In-Reply-To: <3F547734.000001.11037@monica>
Message-ID: <bj1ubl+kjek@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79527

Hi,
I just wanted to tell you that I loved this post of yours. I agree with you to 100%. I 
have nothing to add to it (you covered everything :)) so to post this on the list would 
just be one of those rulebreaking "me too" posts, but I like to let people know I 
support them the off-list way. So here you go. :) Excellent post!
evangelina

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" <kcawte at b...> wrote:
>  
>  Fred Uloth said -
>  
> Now I'd like to say that *nobody* in the Harry Potter books is gay. Rest 
> assured that they are all celibate until we are told otherwise. 
> 
> Me (K) -
> 
> OK now while I agree that 'onscreen' (so to speak) they will all remain
> celibate I hardly think it's realistic to believe that all the characters
> are celibate. I mean Harry and co yes quite probably because they're a
> trifle busy trying to stay alive most of the time but I would bet good money
> that at least some of the kids are experimenting offscreen. And what about
> the adults? *especially* those in relationships, Molly & Arthur, Bill &
> Fleur etc and what if we find out later some of the teachers are married as
> JKR has hinted - are you going to claim that they're celibate too?
> 
> And besides that what on earth does someone's level of sexual activity have
> to do with their sexuality? I personally am currently celibate (darn <g>) -
> does that make me any less heterosexual than I was a couple of years ago
> when I was in a serious relationship? No of course it doesn't. I am not
> heterosexual only when I'm actually having sex and someone who is homosexual
> is homosexual all the time even if they never have sex. With the level of
> prejudice in this world towards gay people I can't understand why people
> seem to think that being gay is some kind of choice.
> 
> And as for the idea that some people have suggested that putting a gay
> character in the books would somehow be wrong because they're children's
> books, I am always astonished when I come up against this level of prejudice
> and stupidity. No one is suggesting that JKR suddenly write Hasrry Potter -
> the *adult* version with hot Remus/Sirius (or whoever) sex scenes ...
> although there'd certainly be a market for it <weg>. But a gay couple acting
> in the same way we see the het couples acting (the obvious affection between
> Molly and Arthur, the Harry/Cho kiss, the pre-ball angst and the dancing at
> the ball etc) wouldn't in any way make the books less suitable for children.
> I *hate* this idea that gay people are something that should be hidden away
> from children in some way. Love and affection between people are (imo) a
> blessing and should be celebrated whatever form they take.
> 
> K




From evangelina839 at yahoo.se  Tue Sep  2 11:47:20 2003
From: evangelina839 at yahoo.se (evangelina839)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 11:47:20 -0000
Subject: Animagus - and Transfiguration
In-Reply-To: <bj06j2+4eva@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj2008+lo7g@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79528

Jazmyn:

> > I have a theory on animagus.  I believe a wizard with any 
> reasonable > skill in transfiguration can turn into any animal they 
> have practiced > at.  What defines an Animagus is the ability to 
> turn into an animal AT > WILL, meaning without a wand.   With a 
> wand, they could turn into other > kinds of animals, but the animal 
> form they are most specialized in, is > their 'animagus form' and 
> they can switch back and forth between this > form at will, with or 
> without a wand.

Wendy:

> The only problem with this theory is that we have canon which 
> indicates that someone transfigured into an animal does not retain 
> his or her human mental faculties. Whereas, it seems clear that 
> someone in their animagus form does, at least to great degree 
> (McGonagall reading the map, for example, as well as various 
> comments made by Sirius). Sirius did say that his emotions were 
> different in his animagus form, but he still appears to be able to 
> think as a human.
> 
<snip QTA quote>
> 
> This indicates to me that there is a substantive difference between 
> Animagi transformation and transfiguration more than just the 
> ability to do it with or without a wand.
> 
> Having said that, I will admit to being confused by Krums' partially 
> successful shark transfiguration during the second task in GoF. If 
> transfigured humans have the brains of their animal forms, why 
> didn't the transfigured Krum go on a feeding frenzy? This is 
> contradictory with what we're told in QTA. Maybe the fact that the 
> transfiguration *was* incomplete allowed Krum to retain his capacity 
> for human thought. Perhaps if he'd transfigured completely into a 
> shark, this would not have been the case? 
> 
> Hopefully we'll learn a bit more about this later, but for now I 
> lean towards the conclusion that transfiguration into an animal is 
> not actually a useful thing that wizards and witches would want to 
> perform upon themselves in most cases. 
> 
> Hmnh. In trying to answer a question, I've only brought up a new 
> question, haven't I? Funny how often that happens around here! ;-)
> 
> Wendy

I think you make good points, both of you. That a type of magic is done without a 
wand indicates to me that it's more a focus of the mind thing, and therefore more 
difficult to do. Which is a good basis for my theory to come. :) And I agree with Wendy 
that the difference between Animagi and humans transfigured into animals is the 
amount of human left in them, except I think it's the other way around. You don't 
become less human when you transfigure into an animal; you just don't get animal 
enough. I think that assuming your Animagus form is like getting in touch with your 
inner animal or something; you become the animal most suited to you. So, in 
contrast to transfiguring into an animal, you don't only transform physically, but 
mentally as well. This doesn't mean that you lose your sense of identity or anything. 
You just apply it, a little differently, to your animal self. On the other hand, since 
transfiguration only works physically, you're just a human in an animal's body, which I 
don't think really benefits you the same way. You're not comfortable enough with 
your animal body, so you can't really work around the obstacles (or, differences) of 
this other creature. Whereas, if you use your Animagus form, you can apply your 
human skills to your animal abilities and, for example, read a map. I'm not entirely 
sure that this fits with all the evidence, but I feel it makes sense. And I think it 
explains Krum's TWT task strategy.

evangelina, who really would have preferred to do this in Swedish ;)


By the way; Hermione said, while helping Harry with the second task in GoF, that they 
wouldn't be studying transfiguration of human beings until sixth grade. I haven't seen 
that brought up anywhere, so I thought I'd mention it.




From evangelina839 at yahoo.se  Tue Sep  2 11:50:33 2003
From: evangelina839 at yahoo.se (evangelina839)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 11:50:33 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter is a CHILDREN'S BOOK re: rape  sexual preference
In-Reply-To: <bj1ubl+kjek@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj2069+3553@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79529

I'm so sorry! I forgot to change the recepient's address... meant to send this to K 
privately, as you may have detected. ;) I'll try not to repeat this mistake!
evangelina, with quite a blush

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "evangelina839" <evangelina839 at y...> 
wrote:
> Hi,
> I just wanted to tell you that I loved this post of yours. I agree with you to 100%. I 
> have nothing to add to it (you covered everything :)) so to post this on the list 
would 
> just be one of those rulebreaking "me too" posts, but I like to let people know I 
> support them the off-list way. So here you go. :) Excellent post!
> evangelina
> 
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" <kcawte at b...> wrote:
> >  
> >  Fred Uloth said -
> >  
> > Now I'd like to say that *nobody* in the Harry Potter books is gay. Rest 
> > assured that they are all celibate until we are told otherwise. 
> > 
> > Me (K) -
> > 
> > OK now while I agree that 'onscreen' (so to speak) they will all remain
> > celibate I hardly think it's realistic to believe that all the characters
> > are celibate. I mean Harry and co yes quite probably because they're a
> > trifle busy trying to stay alive most of the time but I would bet good money
> > that at least some of the kids are experimenting offscreen. And what about
> > the adults? *especially* those in relationships, Molly & Arthur, Bill &
> > Fleur etc and what if we find out later some of the teachers are married as
> > JKR has hinted - are you going to claim that they're celibate too?
> > 
> > And besides that what on earth does someone's level of sexual activity have
> > to do with their sexuality? I personally am currently celibate (darn <g>) -
> > does that make me any less heterosexual than I was a couple of years ago
> > when I was in a serious relationship? No of course it doesn't. I am not
> > heterosexual only when I'm actually having sex and someone who is homosexual
> > is homosexual all the time even if they never have sex. With the level of
> > prejudice in this world towards gay people I can't understand why people
> > seem to think that being gay is some kind of choice.
> > 
> > And as for the idea that some people have suggested that putting a gay
> > character in the books would somehow be wrong because they're children's
> > books, I am always astonished when I come up against this level of prejudice
> > and stupidity. No one is suggesting that JKR suddenly write Hasrry Potter -
> > the *adult* version with hot Remus/Sirius (or whoever) sex scenes ...
> > although there'd certainly be a market for it <weg>. But a gay couple acting
> > in the same way we see the het couples acting (the obvious affection between
> > Molly and Arthur, the Harry/Cho kiss, the pre-ball angst and the dancing at
> > the ball etc) wouldn't in any way make the books less suitable for children.
> > I *hate* this idea that gay people are something that should be hidden away
> > from children in some way. Love and affection between people are (imo) a
> > blessing and should be celebrated whatever form they take.
> > 
> > K




From cressida_tt at hotmail.com  Tue Sep  2 12:13:11 2003
From: cressida_tt at hotmail.com (cressida_tt)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 12:13:11 -0000
Subject: Hermione SHIP question
In-Reply-To: <bj03tg+2t3v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj21gn+3ri2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79530


> Emily (that's me) says (kind of long):
> 
> Well, I would consider myself very much a H/Hr shipper. And it's 
> often hard for me to admit, though I have always admitted it, that 
> Ron and Hermione are more obviously attracted to each other and I'm 
> pretty sure that they will get together. But, hey, a girl can dream 
> right? Now, while Ron and Hermione are the obvious couple, I 
believe 
> (doesn't mean that it's true) that there are very, very subtle 
hints 
> in the series that point to the possibility of Harry and Hermione 
as 
> a couple. Bear with me, however, as I tend to stretch possibilities 
> and clues, take it as you will. But please lets not make this into 
> an argument over who should end up with who, in fact I'd be fine if 
> Ron and Hermione get together. 

Cressida replies:

To begin with I would say that I am an impartial shipper. I read the 
books because I enjoy the characters and plot and I also enjoy 
reading posts here because for the most part they avoid the constant 
desperate sentimental search for a romantic conclusion of some sort 
that afflicts many other sites. It is apparent that along with 
personal choice and the conflict between good and evil, love in it's 
truest sense is a major theme running through the series. By love I 
mean all that love encompasses and that includes respect, 
brotherhood, loyalty and self-sacrifice rather than solely romance. 
To reduce the series to simply the endless nit-picking quest for that 
most clich?d of scenarios, a romance between the lead male and the 
lead female, is both to short change JK Rowling as a storyteller and 
to overlook what is truly important in the books.

Don't misunderstand me, I realise that the characters are at that 
stage of development when hormones are raging and the formation and 
testing of relationships in a `sexual' way becomes important; I 
emphasise that I use sexual in it's loosest sense here. To this end 
we have seen Harry's tentative efforts with Cho Chang forming an 
effective sideline to the plot. 

I would also raise the point that in earlier days of interviews 
before she became more canny with press and fans, we have the well 
remembered comment that Harry and Hermione are `very platonic 
friends'. I am sure like all good shippers our Harry/Hermione 
supporters have a habit of carefully overlooking and re-writing 
anything that doesn't fit the necessary requirements but therein lies 
the futility of shipping.

JK Rowling has laid her clues and plot devices carefully and has also 
for the most part avoided falling in to clich?d traps. At this point 
in time we none of us know how the series is going to turn out to 
which end we spend hours in contemplation of it. Having strung her 
audience along for the course of five books and hopefully for two 
further volumes I would put it to the reader that she is highly 
unlikely to use a plot device that would make every reader 
scream `clich?' and `boring' and obvious and like in all good 
Hollywood epic blockbusters, the hero always gets the girl. If Harry 
is going to have a romance other than the normal teenage longings 
then I am sure that we can rest-assured that JK Rowling will not be 
showing them bonding yet in the way that we have seen Harry and 
Hermione as friends thought out the course of the five books so far. 
Give the woman some credit, she'll be keeping it under wraps.

I simply haven't the time and inclination to go though all those so 
called clues but simply wish to add that all of them were extremely 
tenuous and some of them downright tasteless and certainly not what 
we would expect of the way Rowling treats her younger characters. 

As for Hippogriff:

A legendary animal, half horse and half griffin. Its father was a 
griffin and its mother was a filly. It is often found in ancient 
Greek art and appeared largely in medieval legends. It is also a 
symbol of love. 

This definition from Brewers book of Myth and Legend gives the 
Hippogriff as a symbol of `love' not specifically romantic love. I 
would ask you to recall that it was Sirius whom Harry and Hermione 
rescued using the Hippogriff. Having spent some time on looking up 
Hippogriffs and their meaning I can find no obvious reference to 
romance ? merely love and impossibility. Maybe this is implying that 
a love between Harry and Hermione would be impossible? It is all so 
open to interpretation is it not?






From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 12:19:51 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 12:19:51 -0000
Subject: Minor Hermione Rant ( Was Re: Things that will come into play later.)
In-Reply-To: <bj1ab4+fpbe@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj21t7+c549@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79531

  Hermione has such great story lines attached 
> to her - muggleborn in a prejudiced society, elf rights, and her on 
> going friendship with Krum, who offers a great chance of showing 
how the 
> world is reacting to what is currently Britain's problem.  But I 
want to 
> see her react to them as a human being, as a teenage girl, no 
matter how 
> mature and intelligent.
> 
> Harry and Ron truly got to be teenage boys in OotP, warts and all.  
And 
> I think Ron especially really benefitted from it.  (Harry still has 
some serious- no pun intended -issues to work on.  And two books in 
which to 
> do it.)  I loved the scene when Hermione was rude after messing up 
on an 
> exam.  I'd kind of like to see her crack under the pressure, show a 
little weakness.  And have Ron be the voice of reason for her for 
once.

Laura:

I also hope that she finds herself a girl friend-Harry and Ron are 
all very fine in their ways, but it's not the same as having a same-
gender confidant.  Maybe Ginny can fill that role for Hermione as she 
seems to be coming into her own quite nicely.




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 12:24:39 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 12:24:39 -0000
Subject: a question about secret-keeping
In-Reply-To: <bj0oud+te0j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj2267+qos1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79532

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "yvonne_davies2002" 
<InesitaSimpson at h...> wrote:
> Sirius didn't transfer the secret to Peter, he persuaded James to 
> make Peter his Secret Keeper.  Presumably, James called Sirius to 
> Godric's Hollow when he realised they were under attack.  

Fawkes:
I don't think the secret can be transferred...If it can, the spell 
wouldn't be nearly as effective. Plus, it couldn't have been in 
Sirius because he convinced the Potters to go for Peter Pettigrew 
instead... 

Laura:
Of course, you're both right.  I forgot the details of the switch.  
However, the question still remains valid-since Sirius once had the 
information, does he retain it when he is no longer secret-keeper?  
Assuming, that is, that Yvonne's scenario didn't take place (although 
it makes a lot of sense).




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 12:30:10 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 12:30:10 -0000
Subject: Aiming Wand at Bellatrix Lestrange: CRUCIO!
In-Reply-To: <bj1s7t+e6cf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj22gi+ova2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79533

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "evangelina839" 
<evangelina839 at y...> wrote:
> That's true, but since Aurors were allowed to use (and consequently 
capable of using) 
> the Unforgivables, I don't think it's all evil that makes one able 
to cast the spells. 
> Probably the Aurors could reach the right frame of mind by focusing 
on all the nasty 
> things the DEs had done, and building up some excessive hatred for 
them, though. 
> But, I don't feel comfortable thinking of Aurors as people who 
enjoy causing pain... so 
> I prefer to think enough skill and power could make the curses 
work. Just maybe not 
> quite as "well" as if cast by someone who was enjoying it. And I 
don't think Harry will 
> kill Voldemort with AK (or use any Unforgivable again for that 
matter), I'm not even 
> sure he'll end up killing him - supporting myself on the 
ambigousness of the word 
> "vanquish". But that's another discussion. :)
> evangelina

Laura:

It seems to me that what's unforgiveable about these curses is the 
inability of the victim to defend him/herself as well as their innate 
cruelty.  So they wouldn't be unforgiveable if the person using them 
was fighting against someone equally skilled-say, a DE-or was 
fighting for his/her life.  And actually, how likely is it that an 
Auror would use either Imperius or Crucio?  The only one a trained 
Auror (that is to say, not Harry) is likely to use is AK, and that 
only when there's no alternative.  




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 12:40:50 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 12:40:50 -0000
Subject: Snape the Occlumens
In-Reply-To: <bj0nkr+evb6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj234i+gr0v@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79534

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "yvonne_davies2002" 
<InesitaSimpson at h...> wrote:
> I think that it is entirely possible that Snape was already a 
> profficient Leglimens, and that is why his hatred of James and 
Sirius 
> runs so deep. Imagine knowing all that they were thinking about 
him.  
> It would drive him crazy with bitterness and resentment.

now me:

 Snape wouldn't need to use legilimency to know how James and Sirius 
felt about him.  And if he felt free to invade other people's minds 
without their permission for his own personal reasons, he deserved 
whatever he got.  I can certainly imagine him teaching himself how to 
do it, though, just because he's Snape.  And of course, learning how 
to stop others from doing it to him would go right along.  

Laura, who still thinks Snape was a nasty teenager despite pensieve 2





From entropymail at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 12:56:52 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 12:56:52 -0000
Subject: Voldemort's Age
In-Reply-To: <bj1gb0+uhhd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj242k+h0pq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79535

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "thewierdone18"
<thewierdone18 at y...> wrote:
> Does anyone know how old Voldemort is? I can't figure it out.
> 
> "the weird one"

In GoF, states:

"...fifty years before...a maid had entered the drawing room to find
all three Riddles dead...Elderly Mr. and Mrs. Riddle [Voldemort's
grandparents] had been rich, snobbish, and rude, and their grown-up
son, Tom [Voldemort's father], had been, if anything, worse...Frank
was stubbornly repeating again and again, that he was innocent, and
that the only person he had seen near the house on the day of the
Riddles' deaths had been a teenage boy, a stranger, dark-haired and
pale [Tom Riddle Jr./Voldemort]."

So, that would make Voldemort 50 + 15 (give or take a few years), or
roughly 65.




From jamesredmont at hotmail.com  Tue Sep  2 13:07:55 2003
From: jamesredmont at hotmail.com (James Redmont)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 13:07:55 -0000
Subject: Hogwarts' Dorms
In-Reply-To: <bj0fq9+ghj9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj24nb+gshm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79536

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Robert Jones" 
<jones.r.h.j at w...> wrote:

<snip>
> This brings up a previously discussed issue of how many students 
are 
> there at Hogwarts?  I don't think each house has a new class 
consisting 
> of exactly 5 boys and 5 girls each year <snip>
> Boris the Bewildered

James Redmont:

You know, ever since the fifth year sorting hat song, I've thought 
since Hufflepuff took "all the rest", then maybe hufflepuff house is 
quite large...remember Harry when he was being sorted?  He said 
something like, 'If only there were a house for people who felt a 
bit queasy, that would be the house for him'.  Maybe not everyone is 
brave, smart, or looks good in green.  

Anyway, J.K. Rowling said there were about 1,000 kids at Hogwarts 
(unless she retracted that statement).  Maybe there are a lot of 
kids in Hufflepuff?

James Redmont




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Tue Sep  2 13:33:16 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 13:33:16 -0000
Subject: Aiming Wand at Bellatrix Lestrange:  CRUCIO!
In-Reply-To: <bj0obu+fmdi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj266s+e0b0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79537

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> "Jen Reese" <stevejjen at e...> wrote:
> 
> > Surely Harry will relate that incident with Belltrix to 
> > someone in Book 6, and we will get to know even 
> > more about casting unforgivable curses.   
> 
> Harry:  "Oh, by the way, I used an unforgivable curse on Bellatrix 
> Lestrange; it didn't do much good, but I tried."
> 
> I just can't see Harry telling anyone.  Of course, since the aurors 
> will likely be gearing up against the DE, there may be some 
tolerance 
> of the unforgivables if used against a member of LV's camp.  I 
> consider all the members of the DA like junior aurors; maybe parts 
of 
> the WW will, too.
> 
> "msbeadsley"


Assuming Harry wouldn't willingly be talking to Percy, Fudge or 
Umbridge about his fight with Bellatrix, then there are multiple 
people he could safely discuss the incident with: Hermione, Ron, 
Ginny, Dumbledore, perhaps Lupin or Arthur. He doesn't have a track 
record of keeping secrets from R/H for very long(the contents of the 
prophecy remain to be seen), and DD has an uncanny ability to 
encourage Harry to discuss his burdens (the sorting hat considering 
him for Slytherin). All of the above people know about instances of 
rule-breaking and/or law-breaking by Harry and haven't turned traitor 
(yet anyway). So, I still believe there's a good chance Harry will 
confide the "crucio" to someone.  Jen




From fc26det at aol.com  Tue Sep  2 13:40:36 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 13:40:36 -0000
Subject: Harry's Powers
Message-ID: <bj26kk+gtf4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79538

After reading the posts of the prophecy and Lily's sacrifice, James' 
non-sacrifice, a thought came to me.  Here goes.  From the beginning 
we are told that no one really knows why LV was not able to kill 
Harry.  Even Dumbledore states that "We can only guess,""we may never 
know." SS US p.12.  It is apparent thru canon that DD is guessing 
that the special charm that was created so to speak with Lily's 
sacrifice is what saved Harry's life and stripped LV of his powers.

Now the prophecy states that the person with the power to vanquish 
the Dark Lord will have power the Dark Lord knows not. (not a direct 
quote).  To me this states that the child will be *born* with the 
power.  Canon also tells us that LV at the time of Lily's death was 
not human enough to die.  

What I think may have happened is that Harry was born with the power 
to *strip* LV of his powers.  I think that at the time of the first 
attack, that LV was partially immortal.  After all that is his goal.  
Then when LV uses Harry's blood in GOF he states "....I would settle 
for my old body back again, and my old strength." GOF US p.656.  I 
think this is why DD had the look of triumph in his eyes.  LV is now 
back to human form.  

If what I think is true, Harry will not have to kill LV.  As DD told 
LV in OOP, "We both know that there are other ways of destroying a 
man, Tom," OOP US p.814.  He will simply have to strip LV of the 
remaining magical powers.  He may then become a squib or pure 
muggle.  I think this would be the worst thing that could happen to 
LV in his mind.

Ok guys and gals.....rip apart my theory!!
Susan




From naama2486 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 14:40:39 2003
From: naama2486 at yahoo.com (Naama)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 14:40:39 -0000
Subject: Occlumency and Legilimency (WAS Re: Snape the Occlumens)
In-Reply-To: <bj0niu+e33s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj2a57+45u8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79539

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Wanda Sherratt" 
<<snip snip>>

> Perhaps Snape is so skilled, he can hide his thoughts seamlessly, 
> so Voldemort thinks he is seeing everything there is to see, 
> instead of encountering obstructions or blanks.
> 
> Wanda


I think you've got it there. Like Snape said, Occlumency is NOT mind-
reading. It seems to be more about self control to me. Notice how 
most of the time, Snape is very calm and self-controled. He is also 
a very good actor (IMO anyway). He controles his emotions (most of 
the time) and so makes a good Occlumens. For Snape, it wouldn't be 
hiding his thoughts, but rather blocking them from his mind, 
convincing himself, while LV is around, that his treachery had never 
occured and that he serves Lv alone and truly. 

I think we had an example of Voldemort's Legilimency when he came to 
the MoM. Harry taunted Bellatrix Lestrange about smashing the 
prophecy. Come LV. He looked at Harry's eyes, and confirmed his 
story: "No Bella, he's not lying. I see the truth staring back at me 
from his worthless mind" (not an exact quote, I'm afraid, but I'm 
sure it was there). I'm guessing what LV did was to recall the 
memory of it being smashed from Harry's mind. When Snape was 
teaching Harry, Harry got to see it at work, to actually *see* the 
memories, so as to know his mind was penetrated, and so form a 
defense. However, LV has no interest whatsoever in making his 
victims aware of his Legilimency and what he was extracting from 
their minds. Therefore, Harry did not see the memory of the smashing 
of the prophecy or had any inclination Voldemort had just penetrated 
his thoughts.

I'm guessing a test of loyalty from Voldemort would be either a 
direct question: "Are you loyal to me?" (We know he can tell truth 
from lies). Or, he might try and rouse the image of himself in his 
DEs, and see what emotions arise. The "right answer" would be 
loyalty, fear, awe, love... Hatred and defiance would quite surely 
make Voldemort raise his wand...

Tell me what you think,

-- Naama, a huge Snape fan.


P.S.
Sorry if this has been discussed before... couldn't resist ;-)




From prof_uloth at hotmail.com  Tue Sep  2 15:01:00 2003
From: prof_uloth at hotmail.com (Fred Uloth)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 07:01:00 -0800
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Patronus
In-Reply-To: <bivc3i+j9d6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20030901214555.037a09a8@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 79540

At 11:55 AM 9/1/2003 +0000, sylviablundell2001 wrote:
>Joj mom31 wrote:
>"thinking of how popular and admired his father was makes him feel
>valuable and the stag represents his father."
>Would the fact that Harry's opinion of his father has now taken quite
>a battering have any influence on his Patronus, either in producing
>it or the form it takes? I have always wondered why it wasn't his
>mother who became the Patronus.

The one problem I have with this is that he produced his patronus months 
before he learned his father was an animagus. It's obvious that there is a 
connection, but I don't think it has to Harry's conscious knowledge of his 
father. I believe it has more to do with a genetic sort of thing...maybe 
genetics is not the right term...but you can get the idea. 




From prof_uloth at hotmail.com  Tue Sep  2 15:04:59 2003
From: prof_uloth at hotmail.com (Fred Uloth)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 07:04:59 -0800
Subject: A Conan Doyle (was Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: Pensieves
  objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity)
In-Reply-To: <bivftu+4o2g@eGroups.com>
References: <biuptd+as1t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20030902070210.00b077e8@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 79541

At 01:00 PM 9/1/2003 +0000, amanitamuscaria1 wrote:
>I can see the series ending. in the last book, in the last, or last
>but one chapter, with both Harry and Lord V dying.
>It doesn't necessarily HAVE to happen, but it's one way (let's hope
>not the A.Conan Doyle way) of truly ending the series..

ACD was sick of Sherlock Holmes...he wanted to be appreciated for his full 
body of works. That is why ACD killed Sherlock. Pressure from fans and 
publishers brought Holmes back from the dead. I can easily see that sort of 
thing happening with Harry Potter should JKR kill him off...not saying it 
will happen, but the potential is there...  




From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Tue Sep  2 15:46:58 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 15:46:58 -0000
Subject: Filk: "He's a Nasty Git"
Message-ID: <bj2e1j+o49v@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79542

Decided, with Caius' blessing, to jump on the musical band-wagon 
myself. So here's the first filk from "Harry", a PS musical very 
loosely based on "Annie" (it's going to take me ages to finish it, 
but I thought I'd get in there before anyone else did...)

Scene: The Gryffindor Common Room. Enter the new First Year, fresh 
from a Potions lesson. Harry, Ron, Seamus, Dean, Lavender, Parvati 
and Neville stomp about expressing their frustration at Snape's 
teaching methods. Hermione sits herself down in a corner with a book, 
occasionally muttering "Really, that's a bit immature".
(To the tune of "It's a Hard Knock Life")

HARRY, RON, SEAMUS, DEAN, LAVENDER, PARVATI, NEVILLE:
He's a nasty git to us!
He's a nasty git to us!
HARRY:
'Steada House points,
OTHERS:
We get sneers!
HARRY:
And he gives our Nev
OTHERS:
The fears!
ALL:
He's a nasty git!

None of us can ever win,
`Cos he favours Slytherin!
HARRY:
Draco Malfoy's,
OTHERS:
Top of class!
HARRY:
Even bloody Goyle
OTHERS:
Will pass!
ALL:
He's an unfair git!

RON:
What's the point in completing any homework? 
SEAMUS:
When we know that we'll never get it right?
PARVATI:
Nev, you shouldn't be scared of that mean old berk.
NEVILLE:
Well I do try, but he gives me such a fright!
LAVENDER:
Person'lly I find all that black quite creepy.
DEAN:
He don't care if my Potions av'rage shrinks.
HARRY:
For some reason he really seems to hate me

ALL:
And his dungeon's always got this funny stink!
Oh!

Blooming awful class!
Isn't lawful class!
Don't feel clever class!
And we'll never pass!

HERMIONE (from her corner):
He doesn't teach objectively.
RON:
Stinking biased prat is he!
HERMIONE: 
Neville would be bold as brass
If it weren't for Potions class!

RON throws a (black?)sheet round himself and does his world-famous 
Snape impression. The others (not Hermione) follow him round the 
room, pulling faces behind his back.
RON (spoken): Shut up, Miss Granger. I don't like bossy little know-
it-alls. Wrong again, Finnegan. Longbottom, are you completely 
stupid? You! Potter! What would I get if I added infusion of ashfo 
dillamadiddly to attar of wormyringahoessplot?

NEVILLE: 
Run away! Quickly, escape!
PARVATI (to LAVENDER):
Dare you touch his greasy nape?
SEAMUS (to DEAN): 
Trip him up, stand on his cape!
(RON (spoken): Well, boy? I'm waiting for the answer!)
ALL: 
We don't know, Professor Snape! 

He's a nasty git to us!
He's a nasty git to us!
Worse things never come to pass
Than when we're in his Potions class!
DEAN and SEAMUS:
He's a greasy giiit -
HARRY, NEVILLE and RON:
He's a biased twiiiiit -
HERMIONE, PARVATI and LAVENDER:
He's a nasty giiiiiiiiiiit -
ALL:
To us!





From mom31 at rochester.rr.com  Tue Sep  2 16:58:03 2003
From: mom31 at rochester.rr.com (mom31)
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 12:58:03 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione SHIP question
References: <bj0tn1+rrbd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000601c37173$5fd15d40$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>

No: HPFGUIDX 79543



  From: Robert Jones 



  I agree that there is no strong hint of a romantic relationship 
  between Harry and Hermione.  Emily does a good job in finding some 
  evidence, but I think she would admit that there isn't much.  I 
  thought after GOF that Hermione and Ron would obviously get together 
  in Book 5, but in OOTP Hermione only seemed annoyed with Ron 

  Me:

  I think it's the point that Hermione shows no signs of returning Ron's crush in this book, and H/H growing closness that changed my mind towards H/H.  
  Hermione is either dating Krum or letting Ron think she is.  Why would she do that if she likes Ron?  

  I just see a H/H/R triangle coming, that's going to throw everyone for a loop!

  Joj

   


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 17:22:33 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 17:22:33 -0000
Subject: Lily's Sacrifice, James' Sacrifice, 
In-Reply-To: <bj14nn+assd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj2jkp+3m7n@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79544

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tuck668" <tuck668 at y...> wrote:
> Wanda wrote:
> > > I just don't believe that giving one's life is enough to 
> > > block an AK - there are too many other instances where we 
> > > would have heard of it before.  Why didn't James's sacrifice 
> > > protect Lily, in that case?
> > 
> > (snip)


> 
> Well, James didn't know that Voldemort was definitely going to kill 
> Lily. Lily, however, knew that Voldemort wanted to kill Harry 
> because of the prophecy. Therefore, I don't think that James'       
> was a sacrifice to protect Lily, persay.
> 
> -Anna


bboy_mn:
I think you are on the right track here. It was only Voldemort's
self-important belief in his own grandiose power that lead him to kill
James and Lily. Although, if we go with the extermination of the
Potter line theory, then James was probably done for too.

The point is that Voldemort, if he had a shred of humanity and an
ounce of common sense, could have easily accomplished his goal by
Stunning James and Lily. If he had done that, it's possible that Harry
would be dead, and Voldemort would be King.

I think there may be something deeper to Harry though; some innate
characteristic, some special essense, or perhaps just the demands of
Fate, that would have still protected Harry. Sometimes when you try to
circumvent destiny, Fate conspires against you. 

So, as usual, Voldemort's own ruthless greed and stupidity defeated
him again. Reminds me of the say, that we are our own worst enemy.

As far as the difference between James and Lily's sacrific, I think to
some extent both their sacrifices had an effect, but in a sense, James
mounted a general defense, whereas Lily mounted a specific defense.
That is, James was protecting his home and his family; in doing so, he
was fighting against Voldemort. Lily on the other hand, literally
stood between Harry and Voldemort, refusing to move aside, refusing to
expose her child to an immediate and immenent mortal threat; in this
sense, she was fighting specifically for Harry. From another
perspective, James went out to met Voldemort, Lily moved back to
protect Harry.

I know this is an extremely fine subtle distinction, but sometimes
it's the extremely fine and subtle things in life that are the most
important.

Sure wish I had the 6th book so we could answer some more of these
mysteries.

Just a thought. 

bboy_mn







From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Tue Sep  2 17:23:33 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 18:23:33 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione SHIP question
References: <000601c37173$5fd15d40$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
Message-ID: <3F54D215.000001.98015@monica>

No: HPFGUIDX 79545


 Joj

 

Hermione is either dating Krum or letting Ron think she is. Why would she do
that if she likes Ron? 
 

Me -

Because Viktor makes her feel like a girl. Harry and Ron treat her like a
library book on legs or like part of the furniture. Originally (in GoF) I
think she went out with Viktor because she was flattered (and I think
genuinely liked him, I don't think she's in love though). He's famous, a
sports star and popular and he was attracted to *her*. After all he's only
going to be around till the end of the tournament so he's a safe guy to
spend time with without the worry that it's going to get serious and she can
feel feminine for once instead of like 'one of the boys'.

In OoP I think she genuinely feels friendship for Viktor, but nothing more.
I think a lot of the way she is letting Ron think she 'likes' Viktor is
because about the only time Ron has ever treated her like a girl rather than
taking her for granted is when she went to the Ball with Viktor. Therefore
she thinks that if she continues to bring his name up all the time and makes
sure Ron knows she's still in contact with him then if he likes her he might
actually *do* something about it.

For all Hermione's ability to see where Harry and Cho are going wrong, her
learning is all book learning. She's not very good at all this emotional and
romantic stuff. She had trouble making friends in PS and I think she is
basically insecure, especially when it come to dealing with people rather
than academic problems. Maybe it's because she's a muggleborn and she feels
she has something to prove, maybe it's because she's one of the youngest in
her year, maybe that's just a facet of her personality and has nothing to do
with anything, but there is no way Hermione is going to outright *ask* Ron
if he likes her or tell him her own feelings, unless she already knows the
answer beforehand. Of course there's the added fact that Ron and Harry are
her only close friends (although Ginny might be getting there too) and if
she and Ron did get together and then broke up or if one was interested and
the other wasn't then the dynamic might be irreparably damaged and I doubt
Hermione would want to risk that. So she's going to be sure before she does
anything - and since Ron (like most teenage boys, don't take this as a
criticism of Ron, I love him, honest) has the emotional maturity of a
cabbage when it comes to dealing with girls she could be waiting a long
time!

K



From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Tue Sep  2 17:22:40 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (B Arrowsmith)
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 18:22:40 +0100
Subject: Inside Dumbledores Head (was Re: Prophets without Honour)
Message-ID: <0E1C96DC-DD6A-11D7-8701-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79546

Laura- edited
 >>
Okay, okay, I'm beginning to come around to the suspicious!DD side.
There's evidence that JKR wants us to start distancing ourselves from
him as well-the couple of incidents in which Harry sees him become a
fear-inspiring figure in OoP. Those just confirm what we have known
for a while-that DD can be pretty tough-minded if he wants to be. He
had no problem hanging Snape out to dry in front of Fudge in PoA, and
doing the same to Fudge in the last 2 books.

But if I'm reading all the posts correctly, Kneasy is a lot more
hostile to DD than either Pip or Kirstini. The latter 2 think he's
fundamentally on the good side but that he makes some decisions that
are either poorly thought out or just plain cruel. But Kneasy thinks
there's something else going on with DD altogether.


I still can't decide, though, whether Kirstini and Pip are right or
whether Kneasy is (if I'm understanding everyone correctly). Clearly
DD has the big picture to deal with. Clearly he has to make
decisions that might hurt individuals in order to save society.
(Although it would have been better for Harry and Sirius if DD had
cared about Harry just a little less-then DD would have been able to
tell Harry what he needed to know.) Whether his behavior toward
Harry will change is still an open question; I think his remarks in
OoP simply suggest that he's called himself on his own behavior and
intends to be honest with himself from now on.

But Kneasy thinks there's something deeper going on with DD. A
personal vendetta against LV? A drive to dominate the world
himself? Is he really only fighting LV for pride or ego? I defer to
my superiors on the list for further explanation.
 >>

Hostile? To DD? Moi? Surely you jest.

I'm sorry if my posts read that way, but suspicion not hostility is my 
theme. ESE!DD is not my fantasy ending. But there are different grades 
and nuances of suspicion. What I have is not suspicions of motives or 
betrayal, but suspicions of his function, his place in the order of 
things. What is he up to? What is the function he is fulfilling? How 
will this  govern his actions?

What bothers me - well, let me sift through the rummage bin hat passes 
for my intellect and try to fit a few pieces together.

I am intrigued by where DD  fits in the cast list. He is (was) expected 
to be the mentor/guardian figure for Harry and the other 'youngsters' 
(With that I include the Sirius/James/Lupin generation as well). He is 
the well-worn, battered veteran; been there, seen that, got the 
cauldron. He's getting old; now's  the time to pass on the knowledge, 
skills, advice, ready to slide into a less demanding position. But he 
doesn't. He has an 'otherness' a detachment from events that doesn't 
sit well with his perceived role.

There is no exposition of plans or strategy. Just the largely 
ineffectual Order, from which he sends out members on assignments. He 
never explains why or how the results or intelligence gathered will be 
used. He has no understudy, no second in command privy to his plans. If 
anything happened to him, the whole thing would fall apart. But he is 
not a participant, as far as we can tell. He is a Black Hole; 
everything goes in, nothing, especially not light, comes out. He gives 
facile explanations to Harry, the 'reasons why' something has happened. 
They don't convince. There's more. Much more.

How often does he seem really concerned about Harry's position? How  
often does he really get involved? Well, twice actually. Once after the 
Portkey!Cup and once at the Ministry. (The other possible time, at the 
end of PS/SS I don't count. Reviving Harry etc. was just straightening 
the furniture after an unfortunate disturbance.)

The impression given is that he only intervenes when events are 
deviating from some pre-ordained script. Crouch!Moody and the Portkey 
were not in that script; things were coming off the rails. It wasn't 
supposed to happen this way. then he finds out that Voldemort has used 
blood from Harry - the gleam! Ah! things are back on track again.

The Ministry fracas - Harry should have been protected by his 
Occlumancy lessons; but because of the antipathy between he and Snape 
and teenage bloody-mindedness / curiosity, he didn't knuckle down and 
do it. Either one on it's own would probably not have prevented him 
acquiring sufficient protection. But the juncture of the two, plus 
Snape's reaction was more powerful than DD imagined.
He was vulnerable. So DD has to intervene to prevent things going 
belly-up. (Cheer up, Laura! It wasn't really DD's fault after all.)

Does he *know* what is to happen? Little  seems to surprise him. Calm, 
collected and *ready*, even when Harry comes back from the graveyard to 
tell him V is back. No doubts, no confusion, no checking what assets he 
has available, no planning what to do next. He's ready. Is it his job 
to ensure things go to plan? What plan? Whose plan?

How can we fit this contradictory pattern into the plot? It's 
difficult. DD acts as a cross  between a prompter, reminding the cast 
how they should respond to a cue and to an overseer, making sure 
certain tasks are fulfilled. Within the confines  of the Potterverse 
this character package is  an anomaly. Why is it there? I can't come up 
with a credible answer.

But this is Fantasy. Step back a bit. Distance lends enchantment.
Suppose  more  than the Potterverse  is involved. There is a 
possibility, no more than just a chance, that longer timelines should 
be considered, that the Harry Potter story is a link in a much longer 
chain. At the start of every school year the Sorting Hat gives us a 
reminder of beginnings, of a continuity of themes.
This wider view could explain Dumbledore. He could be assigned a role 
that is a recurring myth in many cultures. That of the advisor/hero who 
appears at times of great need. Merlin, for example. To such, Harry and 
his friends would be transient, small stuff in the greater scheme of 
things. DD is reputed to be 150 years old. What can a person of this 
age have in common with a 15  year old boy. Not much. Common purposes 
at  best. If, as I mused yesterday, he has perhaps been re-born using 
the Essence of PS, he could be much older. He knows people die. He's 
seen it, time and again. The tragedy is if he has  to go on, time and 
again. As he said to Voldemort, there are worse things than death.

This is no  more  than  a hypothesis; an attempt too explain 
observations that do not seem to fit into ordinary categories. I will 
not be surprised if  it's wrong, but I still insist on my basic premise 
that DD is up to something. Being tempted into the realms of myth is 
the only way I can reconcile his actions and attitudes with being on 
the side of good. Mind you, I can always change my mind later. depends 
if I  can fit some pieces into a different pattern. For now I'm stuck 
with this one.

Kneasy

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From severusbook4 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 17:38:34 2003
From: severusbook4 at yahoo.com (severusbook4)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 17:38:34 -0000
Subject: Voldemort's Age
In-Reply-To: <bj242k+h0pq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj2kiq+442a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79547

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "entropymail" 
<entropymail at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "thewierdone18"
> <thewierdone18 at y...> wrote:
> > Does anyone know how old Voldemort is? I can't figure it out.
> > 
> > "the weird one"
> 
> In GoF, states:
> 
> "...fifty years before...a maid had entered the drawing room to 
find
> all three Riddles dead...Elderly Mr. and Mrs. Riddle [Voldemort's
> grandparents] had been rich, snobbish, and rude, and their grown-up
> son, Tom [Voldemort's father], had been, if anything, worse...Frank
> was stubbornly repeating again and again, that he was innocent, and
> that the only person he had seen near the house on the day of the
> Riddles' deaths had been a teenage boy, a stranger, dark-haired and
> pale [Tom Riddle Jr./Voldemort]."
> 
> So, that would make Voldemort 50 + 15 (give or take a few years), 
or
> roughly 65.


Sevvie here:

In CoS. T. Riddle was 16 when the chamber was originally opened.  50 
+ 16 = 66, now add 3 years for the current book 5, and you have LV 
being 69 years old and about to be 70.

Just an observation.

Sevvie.




From alaskamy at hotmail.com  Tue Sep  2 17:40:20 2003
From: alaskamy at hotmail.com (kneazelkid)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 17:40:20 -0000
Subject: Droobles Blowing Gum - Not Anagram
In-Reply-To: <bit1au+qnop@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj2km4+59bk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79548

hermionegallo at y...wrote:
"Lliannanshe" makes an excellent point:  
"Regarding anagrams of Drooble's gum, Snape's name, etc., JKR has 
already done the anagram thing with "Tom Marvolo Riddle."  Don't 
y'all think she's creative enough not to do it twice?"
 
<snip> I also wonder if there's something else on the wrapper besides 
what's already printed on it or what Alice could write on it; without 
this information, we may not be able to figure it out.
I'm almost at the point of letting Luna figure it out, because my 
brain is scrambled eggs.

me(kneazelkid):
Your post reminded me of an X-Files episode. A kid was putting 
together a bunch of paper all over the floor. Up close, it looked 
like drivel, but when you looked down at it from the second story, a 
picture of a face was formed. This reminded me of the comment (sorry, 
no book with me here) Nevile's gram made about how he could paper his 
wall with all those wrappers. What if Nevile actually did paper his 
wall with the wrappers -- and marks his mother had been making on 
them revealed something?
I know the wrappers could just be a sad statement about Nevile's love 
for his mom, but something about it sticks in my head.
Thoughts, anyone?
Kneazelkid




From jdr0918 at hotmail.com  Tue Sep  2 18:13:00 2003
From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 18:13:00 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter is a CHILDREN'S BOOK re: rape  sexual preference
In-Reply-To: <3F547734.000001.11037@monica>
Message-ID: <bj2mjc+ge6i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79549

<<<"Kathryn Cawte" wrote:...Love and affection between people are 
(imo) a blessing and should be celebrated whatever form they take.>>>

The Sergeant Majorette says

Hear, hear. Oh, wait-- public display of affection, ick; so just the 
love.

Additionally, it can't be emphasized enough that rape and sexuality, 
along with prejudice, violence, war and all that "grownup" stuff, 
exist in children's reality. It doesn't make it any easier on a 
sensitive child that adults refuse admit that a child may be dealing 
with such things, forcing the kid to live with the horror alone in 
his own head. If the hero is gay and four-eyed, if his best female 
friend is a bucktoothed, frizzy-haried ubernerd, if his best bud 
wears hand-me-downs, if parents get murdered and teachers get raped 
in a world controlled and adored by adults, maybe a potentially 
suicidal child could be encouraged to seek help and guidance in his 
world.

--JDR




From pegruppel at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 18:20:23 2003
From: pegruppel at yahoo.com (Peggy)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 18:20:23 -0000
Subject: Droobles Blowing Gum - Not Anagram
In-Reply-To: <bj2km4+59bk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj2n17+6n9v@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79550

>kneazelkid:
> Your post reminded me of an X-Files episode. A kid was putting 
> together a bunch of paper all over the floor. Up close, it looked 
> like drivel, but when you looked down at it from the second story, 
a 
> picture of a face was formed. This reminded me of the comment 
(sorry, 
> no book with me here) Nevile's gram made about how he could paper 
his 
> wall with all those wrappers. What if Nevile actually did paper his 
> wall with the wrappers -- and marks his mother had been making on 
> them revealed something?
> I know the wrappers could just be a sad statement about Nevile's 
love 
> for his mom, but something about it sticks in my head.
> Thoughts, anyone?
> Kneazelkid

Me:

Knezelkid, you may just be on to something there.  I remember that X-
File (sorry, the title escapes me).  The SILK GOWNS group has been 
meditating on "why the gum wrappers?" and you have made an excellent 
point.  What a pity JKR didn't tell us more at that time about the 
wrappers.  She may be saving it for Book 6. . .  No fair!

Peg




From mom31 at rochester.rr.com  Tue Sep  2 18:53:48 2003
From: mom31 at rochester.rr.com (mom31)
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 14:53:48 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Things that will come into play later.
References: <bitovq+3ugc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000b01c37183$8b397980$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>

No: HPFGUIDX 79551



  From: mochajava13 
  Also, I thought Hermione and Cho's patronuses (however you pluralize 
  that word) were so girly and cutesy.  Not that a stag strikes fear 
  into the heart of anyone, but at least it's got big antlers to be, 
  well, pointy an look menacing.  Harry's stag did charge at the 
  dementors.  What's so threatening about a swan?  At least that's a 
  land creature.  What was with Hermione's otter?  Don't get me wrong, 
  I adore otters and think they're adorable, but if you're not an 
  abalone or other shell fish, how is that frightening?  And how could 
  either charge at a dementor? 



  Me:  
  I've been wondering how a patronus works.  The patronus comes at the dementor once, and they go away and don't fight or try to come back.  Patronus' must be VERY powerful.  Does it even matter what animal it is or how big it is?  I'm sure even Harry's stag looks small to 100 dementors.

  Joj

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 19:17:39 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 19:17:39 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter is a CHILDREN'S BOOK re: rape  sexual preference
In-Reply-To: <bj2mjc+ge6i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj2qcj+qdmu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79552

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jdr0918" <jdr0918 at h...> wrote:

> 
> The Sergeant Majorette says
> 
> Hear, hear. Oh, wait-- public display of affection, ick; so just the 
> love.
> 
> ... rape and sexuality, along with prejudice, violence, war and all 
> that "grownup" stuff, exist in children's reality. It doesn't make it 
> any easier on a sensitive child that adults refuse admit that a child 
> may be dealing with such things, forcing the kid to live with the 
> horror alone in his own head. ...edited...
> 
> --JDR


bboy_mn:
Excellent point. We need only look at several examples in the current
book to see how a child left with nothing but their own thoughts to
resolve the conflicts in their life, can get hopelessly lost in
incorrect conclusions. 

Think about Harry's reation to what happened to Mr. Weasley, he had
himself talked into believing that he was personally at fault, that he
was a danger to all his friends, and that the only solution was to run
away from the wizarding world forever. It was only the intervention of
friends, and a few trusted adults that help Harry get back on track
again. 

I can see alot of kids hopelessly trapped in their own delusional
thoughts about their lives, that read this and think, maybe I should
talk to some one, maybe there is something here that I don't see.

I posted earlier in this general thread about how I thought JKR's
books were based around universal themes. It is this delicate
interweaving of life's most universal themes that let all of us see
ourselves and our own lives in Harry's story. 

I think looking at Harry's moral conflict and failings, will be much
better at helping kids resolve the own moral conflicts and perceived
personal failing than all the preaching and sermonizing in the world.
In sense, I see JKR succeeding in helping kids deal with life
universal problems, where the moralist and their moralizing are
failing hopelessly. Kids are smarter than we give them credit for. JKR
doesn't not underestimate their ability to draw strength, hope, and
direction from her universal themes.

To a gay kid, everyone in Harry Potter is happily gay, and has the
strength and courage to face any oppression that life might throw at
them. In the universal story, we all discover ourselves. I think that
is really one of the purposes of fairytales.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn




From lupinwolf2001 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 19:26:35 2003
From: lupinwolf2001 at yahoo.com (lupinwolf2001)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 19:26:35 -0000
Subject: Snape Vampire Theory
In-Reply-To: <bj0mcq+joub@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj2qtb+fe46@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79553


1 more instance of Snape missing meals in OOTP is where it is 
commented that "snape never stays for meals, thank goodness"... of 
course he doesn't...

> > subrosax99:
> > > Me: Surely you aren't implying that I lack all subtlety and
> > > imagination? I am more than capable of deducing that Snape is a
> > > vampire without him prancing around like Bela Lugosi. My 
> conclusions
> > > are based on the assumption that vampires are categorically 
> undead,
> > > and must drink the blood of the living to survive. Snape does 
not
> > > appear to meet either of these criteria. The fact that he goes 
> out in
> > > daylight or sleeps in a bed does not prove or disprove anything.
> 
> Gadfly McLellyn writes:
> 
> Everytime I see that Snape doesn't drink blood, all I can think of 
is 
> the miriad of dead creatures that line his office.  I'm thinking 
that 
> he takes some kind of potion so that it doesn't have to be human 
> blood.  It can be the blood of any other creature.  
> 
> And now I will fill my cannon with canon:
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> SS/PS Chapter 8 The Potions Master page 136 of US paperback
> 
> "Potions lessons took place down in one of the dungeons.  It was 
> colder here than up in the main castle, and would have been quite 
> creepy enough without the pickled animals floating in glass jars 
all 
> around the walls."
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> Could be Vampire!Snape's prior meals?
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> SS/PS Chapter 8 The Potions Master Page 137 of US paperback, Snapes 
> famous introductory speech....
> 
> "I can teach you how to bottle fame, brew glory, even stopper 
> death....."  
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> Stoppering death kind of sounds vampirish to me.
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> SS/PS Chapter 13 Nicholas Flamel page 225 of US paperback 
> 
> "And speaking of Snape ...
> 
> A hooded figure came swiftly down the front steps of the castle.  
> Clearly not wanting to be seen, it walked as fast as possible 
toward 
> the forbidden forest.  Harry's victory faded from his mind as he 
> watched.  He recognized the figure's prowling walk.  Snape, 
sneaking 
> into the forest while everyone else was at dinner -- what was going 
> on?
> 
> CoS Chapter 3 The Whomping Willow, page 78 of US paperback
> 
> "Follow me", said Snape.
> 
> Not daring even to look at each other, Harry and Ron followed Snape 
> up the steps into the vast, echoing entrance hall, which was lit 
with 
> flaming torches.  A delicious smell of food was wafting from the 
> Great Hall, but Snape led them away from the warmth and light, down 
a 
> narrow stone staircase that led into the dungeons."
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> Soooooo Snape isn't always eating at dinner time!
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> 
> I accidentally found this passage that kind of backs up my Snape 
> drinks the blood of creatures instead of humans.  Snape can't even 
> look at a creature.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> PoA  Chapter 8 Flight of the Fat Lady, page 156 of US paperback
> 
> "Snape set down the smoking goblet, his eyes wandering between 
Harry 
> and Lupin.
> 
> "I was just showing Harry my grindylow," said Lupin pleasantly, 
> pointing to the tank.
> 
> "Fascinating," said Snape, without looking at it."
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> Kind of sounds like Lupin to tempt Snape into showing his vampirish 
> side.
> 
> 
> I swear I remember something about Harry noticing there were even 
> more jars at one point.  More meals?  Unfortunately I can't find 
the 
> canon regarding that.  I also thought that somewhere it was said 
that 
> Snape often goes into the Forbidden Forest, but I can't find that 
> canon either right now.  But I'm sure I have annoyingly stung 
enough 
> of you now to move on.
> 
> Gadfly 'off to watch the History Detectives' McLellyn




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 19:40:05 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 19:40:05 -0000
Subject: A Conan Doyle (was Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity)
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20030902070210.00b077e8@localhost>
Message-ID: <bj2rml+dfrv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79554

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Fred Uloth <prof_uloth at h...> 
wrote:
> At 01:00 PM 9/1/2003 +0000, amanitamuscaria1 wrote:
> >I can see the series ending. in the last book, in the last, or last
> >but one chapter, with both Harry and Lord V dying.
> >It doesn't necessarily HAVE to happen, but it's one way (let's hope
> >not the A.Conan Doyle way) of truly ending the series..
> 
> ACD was sick of Sherlock Holmes...he wanted to be appreciated for 
his full 
> body of works. That is why ACD killed Sherlock. Pressure from fans 
and 
> publishers brought Holmes back from the dead. I can easily see that 
sort of 
> thing happening with Harry Potter should JKR kill him off...not 
saying it 
> will happen, but the potential is there...

Laura (a major Holmes fan as well as a great lover of HP)

Of course, there are big differences between the Holmes canon and 
HP.  ACD didn't have an overall plan when he came up with the first 
Holmes stories, other than to make a few pounds.  The stories were 
deliberately written to be independent of each other, so people could 
buy any or all of the issues of The Strand magazine and enjoy the 
piece without having to have prior knowledge.  (This is why I love 
the irony of critics of HP who whine about how overcommercialized the 
books are and how JKR is treating her stories as product by producing 
a serialized work.  What do they think Dickens and Doyle did?)  ACD 
felt pressured to continue the Holmes stories long after he'd gotten 
tired of writing them-even his mother scolded him when he first told 
her he'd like to stop the series.  And after ACD did kill Holmes off, 
it took him a long time to bring him back (7 years, I think).  

Because JKR has had an overall plan in place from the beginning, I 
think she'll find it easier to stick to her decision to end the HP 
canon at book 7.  She conceives of the stories as rounded and with a 
narrative arc that ACD never thought of.  

Still, leaving a character when he's only 18 does give one room to 
maneuver...<g>




From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Tue Sep  2 19:38:29 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 19:38:29 -0000
Subject: Things that will come into play later.
In-Reply-To: <bitovq+3ugc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj2rjl+2lpg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79555

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mochajava13" 
<mochajava13 at y...> wrote:
Snip 
> Also, I thought Hermione and Cho's patronuses (however you 
> pluralize that word) were so girly and cutesy.  Not that a stag 
> strikes fear into the heart of anyone, but at least it's got big 
> antlers to be, well, pointy an look menacing.  Harry's stag did 
> charge at the dementors.  What's so threatening about a swan?  At 
> least that's a land creature.  

I take it you've never been chased by a seriously annoyed swan. 
[grin]. 

They can charge you. They're also strong enough to break your arm 
with their wings. Further, if the Dementors (very sensibly ) turned 
and ran, a swan patronus that was imitating a *real* swan would 
chase behind it trying to bite both buttocks off. If Dementors have 
buttocks. ;-)

A swan is quite appropriate for Cho - it suggests she's beautiful 
but tough and a fighter underneath.

Mochajava:
> What was with Hermione's otter?  Don't get me wrong, 
> I adore otters and think they're adorable, but if you're not an 
> abalone or other shell fish, how is that frightening?  And how 
> could either charge at a dementor?  Hermione's otter what, 
> gamboling around the room?  I can't picture that; I can only 
> picture an otter floating on its back with a shellfish to eat or 
> diving underwater to get said shellfish.

You're thinking of a Sea Otter, whereas the most common type of 
Otter in the UK is the River Otter. I don't know as much about them 
as I do swans, but from looking them up:

River otters hunt on land as well as in the river - they catch small 
mammals such as field mice. Think of a smaller sea otter loping 
along. They do fight, but usually only in the mating season, or to 
defend the nest. 

A River Otter could get up a fair amount of speed when running 
towards a Dementor, and would probably try and bite it to death.

They are very playful creatures, which is interesting, because it 
implies Hermione is playful underneath.

Myself, I would go for a ferret patronus. That would try and destroy 
a dementor by running straight up the inside of the robes and 
biting. Alternatively, it would jump onto and bite the Dementor's 
scabby hand - and have you ever tried to make a ferret let go of 
something it's biting?

Between the swan, the otter and the ferret, those Dementors would 
wish they'd never been spawned. [grin]

Pip!Squeak




From melclaros at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 19:52:42 2003
From: melclaros at yahoo.com (melclaros)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 19:52:42 -0000
Subject: Snape Vampire Theory
In-Reply-To: <bj0mcq+joub@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj2sea+7rfm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79556

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mclellyn" <ellyn337 at e...> 
wrote:
> 
> "Potions lessons took place down in one of the dungeons.  It was 
> colder here than up in the main castle, and would have been quite 
> creepy enough without the pickled animals floating in glass jars 
all 
> around the walls."
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> Could be Vampire!Snape's prior meals?



mel's question; Why would he save them? Do you save eggshells? 
Chicken skin? Banana peels?


 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> SS/PS Chapter 8 The Potions Master Page 137 of US paperback, Snapes 
> famous introductory speech....
> 
> "I can teach you how to bottle fame, brew glory, even stopper 
> death....."  
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> Stoppering death kind of sounds vampirish to me.
> 



Mel's comment: Sounds like brewing poison to me.




>> 
> CoS Chapter 3 The Whomping Willow, page 78 of US paperback
> 
> "Follow me", said Snape.
> 
> Not daring even to look at each other, Harry and Ron followed Snape 
> up the steps into the vast, echoing entrance hall, which was lit 
with 
> flaming torches.  A delicious smell of food was wafting from the 
> Great Hall, but Snape led them away from the warmth and light, down 
a 
> narrow stone staircase that led into the dungeons."
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> Soooooo Snape isn't always eating at dinner time!


Mel again: He was royally p*****. He was also royally elated that 
he'd caught Potter in such flagrant disregard for the LAW.
He was probably the Master "On Call" and as such had already eaten or 
planned to later. Without all the noise and bother of the sorting 
going on around him. Maybe he just wasn't hungry. *I* don't always 
eat at dinner time, and you'll have to take my word for it, but I'm 
not a vampire.



> --------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> 
> I accidentally found this passage that kind of backs up my Snape 
> drinks the blood of creatures instead of humans.  Snape can't even 
> look at a creature.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> PoA  Chapter 8 Flight of the Fat Lady, page 156 of US paperback
> 
> "Snape set down the smoking goblet, his eyes wandering between 
Harry 
> and Lupin.
> 
> "I was just showing Harry my grindylow," said Lupin pleasantly, 
> pointing to the tank.
> 
> "Fascinating," said Snape, without looking at it."



Mel asks: Can't look at it? Why would he want to look at it? Remus 
and Harry weren't even looking at it! That Grindylowe line was a 
ruse, remember? Not much blood in a Grindylowe either, I don't think. 
I mean, it's not like Remus said, I was just telling Harry that 
Grindylowe goes very well with a nice Stilton.



Melpomene




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 20:02:43 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 20:02:43 -0000
Subject: Inside Dumbledores Head (was Re: Prophets without Honour)
In-Reply-To: <0E1C96DC-DD6A-11D7-8701-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bj2t13+k9tt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79557

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
What I have is not suspicions of motives or 
> betrayal, but suspicions of his function, his place in the order of 
> things. What is he up to? What is the function he is fulfilling? 
How will this  govern his actions?
> 
> What bothers me - well, let me sift through the rummage bin hat 
passes 
> for my intellect and try to fit a few pieces together.
> 
> I am intrigued by where DD  fits in the cast list. He is (was) 
expected to be the mentor/guardian figure for Harry and the 
other 'youngsters' (With that I include the Sirius/James/Lupin 
generation as well). He is the well-worn, battered veteran; been 
there, seen that, got the cauldron. He's getting old; now's  the time 
to pass on the knowledge, skills, advice, ready to slide into a less 
demanding position. But he doesn't. He has an 'otherness' a 
detachment from events that doesn't sit well with his perceived role.

now me:

DD has been aware from the time of LV's attack on Lily and James that 
the LV story wasn't over.  My sense is that he feels responsible for 
seeing that LV is defeated.  At one point, someone-Hagrid, I think-
says that LV can never be finally killed, just put into abeyance for 
a time.  (I don't know if he means Tom Riddle in particular or evil 
wizards in general, though.) And I think DD knows this as well.  His 
self-assigned task is to eliminate the danger from this particular 
person.  
> 
Kneasy:

> There is no exposition of plans or strategy. Just the largely 
> ineffectual Order, from which he sends out members on assignments. 
He never explains why or how the results or intelligence gathered 
will be used. He has no understudy, no second in command privy to his 
plans. If anything happened to him, the whole thing would fall apart. 
But he is not a participant, as far as we can tell. He is a Black 
Hole;  everything goes in, nothing, especially not light, comes out. 

me again:

This is, imo, a function of the story being told from Harry's pov.  
He can't know what operations are going on at Grimmauld place if no 
one tells him.  I don't know why you think the Order is ineffectual-
they seem to come through when they're needed. Shacklebolt takes care 
of Marietta in the scene in DD's office.  The Order folks come to the 
DoM and save the kids from the DEs.  Even Mundungus manages to do 
something right when he listens in on the planning meeting at the 
Hog's Head.  I give the Order more credit than you do.  Remember that 
they're operating underground-if Fudge found out what they were up 
to, they'd all be in Azkaban.  Now that they can be open, they will 
be that much more effective.

Kneasy:
<snip> 
> The impression given is that he only intervenes when events are 
> deviating from some pre-ordained script. Crouch!Moody and the 
Portkey were not in that script; things were coming off the rails. It 
wasn't supposed to happen this way. then he finds out that Voldemort 
has used blood from Harry - the gleam! Ah! things are back on track 
again.
> 
> The Ministry fracas - Harry should have been protected by his 
> Occlumancy lessons; but because of the antipathy between he and 
Snape and teenage bloody-mindedness / curiosity, he didn't knuckle 
down and do it. Either one on it's own would probably not have 
prevented him  acquiring sufficient protection. But the juncture of 
the two, plus Snape's reaction was more powerful than DD imagined.
> He was vulnerable. So DD has to intervene to prevent things going 
> belly-up. (Cheer up, Laura! It wasn't really DD's fault after all.)
> 
> Does he *know* what is to happen? Little  seems to surprise him. 
Calm, collected and *ready*, even when Harry comes back from the 
graveyard to tell him V is back. No doubts, no confusion, no checking 
what assets he has available, no planning what to do next. He's 
ready. Is it his job to ensure things go to plan? What plan? Whose 
plan?

<snip> 
> But this is Fantasy. Step back a bit. Distance lends enchantment.
> Suppose  more  than the Potterverse  is involved. There is a 
> possibility, no more than just a chance, that longer timelines 
should 
> be considered, that the Harry Potter story is a link in a much 
longer 
> chain. At the start of every school year the Sorting Hat gives us a 
> reminder of beginnings, of a continuity of themes.
> This wider view could explain Dumbledore. He could be assigned a 
role 
> that is a recurring myth in many cultures. That of the advisor/hero 
who 
> appears at times of great need. Merlin, for example. To such, Harry 
and 
> his friends would be transient, small stuff in the greater scheme 
of 
> things. DD is reputed to be 150 years old. What can a person of 
this 
> age have in common with a 15  year old boy. Not much. Common 
purposes 
> at  best. If, as I mused yesterday, he has perhaps been re-born 
using 
> the Essence of PS, he could be much older. He knows people die. 
He's 
> seen it, time and again. The tragedy is if he has  to go on, time 
and 
> again. As he said to Voldemort, there are worse things than death.
<snip>
me:

I think you're reading too much into DD's behavior.  I can support 
the theory that DD's increasing fallibility is a manifestation of 
Harry's growing maturity.  But I don't see evidence of anything 
beyond that.  And I would be surprised if JKR was trying to enlarge 
her world beyond what she describes.  We'll just have to wait for the 
last 2 books to find out what the story is, though.  

I may not agree with everything you propose, but I sure do enjoy 
reading your posts.  Rock on, Kneasy!






From severusbook4 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 20:43:34 2003
From: severusbook4 at yahoo.com (severusbook4)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 20:43:34 -0000
Subject: Wizarding World Fauna and Potions for Muggles
Message-ID: <bj2vdm+7uma@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79558

I hope this has not been covered, but if it has, Sorry.  I started 
thinking about potions and their obvious effect that they have on 
magical people, would the effect be the same for a muggle?  And 
also, what about the plants?  Can you see a muggle trasping through 
a forest and finding a mimblintonia? <sp?> Prodding is odd exterior 
and being covered in ooze.  Or rather a mandrake and thinking it 
would be a nice addition to their garden?   We would see unconsious 
and dead muggles everywhere.  I guess the MOM would police these 
plants and make sure they are not growing wild where muggles could 
find them, but still, think of the possibilities.  Also, would a 
muggle be able to breath under water if they ingested gilly weed? Or 
experience any other magical property of WW plants?  Or is it the 
reccessive gene that makes one magical that also enables them to 
benefit from the magical properties of these plants?  Just some 
strange mental meanderings.

     One more thing, I know it has been discussed about creating 
something from nothing, but in GoF Molly is cooking dinner and she 
stirs an empty pot with her wand and a creamy substance (gravy?) 
pours from the end of her wand, I believe it was just after picking 
up one of the joke wands of the twins.  So this is not real?  It is 
just basically a placebo for gravy with no real nutritional value, 
just for taste?  It is the only reference to food being created from 
nothing in the books. 

Sevvie   




From severusbook4 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 21:00:30 2003
From: severusbook4 at yahoo.com (severusbook4)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 21:00:30 -0000
Subject: Why Harry Potter "cannot" be set in 1991 (Question)
In-Reply-To: <bj1flf+fkc9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj30de+sdei@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79559

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" <yswahl at s...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, alex fox <trinity61us at y...> 
> wrote:
> > Ok, this is a silly thing to ask, but my friend wants to know 
just 
> exactly how everyone KNOWS that HP started in 1991. I would look 
in 
> the archives, but i haven't the ability to do that right now, as I 
am 
> using someone else's computer, and barely getting my mail. Thank 
you, 
> for understanding. If I could get an answer quickly, it would 
avoid a 
> fight. I, personally, know that fact.
> >  
> > Thanks again,
> > Alex Fox 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> Samnanya replies - 
> Here is the clearest argument I can present - 
> All references to the us trade paperback editions - 
>  
> 1. CoS Chapter 8 - Deathday Party for Nearly Headless Nick
> pg 129 "Well this Halloween will be my 500th deathday" said Nearly 
> Headles Nick
> pg 133  description on the cake  "Sir Nicholas ..... Died 31st 
> October, 1492"
>  
> from those two clues Harry's second year at Hogwarts is [1492+500] 
or 
> 1992
> Harry's first year of hogwarts is thus 1991, and the summer of 
1991 is 
> when Harry meets Hagrid for the first time
>  
> 2. SS Chapter 4 - The Keeper of the Keys
> pg 55 Hagrid says about Voldemort "he turned up in your village 
where 
> you was all living on Halloween ten years ago. You was just a year 
> old.
>  
> from this we know that Voldemort killed Harry's parents in [1991-
10] 
> or 1981 and therefore Harry was born in 1980.
>  
> In addition, 
> 
> 3. PoA Chapter 21 - Hermione's Secret
> pg 392 Dumbledore tells Harry and Hermione that "there is not a 
shred 
> of proof to support Black's story, except your word, and the word 
of 
> two thirteen year old wizards will not convince anybody ...."
>  
> since PoA was in year 3, and year 3 was 1993 from the above 
argument, 
> this is further proof that Dumbledore as well says that Harry was 
born 
> in 1980.
>  
> To refute this argument is to say that Dumbledore and Hagrid are 
lying 
> [or uninformed] and the cake decorator for Nick cleverly put on 
the 
> wrong date without anybody knowing ...... 
>  
> I think this carries a little more weight in "canon"  than a 
> playstation ...... 
> Hope this  clears it up for you.... 
> Sam

Also, the Playstation was introduced in North America in September 
1995, so if it was the same for the UK, then JKR's facts still hold 
correct.  If I remember correctly, Harry was writting to Sirius 
about Dudley throwing his PS1 out the window (didn't he just get it 
for his B-day?) in OotP. OotP takes place in 1996, so the PS1 had 
been for sale for about a year.  The other reference about the 
computer Harry wanted to play while left at home, was a computer, 
not a PS1.

Sevvie




From vecseytj at tampabay.rr.com  Tue Sep  2 21:03:54 2003
From: vecseytj at tampabay.rr.com (vecseytj)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 21:03:54 -0000
Subject: Snape Vampire Theory
In-Reply-To: <bj2qtb+fe46@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj30jq+ju8q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79560

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinwolf2001"
<lupinwolf2001 at y...> wrote:
> 
> 1 more instance of Snape missing meals in OOTP is where it is 
> commented that "snape never stays for meals, thank goodness"... of 
> course he doesn't...
> 
> > > subrosax99:
> > > > Me: Surely you aren't implying that I lack all subtlety and
> > > > imagination? I am more than capable of deducing that Snape is a
> > > > vampire without him prancing around like Bela Lugosi. 

Hi, I read the interview with JKR, where she said you'll have to wait
until book 7 to see why, JRK finds it funny that anyone would be in
love with Snape.  Sorry, can't remember where but, it is in the
archives, just read it recently.  And I am not too sure that Snape is
a vampire.  But, I can't think of anything *else* he could be that
love would be an issue.  I mean it is kind of hard to love a blood
sucking vampire. (I know people do, just not me). Anyway, ummm can
anyone think of anything *else* Snape could be?  I mean he must be
*something*.  But, vampire, no I don't think so.

'Cause one thing he goes out and is the ref in that q-match.  So he
was outside in the sun. Not a very vamipre~ie, thing to do.
And he does *eat* that is where Harry sees him the first time in
SS/PS.  His class' take place during the day.

I don't know... I'm just wondering... *what* else he could be?  It's
been at the back of my mind but, I can't think of anything...  Anyone?
any ideas?  Something new?  Oh well... 
Just a thought.. Tj




From tuck668 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 14:18:23 2003
From: tuck668 at yahoo.com (tuck668)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 14:18:23 -0000
Subject: Student Detector, was Re: Number of Students
In-Reply-To: <bj1c0h+m17p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj28rf+rm6q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79561

> 
> And I can see one of those arcane devices in Dumbledore's office 
> projecting something like a holographic map of the area Hogwarts 
> serves, with little twinkly lights representing next year's 
> newbies, growing gradually brighter, with an occasional flare as some nine 
> or ten year old ><pops>< out of danger onto a school roof or vanishes 
> a barrier at the zoo, as the time to mail invitations to the school 
> approaches.
<Snip>
> 
> "msbeadsley"

I think that JKR said somewhere (sorry, don't remember where) that 
when a magical child is born, an enchanted quill writes down the 
name of the child in a book of some sort.. and when the kid turns 11 
they get a letter of acceptance to Hogwarts.

-Anna





From Natdyce at aol.com  Tue Sep  2 17:44:06 2003
From: Natdyce at aol.com (Natdyce at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 13:44:06 EDT
Subject: What does Dumbledore have up his sleeve?
Message-ID: <10d.293b916c.2c8630e6@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79562

I was just thinking, Dumbledore has known, ever since the night Voldemort 
failed in his attempt to kill Harry, that he would be back, and that, in effect, 
until he did the wizarding world would be living on borrowed time. Thus, he 
has had 14 years to think about what he would do when Voldemort did return, he 
must  have plans of some sort drawn up, or at least I think he might. On the 
other hand, I guess the reformation of the Order was his plan, and after that he 
would just take it as it comes. What does everyone else think?

Natalie

p.s. sorry if this has already been brought up


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From furkin1712 at aol.com  Tue Sep  2 15:13:08 2003
From: furkin1712 at aol.com (furkin1712 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 11:13:08 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: green eyes and the killing curse
Message-ID: <31.3d594bd5.2c860d84@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79563

Wanda wrote:
> I just don't believe that giving one's life is enough to 
> block an AK - there are too many other instances where we 
> would have heard of it before.? Why didn't James's sacrifice 
> protect Lily, in that case?

"Rebecca Hoskins" wrote:
Well, maybe the protection was not given passively by Lily dying. 
Maybe Lily did some sort of spell or incantation before her death 
that caused this protection to happen. Remember that we are told that 
this is very old magic, so Lily could have looked it up. She would 
have had reason to find some way of protecting Harry, as she knew 
Voldemort was after him because of the prophecy.
>>



Good theory, I think though that Lily's sacrifice is only a small part of why 
Harry lived, I think that Dumbledore didn't tell him something about that 
night. I think there is a secret that will yet be reveiled. Also, can anyone 
explain why Voldemort offered to spare Lily? Maybe that has something to do with 
it, he didn't want to kill her and something happened to make the curse not 
strong enough to kill Harry because he felt bad that he killed Lily? Hmmm, I 
don't know. Remember what Moody said, about you really have to want to kill and 
find pleasure in killing for AK to work? I think that has something to do with 
it.

*-Blue Eyes-*


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Tue Sep  2 14:20:28 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 14:20:28 -0000
Subject: Predestination (was Re: prophecy/Firenze)
In-Reply-To: <bioep0+ur67@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj28vd+o33o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79564

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" <stevejjen at e...> 
wrote:
(snip)
> I'm just positing that we aren't headed to that conclusion.  I'm not 
> saying the prophecy is a red herring, just the series is chock-full 
> of examples of falliability, plans going awry, people not acting as 
> they should and the like.  
> 
> Dumbledore's master plan to assist Harry with fulfilling the 
prophecy 
> has worked so far, but what if ....what if there's a little door 
over 
> to the side, another outcome that could be equally possible.  I'm 
> really just saying the prophecy doesn't HAVE to be fulfilled in the 
> end. 
> 
> Jen

Remnant:
Jen, I hope I understand your post correctly; it sounds like you 
question whether the prophecy *must* come true. Possibly, you wonder 
how that fits in with freedom of choice in JKR?

I very much agree in spirit--JKR has emphasized the importance of 
choices, and of the repercussions our choices can have. Still, the 
prophecy in this case is quite broad. Either LV or Harry will live. 
One will somehow play a part in vanquishing the other. That's about 
it, really.

And in the "reality" of the Potterverse, Harry has become a 
centerpiece of the WW resistance to LV, whether rightly or wrongly. 
And if Harry's side does not win by defeating LV, then the LV 
faction will certainly kill Harry (and many more).

So Harry can make whatever choices he wants, and the prophecy still 
will come true. But by making the right choices, Harry can help rid 
the world of LV, once and for all. That feels quite powerful to me as 
a moral.

-Remnant





From jdr0918 at hotmail.com  Tue Sep  2 21:42:03 2003
From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 21:42:03 -0000
Subject: Wizarding World Fauna and Potions for Muggles
In-Reply-To: <bj2vdm+7uma@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj32rb+1t3j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79565

<<<"severusbook4" wrote:...Can you see a muggle trasping through a 
forest and finding a mimblintonia? <sp?> Prodding is odd exterior and 
being covered in ooze.  Or rather a mandrake and thinking it would be 
a nice addition to their garden?...>>>

The Sergeant Majorette says

One of the things I find fascinating about JKR's work is that her 
invention is so seamlessly interwoven with sometimes odd reality that 
you can't always tell when she's kidding: mandrake is a real plant, 
used in alchemy because its root resembles a human body, and there 
are a lot of plants that do odder things than mimbulus, which is an 
invention (I think...)

I also waste a lot of time wondering which of her foods is real and 
which are part of her 'magical' universe. If I didn't know better, 
I'd think that spotted dick was a joke, and are pumpkin pasties just 
pumpkin pies?

--JDR




From jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 21:54:05 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 21:54:05 -0000
Subject: At 12 Grimmauld Place (a filk)
Message-ID: <bj33ht+enrj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79566

This is a filk of the title song from the classic movie, then 
musical "Forty-Second Street," called "At 12 Grimmauld Place.
I hope this will be my first filk in another filk-musical.

As usual, asterisks indicate italics unless otherwise specified.


I dedicate this filk to Gail B., a good friend and a great filkmaven!


At 12 Grimmauld Place
(SCENE:  Auror and newer member of the Order of the Phoenix 
Nymphadora Tonks explains to Harry some of the things he has wanted 
to learn about all summer.)

NYMPHADORA TONKS::
In a seedy part of London town,
You'll find a little square.
In that little square in London town,
You'll find a *pied-a-terre*.
A crazy quilt that P. N. Black built,
Quite Unplottable in London town,
But nonetheless it's there.

Come inside the secret base
Of the Order of the Phoenix, luv

(Mad-Eye Moody hands Harry a piece of parchment to read
while he uses the Put-Outer.)

Come inside the secret base
Of the Order of the Phoenix, luv,
At 12 Grimmauld Place.
It's kept hidden just in case
The Death Eaters try to search or to spy
At 12 Grimmauld Place.

There's one feature, name of Kreacher
Lacking charm or grace
Hear him mutter like a nutter,
"Traitors to their race!"

And wall to wall, you'll love it all
Where Mundungus Fletcher hides from the chase,
At 12 Grimmauld Place.

I know you've missed Ron Weasley,
You can also see friend Hermione,
At 12 Grimmauld Place.
Hear a scream like a Banshee,
On a tapestry is the family tree,
At 12 Grimmauld Place.

By the curtain see for certain
A most unpleasant face,
And that painting keeps complaining
That we're a disgrace.

It's Mrs. Black on the attack.
One of many wonders found in this space
Unpack!  Kick back!  House Black's no shack!
At 12 Grimmauld Place!

-Haggridd





From Calimora at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 21:55:23 2003
From: Calimora at yahoo.com (Renee Daniels)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 21:55:23 -0000
Subject: Aiming Wand at Bellatrix Lestrange:  CRUCIO!
In-Reply-To: <bj266s+e0b0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj33kb+k84q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79567

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" <stevejjen at e...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" 
<msbeadsley at y...> 
> wrote:
> > "Jen Reese" <stevejjen at e...> wrote:
> > 
> > > Surely Harry will relate that incident with Belltrix to 
> > > someone in Book 6, and we will get to know even 
> > > more about casting unforgivable curses.   
>

Jen Said:
>
> Assuming Harry wouldn't willingly be talking to Percy, Fudge or 
> Umbridge about his fight with Bellatrix, then there are multiple 
> people he could safely discuss the incident with: Hermione, Ron, 
> Ginny, Dumbledore, perhaps Lupin or Arthur. He doesn't have a track 
> record of keeping secrets from R/H for very long(the contents of 
> the prophecy remain to be seen), 

Me:

But the realy 'evil' stuff Harry keeps from the rest of the trio - 
such as the Sorting Hat's other option.

> and DD has an uncanny ability to 
> encourage Harry to discuss his burdens (the sorting hat considering 
> him for Slytherin). All of the above people know about instances of 
> rule-breaking and/or law-breaking by Harry and haven't turned 
> traitor (yet anyway). So, I still believe there's a good chance
> Harry will confide the "crucio" to someone.  

Me:

In the past DD was regarded with warmth as a protector... and Harry 
only tells when he looks Dumbledore in the eye. At the end of OotP 
Harry's opion of DD has fallen off its pedestal and Harry can't look 
DD in the eye, both for fear of Mindreading and Voldie. This isn't a 
levitating pudding, a violation of the Secrecy Acts, or even self 
defence - this was an Unforgivable. A charm so heinous that only the 
truely evil cast it and using it gets you a life sentance in Azkaban. 

At the moment Harry doesn't really understand that the thing that 
makes the charm so awful is the intent needed to cast it correctly. 
He just knows that in the eyes of the wizarding world Crucio=Evil, 
and to some extent he probably believes it himself. That's why I dont 
think he'll ever tell unless he's backed into a corner. Nobody wants 
people they admire to know them at their worst. 

The only exception I see to this blanket of silence (now that Sirius 
is gone) is Luna Lovegood. She doen't see things through the same 
lenses the rest of the world does, and I think Harry's beginning to 
understand the implications of that...

~Calimora (Back from the Abyss)




From pinoypartygal at aol.com  Tue Sep  2 15:19:08 2003
From: pinoypartygal at aol.com (Emily)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 15:19:08 -0000
Subject: Harry's Powers
In-Reply-To: <bj26kk+gtf4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj2cdc+m69j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79568

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Potterfanme" <fc26det at a...> 
wrote:

> Now the prophecy states that the person with the power to vanquish 
> the Dark Lord will have power the Dark Lord knows not. (not a 
direct 
> quote).  To me this states that the child will be *born* with the 
> power.  Canon also tells us that LV at the time of Lily's death 
was 
> not human enough to die.  
> 
> What I think may have happened is that Harry was born with the 
power 
> to *strip* LV of his powers.  I think that at the time of the 
first 
> attack, that LV was partially immortal.  After all that is his 
goal.  
> Then when LV uses Harry's blood in GOF he states "....I would 
settle 
> for my old body back again, and my old strength." GOF US p.656.  I 
> think this is why DD had the look of triumph in his eyes.  LV is 
now 
> back to human form.  
> 
> If what I think is true, Harry will not have to kill LV.  As DD 
told 
> LV in OOP, "We both know that there are other ways of destroying a 
> man, Tom," OOP US p.814.  He will simply have to strip LV of the 
> remaining magical powers.  He may then become a squib or pure 
> muggle.  I think this would be the worst thing that could happen 
to 
> LV in his mind.


That's a very interesting theory. Though I'm not sure what Harry's 
power is, I agree with you in that I do not think that Harry was 
actually meant to kill LV. Now why do I think this? You ask. Well, 
after book four it was clear to me that LV was very much human and I 
think that is why DD had that gleam of triumph in his eyes. After 
much discussing with my older brother (whom I got sucked into the 
magical world that is Harry Potter) we both came to the consensus 
that when LV took some of Harry's blood that instead of removing 
Lily's protection from Harry but in fact, he (LV) now has the 
protection himself. This would mean that they would not be able to 
kill each other (despite the prophecies words...which I still think 
are a bit hokey)Your theory seems to fit well with me and brother's 
theory. I wondered how it would be if it wasn't possible for them to 
kill each other. I searched my mind, who would kill Voldemort then? 
Neville? But with your theory, my theory could be possible. But 
until the next two books come out, we just don't know. But it sure 
is fun to speculate, isn't it? :)

~Emily~





From gaspode2002 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 19:27:28 2003
From: gaspode2002 at yahoo.com (gaspode2002)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 19:27:28 -0000
Subject: Why Harry Potter "cannot" be set in 1991 (Question)
In-Reply-To: <bj1flf+fkc9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj2qv0+35ss@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79569

About the playstation controversy. It seems likely to me 
that "playstation" is simply local Little Whinging slang for "any 
video game system". It obviously pre-dates the commercial term. Shall 
we just leave it at that?
Gaspode (named for the famous Gaspode).





From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 19:46:47 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 19:46:47 -0000
Subject: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj1e3l+nch9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj2s37+pugt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79570

Salit said:
The problem for Dumbledore is that his main goal is to defeat
Voldemort. Everything else is a means to that end, including Harry
himself. Dumbledore concedes that his weakness is that he grew to
love Harry, thus not being able to use him effectively as the
tool to destroy Voldemort. In OoP Dumbledore was able to make
the switch and while he will still care for Harry very much,
I think that he is ready to sacrifice him - whether his life or
his happiness to achieve the ultimate goal.

This may seem like cold calculation to you, but when you fight
pure evil you have to make sacrifices and use whatever tools
you have, and Dumbledore is the leader in that battle.


Now me (Sarah):

I agree with all that has been said about Dumbledore needing to be 
cold and calculating in order to effectively battle Voldemort.  
However, I think Dumbledore's weakness is that he also treats some 
people as children when they aren't (or can't be), and when he 
should have placed adult responsibilites on them.  In other words, 
he cares about people as a father cares for his children.  He wants 
to protect people he cares for, but panders to their desires to feel 
happy and useful.  

For example, with Harry, Dumbledore should have told Harry 
everything.  Harry needed to know, for his own protection.  I don't 
think the events of OoP would have changed even if Harry knew that 
Voldemort wanted the prophecy.  (Well, Harry might not have picked 
up the prophecy.)  Harry already knew that Voldemort wanted 
something in the Department of Mysteries very badly, and had tried 
to get that.  Hermione told Harry that Voldemort might be tricking 
Harry, but Harry said he didn't care; he was going to go after 
Sirius anyway.  I think that Harry would have gone after Sirius even 
if he knew what the prophecy was all about.  That's Harry's nature; 
to go after those in trouble.  Dumbledore telling Harry about the 
prophecy and Voldemort's desire to get it wouldn't have changed 
anything.  (Harry might have been even more likely to go after 
Sirius in an attempt to prevent Sirius picking up the prophecy and 
going insane.)

And Dumbledore also treats Sirius like a child.  Dumbledore ordered 
Sirius to stay inside Grimmauld Place, with good reason.  The death 
eates knew of Sirius' animagus form, and would have tried to kidnap 
Sirius just to get Harry.  Sirius was a target, and needed to stay 
hidden.  Plus, the ministry was looking for Sirius.  Human disguises 
could be seen through, and Sirius might have been sent back to 
Azkaban or given a dementor's kiss.  Sirius realizes this, and, for 
the most part, complies with Dumbledore's orders to stay inside.  
But, Dumbledore pandered to Sirius' desire to be useful and to know 
about the fight against Voldemort.  Why keep Sirius at Grimmauld 
Place?  True, it is very well hidden, but enchantments could have 
been placed at a number of other locations.  However, if Sirius was 
carted off to a different location, even if it was one Sirius 
enjoyed being at, Sirius would be out of the loop.  He would have to 
rely on messages from others.  So instead of having Sirius hide 
somewhere else, or setting up headquarters somewhere else, 
Dumbledore gives into Sirius' desires.  As a father would, not as a 
general would.  Dumbledore had misgivings about using Grimmauld 
Place as headquarters, but gave into Sirius' desire to feel useful.

Anyway, I think Dumbledore tries to be Macchiavellian for the 
greater good.  (Sacrifice the few for the greater good of the 
whole.)  But I think he fails because of his fatherly attitude 
towards those much younger than himself.  Dumbledore tries to 
protect too many people, instead of giving these people the 
responsibility to look after themselves.  (Namely Harry and 
Sirius.)  He wants to give Harry a childhood.  He wants Sirius to 
live, really live, after being unjustly stuck in Azkaban for so 
long.  Just my two cents.





From cubs9911 at aol.com  Tue Sep  2 19:47:17 2003
From: cubs9911 at aol.com (cubs99111)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 19:47:17 -0000
Subject: Umbridge????
In-Reply-To: <biod6s+qdgv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj2s45+ji7j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79571

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "slgazit" <slgazit at s...> 
wrote:
> ~snip~
> > I personally don't believe she was raped. For two reasons: I can't
> > imagine any woman writer, especially one as sensitive as JKR,
> > using rape as a punishment, even towards such a disgusting
> > character. The second reason is the nurse's
> > assertion that there was nothing wrong with her except for shock.
> > She would not have said so if Umbridge was raped.
> > 

Me (Joe):  When I first read the book, the idea that Umbridge could have 
been raped did not come in to my head for a minute, however when I 
read the posts about this and re-read that chapter I started to think 
that maybe she was raped.  The reason that I think it could be 
possible is because she is just sitting there completly in shock.  
When the Centaurs were carrying her away she was still yelling at 
them, however after Dumbledore rescued her she was in a state of 
shock so great that she was not even saying a word.  I would think 
that she would have come back yelling about how they should get rid 
of centaurs because they are uncivilized and dangerous, but she came 
back and was instead in shock even though it APPEARED that there was 
no physical damage done.  Now what could the centaurs have done to 
her to put her in this state of shock without doing any obvious 
physical damage to her?  When the nurse examined Umbridge she may not 
have seen any physical damage but it could have been there. Also, 
when Ron started to make the noises that sounded like the Centaurs, 
she obviously had a reaction of terror.  Why would she be this 
terrified if the Centaurs simply held her captive for less than a day 
without even physically hurting her.  Now I'm not saying that I even 
believe that JKR was trying to infer that Umbridge was raped but I am 
definitly leaving the possiblity open.  

-Joe





From megalynn44 at hotmail.com  Tue Sep  2 21:59:00 2003
From: megalynn44 at hotmail.com (megalynn44)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 21:59:00 -0000
Subject: Why Harry Potter "cannot" be set in 1991 (Question)
In-Reply-To: <bj30de+sdei@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj33r4+9l4g@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79572

> Sevvie wrote:
> Also, the Playstation was introduced in North America in September 
> 1995, so if it was the same for the UK, then JKR's facts still hold 
> correct.  If I remember correctly, Harry was writting to Sirius 
> about Dudley throwing his PS1 out the window (didn't he just get it 
> for his B-day?) in OotP. OotP takes place in 1996, so the PS1 had 
> been for sale for about a year.  The other reference about the 
> computer Harry wanted to play while left at home, was a computer, 
> not a PS1.
> 

Actually, the playstation was mentioned in the beginning of book 
four. And GOF starts in summer '94 if book one starts in summer '91. 
Even if it was mentioned in book five that still puts it at 
summer '95 which is before the September release date. I am not 
saying that Harrry born in 1980 is not the best timeline to use, I 
just think there is a flint with the playstation.




From Malady579 at hotmail.com  Tue Sep  2 21:59:19 2003
From: Malady579 at hotmail.com (Melody)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 21:59:19 -0000
Subject: Patronuses  (was: Things...play later)
In-Reply-To: <bitovq+3ugc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj33rn+9l5c@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79573

Mom 31 wrote:
>> 1.  Hermione's otter patronus and/or Cho's swan patronus.  

Mochajava wondered:
> I was wondering if those two were the only ones that could perform 
> the spell, also.  


Huh.  I just read this chapter last night and was wondering that too.
 From rereading Ch 27 it says, "The few patronuses people had managed
to conjure...."  

a) seems that is how JKR pluralizes 'patronus'.
b) It said few.  And Cho and Hermione are a few.  

But also, it only says Cho and Hermione actually created one.  It does
say Lavender was having trouble.  As was Neville.  But they both were
trying.  Seamus did not manage one either.  No mention of Ginny or Ron
accomplishing the feat.


> Adult wizards were impressed that Harry could 
> perform the spell at all, and even more impressed that he could at 
> age 13.  

I think the fact Harry taught two more the spell is a rather sad
reflection on the teaching style and skills of the DADA teachers. 
Their kids are talented, but they do not know how to unlock it.  But
then again, Lupin was trying.  


> Also, I thought Hermione and Cho's patronuses (however you pluralize 
> that word) were so girly and cutesy. 

Ok, so a swan is cutesy.  I find it interesting it was just gliding. 
Not a very attacking stance.  The deer always erupts out of Harry's
wand galloping.  Granted, when Harry does it, he *has* to.  He has a
reason.  Both Cho and Hermione were just trying to accomplish it
without the pressure.  Which Harry does warn them about.  

Still.  I like Pip!Squeak's idea that a swan can be rather menacing. 
They are big and move rather fast for something with flippers. 
Especially when they get those wings going.  I think though, it is not
*how* the patronus attacks the dementor, but rather that they
*attack*.  Any animal, when threatened, goes maniac.  Some are more
amusing than others though...

Hermione's at least has the big teeth, claws, and rabies.   
Ok, I see more of the connection between the otter and Hermione.  :D


Hmmm, my personal patronus?  

It is a toss up.  Between a duck or a llama.

I have seen grown men run away from a mad duck chasing after them. 
The waddle is adorable, but that straining neck, flapping wings, fly
of loose feathers, and not the most musical squawk freak people out.  

And as for the llama...they are so cute, but when you get close they
can spit with the pro skills of a 10 year old boy.


Melody




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 20:23:06 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 20:23:06 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter CHILDREN'S BOOK/rape; sexual preference/META
In-Reply-To: <bj2mjc+ge6i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj2u7a+i3g1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79574

I left the subject line mostly as is, and, having said that, I have 
to reiterate what is already widely known:  JKR did *not* write HP & 
The Current Bugaboo for children; she was writing a story she would 
enjoy reading.

IMO (and in my limited experience, and from what I've heard from 
pros), that's what writing *is*--for writers: it's your mind telling 
*itself* a story using that old imagination.  Even the crustiest old 
pros get fan mail pointing out stuff (archetypes; myths) they didn't 
know they put in there; a lot of the process (IMO, the most enjoyable 
part) goes on unconsciously, out of sight.  I doubt that any one 
writer or artist focuses on as many details as I have seen picked at 
here.  (It's highly unlikely one person *could* without grinding to a 
full stop creatively; and stories written by committee don't become 
bestsellers ^-^.)  Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, isn't it?  (I 
guess the endless guessing is because no one (except maybe JKR; nah, 
probably not her either!) completely knows which ones are and which 
ones aren't.)

JKR said that she had a rough outline from the beginning which 
covered the entire saga; the end is already done and one of the 
hardest parts of writing it is not giving away too much too soon.  
The "hardest" part, she said, implying that it was *not* the most fun 
to do.  That's the writer-as-editor as she goes.  That's intellectual 
mechanics for JKR, not smooth internal narrative flow or inspired 
conception; it's the deliberate structuring of the mystery, the runes 
*we* will examine endlessly from all angles later.  She may have fun 
with us, with it; but it isn't *the story*; it is the parceling up 
and doling out of the story.

A lot of us seem to be focusing on the parcels instead of the story.  
On the medium, not the message.  I'm suggesting a periodic paradigm 
shift, a temporary panning out with the camera to include a wider 
field of vision, perhaps less deconstructing of details.  I think I'm 
afraid it might be a little like my first "transistor" radio (old 
fart here, yep), which I took apart in fascination.  It was an 
enjoyable exercise, but it never played again.  I am not complaining 
(I *love* this group); it's just a suggestion, and one I think might 
actually help some of us nitpick more effectively after the shift in 
perspective.

As for whether or not the books are *appropriate* for children, it 
depends (beating a dying horse here, I know) on the child.  Not only 
do the books become mature along with Harry as they go, but each 
child (and any person for that matter) of any age is going to bring a 
unique set of experiences to the story.

The books are not designed to help children who have post traumatic 
stress; and JKR is not writing Heather Has Two Mommies.  JKR is a 
bard, a professional dreamer, an entertainer, a fantasist, a word 
artist.  She is after the high: the process of telling/creating the 
story (to herself) and satisfaction of a tale well told.  (It isn't 
about the money; when/if the money (or we, the deconstructive 
readership) intrude/s, the story suffers.)  If, in her mind, the 
story tells itself to include a rape, it'll be there (my take is 
not); and like it or not, sexual preference is a tap at knee-jerk 
responses almost everywhere.  If the story told itself with an 
obviously gay character, the story would then, for her and for 
readers, be about being gay, to the degree that the gay character was 
major in the story and the degree that the issue (and it is one) 
impacted the reader.  I'm guessing if it hasn't happened even subtly 
by now (and I don't think it has), it isn't going to happen more 
overtly later.  (And I may get deluged with protests:  "But it 
COULD!"  Yes, it could.  The likelihood is not very great, and I 
would see it as odd, literarily.)

I see HP as being about friendship, loyalty, courage, maturity, 
sacrifice, choice, trust, and love (maternal, fraternal, agape).  And 
here I will sign off, having exhausted myself with my own rather META 
oratory, and hoping I haven't been an utterly pompous git,

"msbeadsley"





From hpfanmatt at gmx.net  Tue Sep  2 20:41:21 2003
From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 20:41:21 -0000
Subject: Pensieves objectivity
In-Reply-To: <bitrc3+qavj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj2v9h+a0vv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79575

--- Pip!Squeak wrote:
>
> *However*, the evidence that Pensieves provide 
> objective evidence is becoming very strong. Both 
> in GoF and OOP Harry is able to wander around in 
> the scene and observe things that the person 
> whose memory it is could not have seen.
> 
> In GoF, Harry can see Mad Eye Moody's expression 
> when Moody is behind Dumbledore. In OOP, Harry 
> can read what his father was doodling on a scrap 
> of paper - despite Snape being several tables 
> away.
> 
> In both cases, the Pensieve appears to not so 
> much store the person's *memory* as use the 
> memory to access the actual event. 

I like your interpretation, but it is not the only possible one.  The
fact that the Pensieve shows portions of the event sequence that were
not directly perceived by the first observer could just as easily be
read as support for a "subjective" Pensieve.  Rather than the "actual
event," the Pensieve might be showing items filled in by the
observer's subconscious.  For instance, Snape might have physically
perceived enough to infer that James was doodling, and might have
known enough to imagine that it would be something about Lily. 
Correspondingly for Dumbledore with Moody (who was expressing enough
consternation verbally for DD to mentally fill in an image).  Indeed,
it would fit well with what we know in the RW about how perception and
illusion work if the memories held by the Pensieve were *mostly* the
product of the observer's inference and imagination.  

It also fits with JKR's portrayal of the process of transferring
memories to the Pensieve (memory as a self-contained thread plucked
from the wizard's head and deposited in the Pensieve).  It would be a
little odd for something unperceived to the observer to be stuck in
his head, unless it was created there.  And while your concept of the
memory as the key to access the actual event is attractive, it doesn't
fit neatly with the picture JKR draws of the memories floating there
on the surface of the Pensieve, waiting to be stirred up.

Getting back to the idea of gaps being filled in by the subconscious,
it is conceivable that some of the filling in might be supplied by the
person observing the memory in the Pensieve.  That would help explain
why DD says the Pensieve can be a useful tool for making connections
and seeing things that you missed the first time.  (Objective!Pensieve
also explains that statement, but arguably gives the Pensieve
inordinate power as a detective's tool: you could never whisper a
secret while sitting in the same room with someone who had access to a
Pensieve, lest she listen in on you while replaying the memory.)

-- Matt





From hardcoreukuk at yahoo.co.uk  Tue Sep  2 20:40:47 2003
From: hardcoreukuk at yahoo.co.uk (Tricia Hemans)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 20:40:47 -0000
Subject: Elixir of Life 
Message-ID: <bj2v8f+dml2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79576

Arguable: In the first book it said that by drinking the Elixir of 
Life it would make the drinker immortal, but later in the story 
Dumbledore says to Harry that the Flamel's had enough Elixir stored 
in them to set their affairs straight. But, if drinking the Elixir of 
Life makes you immortal then if you had some, you would never die, 
ever. You can't just be immortal as long as you have a certain item, 
then that would mean you could still die. You would be still mortal 
like Achilles. Immortality means you can never die.





From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 20:48:24 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 20:48:24 -0000
Subject: Hermione SHIP question
In-Reply-To: <3F535B32.000003.29535@monica>
Message-ID: <bj2vmp+85sr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79577

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" <kcawte at b...> 
wrote:
>  
>  Can one of the Hermione/Harry SHIPpers out there explain it to 
me? I don't
> see any clues towards it in the books at all. I've always thought 
that it
> was 'obvious' that the Viktor thing was a brief fling brought on 
because she
> was flattered at the way he was paying her attention while Ron 
takes her for
> granted and that eventually she and Ron will end up together. It 
seemed to
> me that that ship was obvious and that there are *no* hints at all 
of Harry
> liking Hermione as more than a friend or Hermione liking him.
> 
> I'm not trying to put the people who like this ship down - I just 
want
> someone to explain it to me - what is it that makes you think this 
is a
> possibility?
> 
> K


Well, I'm going to take a stab at this.

First, discredit the romantic implications of the R/Hr moments one 
at a time:

1 - The Yule Ball fight and the events leading up to it:  Hermione 
was offended by Ron's treating her like a last resort date and 
assuming she had no one else to go with but either Harry or Ron.  
She was fuming at his comment that he and Harry were just going to 
try and get the best looking girls they could.  Then Hermione lords 
it over Ron when he can't get a date.  (She tells him loftily that 
Eloise Midgen was looking pretty good.)  She's annoyed at him, then 
ticked that he assumed that no one else would think of her as a 
girl.  Pissed and ticked.  Now compare this to Ginny's reaction: 
Ginny looked miserable when she found out that she might have ended 
up going with Harry if she hadn't said yes to Neville.  Acting like 
a girl who has a crush on a guy.  Hermione wasn't miserable that she 
had accepted someone else, only to find that Ron might have asked 
her.  She was furious at being a last resort.  Didn't strike me as 
her being upset that Ron hadn't noticed her until then, or as an 
indication that she liked Ron.  Especially since Ron insulted her 
even more at the Yule Ball by saying that Viktor only asked her to 
get information on Harry.  Hermione seemed to be pretty taken with 
Viktor at the ball; she didn't notice her food because she was so 
deep in conversation with Viktor.  She danced with Viktor, and 
seemed to be having a good time until Ron said Viktor was using her, 
and that Hermione was fraternizing with the enemy.  Then comes the 
fight after the ball, where Hermione tells Ron that if he's so upset 
over her going to a ball with someone else, he shouldn't treat her 
as the last resort.  Not that she liked him, just he shouldn't be 
upset that she said yes to someone else before he even asked her.  
Again, her being ticked at being thought of as a last resort date by 
anyone, not necessarily by Ron.


2 -  Hermione's fury/scowl over any time Ron interacted with Fleur: 
Hermione was annoyed at Ron AND Harry whenever either of them was 
acting like, well, a hormone driven guy.  The veelas at the World 
Cup: Hermione was annoyed at Harry, then at Ron.  She had an eye-
rolling/"boys!" reaction in the top box, tutting over Ron's reaction 
and pulling Harry down with an "Honestly!"  Same "Honestly!" over 
Ron's reaction to the veela in the forest.  Then Ron goggling over 
Fleur at the feast for Durmstrang and Beauxbaton: Hermione tells Ron 
that no one is acting like an idiot over Fleur.  Then Hermione 
notices Harry noticing Cho, and tells both Ron and Harry to put 
their eyes back in.  We just see more of Ron acting like an idiot 
over girls in GoF than Harry.

Now the two specific times we saw Ron acting like an idiot over 
Fleur, Harry was there, too, also acting like an idiot.  After the 
second task, Harry is blushing (and thinks that steam should be 
coming out of his ears) after getting kissed by Fleur, and keeps 
watching Fleur as she kisses Ron.  Then he notices  Hermione's 
fury.  It seems that Hermione is ticked over Ron.  BUT look at the 
rest of the scene: Hermione is paying attention to Harry, to the 
exclusion of Viktor.  She didn't even spare a second glance for Ron 
at any other point but here.  Not just that, but she's been talking 
to Harry, congratulating him and everything, and here this upstart 
tart Fluer sweeps in, kisses Harry and then Ron on the cheek, and 
leaves as two boys are goggling over her.  Considering that Hermione 
was talking with Harry, not Ron, both before and after Fleur sweeps 
in, it seems (to me) to be more consistent with the scene that 
Hermione was furious over Harry's reaction, combined with Ron's.  
(Just from picturing the scene.  JKR makes a point of saying that 
Hermione was ignoring Viktor because she was too busy with Harry.)  
Then the ending scowl over Fleur: first glance, she seems to be 
scowling over Ron's tone of voice.  But look around it, and the 
emphasis of the scene is again on Harry: Fleur comes into talk to 
Harry, and directs all the conversation at Harry.  Harry doesn't say 
a word to Fleur; only Ron does.  Not just that, but Fleur is 
sticking her hand out towards Harry as Ron makes his comment.  What 
did Harry do with Fleur's hand?  Leave it there?  Shake it?  Give it 
a good-bye squeeze?  Who knows?  Anyways, in both of these scenes, 
Ron is in focus only because Harry was watching (probably goggling 
over) Fleur, and doesn't even notice Hermione until afterwards.  

Then in GoF, we end with a kiss on the cheek from Hermione to 
Harry.  Which mimics Fleur's behaviour of kissing the boys on the 
cheek.  And Harry notices that Hermione had never done this before.  
With this in mind, it seems much more likely that Hermione had been 
watching Harry's reaction to Fleur kissing him and talking to him, 
not Ron.  In other words, Hermione sees Harry, and Ron, reacting to 
Fleur's kiss.  Hermione gives it a go herself by kissing Harry, not 
Ron, at an important point in the book.  Not only is it the last 
page of a novel, it's the last page of the novel JKR has said is the 
pivotal book, in the chapter that JKR has said is extremely 
significant.  Not to mention the location: King's Cross Station.  
JKR has said that she finds King's Cross Station romantic, since her 
parents met there.  Not to mention all the classic movies with 
romantic good-bye scenes.

Anyway, I'll add more later (I've got so much more!), but I've got 
to get to work.
Sarah





From Calimora at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 22:08:06 2003
From: Calimora at yahoo.com (Renee Daniels)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 22:08:06 -0000
Subject: Voldemort's Age
In-Reply-To: <bj2kiq+442a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj34c6+gk63@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79578

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "severusbook4" 
<severusbook4 at y...> wrote:

> 
> Sevvie here:
> 
> In CoS. T. Riddle was 16 when the chamber was originally opened.  
50 
> + 16 = 66, now add 3 years for the current book 5, and you have LV 
> being 69 years old and about to be 70.
> 
> Just an observation.
> 
> Sevvie.

Me:

I'd tack another year on that, i got the impression that Tommy-boy 
didn't nail his father untill after he left Hogwarts, so 17+50+3=70 
or 71.

~Calimora (The dense and sinking fast)




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 21:50:02 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 21:50:02 -0000
Subject: Aiming Wand at Bellatrix Lestrange:  CRUCIO!
In-Reply-To: <bj266s+e0b0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj33aa+16b8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79579

>> "msbeadsley" wrote:  I just can't see Harry telling anyone. 

> "Jen Reese" wrote: Assuming Harry wouldn't willingly be talking to 
Percy, Fudge or Umbridge about his fight with Bellatrix, then there 
are multiple people he could safely discuss the incident with: 
Hermione, Ron, Ginny, Dumbledore, perhaps Lupin or Arthur. He doesn't 
have a track record of keeping secrets from R/H for very long(the 
contents of the prophecy remain to be seen), and DD has an uncanny 
ability to encourage Harry to discuss his burdens (the sorting hat 
considering him for Slytherin). All of the above people know about 
instances of rule-breaking and/or law-breaking by Harry and haven't 
turned traitor (yet anyway). So, I still believe there's a good 
chance Harry will confide the "crucio" to someone.  Jen

---> "msbeadsley" _realtime_:  I think Harry has been much less apt 
to share lately.  He isn't talking about much of anything:  the 
prophesy, Sirius's death, what he saw in the pensieve (including 
lying to his friends about not needing Occlumency lessons anymore), 
and there are probably several more I'm missing.  He even kept his 
financial support of Gred and Forge to himself until later in OoP.  I 
don't think Harry's as worried about the MoM finding out or even 
being considered a lawbreaker as he is just increasingly keeping his 
own counsel.  And it seems to me that DD's "uncanny ability to 
encourage Harry to discuss" may be a thing of the past.  It really 
depends on which Harry we get when Book 6 opens and where he goes 
from there.

"msbeadsley"





From eileenh28 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 21:15:32 2003
From: eileenh28 at yahoo.com (eileenh28)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 21:15:32 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter is a CHILDREN'S BOOK re: rape sexual preference 
Message-ID: <bj319k+6ian@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79580

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" <kcawte at b...> 
wrote:
>  
>  Fred Uloth said -
>  
> Now I'd like to say that *nobody* in the Harry Potter books is gay. 
> Rest assured that they are all celibate until we are told 
> otherwise. 
> 
> Me (K) -
> 
<snip>
> 
> And as for the idea that some people have suggested that putting a
> gay Character in the books would somehow be wrong because they're  
> children's books, I am always astonished when I come up against this
> level of prejudice and stupidity. 

Whee, my first (non-eaten) post!

I would like to agree with Kathryn 100%. I would also like to add 
that I'm a bit confused as to why a gay character in a "Children's 
Book" is inappropriate, but multiple murders, assaults and *tortures* 
are just hunky-dory for the kidlets to read about.

Can some of those who have strongly objected to any speculation upon 
HP characters' sexuality clear this up for me?  Why is violence 
*better* than sex? Especially when the violence is actually 
portrayed, and the sex stuff is just idle speculation?

Eileen 
Who thinks Severus was in love with *James* Potter way back in the 
day.





From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Tue Sep  2 22:13:37 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 23:13:37 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Patronuses  (was: Things...play later)
References: <bj33rn+9l5c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F551611.000001.81963@monica>

No: HPFGUIDX 79581

 
   I think people are worrying too much about the attacking abilities of the
various patronuses. Dementors work by sucking happy thought out of people. A
Patronus is the embodiment of a happy thought and thus can defeat a Dementor
 Sort of like fire and water - fire can cause water to evaporate (the
Dementor sucking out the emotions) but a concentrated amount of water will
extinguish a fire (the patronus defeating a Dementor). The power of a
Patronus is not in the particular abilities of an otter or a swan or
whatever (although I agree with whoever pointed out that Swans are big,
vicious, scary birds, trust me I live in Windsor on the Thames,  I know
whereof I speak) but in its significance to the caster. The Dementors did
not, as I understand it, retreat from Harry's patronus because it was a
large animal with big horns but because of what the stag (and therefore)
James meant to Harry. Harry's happy thought was his father who may have been
a total brat at 15 but grew up to be a brave man who died to give his wife
and child a few moments in which to escape and who loved his son very much.
*That* is what forced them to retreat - Harry's emotions regarding his
father, not the stag itself.Another example of 'love' and other positive
feelings defeating evil.

K



From rayheuer3 at aol.com  Tue Sep  2 22:20:40 2003
From: rayheuer3 at aol.com (rayheuer3 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 18:20:40 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Elixir of Life
Message-ID: <138.24898d28.2c8671b8@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79582

hardcoreukuk at yahoo.co.uk writes:

> But, if drinking the Elixir of 
> Life makes you immortal then if you had some, you would never die, 
> ever. You can't just be immortal as long as you have a certain item, 
> then that would mean you could still die. You would be still mortal 
> like Achilles. Immortality means you can never die.

I think this is just sloppy phrasing.  Drinking the Elixir *regularly* makes 
you immortal, but without it, time "catches up with you", and you wither and 
die.  I believe there was also a mention of a Mrs. Flamel, who would also be 
passing.

  --  Ray

"I plan to live forever or die in the attempt!"


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From vecseytj at tampabay.rr.com  Tue Sep  2 22:27:15 2003
From: vecseytj at tampabay.rr.com (vecseytj)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 22:27:15 -0000
Subject: green eyes and the killing curse
In-Reply-To: <31.3d594bd5.2c860d84@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bj35g3+mn09@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79583

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, furkin1712 at a... wrote:
> Wanda wrote:
> > I just don't believe that giving one's life is enough to 
> > block an AK - there are too many other instances where we 
> > would have heard of it before.  Why didn't James's sacrifice 
> > protect Lily, in that case?
> 
> "Rebecca Hoskins" wrote:
> Well, maybe the protection was not given passively by Lily dying. 
> Maybe Lily did some sort of spell or incantation before her death 
> that caused this protection to happen. Remember that we are told that 
> this is very old magic, so Lily could have looked it up. She would 
> have had reason to find some way of protecting Harry, as she knew 
> Voldemort was after him because of the prophecy.
> >>
> 
> 
> 
> Good theory, I think though that Lily's sacrifice is only a small
part of why 
> Harry lived, I think that Dumbledore didn't tell him something about
that 
> night. I think there is a secret that will yet be reveiled. Also,
can anyone 
> explain why Voldemort offered to spare Lily? Maybe that has
something to do with 
> it, he didn't want to kill her and something happened to make the
curse not 
> strong enough to kill Harry because he felt bad that he killed Lily?
Hmmm, I 
> don't know. Remember what Moody said, about you really have to want
to kill and 
> find pleasure in killing for AK to work? I think that has something
to do with 
> it.
> 
> *-Blue Eyes-*


Hi,  Just a odd sort of idea here... but, maybe LV, wanted to make
Lily suffer, (ie. see her husband and son killed) then kill or make
her live with the suffering he (LV) had inflicted on her.  REALLY
EVILLLL people like suffering... the more they cause the more they
love it.
I know a very simple idea, but, I think one that would appeal to LV.

I also kinda (just a little bit) think that Wormtail wanted her.  Ya
know like "Oh look everybody, I got James Potters wife!  Woo Hoo!
Arn't I cool"  But, just a little... 'cause it crossed my mind that
Wormtail, would *do* something like that.  But, oh well... I know...
it is more than likely something about Lily being able to have really
powerful wizard children or something... and LV wanted Lily to be his
breeding machine or something gross like that.. ick..

just odd thoughts.. I need a nap.. Tj




From Calimora at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 22:43:40 2003
From: Calimora at yahoo.com (Renee Daniels)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 22:43:40 -0000
Subject: a question about secret-keeping
In-Reply-To: <bj2267+qos1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj36es+d9j6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79584

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "yvonne_davies2002" 
> <InesitaSimpson at h...> wrote:
> > Sirius didn't transfer the secret to Peter, he persuaded James to 
> > make Peter his Secret Keeper.  Presumably, James called Sirius to 
> > Godric's Hollow when he realised they were under attack.  
> 
> Fawkes:
> I don't think the secret can be transferred...If it can, the spell 
> wouldn't be nearly as effective. Plus, it couldn't have been in 
> Sirius because he convinced the Potters to go for Peter Pettigrew 
> instead... 
> 
> Laura:
> Of course, you're both right.  I forgot the details of the switch.  
> However, the question still remains valid-since Sirius once had the 
> information, does he retain it when he is no longer secret-keeper?  
> Assuming, that is, that Yvonne's scenario didn't take place 
(although 
> it makes a lot of sense).

Me:
Nope, if secret-keeping on people is anything like secret-keeping on 
buildings then Sirius has no clue where James and Lily were and more 
importantly, it was *impossible* for Sirius to find them until Peter 
told him or the charm was broken. Just like Harry could walk up to 
Grimauld Place and not see Number 12, Sirius (and LV) could have been 
sitting with the Potters in their living room, and still not be able 
to find them.

~Calimora




From Veritas771 at hotmail.com  Tue Sep  2 22:43:14 2003
From: Veritas771 at hotmail.com (michaelkgidlow)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 22:43:14 -0000
Subject: How long are the classes?
Message-ID: <bj36e2+eu23@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79585

I always assumed a standard class was 45 minutes, but in book 5, both 
a single period and a dubble period are refered to as being one and a 
half hours long. What's up with this?




From Veritas771 at hotmail.com  Tue Sep  2 22:45:03 2003
From: Veritas771 at hotmail.com (michaelkgidlow)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 22:45:03 -0000
Subject: Vanishing spell
Message-ID: <bj36hf+4mm5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79586

Are vanishing spells permanent? When something is vanished, is it 
gone forever or is it just transfered to another place?




From Zarleycat at aol.com  Tue Sep  2 23:02:32 2003
From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 23:02:32 -0000
Subject: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj2s37+pugt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj37i8+moof@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79587

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mochajava13" 
<mochajava13 at y...> wrote:
>> Now me (Sarah):
> 
> I agree with all that has been said about Dumbledore needing to be 
> cold and calculating in order to effectively battle Voldemort.  
> However, I think Dumbledore's weakness is that he also treats some 
> people as children when they aren't (or can't be), and when he 
> should have placed adult responsibilites on them.  In other words, 
> he cares about people as a father cares for his children.  He wants 
> to protect people he cares for, but panders to their desires to 
feel 
> happy and useful.  
> 
> For example, with Harry, Dumbledore should have told Harry 
> everything.  Harry needed to know, for his own protection.  I don't 
> think the events of OoP would have changed even if Harry knew that 
> Voldemort wanted the prophecy. 

But, perhaps the combination of Harry knowing what was going on, plus 
hearing a detailed explanation about the value and nature of 
Occlumency from someone he trusted, might have made a difference. I 
know, I know, Dumbledore had to stay away from Harry  so Voldemort 
wouldn't find out when strolling through Harry's mind that the good 
guys had figured out about the connection between Harry's mind and 
Voldemort.  But, Dumbledore could have had Remus or Moody or 
McGonagall be the one to talk to Harry alone to explain all of this, 
and also explain why Snape has to be the one to teach Harry.  
Instead, Harry is informed about this (still with his relative 
knowledge vaccuum) by Snape in a tense situation.  From the start, 
Harry was unwilling and unhappy about this extra instruction.

 Hermione told Harry that Voldemort might be tricking 
> Harry, but Harry said he didn't care; he was going to go after 
> Sirius anyway.  I think that Harry would have gone after Sirius 
even 
> if he knew what the prophecy was all about.  That's Harry's nature; 
> to go after those in trouble.  Dumbledore telling Harry about the 
> prophecy and Voldemort's desire to get it wouldn't have changed 
> anything.  (Harry might have been even more likely to go after 
> Sirius in an attempt to prevent Sirius picking up the prophecy and 
> going insane.)


> And Dumbledore also treats Sirius like a child.  Dumbledore ordered 
> Sirius to stay inside Grimmauld Place, with good reason.  The death 
> eates knew of Sirius' animagus form, and would have tried to kidnap 
> Sirius just to get Harry.  Sirius was a target, and needed to stay 
> hidden.  Plus, the ministry was looking for Sirius.  Human 
disguises 
> could be seen through, 

What sort of disguises do you mean? Polyjuice Potions?  
Disillusionment Charms? Grouch Marx masks?  How long does a 
Disillusionment Charm last?  That was used on Harry when he was being 
sent to 12 Grimmauld Place from the Dursleys because of the great 
need for secrecy (although his flying wizard escorts were evidently 
perfectly visible...)

and Sirius might have been sent back to 
> Azkaban or given a dementor's kiss.  Sirius realizes this, and, for 
> the most part, complies with Dumbledore's orders to stay inside.  
> But, Dumbledore pandered to Sirius' desire to be useful and to know 
> about the fight against Voldemort.  Why keep Sirius at Grimmauld 
> Place?  True, it is very well hidden, but enchantments could have 
> been placed at a number of other locations.  However, if Sirius was 
> carted off to a different location, even if it was one Sirius 
> enjoyed being at, Sirius would be out of the loop.  He would have 
to 
> rely on messages from others.  So instead of having Sirius hide 
> somewhere else, or setting up headquarters somewhere else, 
> Dumbledore gives into Sirius' desires.  
 
As a father would, not as a 
> general would.  Dumbledore had misgivings about using Grimmauld 
> Place as headquarters, but gave into Sirius' desire to feel useful.

I think this is a stretch.  Sirius offered the house as a 
headquarters and Dumbledore accepted.  I haven't found any evidence 
that Dumbledore did this because it would make Sirius feel good. And 
Sirius indicates from the very first scene we see him that he feels 
he doesn't have anything useful to do.  

Plus, where does it say that Dumbledore had misgivings about using 12 
Grimmauld PLace?  Had Dumbledore had another place to use as 
Headquarters and insisted that Sirius stay locked up in it, I think 
Sirius would have handled it better than being locked up in the very 
house that represented everything he hated about his childhood. 


> Anyway, I think Dumbledore tries to be Macchiavellian for the 
> greater good.  (Sacrifice the few for the greater good of the 
> whole.)  But I think he fails because of his fatherly attitude 
> towards those much younger than himself.  Dumbledore tries to 
> protect too many people, instead of giving these people the 
> responsibility to look after themselves.  (Namely Harry and 
> Sirius.)  He wants to give Harry a childhood.  He wants Sirius to 
> live, really live, after being unjustly stuck in Azkaban for so 
> long.  Just my two cents.

If keeping Sirius locked up in that house was Dumbledore's idea of a 
great way for Sirius to be able to live, really live, then 
Dumbledore's not being either Macchiavellian or fatherly - he's being 
sadistic.  The only way to give Sirius a chance to live was to find 
Pettigrew and bring him to justice.  We heard not a peep about that 
in OoP because everyone was so busy with the prophecy stuff. 

I think your points are quite valide with Harry, but I just don't see 
it with Sirius.

Marianne






From helen at odegard.com  Tue Sep  2 23:08:59 2003
From: helen at odegard.com (Helen R. Granberry)
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 16:08:59 -0700
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Droobles Blowing Gum - Not Anagram
In-Reply-To: <bj2n17+6n9v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000001c371a7$31867b80$6401a8c0@helenw1>

No: HPFGUIDX 79588


>kneazelkid:
> Your post reminded me of an X-Files episode. A kid was putting 
> together a bunch of paper all over the floor. Up close, it looked 
> like drivel, but when you looked down at it from the second story, 
a 
> picture of a face was formed. This reminded me of the comment 
(sorry, 
> no book with me here) Nevile's gram made about how he could paper 
his 
> wall with all those wrappers. What if Nevile actually did paper his 
> wall with the wrappers -- and marks his mother had been making on 
> them revealed something?
> I know the wrappers could just be a sad statement about Nevile's 
love 
> for his mom, but something about it sticks in my head.
> Thoughts, anyone?
> Kneazelkid

This thought definitely occurred to me when Neville's gran mentioned he
could paper his room with the wrappers. I don't think it was a throwaway
line, I think it meant something. It is hard for me to keep up with the
list these days, but from what I have seen of SILK GOWNS, it sounds
entirely plausible. Maybe Neville *will* paper his room... and maybe he
will find a message. 

Helen

 




From Zarleycat at aol.com  Tue Sep  2 23:12:24 2003
From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 23:12:24 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter is a CHILDREN'S BOOK re: rape  sexual preference
In-Reply-To: <3F547734.000001.11037@monica>
Message-ID: <bj384o+i3sj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79589

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" <kcawte at b...> 
wrote:
>  
>  Fred Uloth said -
>  
> Now I'd like to say that *nobody* in the Harry Potter books is gay. 
Rest 
> assured that they are all celibate until we are told otherwise. 
> 
> Me (K) -
> 
> OK now while I agree that 'onscreen' (so to speak) they will all 
remain
> celibate I hardly think it's realistic to believe that all the 
characters
> are celibate. 

Regretful Snipping of good stuff

> And as for the idea that some people have suggested that putting a 
gay
> character in the books would somehow be wrong because they're 
children's
> books, I am always astonished when I come up against this level of 
prejudice
> and stupidity. No one is suggesting that JKR suddenly write Hasrry 
Potter -
> the *adult* version with hot Remus/Sirius (or whoever) sex 
scenes ...
> although there'd certainly be a market for it <weg>. But a gay 
couple acting
> in the same way we see the het couples acting (the obvious 
affection between
> Molly and Arthur, the Harry/Cho kiss, the pre-ball angst and the 
dancing at
> the ball etc) wouldn't in any way make the books less suitable for 
children.
> I *hate* this idea that gay people are something that should be 
hidden away
> from children in some way. Love and affection between people are 
(imo) a
> blessing and should be celebrated whatever form they take.
> 
> K

I find it odd that the potential presence of gays in what many 
consider a children's book is considered by some to be taboo.  Even 
the thought of off-screen gays.  But having Harry witness the cold-
blooded murder of a schoolmate in one book and then have him witness 
the death/murder/manslaughter (your choice) of his godfather in the 
next book hardly raises an eyebrow. 

Marianne
 




From Malady579 at hotmail.com  Tue Sep  2 23:12:09 2003
From: Malady579 at hotmail.com (Melody)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 23:12:09 -0000
Subject: Umbridge????
In-Reply-To: <bj2s45+ji7j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj3849+v3fs@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79590

Joe wrote about the centaurs raping Umbridge:

> I would think 
> that she would have come back yelling about how they should get rid 
> of centaurs because they are uncivilized and dangerous, but she came 
> back and was instead in shock even though it APPEARED that there was 
> no physical damage done.  Now what could the centaurs have done to 
> her to put her in this state of shock without doing any obvious 
> physical damage to her?  When the nurse examined Umbridge she may not 
> have seen any physical damage but it could have been there. 


First: the punishment does not really fit the crime, in my opinion,
but I want to point something out.

Centaurs are men from the waist up.  Therefore, they are horses in the
area that matters here.  Now, it is said in history, and I am sure
some interesting porns, that women can have sex with horses.  

Now, this is Umbridge.  We have no record that she is married or has a
boyfriend or even a gentleman caller for at least a year.  Given her
passion and sheer lust after her "job" at Hogwarts, that is equaled by
Filch's who is probably not getting any either (and she is not getting
together with a squib...though she could...), so what I am getting at
is...she is rather tight.  Hey, if we are going to discuss this, I
want to get facts on the table.

So, we have a tight woman, possible virgin, who we have suggested is
being raped by essentially *horses*.  She *is* going to be torn.  And
split.  And bleeding.  Period.  A nurse would find that.  We have no
reason to think Madame Pomfrey is a sub-par nurse.  She has always
been rather good at what she does.  But there is no bandages.  No
special pillows.  No hush curtains.  The kids can see and interact
with her.  If she was raped, then I think they would have been more
delicate with her.  Also she would have had torn clothes, and the fact
there were witnesses seeing Dumbledore carrying her out and nothing
was said of her being half-naked, so seems to me she was not gang raped. 

Maybe, politely gang raped, but really.  You think so?  As much as
they hate humans?

So really, I say the evidence presented does not say she was raped. 
Mentally screwed over yes, but not physically.  


Melody




From thomasmwall at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 23:12:55 2003
From: thomasmwall at yahoo.com (Tom Wall)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 23:12:55 -0000
Subject: Special Qualities of Auror Magic?
Message-ID: <bj385n+10ac6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79591

After rereading the *beginning* of OoP (I've already read and re-
read the end about a bazillion times,) I noticed something odd in 
Ch.3, "The Advance Guard:" the only people who use magic at Privet 
Drive in this chapter (of which we know) are Tonks and Moody - the 
Aurors.

"Why are we all standing in the dark?" said a third voice, this one 
completely unfamiliar, a woman's. "Lumos." (OoP, US hardcover, Ch.3, 
p47)

"Don't be stupid, it'll be much quicker if I ? pack!" (ibid, p53)

"That could do with a bit of cleaning, too ? Scourgify ?" (ibid, p53)

"Okay, let's go. Locomotor Trunk." (ibid, p53)

In addition, there's Moody's use of the Disillusionment Charm on 
Harry (p54), and Moody's unlocking of the back door. (ibid)

Of course, thanks to Tonks, we know that the Aurors 
learn "Concealment and Disguise," and "Stealth and Tracking" during 
their training. (ibid, p52) Perhaps there is some kind of skill 
involved with these classes that make one's very *spells* stealthy. 
It seems reasonable to me that this would be a valuable attribute to 
possess... since detection in the Aurors' line of work could have 
deadly consequences. 

But, do you think that they'd be taught how to keep their magic 
undetectable even to the Ministry itself?

As we know, use of *any* magic at Harry's house has classically been 
detected by the Ministry of Magic ? first, we have Dobby's use of a 
hover charm in CoS, which illustrates that it is not just *wizard* 
magic that the Ministry is detecting. Then we have Harry's 
accidental blowing up of Aunt Marge in PoA. Finally, in OoP, we have 
Harry's use of the Patronus Charm, which results in his Hearing at 
the Ministry of Magic. Yet, here is a case where magic is used at 
least six times, and we hear nothing to the effect that the Ministry 
has detected it.

Arthur also uses magic on Privet Drive in GoF, when the Weasleys are 
picking Harry up before the Quidditch World Cup (QWC.) As far as we 
know, Harry didn't get another warning in this case, but I'd suggest 
that any problems derived from this could be easily explained away 
by Arthur himself ? after all, Fudge personally sees Harry in the 
Top Box at the QWC.

One problem I have with this idea, in general, is Mundungus' 
Apparation and Disapparation on Privet Drive. I can't figure out why 
this wouldn't be detected, nor (since Harry has been under 
surveillance all summer) why the possible Apparation and 
Disapparation of the *other* members of the Order wasn't detected 
either. 

Of course, Dumbledore might know how to keep magic from being 
detected as well... that man's always full of surprises. ;-)

-Tom





From sydenmill at msn.com  Tue Sep  2 23:14:33 2003
From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 23:14:33 -0000
Subject: Of Pensieves and Memory Diaries 
Message-ID: <bj388p+qrh8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79592



1.  What would happen if Snape or Dumbledore accidently dropped the 
Pensieve when transferring it from the cabinet/table and broke it, 
like the prophecies that got broken in the Department of Mysteries?
All the memories that had been placed there would cease to exist, 
wouldn't they? (I am assuming that when Snape put his memory of The 
Lake Incident into the Pensieve, he no longer could remember it 
himself. He had transferred it for safekeeping.) 

2.  Which, MOL leads me to my next question: What would happen if the 
Pensieve were to get broken while Harry happened to be inside it on 
one of his visits? Would he be stuck in that particular memory for 
all eternity or would he pop right back to the present when the 
vessel broke since he did not belong to that time?

3.  Same questions for memory diaries like the one Tom Riddle created 
to "preserve his 16-year-old-self." If the diary had been destroyed 
while Harry was witnessing Hagrid's downfall at the hands of Tom 
Riddle, would he have been stuck there?

4.  What would happen if Harry happened to be in the Pensieve looking 
over, say, one of Snape's memories and for whatever reason, Snape 
were to die? In each instance where Harry paid a visit to someone 
else's memory, the owner of the memory came down into the memory and 
physically retrieved Harry to the present. If the owner of the memory 
were to die, how would Harry get back out of the memory? Remember, in 
Dumbledore's memory of the trials, Harry could no longer see the 
Pensieve "hole" in the ceiling -- all he saw was smooth ceiling. 
Serious creeps.

Thanks in advance for your theories and thoughts on these questions!

With apologies if I missed the first 1200 discussions of this subject,

Bohcoo




From sydenmill at msn.com  Tue Sep  2 23:22:11 2003
From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 23:22:11 -0000
Subject: Things that will come into play later
In-Reply-To: <000a01c36fdf$817403c0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
Message-ID: <bj38n3+i46g@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79593

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mom31" <mom31 at r...> wrote:
> Was Hermione's otter a clue like Sirius's code name "snuffles" 
(snuffed out)?  Add a P to otter, and what do you get?>  


Sorry for the huge snip here -- your post was fabulous and I loved 
every word of it -- but I only have a burning comment to add to your 
above comment:

When I read that Hermoine's Patronus was an otter I immediately 
thought of OTTER-y St. Catchpole, Ron's hometown.

And, I must admit, I had smutty thoughts on the Catch-POLE part, too.

Big grins,
Bohcoo




From siriuslove71 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 23:32:12 2003
From: siriuslove71 at yahoo.com (Diana_Sirius_fan)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 23:32:12 -0000
Subject: Things that will come into play later
In-Reply-To: <bj38n3+i46g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj399s+f1vt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79594

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bohcoo" <sydenmill at m...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mom31" <mom31 at r...> wrote:
> > Was Hermione's otter a clue like Sirius's code name "snuffles" 
> (snuffed out)?  Add a P to otter, and what do you get?>  
> 
> bohcoo wrote:
> 
> When I read that Hermoine's Patronus was an otter I immediately 
> thought of OTTER-y St. Catchpole, Ron's hometown.
> 
> And, I must admit, I had smutty thoughts on the Catch-POLE part, 
too.
> 
> Big grins,
> Bohcoo

Now Me:   I really like both of these ideas but...  JK has mentioned 
in interviews before that her very favorite animal is the otter.  So, 
I think since Hermoine is a character sorta based on JK herself, she 
had to make H's patronus be an otter.  

Diana




From yswahl at stis.net  Wed Sep  3 00:15:00 2003
From: yswahl at stis.net (samnanya)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 00:15:00 -0000
Subject: Hermione SHIP question
In-Reply-To: <3F54D215.000001.98015@monica>
Message-ID: <bj3bq4+eat7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79595

Kathryn Cawte
For all Hermione's ability to see where Harry and Cho are going
wrong, her learning is all book learning. She's not very good at all 
this emotional and romantic stuff. She had trouble making friends in 
PS and I think she is basically insecure, especially when it come to 
dealing with people rather than academic problems.

me -
Ahh but she is getting much better ..... Luna was talking about the 
Crumple-Horned Snorkack (OotP Pge 848) "Hermione seemed to struggle 
with herself for a moment, then said, "That sounds lovely."

Uhhh... Hermione, isn't this the same Luna you crossed swords with so 
many times before? {and as an aside, note that "ginny caught Harry's 
eye and looked away quickly, grinning" as if JKR wanted to give a 
contrast in maturity level....}

Also notice who gets in the last words of the story.

and in the end, as with any theory, SHIP or otherwise, you can read 
into this whatever you want to, and these comments mean nothing unless 
they don't  

samnanya {who has a life, as well as loves puzzles, especially 
involving plot points and character development}  




From sydenmill at msn.com  Wed Sep  3 00:16:44 2003
From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 00:16:44 -0000
Subject: Apparating/ Disapparating
In-Reply-To: <bj1ckm+lfvu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj3btc+dm5v@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79596

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
 
> So that's my theory. In a nutshell, the intensity of sound is
> proportional to the intensity of effort it took to apparate.
> 
> Just a thought.
> 
> bboy_mn


Bohcoo responds:

Which would explain why Mundungus's Disapparation on Harry's street 
at the beginning of OOP sounded like a gunshot or a car backfiring 
that the entire neighborhood heard. He was drinking at the time and 
I'm guessing that if it is hard to WALK when one is drunk. . . well.

Thanks! Steve. You always come up with the most reasonable and 
logical explanations for these types of things. 

Regards,
Bohcoo





From Malady579 at hotmail.com  Wed Sep  3 00:21:09 2003
From: Malady579 at hotmail.com (Melody)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 00:21:09 -0000
Subject: Special Qualities of Auror Magic?
In-Reply-To: <bj385n+10ac6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj3c5l+t818@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79597

Tom pointed out:
> I noticed something odd in 
> Ch.3, "The Advance Guard:" the only people who use magic at Privet 
> Drive in this chapter (of which we know) are Tonks and Moody - the 
> Aurors.

so he asked: 
> But, do you think that they'd be taught how to keep their magic 
> undetectable even to the Ministry itself?
> 
> As we know, use of *any* magic at Harry's house has classically been 
> detected by the Ministry of Magic ? first, we have Dobby's use of a 
> hover charm in CoS, which illustrates that it is not just *wizard* 
> magic that the Ministry is detecting. Then we have Harry's 
> accidental blowing up of Aunt Marge in PoA. Finally, in OoP, we have 
> Harry's use of the Patronus Charm, which results in his Hearing at 
> the Ministry of Magic. 

Um.  Most all of those happened in the house, I agree, but Harry did
the patronus in an alley.  He was not even on Privet Drive.  So they
are more than tracking his house in that instance.  They are tracking
the area.  Or is it just him?  Can they track individuals?  Obviously
not, it they can accuse Harry of levitating the sugarplum confection.

So they are tracking the area.  But for what exactly?

Now, we know Umbridge sent those dementors.  She wants to capture
Harry doing magic. 

We know Harry doing magic has registered somewhere for the MoM to
punish.  We know that a house elf's magic has registered somewhere for
the MoM.  We also assume that no adult magic has ever registered in
the MoM or worried them.  Not that the adult magic is that amazing,
since Harry's patronus is highly advanced for his stage, but it
registered.

As you pointed out, Mundungus apparated before and after the "patronus
incident".  And he is not that skilled at it since his apparating
creating a "loud crack".  Now if they *really* wanted to get Harry,
they could have tacked on apparating to his "crimes".  But seems they
did not hear that.  They were not listening.


> Arthur also uses magic on Privet Drive in GoF, when the Weasleys are 
> picking Harry up before the Quidditch World Cup (QWC.) As far as we 
> know, Harry didn't get another warning in this case, but I'd suggest 
> that any problems derived from this could be easily explained away 
> by Arthur himself ? after all, Fudge personally sees Harry in the 
> Top Box at the QWC.

Harry was on his good side at that time.  I think they were just not
listening.  And that is what I see happening here.  I mean, if they
can really track one wizard and the area just around him (i.e. they
can accuse Harry of magic when it was Dobby a few feet away), then I
think they can track say...Sirius.

But they do not put his little name, or a hair sample, or whatever
they need to track his magic.  They seem to not be able to track him
in that method.  To take this up a step, if they can track a person,
then seems to me that Dumbledore can track Voldemort.  Track when he
does magic.  And if that is also true, then they can track the DE's
back in the day when the MoM wanted to catch them and capture them
when they do an Unforgivable.

So seems to me, that once you get off Moderated Status, your magic is
untrackable.  :D

The adults have passed the status.  They cannot be rewatched.  Maybe
is a something along the lines that once a magic child is born, they
are in a special state until they move on when they graduate.  That is
why the MoM can track Hagrid.  He never graduated.

Which could also be why they heard the house elf.  His magic was never
approved.

-or-

Dobby wanted Harry to be kicked out.  So he ran to the MoM and told
them Harry did magic, a sort of, anonymous tip.  Possible.  I like the
other one better though. 

 
> Of course, Dumbledore might know how to keep magic from being 
> detected as well... that man's always full of surprises. ;-)

That is completely possible.  The man has style.  :D


Melody




From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Wed Sep  3 00:26:29 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 00:26:29 -0000
Subject: Umbridge????
In-Reply-To: <bj2s45+ji7j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj3cfl+26i9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79598

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubs99111" <cubs9911 at a...> 
wrote:
> Me (Joe):  When I first read the book, the idea that Umbridge could 
have 
> been raped did not come in to my head for a minute, however when I 
> read the posts about this and re-read that chapter I started to 
think 
> that maybe she was raped.  The reason that I think it could be 
> possible is because she is just sitting there completly in shock.

Being in shock due to a kidnapping does not equal rape.
  
> she came 
> back and was instead in shock even though it APPEARED that there 
was 
> no physical damage done.  Now what could the centaurs have done to 
> her to put her in this state of shock without doing any obvious 
> physical damage to her?

But rape does cause physical damage, especially gang rape. And don't
forget that the WW medical system is a lot more advanced than ours
(e.g. they mend broken bones in a second). If it happened, it would
be diagnosed.

>  Now I'm not saying that I even 
> believe that JKR was trying to infer that Umbridge was raped but I 
am 
> definitly leaving the possiblity open.  

Since JKR is the author, she is in charge of the contents and what
happened, whether we like it or not. I don't believe that rape
was her intent. Not only does it not fit with the story, it would
seem extremely strange as the story implies that Umbridge got what
she deserved (note the satisfaction by everyone at Umbridge's fate). 
I don't believe for a moment that it would be JKR's
intent to present rape as due punishment, even for someone like
Umbridge.

Of course, you could add your own details to it, but I prefer to
let JKR tell her story, even when I don't like her choices
(e.g. I would like Harry and Hermione to fall in love, but
JKR is clearly leading us to a Ron/Hermione relationship), and
rape simply does not have a place there - unless presented as
a horrible crime (and Umbridge's treatment was not presented as such).

Salit





From lupinwolf2001 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 00:41:51 2003
From: lupinwolf2001 at yahoo.com (lupinwolf2001)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 00:41:51 -0000
Subject: Droobles Blowing Gum - Not Anagram
In-Reply-To: <000001c371a7$31867b80$6401a8c0@helenw1>
Message-ID: <bj3dcf+10f5u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79599

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Helen R. Granberry" 
<helen at o...> wrote:
> 
> >kneazelkid:
> > Your post reminded me of an X-Files episode. A kid was putting 
> > together a bunch of paper all over the floor. Up close, it looked 
> > like drivel, but when you looked down at it from the second 
story, 
> a 
> > picture of a face was formed. This reminded me of the comment 
> (sorry, 
> > no book with me here) Nevile's gram made about how he could paper 
> his 
> > wall with all those wrappers. What if Nevile actually did paper 
his 
> > wall with the wrappers -- and marks his mother had been making on 
> > them revealed something?
> > I know the wrappers could just be a sad statement about Nevile's 
> love 
> > for his mom, but something about it sticks in my head.
> > Thoughts, anyone?
> > Kneazelkid
> 
> This thought definitely occurred to me when Neville's gran 
mentioned he
> could paper his room with the wrappers. I don't think it was a 
throwaway
> line, I think it meant something. It is hard for me to keep up with 
the
> list these days, but from what I have seen of SILK GOWNS, it sounds
> entirely plausible. Maybe Neville *will* paper his room... and 
maybe he
> will find a message. 
> 
> Helen

This isn't anything related to the books but more along the idea that 
you are presenting. In New York and the ESPN zone you see a TON of 
baseball cards (from different eras) all attached to the wall... as 
you move further away, the colors and cards used masterfully become a 
VERY clear picture of Babe Ruth. Problem is, this would be a tough 
thing to get across as a mystery plot in literature. Visual mediums 
maybe... but as for reading/writing this type of effect... Tough!




From tahewitt at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 00:43:59 2003
From: tahewitt at yahoo.com (Tyler Hewitt)
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 17:43:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: pumpkin pasties
In-Reply-To: <1062544190.9048.72121.m17@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030903004359.27386.qmail@web14208.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79600

JDR asks
...are pumpkin pasties just pumpkin pies?


ME:
A trivial matter, but the only one I feel motivated to
discuss at the moment.

Pasties are small hand-held pies, similar to a calzone
(maybe a little smaller). I've never seen them in the
U.S. outside of northern Michigan, where they seem to
exist solely to feed tourists. The 'classic' pastie is
filled with a beef stew-like mixture, but other
varieties are available.

When I was in Britain this summer, I ate pasties in
York and Edinburgh. Again, they may only exist to feed
tourists, but they were so good! And they came in many
more varieties than I've ever seen in the states. The
shop in York must have had 30 different varieties.

I've always pictured pumpkin pasties being like
pumpkin pies, but I suppose they could be savory and
not sweet. Pumpkin is a pretty versatile ingredient.
At any rate, they sound yummy, I love anything with
pumpkin in it!

OK, enough frivolity. Back to discussing the Sorting
Hat's sexual orientation!

Tyler


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From meltowne at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 00:49:49 2003
From: meltowne at yahoo.com (meltowne)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 00:49:49 -0000
Subject: Lexicon -Flying Broom and Motorcycle
In-Reply-To: <bipft0+c6d1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj3drd+9nm2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79601

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:

> In my wild imagination, I have speculated that a somewhat small
> leading edge dome of windscreen builds up in front of the broom, and
> expands as the broom goes faster. It still unbelievably windy, but 
if
> you are lying flat on your broom, it does offer some reasonable
> protection from the wind. That would make the broom's top 
speed 'drag
> limited' by the windscreen. (my guess top=200mph; actual top speed
> without the windscreen, close to 250mph.)

I suspect with windscreen would be faster - a magical windscreen 
could easily be aerodynamic, while the body of the rider would not 
be, and would thus produce greater drag.

Melinda




From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Wed Sep  3 00:53:56 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 01:53:56 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: pumpkin pasties
References: <20030903004359.27386.qmail@web14208.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3F553BA4.000001.75005@monica>

No: HPFGUIDX 79602

 
 
 Tyler

A trivial matter, but the only one I feel motivated to
discuss at the moment.
 
Pasties are small hand-held pies, similar to a calzone
(maybe a little smaller). I've never seen them in the
U.S. outside of northern Michigan, where they seem to
exist solely to feed tourists. The 'classic' pastie is
filled with a beef stew-like mixture, but other
varieties are available.

 
K -

Actually while the most common pasties (which are Cornish btw) are savoury
minced beef and veg the 'traditional' pasty was half this sort of filling
and half apple (for dessert). they were provided by wives for their miner
husbands in Cornwall, being filling and east to eat by hand. Traditionally a
corner would be thrown to appease the uh I forget what their called, little
mine demon thingies, similar to the European Kobolds.

Anyway my point (yes I did have one) is that they can be either savoury or
sweet. Specialist shops, especially in Cornwall, sell many, many varieties
now including sweet ones like blackberry and apple.

End of pointless history lesson.

K



From steve at hp-lexicon.org  Wed Sep  3 01:08:11 2003
From: steve at hp-lexicon.org (hp_lexicon)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 01:08:11 -0000
Subject: Vanishing spell
In-Reply-To: <bj36hf+4mm5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj3etr+afc6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79603

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "michaelkgidlow" 
<Veritas771 at h...> wrote:
> Are vanishing spells permanent? When something is vanished, is it 
> gone forever or is it just transfered to another place?

>From everything we can tell, Vanishing transfers something to 
another place. There is an entire page about Vanishing Magic in the 
Lexicon if you want to read up on it. It connects Vanish with 
Apparating and Splinching (remember Ron's wiggling mouse tail?). It 
also talks about Invisibility spells. 

I don't remember the URL of the page off the top of my head, but if 
you go to the Magic link on any Lexicon page, you'll find links 
there to various types of magic including Vanishing.

Steve Vander Ark
The Harry Potter Lexicon




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Wed Sep  3 01:16:22 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 01:16:22 -0000
Subject: Aiming Wand at Bellatrix Lestrange:  CRUCIO!
In-Reply-To: <bj33aa+16b8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj3fd6+f52s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79604

> ---> "msbeadsley" _realtime_:  I think Harry has been much less apt 
> to share lately.  He isn't talking about much of anything:  the 
> prophesy, Sirius's death, what he saw in the pensieve (including 
> lying to his friends about not needing Occlumency lessons anymore), 
> and there are probably several more I'm missing.  He even kept his 
> financial support of Gred and Forge to himself until later in OoP.  
I 
> don't think Harry's as worried about the MoM finding out or even 
> being considered a lawbreaker as he is just increasingly keeping 
his 
> own counsel.  And it seems to me that DD's "uncanny ability to 
> encourage Harry to discuss" may be a thing of the past.  It really 
> depends on which Harry we get when Book 6 opens and where he goes 
> from there.
> 
> "msbeadsley"


Jen: Yes, what you say is true.  I believe a core universal theme in 
the series, as Harry ages, is that of the "student becoming the 
master." Believing that theme, it naturally follows that Harry won't 
continue confiding in others to the same extent. Instead he is 
inwardly acknowledging the unique and solitary role he plays in this 
battle. 

Even though Harry is in lonely position at the moment, solidified by 
his current interpretation of the prophecy, I hope the group at the 
train station and his scene with Luna were foreshadowing of a 
different Harry in Book 6--one who can join the opposing ideas of 
individuation and intimacy/connection. If he is indeed the one with 
the power to *vanquish* the Dark Lord, then he definitely needs a few 
friends covering his back! Jen




From wsherratt3338 at rogers.com  Wed Sep  3 01:27:50 2003
From: wsherratt3338 at rogers.com (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 01:27:50 -0000
Subject: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj37i8+moof@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj3g2m+m9hv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79605

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kiricat2001" <Zarleycat at a...> 
wrote:
> If keeping Sirius locked up in that house was Dumbledore's idea of 
a 
> great way for Sirius to be able to live, really live, then 
> Dumbledore's not being either Macchiavellian or fatherly - he's 
being 
> sadistic.  The only way to give Sirius a chance to live was to 
find 
> Pettigrew and bring him to justice.  We heard not a peep about 
that 
> in OoP because everyone was so busy with the prophecy stuff. 
> 
> I think your points are quite valide with Harry, but I just don't 
see 
> it with Sirius.
> 
I understand that people who didn't want Sirius to die might think 
that Dumbledore has the broadest shoulders so he should carry the 
heaviest blame, but I just don't see it.  "Sadistic" is a pretty 
extreme word.  Umbridge is sadistic; I don't see how any reasonable 
person can class Dumbledore with her.  I don't even see exactly why 
he was being so apologetic at the end of OotP.  I wouldn't have 
been, especially not to a loud-mouthed, self-righteous brat like 
Harry.  For every suggestion that Dumbledore should have done this, 
or should have done that, there is at least a very good objection 
that such a course of action would have led to disaster.  I don't 
think he did anything without good reason, and it's strange to hear 
people dismiss his actions as if the right course was so plain and 
easy to see, that he must have been stupid or evil to have done 
anything else.  I think his plan was a perfectly good one, and it's 
not exactly his fault that Harry and Sirius thought they knew better 
and tried something else.  Their plans didn't work out any better 
than his, so why is he the only one apologizing at the end?  Maybe 
because he's the only one with the guts to admit that he isn't 
always right and always perfect; it would be refreshing to hear 
something remotely similar coming from Harry for a change.

Wanda





From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 01:59:42 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 01:59:42 -0000
Subject: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj3g2m+m9hv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj3hue+50k9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79606

 In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kiricat2001" <Zarleycat at a...> 
> wrote:
> > If keeping Sirius locked up in that house was Dumbledore's idea 
of 
> a 
> > great way for Sirius to be able to live, really live, then 
> > Dumbledore's not being either Macchiavellian or fatherly - he's 
> being 
> > sadistic.  The only way to give Sirius a chance to live was to 
> find 
> > Pettigrew and bring him to justice.  We heard not a peep about 
> that 
> > in OoP because everyone was so busy with the prophecy stuff. 
> > 
> >  "Wanda Sherratt" <wsherratt3338 at r...> wrote:

> I understand that people who didn't want Sirius to die might think 
> that Dumbledore has the broadest shoulders so he should carry the 
> heaviest blame, but I just don't see it.  "Sadistic" is a pretty 
> extreme word.  Umbridge is sadistic; I don't see how any reasonable 
> person can class Dumbledore with her.  I don't even see exactly why 
> he was being so apologetic at the end of OotP.  I wouldn't have 
> been, especially not to a loud-mouthed, self-righteous brat like 
> Harry.  For every suggestion that Dumbledore should have done this, 
> or should have done that, there is at least a very good objection 
> that such a course of action would have led to disaster.  I don't 
> think he did anything without good reason, and it's strange to hear 
> people dismiss his actions as if the right course was so plain and 
> easy to see, that he must have been stupid or evil to have done 
> anything else.  I think his plan was a perfectly good one, and it's 
> not exactly his fault that Harry and Sirius thought they knew 
better 
> and tried something else.  Their plans didn't work out any better 
> than his, so why is he the only one apologizing at the end?  Maybe 
> because he's the only one with the guts to admit that he isn't 
> always right and always perfect; it would be refreshing to hear 
> something remotely similar coming from Harry for a change.
> 
> Wanda

Laura:

The thing that's disappointing about DD in OoP is his utter lack of 
understanding of human psychology.  That's where he fails, and that's 
what leads to Harry's rescue mission and Sirius's death.  DD has 
always been shown before as someone with a great deal of empathy.  
His unstinting support of Snape is a good example-he understands the 
conflicts Snape faces and the choices he's made, and he shows it.  He 
is very clear on what motivates people like Lucius and Fudge and he 
knows how to deal with them.  But when it comes to Harry and Sirius 
in book 5, it all falls apart.  He makes exactly the same mistake 
with both of them-as Harry says, people don't like to be locked up.  
The cage Harry is in is a virual one-it's the ignorance of the 
situation that DD has forced on him.  And as for Sirius, well, we all 
know how he felt about Grimmauld Place.  Maybe DD had sound reasoning 
behind his decisions about how to treat H&S.  But once he put his 
theory into practice he had to see how destructive and counter-
productive it was.  The fault is his-not Harry's, not Sirius's.




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 02:05:53 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 02:05:53 -0000
Subject: Pensieves objectivity
In-Reply-To: <bj2v9h+a0vv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj3ia1+9r5v@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79607

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Matt" <hpfanmatt at g...> wrote:
> --- Pip!Squeak wrote:
> >
> > *However*, the evidence that Pensieves provide 
> > objective evidence is becoming very strong. Both 
> > in GoF and OOP Harry is able to wander around in 
> > the scene and observe things that the person 
> > whose memory it is could not have seen.
> > 
> > In GoF, Harry can see Mad Eye Moody's expression 
> > when Moody is behind Dumbledore. In OOP, Harry 
> > can read what his father was doodling on a scrap 
> > of paper - despite Snape being several tables 
> > away.
> > 
> > In both cases, the Pensieve appears to not so 
> > much store the person's *memory* as use the 
> > memory to access the actual event. 
> 
> I like your interpretation, but it is not the only possible one.  
The
> fact that the Pensieve shows portions of the event sequence that 
were
> not directly perceived by the first observer could just as easily be
> read as support for a "subjective" Pensieve.  Rather than 
the "actual
> event," the Pensieve might be showing items filled in by the
> observer's subconscious.  For instance, Snape might have physically
> perceived enough to infer that James was doodling, and might have
> known enough to imagine that it would be something about Lily. 
> Correspondingly for Dumbledore with Moody (who was expressing enough
> consternation verbally for DD to mentally fill in an image).  
Indeed,
> it would fit well with what we know in the RW about how perception 
and
> illusion work if the memories held by the Pensieve were *mostly* the
> product of the observer's inference and imagination.  <snip>
> -- Matt
Laura (having a prolific day, apparently):

The thing I don't understand about the objective!pensieve theory is 
why we would call what appears in one a memory.  As I would define 
it, a memory is a personal version of a past event.  It's not just 
the factual event itself but how the person experiencing it felt 
about the event.  It's not a videorecording.  I just can't believe, 
for instance, that if you saw James's or Sirius's memories of 
Pensieve 2, they would be exactly the same as what we saw in Snape's 
memory.  




From annemehr at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 02:19:44 2003
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 02:19:44 -0000
Subject: Hermione's Patronus (Was:Re: Things that will come into play later.)
In-Reply-To: <bj2rjl+2lpg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj3j40+eh7c@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79608

mochajava13 wrote:
> Snip 
> > Also, I thought Hermione and Cho's patronuses (however you 
> > pluralize that word) were so girly and cutesy.<BIG snip>
> > What was with Hermione's otter?

Pip!Squeak:
> A River Otter could get up a fair amount of speed when running 
> towards a Dementor, and would probably try and bite it to death.
> 
> They are very playful creatures, which is interesting, because it 
> implies Hermione is playful underneath.
<snip>

Annemehr:
Yes.  Playful creatures. *Joyful* creatures. ANATHEMA to Dementors!

You're right, Pip, it would be Otters 1, Dementors 0.  I don't think 
biting would even come into it.

I wonder what Hermione's happiest thoughts would be?  Finding out 
she's a witch?  That Harry and Ron figured out it was a basilisk?  
That H & R buried the hatchet after the First Task?  Or imprisoning 
Rita S. in a jar?

Annemehr
realising there's WAY too much stuff that *needs* to be written to 
fit into two measly books...(yes -- 700 pages each would be measly)




From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 02:24:54 2003
From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 02:24:54 -0000
Subject: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj3g2m+m9hv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj3jdm+3stt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79609

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Wanda Sherratt" 
<wsherratt3338 at r...> wrote:
 I understand that people who didn't want Sirius to die might think 
> that Dumbledore has the broadest shoulders so he should carry the 
> heaviest blame, but I just don't see it.  "Sadistic" is a pretty 
> extreme word.  Umbridge is sadistic; I don't see how any reasonable 
> person can class Dumbledore with her.  I don't even see exactly why 
> he was being so apologetic at the end of OotP.  I wouldn't have 
> been, especially not to a loud-mouthed, self-righteous brat like 
> Harry.  For every suggestion that Dumbledore should have done this, 
> or should have done that, there is at least a very good objection 
> that such a course of action would have led to disaster.  I don't 
> think he did anything without good reason, and it's strange to hear 
> people dismiss his actions as if the right course was so plain and 
> easy to see, that he must have been stupid or evil to have done 
> anything else.  I think his plan was a perfectly good one, and it's 
> not exactly his fault that Harry and Sirius thought they knew 
better 
> and tried something else.  Their plans didn't work out any better 
> than his, so why is he the only one apologizing at the end?  Maybe 
> because he's the only one with the guts to admit that he isn't 
> always right and always perfect; it would be refreshing to hear 
> something remotely similar coming from Harry for a change.
> 
> Wanda

I was about to send my message  and then I read Laura's post, which I 
think sums it up perfectly.

Yes, I think that Dumbledore should bear a heaviest blame. As Laura 
said, he demonstrated  complete lack of understanding of human 
psychology. I expected better of him. I liked him a lot before OoP. I 
dreaded the thought of his possible death before OoP. Now I think 
that Minerva McGonagall would be a more capable leader.

His plan in regard to Sirius was a perfectly good one? Please allow 
me to disagree VERY strongly. Sirius run away from this place when he 
was a child. I think that in Azkaban he was also hunted by the 
memories of his chidlhood, not only Potters' death. I think it is 
safe to assume that he was trying to forget about this house for a 
long time. Dumbledore made him relive these memories over and over 
again. Add to this Sirius' understandable desire to contribute to the 
fight in a meaningful way and even if I would not use the 
word "sadistic" to describe Dumbledore's treatment of him, the 
words "complete and utter stupidity" come to mind.

I can't completely disregard the possibility of Dumbledore's 
sacrificing Sirius toward "greater something". If so, he is MUCH 
worse than "sadistic".


He had the guts to apologize? Good! Maybe not everything is lost for 
him. Maybe he is not ESE!, just plain stupid as I said before.

Are you seriously suggesting that Harry should apologise to 
Dumbledore? For what? For desperately trying to find the truth, that 
was being kept from him? For suffering after watching death (or 
supposed eath :o))of his godfather?

Please forgive my sarcasm, but yeah, right.

I am sorry, but I am SO VERY disappointed in Dumbledore now.

Alla





From annemehr at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 02:38:03 2003
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 02:38:03 -0000
Subject: Wizarding World Fauna and Potions for Muggles
In-Reply-To: <bj32rb+1t3j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj3k6b+svpl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79610

> The Sergeant Majorette says
> 
> One of the things I find fascinating about JKR's work is that her 
> invention is so seamlessly interwoven with sometimes odd reality 
that 
> you can't always tell when she's kidding:<snip>
> 
> I also waste a lot of time wondering which of her foods is real 
and 
> which are part of her 'magical' universe. If I didn't know better, 
> I'd think that spotted dick was a joke, and are pumpkin pasties 
just 
> pumpkin pies?
> 
> --JDR

Well, what I know about pasties comes from Lilian Jackson 
Braun's "The Cat Who ..." mysteries, so for what it's worth:

Pasties (pronounced pass-tees in L.J.B.) are apparantly a real food 
consisting of meat, vegetables and gravy wrapped up in a shapeless 
dough and cooked (I forget how).  Think more like a biscuit or 
dumpling rather than a pie crust -- this is filling food for a 
laboror to take for his lunch and eat out of hand, not a dessert.  
It would go good if you were riding on a train all day, too!  ;)

Annemehr




From profwildflower at mindspring.com  Wed Sep  3 03:31:59 2003
From: profwildflower at mindspring.com (whimsyflower)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 03:31:59 -0000
Subject: Wizarding World (Flora and)Fauna and Potions for Muggles
Message-ID: <bj3nbf+2g4q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79611

In post 79558 by severusbook4, Sevvie asked, "Would the effect of a potion 
be the same for a Muggle?"  and in post 79565 by jdr0918, JDR said s/he 
wonders which foods are real.

I want to add that from what I read, JKR really knows her herbs for these 
potions.  For example in OoTP, Harry forgets to add two drops of hellebore 
syrup to his Peacefulness Potion.  I've worked with herbs for over thirty years, 
and I couldn't resist the urge to find out if one would put hellebore into a 
peacefulness potion.  Good Ravenclaw that I am, I checked some of my herb 
books and found this:

Hellebore:  Veratrum viride
"Medicinal part: the rhizome
Solvent: alcohol
Dose: usually given in the form of a tincture. Formula for the
tincture is dried root 8-16 oz., diluted (83.5% alcohol) macerating for
two weeks and then expressed and filtered.

Uses: Sedative, Emetic, Diaphoretic, and Sternutatory (causing or tending to 
cause sneezing)
It is an unsurpassed by any article as an expectorant.  As an
arterial sedative it stands unparalleled and unequalled.  In small
doses it creates and promotes appetite.  It slows the pulse by its
powerful stimulating influence upon the vagus nerve.  In suitable doses
it can be relied upon to bring the pulse down from 150 beats per minute
to forty or even thirty." (Is that peace or what?  Maybe it's even a tad too 
peaceful.)

Source: Hutchens, Alma R. (1973). Indian herbology of north america.
Ontario, Canada, Merco Press

So, yes, these potions would likely have exactly the same effect on Muggles, 
and Hellebore, for one, is a "real" plant.   I can't believe how well read JKR 
must be to know all this stuff !!

Whimsy 

 And thanks to all who posted about pasties, pumpkin and otherwise!  






From annemehr at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 04:17:48 2003
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 04:17:48 -0000
Subject: Harry's Powers
In-Reply-To: <bj2cdc+m69j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj3q1c+g7fg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79612

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Emily" <pinoypartygal at a...> 
wrote:
<snip> 
>After 
> much discussing with my older brother (whom I got sucked into the 
> magical world that is Harry Potter) we both came to the consensus 
> that when LV took some of Harry's blood that instead of removing 
> Lily's protection from Harry but in fact, he (LV) now has the 
> protection himself. This would mean that they would not be able to 
> kill each other (despite the prophecies words...which I still 
think 
> are a bit hokey)
<snip>

Your theory does introduce a symmetry that I find pleasing.  So, 
just as Voldemort's and Harry's wands are "brothers" and will not 
work properly against each other, maybe Harry and Voldemort are now 
connected in such a way that they *cannot* kill each other?  Then I 
suppose the first one who tried it would end up stripping himself of 
his own powers?  And then *neither* would die at the hand of the 
other, though it would make a satisfying ending to see LV try it.

Ah, but the reason LV did not die the first time was because he had 
gone very far on the road to immortality -- but now he has settled 
for his old body back, except he now supposedly has Lily's 
protection.  Maybe having Lily's protection means that if *Harry* 
tried to kill LV, the attempt would rebound on Harry now, too.  But 
what if LV tried to kill Harry now and managed to avoid the wand 
connection?  Wouldn't an AK still bounce off Harry and hit LV, only 
now LV is merely mortal so that he would only manage to kill 
*himself*?  And Harry would die if he tried to kill LV?  But, if 
that's the case, the prophecy would have to say that "either shall 
die at his own hand..." and you'd think it meant suicide if you 
didn't know better...

Annemehr
cursing the day she read that prophecy...




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 05:20:51 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 05:20:51 -0000
Subject: What does Dumbledore have up his sleeve?
In-Reply-To: <10d.293b916c.2c8630e6@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bj3tnj+tnk6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79613

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Natdyce at a... wrote:
> ..., Dumbledore has known, ever since the night Voldemort 
> failed in his attempt to kill Harry, that he would be back,... Thus,
> he has had 14 years to think about what he would do when Voldemort 
> did return,....edited...
> 
> Natalie
> 

bboy_mn:
I'm sure you are right, Dumbledore has been thinking about what he
will do when Voldemort comes back, but not knowing when or how that
would happen doesn't give him much to work with. 

He can't make specific plans until he has something specific to react
too. That's like planning for World Was III. Yes, you have to be ready
for it, but you are very limited in your ability to making specific plans.

So, contrary to those who believe that Dumbledore is the master
manipulator, and that he has and has had every person he comes in
contact with for the last 15 years dancing like puppet on a string, I
think there is very little Dumbledore can do.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn




From prof_uloth at hotmail.com  Wed Sep  3 05:31:57 2003
From: prof_uloth at hotmail.com (Fred Uloth)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 21:31:57 -0800
Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Riddle House
In-Reply-To: <bivii9+gm80@eGroups.com>
References: <bit6sh+a495@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20030902212647.00a6bb78@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 79614

At 01:45 PM 9/1/2003 +0000, amanitamuscaria1 wrote:
>--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...
> > BIG SNIP
> >(And *I* want to know who the rich
> > man is who's been keeping Riddle House "for tax purposes")
> >
> > "msbeadsley"
>Now Me :
>Lucius Malfoy, perchance?

Highly likely...as he seems to represent the financial backing of the movement.

>Equivalent of Grimmauld Place for DEs?

Maybe. But here is something that has been nagging at me since we learned 
of the magical protections placed on Grimmauld Place. Why didn't Tom and 
Peter (Voldy and Wormy if you prefer) place some sort of enchantment to 
protect anyone from seeing their activities the night Frank(? If it was 
indeed Frank, then there is another one to add to list of repeated names) 
died. Oh well...once again it was necessary to advance the plot, but I 
wonder if there wasn't a better reason behind it.....




From constancevigilance at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 05:53:54 2003
From: constancevigilance at yahoo.com (Susan Miller)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 05:53:54 -0000
Subject: FILK: Helga Hufflepuff
Message-ID: <bj3vli+kqpa@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79615

To honor our second Great Founder, we will borrow the theme from H.R. 
Pufnstuf. (Confess, you do remember this tune!) For a nostalgia trip, 
and to sing along with Helga, go to 
http://dt.prohosting.com/70s/childtv/pufnstuf.au

Helga Hufflepuff

Helga Hufflepuff
Who's your friend when things get rough?
Helga Hufflepuff
She'll teach you until you've learned enough.

Helga came from valley fair
And never thought of leaving there.
She spun her spells with great success
She was a mighty sorceress.

One night she was asleep in bed
She heard a voice inside her head,
"You need to start a school, Helga
Start a wizard schoo-oo-oo-ool."

She knew not what that would become
But very soon, she found a chum.
Rowena Ravenclaw was she
Then Godric Gryffindor made three.

And his best friend
Was Salazar Slytherin.
But they had not
Yet found a spot.
So the search went on and on and on and on and on and on.

But at last they found a space -
A forest, lake, a perfect place!
A castle on a high ascent
And charmed with Disillusionment!

The school was ready to begin
But who should be invited in?
The smart, the brave, or should it be
(spoken) Just those of purest pedigree?

But Helga said, "If they've got heart
I'll teach them all, I'll do my part."
And so her days were wondrous full
Of magic pedagogical.

Helga Hufflepuff
Who's your friend when things get rough?
Helga Hufflepuff
She'll teach you until you've learned enough.

Helga Hufflepuff
Who's your friend when things get rough?
Helga Hufflepuff
She'll teach you until you've learned enough.

~ Constance Vigilance






From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 06:00:19 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 06:00:19 -0000
Subject: Wizarding World Fauna, Potions, Pasties, & Pies
In-Reply-To: <bj3k6b+svpl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj401j+5cs2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79616

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" <annemehr at y...> wrote:
> > The Sergeant Majorette says
> > 
> > ... JKR's ...invention is so seamlessly interwoven with sometimes 
> > odd reality that you can't always tell when she's kidding:<snip>
> > 
> > I ... wondering which of her foods is real and which are part of 
> > her 'magical' universe. ...
> > 
> > --JDR
> 
> Well, what I know about pasties comes from Lilian Jackson 
> Braun's "The Cat Who ..." mysteries, so for what it's worth:
> 
> Pasties (pronounced pass-tees in L.J.B.) are apparantly a real food 
> consisting of meat, vegetables and gravy wrapped up in a shapeless 
> dough and cooked (I forget how). 
> 
> Annemehr

bboy_mn:

Here is America we call them 'Hot Pockets'.

Actually, various meats baked into a pie crust either resembling a pie
or as a self-contained sandwich like pastry is very common in Britain,
although, I know this mostly from photos. I've never actually been to
Britain. 

Pasties actually started out as Cornish Pasties. Apparently there are
coal mines in Cornwall, and the coal miners had to eat there lunch
down in the mines. So their wives would put the entire lunch into a
pastie or pie crust rolled so it was closed into a small sandwich. 

Down in the mines there is really no way to wash your hands, and there
is nothing to eat off of; no tables or chairs or anything. So the
miner just sat on the ground and ate there enclosed pie crust
sandwiches. The pie crust would not absorb dirt and grim from their
hands to the same degree that bread would, so it worked out very nice. 

Some thoughtful wives would make the pasties so that one end had the
meat, the middle had potatoes or other vegetables, and the other end
would have a bit of apple pie filling in it. So, a meal and desert all
in one neat little package.

Make Your Own Spotted Dick

The following recipe is a traditional one for making this great
pudding and will serve four normal people, two greedy ones or one pig

You need:

2 oz white breadcrumbs
2 oz self raising flour
4 oz shredded suet
8 oz prepared stoned raisins
1/8 teaspoon salt
1/2 grated nutmeg
1/2 teaspoon ground ginger
1/8 teaspoon mace
1 oz whole candidied peel, finely chopped
grated zest of one orange
3 eggs
3 tablespoons brandy

I know I've strayed dangerously off topic, but I've had great fun
searching out all the bizarre British foods on the internet trying to
find out what they are. 

If anyone is interested, there have been several good discussion about
British food in the Off-Topics group. Also, I posted several links in
the USA and Canada where you can by common British brand food products
like golden syrup and treacle, as well as sugar mice and acid pops
which are real candies.

Sorry for the OT.

bboy_mn






From prof_uloth at hotmail.com  Wed Sep  3 06:16:07 2003
From: prof_uloth at hotmail.com (Fred Uloth)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 22:16:07 -0800
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Percy question
In-Reply-To: <bj0eod+nihb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20030902220133.00b06198@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 79617

At 09:46 PM 9/1/2003 +0000, Sembei Grindelwald wrote:
>Creo que Percy es un esp?a de DD en el Ministerio, y por eso
>necesita alejarse de su familia, aunque tambi?n podr?a ser que
>estuviera bajo la maldici?n Imperius.

Seria posible...pero a mi me gusta la idea que ?l se actua por su propio 
voluntad, pero no es un espia. Creo que el tiene demasiado argullo y deseos 
de subir su estacion en la vida. Hay mucho ejemplos de esto en las primera 
quatro libros.

Translation: Sembei ascribes to the Percy is DD spy in deep cover.
This is possible...by I like the idea that he is acting on his own free 
will, but is not a spy. I believe that has too much pride and desires to 
elevate his station in life. There are many examples in the first four books.

>Su novia se llama Penelope. Me parece que este Ulisses pasar?
>tambi?n por alg?n infierno antes de volver a su Itaca familiar.

No ubico la historia de Ulisses y Penelope...entonces no puedo hablar de 
esto. Toda la informacion que tango yo es de la pelicula "O Herman Donde 
Estas"...

Translation: He finds it interesting that Penelope is the name of Percy's 
girlfriend. It appears to him that Ulysses also had to go through 
hell/fires to return to home of Ithica

I'm not familiar with the story of Ulysses and Penelope...therefore I 
cannot comment. Everything I know about the story came from the film "O 
Brother, Where Art Thou." 




From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Wed Sep  3 06:29:52 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 06:29:52 -0000
Subject: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj37i8+moof@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj41p0+86bg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79618

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kiricat2001" <Zarleycat at a...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mochajava13" 
> <mochajava13 at y...> wrote:
>  But, Dumbledore could have had Remus or Moody or 
> McGonagall be the one to talk to Harry alone to explain all of 
this, 
> and also explain why Snape has to be the one to teach Harry.

I think Dumbledore wanted Snape to teach Harry for two reasons:

1. Snape was the best for the job and also right there at Hogwarts
   (as Dumbledore felt he himself could not do it).

2. He was hoping that by more one-on-one contact, and by letting
   Snape see what life has really been like for Harry, that the
   relationship between Harry and Snape will improve. Since
   both Harry and Snape are central to his battle plans, it
   makes sense to try to improve their relationship.
   Once the decision to have Snape teach was reached and Snape
   accepted, it would be undermining his authority to have
   another person act as intermediary.

> Plus, where does it say that Dumbledore had misgivings about using 
12 
> Grimmauld PLace?

Dumbledore had misgivings about the trustworthiness of Kreacher.
He says so himself in his post-mortem discussion with Harry.

> Had Dumbledore had another place to use as 
> Headquarters and insisted that Sirius stay locked up in it, I think 
> Sirius would have handled it better than being locked up in the 
very 
> house that represented everything he hated about his childhood.

I think that Sirius had to be there or they could not have used
the house at all. What would have prevented Kreacher from betraying
the order sooner had Sirius not been there. I doubt they can still
safely use the house now as Kreacher is no longer bound to obey
them, since his master is dead.

> If keeping Sirius locked up in that house was Dumbledore's idea of 
a 
> great way for Sirius to be able to live, really live, then 
> Dumbledore's not being either Macchiavellian or fatherly - he's 
being 
> sadistic.

I don't think he thought it a "great way". His reasoning was the
same one that he used when he left
Harry with the Dursleys knowing what kind of life he is sentencing
him to. In both cases he considered the "home" he was leaving
them to be the only thing that would keep them alive. I believe
he was right.

> to give Sirius a chance to live was to find 
> Pettigrew and bring him to justice.  We heard not a peep about that 
> in OoP because everyone was so busy with the prophecy stuff.

Dumbledore knew that once he can convince the wizarding world that
Harry's account of the events is correct, getting Sirius exonerated
would be a cinch. Sirius had only to stay hidden until then,
so it was only a temporary setting.
Sadly if he had not gone to the MoM to save Harry, he would have
been a free man thereafter.

It seems to me that Dumbledore's greatest error that while he
had the best interests of the people he was leading in his mind,
he ignored the impact of the events on them emotionally. Harry
was extremely traumatised by the events in the graveyard and
then put under pressures from all sides (slandering, MoM campaign
against him, Umbridge, Dumbledore ignoring him, Voldemort's
manipulations, etc.). Sirius was already unbalanced after 12 years
in Azkaban and then put effectively in jail again. Snape was still
not over the conflict with Harry's father and with Sirius.
Dumbledore was too focused on the big picture to notice all that or
account for it in his plans and so invited disaster.

Salit





From prof_uloth at hotmail.com  Wed Sep  3 06:31:27 2003
From: prof_uloth at hotmail.com (Fred Uloth)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 22:31:27 -0800
Subject: Bloody Baron (was Re: [HPforGrownups] Ghost Voldemort?)
In-Reply-To: <bj0om4+a4vs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20030902222814.00b04430@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 79619

At 12:36 AM 9/2/2003 +0000, kiricat2001 wrote:
>If Nearly Headless Nick is correct, in that those who fear death are
>the beings that become ghosts, and if Voldemort's greatest fear is
>death, does that mean Vmort is destined for Ghosthood, should he meet
>his death at the end of the series?

Hmm....maybe we'll find out that the Bloody Baron was one of the great evil 
wizards that came between Slytherin and Voldemort. I've always sensed that 
his story line would come in to play. He just seems to mysterious...all the 
other ghosts are scared of him and he can keep Peeves under control. This 
leads me to believe he must have been very powerful and very ruthless. 




From Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com  Wed Sep  3 06:33:53 2003
From: Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com (arcum42)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 06:33:53 -0000
Subject: Why Harry Potter "cannot" be set in 1991 (Question)
In-Reply-To: <bj33r4+9l4g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj420h+21ck@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79620

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "megalynn44" <megalynn44 at h...>
wrote:
> > Sevvie wrote:
> > Also, the Playstation was introduced in North America in September 
> > 1995, so if it was the same for the UK, then JKR's facts still hold 
> > correct.  If I remember correctly, Harry was writting to Sirius 
> > about Dudley throwing his PS1 out the window (didn't he just get it 
> > for his B-day?) in OotP. OotP takes place in 1996, so the PS1 had 
> > been for sale for about a year.  The other reference about the 
> > computer Harry wanted to play while left at home, was a computer, 
> > not a PS1.
> > 
> 
> Actually, the playstation was mentioned in the beginning of book 
> four. And GOF starts in summer '94 if book one starts in summer '91. 
> Even if it was mentioned in book five that still puts it at 
> summer '95 which is before the September release date. I am not 
> saying that Harrry born in 1980 is not the best timeline to use, I 
> just think there is a flint with the playstation.

Not neccessarily. Sony's UK website has a timeline here:
http://www.sony.co.uk/aboutSony/companymilestones.asp

And this timeline shows the Playstation being launched in 1994...
--Arcum




From jdr0918 at hotmail.com  Wed Sep  3 07:02:02 2003
From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 07:02:02 -0000
Subject: Wizarding World Fauna, Potions, Pasties, & Pies
In-Reply-To: <bj401j+5cs2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj43la+k5e6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79621

<<<"Steve" wrote:...as well as sugar mice and acid pops which are 
real candies...Sorry for the OT.>>>

The Sergeant Majorette says

We're not really that far off-topic, are we? We're just trying to 
nail down all the food items in the Potterverse, which JKR has said 
are important...

Seems pasties are what we New Yorkers of West Indian descent call 
patties, and Latinos call empanadas; Hogwarts Express' pumpkin 
pasties are probably savory, with oxtails.

As for spotted dick, I'd rather eat cockroach clusters, which also 
exist, like gummi rats...

--JDR 




From sues0101 at hotmail.com  Wed Sep  3 07:25:46 2003
From: sues0101 at hotmail.com (Sue Porter)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 07:25:46 +0000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry Potter is a CHILDREN'S BOOK re: rape sexual preference
Message-ID: <BAY2-F110PZrIkyPzGN0000c3df@hotmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79622





>  Fred Uloth said -
>
>Now I'd like to say that *nobody* in the Harry Potter books is gay. Rest
>assured that they are all celibate until we are told otherwise.
>
>Me (K) -
>
>OK now while I agree that 'onscreen' (so to speak) they will all remain
>celibate I hardly think it's realistic to believe that all the characters
>are celibate. I mean Harry and co yes quite probably because they're a
>trifle busy trying to stay alive most of the time but I would bet good 
>money
>that at least some of the kids are experimenting offscreen. And what about
>the adults? *especially* those in relationships, Molly & Arthur, Bill &
>Fleur etc and what if we find out later some of the teachers are married as
>JKR has hinted - are you going to claim that they're celibate too?
>
>And besides that what on earth does someone's level of sexual activity have
>to do with their sexuality? I personally am currently celibate (darn <g>) -
>does that make me any less heterosexual than I was a couple of years ago
>when I was in a serious relationship? No of course it doesn't. I am not
>heterosexual only when I'm actually having sex and someone who is 
>homosexual
>is homosexual all the time even if they never have sex. With the level of
>prejudice in this world towards gay people I can't understand why people
>seem to think that being gay is some kind of choice.
>
>And as for the idea that some people have suggested that putting a gay
>character in the books would somehow be wrong because they're children's
>books, I am always astonished when I come up against this level of 
>prejudice
>and stupidity. No one is suggesting that JKR suddenly write Hasrry Potter -
>the *adult* version with hot Remus/Sirius (or whoever) sex scenes ...
>although there'd certainly be a market for it <weg>. But a gay couple 
>acting
>in the same way we see the het couples acting (the obvious affection 
>between
>Molly and Arthur, the Harry/Cho kiss, the pre-ball angst and the dancing at
>the ball etc) wouldn't in any way make the books less suitable for 
>children.
>I *hate* this idea that gay people are something that should be hidden away
>from children in some way. Love and affection between people are (imo) a
>blessing and should be celebrated whatever form they take.
>
>K

I would like to add my agreement to this post. Why is it that it's ok for JK 
to write about war, death, racism, opression, torture, cuelty etc etc, but 
some people seem to think that it's not ok for her to write about sexuality? 
Why is it not ok to write about something that is good and beautiful? Why 
are we so scared to let kids read about love and sex (and no I'm not talking 
about reading graphic porn here, even I'm not so stupid as to approve of 
that!)?

Before I get shot down by those who disagree and say that JKR is not writing 
a book about teenage love, het or gay or anywhich way, and if its not 
important to the storyline it wont be in the book, let me say this. Harry 
will win the battle against evil somehow. Love is the key here. Love saved 
Harry from LV when he was a baby. Seems to me that an exploration of some 
other forms of love will be something that JK will do in the next two books. 
Exploring love would bring a nice balance to the books after dealing with so 
much evil. Harry has to learn about love somehow if he is going to have the 
ability to defeat LV, and unless there is some exploration and understanding 
by Harry, he won't have the emotional depth to deal with it.

JMHO, but why is writing about something so good, so frowned upon? Are we 
saying that kids are better able to deal with evil, death, torture, murder, 
war and opression than with love?  You can say kids don't need to know about 
sex/love until they are old enough to understand it, BUT why are they old 
enough to understand the evil stuff and not the good stuff? Is it a comment 
upon our society that
we have become immune to how bad evil is, and have lost the ability to teach 
our children how to love?

I probably haven't worded this as well as I might, but I hope you all get 
the point I am trying to make.

Sue

_________________________________________________________________
Protect your inbox from harmful viruses with new ninemsn Premium. Click here 
  http://ninemsn.com.au/premium/landing.asp




From deemarie1a at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 10:20:22 2003
From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 10:20:22 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter is a CHILDREN'S BOOK re: rape sexual preference
In-Reply-To: <BAY2-F110PZrIkyPzGN0000c3df@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <bj4f96+3o1h@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79623

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sue Porter" <sues0101 at h...> 
wrote:
> 
>> 
> I would like to add my agreement to this post. Why is it that it's 
ok for JK 
> to write about war, death, racism, opression, torture, cuelty etc 
etc, but 
> some people seem to think that it's not ok for her to write about 
sexuality? 
> Why is it not ok to write about something that is good and 
beautiful? Why 
> are we so scared to let kids read about love and sex (and no I'm 
not talking 
> about reading graphic porn here, even I'm not so stupid as to 
approve of 
> that!)?
> 
> Before I get shot down by those who disagree and say that JKR is 
not writing 
> a book about teenage love, het or gay or anywhich way, and if its 
not 
> important to the storyline it wont be in the book, let me say this. 
Harry 
> will win the battle against evil somehow. Love is the key here. 
Love saved 
> Harry from LV when he was a baby. Seems to me that an exploration 
of some 
> other forms of love will be something that JK will do in the next 
two books. 
> Exploring love would bring a nice balance to the books after 
dealing with so 
> much evil. Harry has to learn about love somehow if he is going to 
have the 
> ability to defeat LV, and unless there is some exploration and 
understanding 
> by Harry, he won't have the emotional depth to deal with it.
> 
> JMHO, but why is writing about something so good, so frowned upon? 
Are we 
> saying that kids are better able to deal with evil, death, torture, 
murder, 
> war and opression than with love?  You can say kids don't need to 
know about 
> sex/love until they are old enough to understand it, BUT why are 
they old 
> enough to understand the evil stuff and not the good stuff? Is it a 
comment 
> upon our society that
> we have become immune to how bad evil is, and have lost the ability 
to teach 
> our children how to love?
> 
> I probably haven't worded this as well as I might, but I hope you 
all get 
> the point I am trying to make.
> 
> Sue

I do see the point Sue is trying to make.  It is just as important 
for our children to see love in literature as well as hate.  I just 
want to point out that violence and mayhem have always been an 
accepted part of Children's Literature.  Has anyone read Grimm's 
Fairy Tales in their orignal versions?  They are quite a bit darker 
and more violent than they are today.  Lewis Carroll wrote about the 
Walrus and the Carpenter devouring those poor little oysters who were 
given quite human characteristics.  

Even Disney has presented violence in their latest movies.  From Snow 
White and the 7 Dwarfs, the defeat of the old queen (seeing that hag 
fall from the rock, to a small child, pretty scary) to Atlantis 
(sorry that's the last Disney movie I have seen), when the villain 
gets blown up!  Yes, even child abuse - Cinderella!

But over time, only romantic love has been presented.  It is only 
recently that other forms of love have been represented in Children's 
Lit.  And it is spotty at that.  "Heather Has Two Mommies" is the 
only recent literature that comes to my mind about alternative 
lifestyles.  

I believe, that if it is essential to the story, JKR will show 
alternative lifestyles.  IMO, she is broadminded enough to write 
about that in a way that shows respect and acceptance.  We still have 
two books to go...who knows?

D




From jferer at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 10:36:13 2003
From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 10:36:13 -0000
Subject: Hermione SHIP question
In-Reply-To: <3F535B32.000003.29535@monica>
Message-ID: <bj4g6t+l8cs@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79624

Kathrun Cawte: "Can one of the Hermione/Harry SHIPpers out there
explain it to me? I don't see any clues towards it in the books at
all. I've always thought that it was 'obvious' that the Viktor thing
was a brief fling brought on because she was flattered at the way he
was paying her attention while Ron takes her for granted and that
eventually she and Ron will end up together. It seemed to me that that
ship was obvious and that there are *no* hints at all of Harry liking
Hermione as more than a friend or Hermione liking him."

Jim (me): I'll try.  I'm an H/H shipper, but I don't go around looking
for tiny clues ? I don't care whose pillow lands on whose in Charms
class.  I see Harry and Hermione converging all the time. They've
changed each other and are more complete together than apart.
 
Never have two people been more suited to each other, perfect
soulmates. Hermione has been the person who has prepared him for his
challenges; while he is the greatest natural talent of his generation,
she is the exemplar of what hard work and application can do - a
perfect yin and yang. She understands him better than anyone else.

Hermione cares for him as much or more than anyone. When she asks
after Harry and Cho, what's going on there? Is she not interested in
Harry, or not aware of *how* she might care for him, or is she mature
enough to know his feelings for Cho have to be resolved, that the risk
must be run? I don't know, but I know that Harry and Hermione love
each other already. It may not be romantic love, but they are
incredibly close. Hermione with anybody else - even Ron - would be a
step backward in intimacy.

Hermione knows exactly what Harry needs. Her DA idea was brilliant,
giving him a purpose and a boost he badly needed at the same time
providing others with something they needed as well. She sees in Harry
his natural leadership qualities and the isolation that was hurting
him, and came up with just the right thing that helped him keep going.
It's not an accident that JKR tells us more than once how much the DA
means to Harry. Let's remember whose idea it was, and how she cared
for him at a time when Harry was just plain unlikable. (I was mad at
him about fifty times in OOP).   Hermione also has the idea to use
Rita Skeeter to get Harry's story out, which aids him mentally as
well.  You will answer that any friend might do that for him, but I
offer it up as an example of how in tune Hermione is to Harry.

Harry has noticed her, and the subtlety of the clues make them more
convincing. In OOP, when she suggests he tell Cho how ugly he thinks
Hermione is, he says 'but I don't think you're ugly!' which was a
spontaneous letting out of his feelings. In GoF, there were true
sparks when he noticed her at the Yule Ball. These seeds are not idly
planted. They will burst out someday. (BTW, when JKR repeats
something, remember it). I suspect Cho, and others, see how close
Harry and Hermione are better than the principals themselves.
 
Harry's 'saved' Hermione, too. I don't mean physically, although he
has, but Hermione knew early that she would be a different person and
a lesser one without being in the Trio. She started out with an
affinity to Percy, but look at how the two have diverged. Because of
her adventures, because she's discovered real purpose, she's a young
woman of character and moral courage and Percy's a disgusting
sycophant. She might have been a Ravenclaw at heart when she arrived,
but there never was a truer Gryffindor now. She's seen what bravery
can do. Hermione has gained immensely from knowing Harry.

WHAT DOES HARRY NEED?

If Harry ends up with Ginny, he's going to have a supportive, loving
woman and family, a healing balm for all the hurts he's got and will
get. If it's Hermione, she's going to care for him in a different way,
pushing him when he needs it, tough when she has to be, challenging
him back to health. Which will he need?  He's going to need something,
because he's going to pay a high price for defying Voldemort, as all
the Dark Lord's enemies have.

If anyone wants to argue an R/H viewpoint based on the idea that "JKR
says so," that's weak, IMO. JKR doesn't want us to do that. She wants
us to find it in her text. She keeps telling us everything is there,
and it is, but you won't find it in how the pillows fall or anything
like that. It's in the people.

Jim Ferer






From gbannister10 at aol.com  Wed Sep  3 11:04:19 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 11:04:19 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter is a CHILDREN'S BOOK re: rape sexual preference
In-Reply-To: <bj4f96+3o1h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj4hrj+imrn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79625

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Donna" <deemarie1a at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sue Porter" <sues0101 at h...> 
> wrote:
> > 
> >> 
> > I would like to add my agreement to this post. Why is it that 
it's 
> ok for JK 
> > to write about war, death, racism, opression, torture, cuelty etc 
> etc, but 
> > some people seem to think that it's not ok for her to write about 
> sexuality? 
> > Why is it not ok to write about something that is good and 
> beautiful? Why 
> > are we so scared to let kids read about love and sex (and no I'm 
> not talking 
> > about reading graphic porn here, even I'm not so stupid as to 
> approve of 
> > that!)?
> > 
> > Before I get shot down by those who disagree and say that JKR is 
> not writing 
> > a book about teenage love, het or gay or anywhich way, and if its 
> not 
> > important to the storyline it wont be in the book, let me say 
this. 
> Harry 
> > will win the battle against evil somehow. Love is the key here. 
> Love saved 
> > Harry from LV when he was a baby. Seems to me that an exploration 
> of some 
> > other forms of love will be something that JK will do in the next 
> two books. 
> > Exploring love would bring a nice balance to the books after 
> dealing with so 
> > much evil. Harry has to learn about love somehow if he is going 
to 
> have the 
> > ability to defeat LV, and unless there is some exploration and 
> understanding 
> > by Harry, he won't have the emotional depth to deal with it.
> > 
> > JMHO, but why is writing about something so good, so frowned 
upon? 
> Are we 
> > saying that kids are better able to deal with evil, death, 
torture, 
> murder, 
> > war and opression than with love?  You can say kids don't need to 
> know about 
> > sex/love until they are old enough to understand it, BUT why are 
> they old 
> > enough to understand the evil stuff and not the good stuff? Is it 
a 
> comment 
> > upon our society that
> > we have become immune to how bad evil is, and have lost the 
ability 
> to teach 
> > our children how to love?
> > 
> > I probably haven't worded this as well as I might, but I hope you 
> all get 
> > the point I am trying to make.
> > 
> > Sue
> 


Donna:
> I do see the point Sue is trying to make.  It is just as important 
> for our children to see love in literature as well as hate.  I just 
> want to point out that violence and mayhem have always been an 
> accepted part of Children's Literature.  Has anyone read Grimm's 
> Fairy Tales in their orignal versions?  They are quite a bit darker 
> and more violent than they are today.  Lewis Carroll wrote about 
the 
> Walrus and the Carpenter devouring those poor little oysters who 
were 
> given quite human characteristics.  
> 
> Even Disney has presented violence in their latest movies.  From 
Snow 
> White and the 7 Dwarfs, the defeat of the old queen (seeing that 
hag 
> fall from the rock, to a small child, pretty scary) to Atlantis 
> (sorry that's the last Disney movie I have seen), when the villain 
> gets blown up!  Yes, even child abuse - Cinderella!
> 
> But over time, only romantic love has been presented.  It is only 
> recently that other forms of love have been represented in 
Children's 
> Lit.  And it is spotty at that.  "Heather Has Two Mommies" is the 
> only recent literature that comes to my mind about alternative 
> lifestyles.  
> 
> I believe, that if it is essential to the story, JKR will show 
> alternative lifestyles.  IMO, she is broadminded enough to write 
> about that in a way that shows respect and acceptance.  We still 
have 
> two books to go...who knows?
> 


Geoff:
I think there is a problem in the group - problem is probably the 
wrong word - in that there is a hothouse atmosphere because of the 
intense scrutiny which all our gathered minds give to the books. I 
have a feeling that Jo Rowling does not stop to consider the weight 
of every word which she writes because somebody on hpfgu will start a 
thread interpreting it which will run for months!

Someone like Tolkien probably does operate in this way. If you 
consider that "The Silmarillion", published posthumously in 1977 had 
first started taking shape around 1915, likewise LOTR took about 14 
years to completion and you look at the material amassed by 
Christopher Tolkien showing how his father niggled away at tiny 
points of detail, the size of the project is awe-inspiring. Bbu that 
was JRRT.

Some years ago, I wrote a sci-fi novel - for my own satisfaction. Two 
or three years and several rejection slips later, my point was 
proved. It was for my own delight! When I visualised the characters, 
I really though them out in rough (40ish, tall, well-built, brown 
hair etc) as far as I needed for the plot line. The question of the 
sort of relationship they were in etc. was only tackled as and when 
necessary. I agree with other posters who say that we cannot skirt 
questions of sexuality, any more than we can skirt violence or racism 
but if these themes have to be brought in, then it is as part of the 
fabric of the tapestry not just because we feel we ought to nod in 
that direction.

One of the things which has made the HP books rapidly into favourite 
reading for me is the seamless and subtle way in which they have 
moved from the 11 year old point of view to the rising 16 view. Harry 
has changed gradually from a naive, wide opened eyed entrant into the 
Wizarding World (ooh-ing and wow-ing at everything) to someone who 
already has a track record of coping with a wide range of events 
which would leave many an adult breathless (and has also a sometimes 
rather cycnical and worldly wise view of events) and through whose 
eyes we can view growing up - and relate it back to our own rites of 
passage. This is the secret of the books; it is not "in your face" 
stuff just for the sake of it; anything which occurs is a valuable 
brick in the construction of the WW wall (even if we are not sure 
quite what the brick is supposed to do until Boook 7!).

Geoff




From jferer at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 11:14:18 2003
From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 11:14:18 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter is a CHILDREN'S BOOK re: rape sexual preference
In-Reply-To: <BAY2-F110PZrIkyPzGN0000c3df@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <bj4iea+9s6e@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79626

For everyone, before I get into this post, can everyone PLEASE SNIP
ONLY THE RELEVANT PORTIONS OF THE POSTS WE'RE ANSWERING, INSTEAD OF
THE ENTIRE [CENSORED] MESSAGE? THIS IS NOT, REPEAT NOT, USENET. If
you're not willing to put in the work to make a coherent, legible
post, maybe your thoughts weren't worth the trouble to begin with.

Sue: "Why is it that it's ok for JKR to write about war, death,
racism, oppression, torture, cruelty etc etc, but some people seem to
think that it's not ok for her to write about sexuality?"

It's always been that way in literature, especially for younger
readers.  That's not a satisfactory answer, of course, but my answer
would be that war, death, and so on are very public, while sexuality
is very private, and touches on taboos. We don't want the kids to get
all jumpy after reading the story, do we?

Sue:" Harry will win the battle against evil somehow. Love is the key
here. Love saved Harry from LV when he was a baby. Seems to me that an
exploration of some other forms of love will be something that JK will
do in the next two books."

JKR can, does, and will write about love.  Great literature has long
dealt with love without getting sexual, or at least with sex in the
background.  In canon, we have many kinds of love already: Lily's love
for her son; Dumbledore's for Harry; Harry's for Sirius; the Trio's
for each other; and the beginning of attraction as the characters get
older. It's love we don't spend enough time considering these days ?
the kinds of love, who we love, and how we express it. Getting into
sexuality might even overshadow some of the excellent points about
love we're seeing.  It's an example of JKR's genius that we're seeing
so much about love.

I noticed that in your first paragraph you used the word "sexuality"
but substituted "love" in the next paragraph. Love and sexuality are
not synonymous. We all know there's sex without love, and there's many
kinds of love, most of which don't involve sex.  I'm surprised so many
have missed all the love in these stories. The word "love" does not
sound like a zipper opening.

Jim Ferer




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Wed Sep  3 11:14:53 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 11:14:53 -0000
Subject: Why Harry Potter "cannot" be set in 1991 (Question)
In-Reply-To: <bj420h+21ck@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj4ifd+hsmo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79627

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arcum42" <Arcum_Dagsson at c...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "megalynn44" <megalynn44 at h...>
> wrote:
> > > Sevvie wrote:
> > > Also, the Playstation was introduced in North America in 
September 
> > > 1995, so if it was the same for the UK, then JKR's facts still 
hold 
> > > correct.  If I remember correctly, Harry was writting to Sirius 
> > > about Dudley throwing his PS1 out the window (didn't he just 
get it 
> > > for his B-day?) in OotP. OotP takes place in 1996, so the PS1 
had 
> > > been for sale for about a year.  The other reference about the 
> > > computer Harry wanted to play while left at home, was a 
computer, 
> > > not a PS1.
> > > 
> > 
> > Actually, the playstation was mentioned in the beginning of book 
> > four. And GOF starts in summer '94 if book one starts in 
summer '91. 
> > Even if it was mentioned in book five that still puts it at 
> > summer '95 which is before the September release date. I am not 
> > saying that Harrry born in 1980 is not the best timeline to use, 
I 
> > just think there is a flint with the playstation.
> 

Geoff:
I was a computing studies teacher from 1984-93. But I have to admit 
that I had little to do with games consoles. If you were to ask me 
when Playstations were introduced, I would be at a loss. Perhaps this 
is JKR's situation. Someone has suggested that she wanted to refer to 
a games console and the first one that came to mind was a PS.




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Wed Sep  3 11:35:24 2003
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 21:35:24 +1000
Subject: On Playstations and Dates
In-Reply-To: <82152.150F%melindaleo@msn.com>
Message-ID: <3F565E9C.31738.413ADD@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 79628

Been doing a little bit of research.

The Playstation was first available for regular import into the UK in 
around December 1994 - exact date is hard to pin down. Limited numbers 
of machines were certainly being imported for games development purposes 
before June 1994 - I've no idea how much before - and some of these did 
get into the hands of private citizens if they were willing to pay the 
money.

That comes from looking through old messages from a computer and video 
games e-mail list I was on at the time, which had a significant UK 
membership. I had to search for the disks I had messages archived on 
(and now I have a huge desire to replay Eye of the Beholder).







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 jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 11:45:48 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 11:45:48 -0000
Subject: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj41p0+86bg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj4k9c+f26a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79629

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "slgazit" <slgazit at s...> wrote:
> I think Dumbledore wanted Snape to teach Harry for two reasons:
> 
> 1. Snape was the best for the job and also right there at Hogwarts
>    (as Dumbledore felt he himself could not do it).
> 
> 2. He was hoping that by more one-on-one contact, and by letting
>    Snape see what life has really been like for Harry, that the
>    relationship between Harry and Snape will improve. Since
>    both Harry and Snape are central to his battle plans, it
>    makes sense to try to improve their relationship.
>    Once the decision to have Snape teach was reached and Snape
>    accepted, it would be undermining his authority to have
>    another person act as intermediary.

Laura:

Those are good points, and they show again how DD failed to 
understand the people he was dealing with.  Before he allowed Snape 
to try to teach Harry anything one-on-one, he should have sat SS down 
for a long talk.  Snape has been tormenting and humiliating Harry 
ever since he first laid eyes on him.  Yes, he follows DD's orders to 
keep Harry alive, but he feels free to do whatever he wants to Harry 
as long as Harry survives.  After the scene in the hospital wing in 
PoA, it should have been crystal clear that Snape could not be 
rational about Harry.  And if there were any doubt, Snape's 
gratuitous interference with Harry's attempt to find DD in GoF (when 
Crouch Sr was in the Forest) should be conclusive.  Maybe, if DD had 
worked with Snape a bit, the latter would have been able to teach 
Harry.  But under the circumstances the attempt was doomed to failure 
before it even started.  




From sylviablundell at aol.com  Wed Sep  3 12:47:01 2003
From: sylviablundell at aol.com (sylviablundell2001)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 12:47:01 -0000
Subject: Pasties andPies
Message-ID: <bj4ns5+d1ct@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79630

Just a very small point.  The mines in Cornwall, where the pasties 
originate, are usually tin mines, not coal mines. Otherwise, the 
information is correct.  And the pasties are delicious, especially if 
you buy them in Polperro, Cornwall.
Sylvia (nit-picking as usual)




From fc26det at aol.com  Wed Sep  3 12:54:12 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 12:54:12 -0000
Subject: Harry's Powers
In-Reply-To: <bj3q1c+g7fg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj4o9k+gm93@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79631

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" <annemehr at y...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Emily" <pinoypartygal at a...> 
> wrote:
> <snip> 
> >After 
> > much discussing with my older brother (whom I got sucked into the 
> > magical world that is Harry Potter) we both came to the consensus 
> > that when LV took some of Harry's blood that instead of removing 
> > Lily's protection from Harry but in fact, he (LV) now has the 
> > protection himself. This would mean that they would not be able 
to 
> > kill each other (despite the prophecies words...which I still 
> think 
> > are a bit hokey)
> <snip>
> 
> Your theory does introduce a symmetry that I find pleasing.  So, 
> just as Voldemort's and Harry's wands are "brothers" and will not 
> work properly against each other, maybe Harry and Voldemort are now 
> connected in such a way that they *cannot* kill each other?  Then I 
> suppose the first one who tried it would end up stripping himself 
of 
> his own powers?  And then *neither* would die at the hand of the 
> other, though it would make a satisfying ending to see LV try it.
> 
> Ah, but the reason LV did not die the first time was because he had 
> gone very far on the road to immortality -- but now he has settled 
> for his old body back, except he now supposedly has Lily's 
> protection.  Maybe having Lily's protection means that if *Harry* 
> tried to kill LV, the attempt would rebound on Harry now, too.  But 
> what if LV tried to kill Harry now and managed to avoid the wand 
> connection?  Wouldn't an AK still bounce off Harry and hit LV, only 
> now LV is merely mortal so that he would only manage to kill 
> *himself*?  And Harry would die if he tried to kill LV?  But, if 
> that's the case, the prophecy would have to say that "either shall 
> die at his own hand..." and you'd think it meant suicide if you 
> didn't know better...
> 
> Annemehr
> cursing the day she read that prophecy...

Susan again:
I think Lily's protection and Harry's inborn powers are separate.  I 
think Lily's protection is more of a shield type protection similar 
to the Protego charm and that is why Harry is safe at Petunia's.  
That protection is not in his blood so to speak.  It is around him 
all the time but reinforced when he is with a blood relative of 
Lily's.  We know Petunia has a hard time looking at Harry much less 
ever touching him.  If Lily's protection is in his blood, wouldn't 
Petunia have to at least have some sort of physical contact with him 
to reinforce it?  If it is more like a shield charm, her just being a 
blood relative would reinforce it.  

The power that Harry was born with to my mind would be more like the 
Priori Incantatem situation.  I think when LV attacked him the first 
time the cut on Harry's head worked in a similar way as his wand in 
GOF.  But instead of the wands battling each other, the scar took 
away some of LV's powers and left him less than a man.  I think this 
is why Harry was able to control the Priori Incantatem so well in 
GOF.  He obviously had much more power than LV at that time if he was 
able to send the beads back toward LV.

When LV took Harry's blood, the blood itself with the Priori 
Incantatum type power removed the immortality in LV that he worked so 
hard to acquire.

Susan






From saraandra at whsmithnet.co.uk  Wed Sep  3 13:17:28 2003
From: saraandra at whsmithnet.co.uk (amanitamuscaria1)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 13:17:28 -0000
Subject: The Riddle House
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20030902212647.00a6bb78@localhost>
Message-ID: <bj4pl8+b0tt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79632

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Fred Uloth <prof_uloth at h...> 
wrote:
> At 01:45 PM 9/1/2003 +0000, amanitamuscaria1 wrote:
snip
> >Equivalent of Grimmauld Place for DEs?
> 
> Maybe. But here is something that has been nagging at me since we 
learned 
> of the magical protections placed on Grimmauld Place. Why didn't 
Tom and 
> Peter (Voldy and Wormy if you prefer) place some sort of 
enchantment to 
> protect anyone from seeing their activities the night Frank(? If it 
was 
> indeed Frank, then there is another one to add to list of repeated 
names) 
> died. Oh well...once again it was necessary to advance the plot, 
but I 
> wonder if there wasn't a better reason behind it.....

Me again - As Tom, at least, has previous experience of the place 
from killing his family, perhaps he just didn't think anyone would 
still be around? Could this be an additional hint that it is Lucius 
who owns the house now? We don't actually know if Frank was being 
paid for his gardening work, he may just have been living in the 
cottage as noone moved him.
It may, too, be the sort of feeling in PoA when everyone is in the 
Shrieking Shack - the place has such a ghostly reputation, why would 
they expect anyone to interfere?
Have you got any ideas for a better reason for not protecting the old 
Riddle House? As they didn't use Frank, but just killed him, the 
notion of maybe getting another body for Voldie doesn't come into it; 
which was the only thing that sprang to mind.
Cheers. AmanitaMuscaria 




From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Wed Sep  3 13:39:19 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 13:39:19 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj4k9c+f26a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj4qu7+rsvq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79633

 
> Laura:
<Snip>
> And if there were any doubt, Snape's 
> gratuitous interference with Harry's attempt to find DD in GoF 
> (when Crouch Sr was in the Forest) should be conclusive.  

No, no, no, no. This is a classic example of the reader falling 
under the spell of Harry's POV.

Ahem.

Read the scene in GoF Ch.28 again.

The sequence of events is:

*****************************************************************
Harry screams invented passwords at the gargoyle. They don't work.

Harry decides that Dumbledore is just possibly in the staff room. 

Harry starts running as fast as he can *away* from Dumbledore's 
office, to the staff room. 

Snape emerges from Dumbledore's office, sees Harry running at high 
speed *away* from the office, and *calls him back*.

Snape then spends about 20 seconds teasing (OK, being verbally 
sadistic to) Harry before Dumbledore walks out of the door behind 
him.

**************************************************************

And what does Harry remember this sequence as? 'If Snape hadn't held 
me up, we might have got there in time.' [Ch. 29]

And that's what we, the reader, remember, because we're locked into 
Harry's POV. Snape didn't delay Harry at all. Snape calling Harry 
back (to find out what he was doing in front of Dumbledore's office) 
probably saved a lot of time. Certainly a lot more than the 20 
seconds he 'wasted'.

>From our POV, we cannot actually see if Snape was 'gratuitously 
interfering'. It's entirely within Snape's revealed characterisation 
for him to enjoy the spectacle of Harry hopping up and down, whilst 
knowing that Dumbledore is coming down the stairs right now. 

Laura: 
> Maybe,if DD had worked with Snape a bit, the latter would have 
> been able to teach Harry.  But under the circumstances the attempt 
> was doomed to failure before it even started.

It may have been, but it's partly Harry's problem as well as 
Snape's. Harry has a rather strong dose of 'people who don't like me 
must be bad people' syndrome. In his case, it's probably a survival 
technique; his foster parents the Dursley's have never liked him. In 
that situation children often choose between 'they don't like me 
because I *am* bad' and 'they don't like me because *they're* bad'.

He's beginning to grow out of it a bit; he acknowledges honestly 
that while Petunia doesn't like him, she said he had to stay. [After 
she was reminded that chucking him out would almost certainly lead 
to his death.] Like Quirrel's description of Snape in PS/SS, she may 
not like Harry, but she doesn't want him *dead*.

But 'he doesn't like me, so he's *bad*' is in full flight with 
Snape. Despite consistent evidence in PS/SS, CoS, PoA, GoF and OOP 
that Snape cares so deeply for *all* the Hogwarts students that he 
will fight trolls for them, fight werewolves and (he thinks) escaped 
murderers for them, charge into the office of a powerful DE for 
them, and face a Forbidden Forest full of angry centaurs for them. 

Even when its the students he likes least.

And there's all the little protective-of-students side comments, as 
well. 'Crabbe,loosen your hold a little...' 'We'll be carrying 
what's left of Finch-Fletchley to the Hospital Wing in a 
matchbox' 'Snape gripped the back of a chair very hard' [when Ginny 
has been kidnapped in CoS.]

But no. This is less important to Harry than the fact that Snape is 
*nasty* to him. He gives him detentions. He makes *sarcastic 
comments*. He marks him unfairly. He's *horrible* to him!

And it culminates in Sirius's death. If Harry had remembered that 
Snape was an Order member, Snape could have contacted Sirius for 
him, safely. Harry subconciously discounts Snape because 'he's nasty 
to me. I don't trust nasty people.' [not a quote]

Snape, when he finds out what's going on, tells everyone he should, 
gives the advice he ought to give [if Voldemort is using just a 
vision of Sirius to trap Harry, the last thing needed was for Sirius 
to go out and make himself a target. Just imagine Voldemort's 
bargaining power if the DE's had captured the real Sirius in the 
fight!] and does what he can practically do [propose searching the 
Forbidden Forest in case Harry and Co are still there].

Snape is a nasty son-of-a-sorceror, and he and Harry don't like each 
other one little bit. But when the order comes through that Snape 
and Harry have to work together, it's Snape who makes-sarcastic-
comments-and-soldiers. Harry is the one who obstructs the lessons as 
much as he can by the passive method of I-haven't-done-my-homework-
Sir and the active method of breaking into the pensieve.

It is Snape who tries as much as he can to be adult about the 
Occlumency lessons. It is Harry who behaves like the 15 year old he 
is, shuffling his feet, doing as little as he can, and finally 
breaking the rules so badly that Snape chucks him out. But Harry's 
reaction to this is 'I don't care'. When he's asked to talk to Snape 
and ask to be taken back, he doesn't.

And when Sirius dies, he blames Snape for stopping the lessons ...

As I said above, it's a consistent Harry pattern. People who don't 
like him are bad. If they do things he doesn't like, it's their 
fault. The idea that he might be contributing to their dislike by 
his actions doesn't really make much headway; the idea that an 
apology might do wonders is never considered.

His childhood of 'Harry v. the Dursleys' has been translated 
into 'Harry v. anyone who doesn't like me.'

The trouble is, that he's now in the middle of a war. And he really 
has to get it into his head that people who are nice to him (fake!
Moody, anyone?) are not necessarily on his side; and conversely, 
those who are nasty to him might be doing their best to keep him 
alive (Petunia, anyone?)

Harry's dislike of Snape has just killed the person he most loved. 
But that's OK. 

You can bet it will be all Snape's fault [grin].

Pip!Squeak




From tcyhunt at earthlink.net  Wed Sep  3 13:51:01 2003
From: tcyhunt at earthlink.net (tcyhunt)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 13:51:01 -0000
Subject: Turn the Plot Around (filk)
Message-ID: <bj4rk5+iad2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79634

Sometimes I hear a song on the radio and it just possesses me.  This 
started out innocently enough with the chorus...but then somehow all 
of the recent sexual preference theories and SHIPs just jumped in 
there and I couldn't stop them.

I appologize in advance for this one - well not really...just take it 
with a grain of salt if you're easily offened by such topics - or 
better yet, if you are easily offended don't read it.

I'm dedicating this to all of the open minded listees.    


To the tune of Turn the Beat Around by Gloria Estefan (I can't 
believe I'm filking disco)

Midi may be found: 

http://the-midi-universe.virtualave.net/disco.html
(use the 1st of the 3 on the list)


Turn the plot around
Love to hear discussion

Turn it upside down
Love to hear discussion
Love to hear it

Bill, he's lookin' mighty pretty
Lupin keeps him movin' to the nitty gritty
But when you hear the speed of spells they're castin'
Then you'll know this theory isn't just from canon, so...

Turn the plot around
Love to hear discussion
Turn it upside down
Love to hear discussion
Love to hear it

Turn the plot around
Love to hear discussion
Turn it upside down
Love to hear discussion
Love to hear it

Listees post your thoughts 'cause
I know you want to piss me off
But see, I've not made up my mind about it
To me it is the banter, no doubt about it 
whoa, whoa

'Cause when the SHIPers really get rollin'
With the back-n-forth banter
With the SHIP, SHIP, SHIP
Make me wanna reply hotly
Yeah, yeah, yeah

And when the SHIPper starts spinning that tale
He nails that tale with the back-n-forth banter
With the SHIP, SHIP, SHIP,SHIP, SHIP on the board, hey!

Turn the plot around
Love to hear discussion
Turn it upside down
Love to hear discussion
Love to hear it
Love to hear it
Love to hear it 

Turn the plot around
Love to hear discussion
Turn it upside down
Love to hear discussion
Love to hear it....


Tcy (turning off the glitter ball and returning to work)




From talisman22457 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 14:16:42 2003
From: talisman22457 at yahoo.com (Talisman)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 14:16:42 -0000
Subject: Time, Repetition and the Uber-Dimension (was: Narrative Function
In-Reply-To: <bik2jj+4ohd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj4t4b+r108@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79635

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sevenhundredandthirteen" 
<sevenhundredandthirteen at y...> wrote:
> This is a follow on from my last post (#79043) in which I presented
> both sides of the 'Which type of Time-Travel is JKR using?' from 
the point of view that both are possible. <snip> And *NOW* I would 
like to take the opportunity to show you why I think the 'it 
happened once' theory is much more likely that the 'it happened 
twice' theory.
>> Laurasia

Talisman, just back from a net-free frolic in the Forbidden Forest, 
checks the post, and sighs:

Alas.  
Laurasia, you seem to have spent a good deal of time 
crafting "authoritative" tomes on the  "Two Options In
Time Travel," 
in which you explain your theory vs. what you assert to be my 
theory.  The problem is that you have not yet understood, or at 
least not yet iterated, my theory.  I hope you'll understand why
I 
don't provide a specific response to your posts, as they are not 
germane to any actual view I hold.

And, bboy, don't you go anywhere.  I know that you and Laurasia
are 
not the same person (at least I think not)  but in the surprise move 
of the week, your "relativity" and "metabolism" riffs
provided good 
tools for illuminating the critical junctures where we part company 
in Time-Travel theory (though you may be surprised to find we agree 
on a great deal.) 

* * * The Actual Theory: * * * 

(It might be helpful to invoke a muse at this point.  Lets all close 
our eyes and chant Scotty Fitzgerald's quip three times: "The
test 
of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed 
ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to 
function.")

Good.  Now, for purposes of this discussion, I will assume that Time 
is linear.  This is a Greek idea, and not the only extant concept of 
time (that spiral shape we keep seeing, being another) but I'm as 
happy as a bug with linear, so that's one less argument.

All posts on this topic are pseudo-science, but it's good to set
out 
the parameters so that any assumptions at the foundation, which will 
ultimately affect the outcome, remain transparent.

Therefore, let's start with some "rules:"

1) There is only one Time. Time itself is never, in any way, split, 
bifurcated, divided, multiplied, or otherwise partitioned.  

2) Time moves ineluctably forward (except when it's trapped in a 
Bell Jar).  It is never rewound or erased.

3) Time, qua Time, is static. That is to say, Time itself never 
changes.

4) The events within Time are not static. Indeed, altering past 
events is the raison d'?tre of Time Travel. 

I know you don't agree with this Laurasia.  But, the proposition
is 
self-evident. I find your alternative explanation: that Travelers 
are just "ensuring time happens correctly" (#72145), 
disingenuous.  
In any event, your "ensuring" idea  includes the notion that
things 
could "go wrong" without the Traveler's assistance;
therefore, by 
preventing something from happening, your Traveler still changes the 
course of events. 

5) Time is relative.  No doubt about it.  Hermione experiences the 
same hour from three vantage points in a serial manner, while Time 
itself sees all events simultaneously in the same "fixed"
hour. 
Hence, the pre-traveled self can experience the post-traveled self 
within the Relevant Span of Time. Voila, the notorious "footsteps
in 
the hall."

I agree with all of this, but I require more than the circular 
sophistry of: "I returned, therefore I was always there."

In order to accept the Harry-always-saved-himself theory, the reader 
must defer entirely to Time's point of view; they must allow Time
to 
be the arbiter of the action. But, this is error because,

6) Time is a highly prejudiced observer.

Here, bboy, you and I definitely part company.  I cannot join your 
reliance on the premise of an  "unbiased, neutral timeline"
(#78975).

 Time is not at all unbiased.  Indeed, Time is so fanatically biased 
that it insists on its own rules and will neither demonstrate nor 
admit to anything that does not wholly conform to its rules.

7) Time-Travel is predicated on the violation of Time's rules.  

8)  It is axiomatic that Time does not control Time-Travel.

9) Because Time will never recognize or demonstrate a violation of 
its own rules, Time's view of Time-Travel events is always
flawed.  

Nothing is erased, nothing is rewound, but some things simply do not 
appear in Time's  record.  And, herein lies the crucial missing
step.

  * * * * A Demonstration* * * *

Let's take a black permanent marker, some HP action figures and
your 
kitchen table.

Use the marker to draw a ray, ~3 feet long,  moving left to right.  
This is Time.  Permanent, linear, forward-moving, etc.

(Alright bboy, yours can be 3 ? feet long.)

Mark off the center one foot section of the line.  We'll call
this 
the Relevant Span (so we can reuse it for demonstrating any Travel 
event).

Now, we are obviously in the Uber-Dimension (though it looks a lot 
like your kitchen) because we are outside of Time, looking down on 
it.

Because the Traveler must break free of Time's grip in order to 
travel, I believe most of the trip happens in the Uber-Dimension.  
It's not necessary that you agree. You can think of Travelers as 
somehow-still-being-in-Time-but-no-longer-subject-to-Time's-rules
if 
that makes you happy.  I'll use the Uber-Dimension. 

Now, let's place a Time-Turning Action!Hermione at the beginning
of 
the line. It's September 2, 1993 and she's on her way to 
Arithmancy.  Slide her up the line. There she is at 9:00am (first 
tick mark on your line). Now she`s moving through the class hour.
 
Here we come to the second tick mark (10:00am). She exits the door, 
and stops.  Make her little hands turn the Time-Turner.

Now, using Laurasia's own words to describe the Time-Travel
process, 
Hermione will "get transported back,"  she will "get
picked up and 
placed [back] in the actual events [at 9:00am]." (#79019)  

So, pick up your Action!Hermione and place her back at 9:00am.

You might have noticed that you just made a loop. It happened in the 
Uber-Dimension (or its correlate) and it left no visible trail 
(unless Hermione was leaking jet-fuel).  Time will not record it, 
because it is a violation of Time's rules.  But it is there.  We
all 
saw it.  

Any time you "go back" to a place you've already been,
you 
necessarily make a loop.  It's as simple as that.  It doesn't
matter 
if you drag Hermione back with her little feet touching the line the 
whole way.  That would just be a two-dimensional loop. Time isn't 
looping, Hermione is.

Now, Hermione1 is still going to Arithmancy, and Hermione2 decides 
to go to Divination (put another Action!Hermione at 9:00am to 
represent this).  Looking down at the Timeline, you see no evidence 
of HOW this state of affairs came to be, you only see Hermione in 
two places, simultaneously, "as if" both selves were
"always" there.

You can repeat this a third time for Muggle Studies.  Then, after 
the third and final Hermione arrives, we see the ultimate record of 
Time for the hour between 9:00am and 10:00am on September 2, 1993.

Because 9:00am-10:00am, September 2, 1993,  is "always" the
same, 
exact hour, however many times Hermione uses the Time-Turner will 
determine how many Hermiones will populate the hour and, whatever 
the number, they will seem "always" to have been there.

But, "always" is a word from Time's limited vocabulary. 
In 
actuality, the "always" that we end up with is not the only
"always" 
that ever was, nor is it the only "always" that could ever
have 
been. 

If Professor Trelawney were to throttle Hermione2-- before the 
second turning of the Time-Turner, before we lifted Hermione's 
little feet from 10:00 back to 9:00, again-- then Hermione would 
only  "always"  have been two places during that hour.  It is
only 
because Hermione lived to turn the Time-Turner twice that she will 
now "always" be three places during that hour.

In addition to explaining why Hermione is in for an early menopause, 
bboy's metabolic riff further underscores this point.

Though we finally see all three Hermiones in the 9:00am to 10:00am 
slot, we know that Hermione3 is a metabolic-hour older than 
Hermione2, and two metabolic-hours older than Hermione1.  

This demonstrates that each iteration of Hermione had to survive 
(and choose to use a Time-Turner)--without the assistance of the 
older version of herself-- in order to "send back" that older 
version.
 
Though Time stubbornly shows Hermiones 1,2 & 3 as 
being "always" "simultaneously"  there, we know that
they arrived in 
a serial fashion, and they still bear the metabolic proof of it.  
Therefore, each is dependant on the pre-survival of the other.  

This has important implications for Harry by the lake, because:

You cannot exist as a savior-self that is even one metabolic-second 
older than you were when you would have perished without it.

Say it again. 

You cannot exist as a savior-self that is even one metabolic-second 
older than you were when you would have perished without it.

To say otherwise is not only improbable, it is impossible.

Therefore, older Harry could not initially save younger Harry--even 
though Time insists that he was "always" present in both
roles.  
Younger Harry needed to survive long enough to be older Harry--so 
that older Harry could, in turn,  go back and "always" be
there.  At 
least "always" in  Time's point of view, which is warped
by its need 
to adhere to its own rules and its very denial of the Time-Travel 
event.

Bboy seems to recognize this, at least briefly,  in #57776 when he 
says: "I won't get into what happens if your original self
dies 
during that 10 years because it obviously didn't happen or you 
wouldn't have been able to be age 30 and go back in time."

Quod erat demonstrandum.

Time-Travelers will experience the "always" presence of
themselves, 
because whenever they act in the Relevant Span, they are back inside 
of Time, once again subject to its rules, and it's denial of 
the "return trip."

But we, in the Uber-Dimension of your kitchen, know differently.  
And we have snacks. 

* * * * *Narrative Function* * * * *

I neither accept Laurasia's mandate for a Two Option universe,
nor 
the artificial dichotomy she tries to create by insisting that 
theory choice is driven by the reader's narrative preferences.

Acctually, the "it-was-always-that-way" theory seems to
largely 
render the narrative work of Time-Travel superfluous. Laurasia 
maintains that Travelers have always achieved their goals, before 
ever using the Turner, and that they don't actually change
anything. 
Under these circumstances, one doesn't wonder why the Ministry 
controls Time-Turners, one wonders why they bother to produce them 
at all.

The idea of the series' message being that Harry "only has
himself, 
and doesn't need anyone else" is rather perverse inasmuch as
he has 
never yet survived an adventure without a great deal of assistance.

Even under Laurasia's theory, Harry needed Dumbledore's plan
and 
Hermione's knowledge/use of the Turner in order to "always be
there 
for himself."  Then there was McGonagall's work persuading
the 
M.o.M. to let Hermione have the Turner, and of course Lupin's 
efforts to teach Harry how to make a Patronus, in the first place.   

Next, Laurasia tries to equate rejecting her theory with denying 
that Harry created the patronus.  How she comes to this, I do not 
know.

I unequivocally believe that Harry created the "Prongs"
patronus, 
which was the one and only patronus seen in the PoA "dementors by 
the lake" scene.

I do not think Snape used a patronus there at all.  Harry may not 
know of any other means to control dementors, but he is hardly 
Snape's equal in DADA.

The only difference the reader has with my theory is that Snape is, 
as usual, protecting Harry.  In this case, protecting him in such a 
way that Harry gains the confidence he needs to finally produce 
his "Prongs," and so reap all the narrative benefits thereof.


None of the melodramatic intimations of narrative consequence obtain.

Nonetheless, I have no doubt that Harry will someday be surprised to 
find what an ally he has in Snape. Especially in light of all the 
guilt and anger Harry is busily displacing in unreasoned hatred of 
Snape, by the end of OoP.  (Though Snape's new awareness of the 
Dursley's abuse is the likely source of the Order's sudden 
intervention on Harry's behalf.)

Along the lines of  bluesqueak's "Good vs. Nice" review
(#79453), 
with which I agree 200%,  I'll say that Snape is as Good (and
Brave) 
as he is "not Nice."  He has helped Harry in every book, and
we 
haven't seen the best of him yet.

It is not rational to say that my requiring the Traveler to survive 
long enough to "go back" would allow mass resurrections.
There is 
just no basis for this statement.  Moreover, when this discussion 
started, one of my first postulates was that Time-Travel could not 
bring back the dead or soul-sucked, and I thought we, at least, all 
agreed on that.

As to the grayness of HP's moral landscape, I am on record,
previous 
to the TBAY posts you laud, Laurasia, as to its being very gray, 
indeed.  This is not at all altered by Snape's helping Harry.  
(Although, your being Kirstini's alter-ego WOULD explain a few 
things. )

Rather than causing gaps in the narrative, my account 1) joins 
seamlessly with Snape's established character development, 2)
offers 
the "least inventive" explanation of how Fudge, etc. knew the 
dementors had tried to kiss Harry, 3) is perfectly supported by 
Snape's proximity and Harry's limited vision in each version
of the 
experience, and 4) explains the repeated use of the dementor scenes 
during Occlumency lessons in OoP.  

At the risk of inbreeding, I'll point out that more on these
points 
can be found in my posts leading up to this Troll wrestling event: # 
# 78215, 78258, 78273, 79068.  

Let me add this little smidgen to my facial comparisons in # 79068 
(Occlumency dementor scene), not only is Harry's "screwing up
his 
face" in the "Snape among the dementors" vision (OoP 591)
consistent 
with what Harry1 would have been doing as he fought for 
consciousness, (PoA , 383-84 ) but it is what Harry2 is described as 
doing as he tries to see across the lake (PoA, 411).  

Finally, JKR is sometimes criticized for descriptive repetition, but 
repetition is a time-honored literary device that not only unifies a 
text, but infuses it with meaning by creating internal symbolism.  
Next time you think you hear an old bell ringing, listen.  Give it a 
chance to tell you something.      

Talisman, off to Knock-turn Alley for that Action!Hand of Glory. 





 





From sofdog_2000 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 14:17:37 2003
From: sofdog_2000 at yahoo.com (sofdog_2000)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 14:17:37 -0000
Subject: Harry's Powers
In-Reply-To: <bj4o9k+gm93@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj4t61+5077@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79636

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Potterfanme" <fc26det at a...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" <annemehr at y...> 
> wrote:
> > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Emily" 
<pinoypartygal at a...> 
> 
> Susan again:
> I think Lily's protection and Harry's inborn powers are separate.  
I 
> think Lily's protection is more of a shield type protection similar 
> to the Protego charm and that is why Harry is safe at Petunia's.  
> That protection is not in his blood so to speak.  It is around him 
> all the time but reinforced when he is with a blood relative of 
> Lily's.  We know Petunia has a hard time looking at Harry much less 
> ever touching him.  If Lily's protection is in his blood, wouldn't 
> Petunia have to at least have some sort of physical contact with 
him 
> to reinforce it?  If it is more like a shield charm, her just being 
a 
> blood relative would reinforce it.  
> 
> The power that Harry was born with to my mind would be more like 
the 
> Priori Incantatem situation.  I think when LV attacked him the 
first 
> time the cut on Harry's head worked in a similar way as his wand in 
> GOF.  But instead of the wands battling each other, the scar took 
> away some of LV's powers and left him less than a man.  I think 
this 
> is why Harry was able to control the Priori Incantatem so well in 
> GOF.  He obviously had much more power than LV at that time if he 
was 
> able to send the beads back toward LV.
> 
> When LV took Harry's blood, the blood itself with the Priori 
> Incantatum type power removed the immortality in LV that he worked 
so 
> hard to acquire.
> 
> Susan


Sof:

Actually, Lily's sacrifice is a different protection from the blood 
charm that protects Harry at Petunia's house. Voldemort is very 
particular about this. He worked the blood charm on Harry *because* 
of the nature of Lily's protection. By accepting Harry, Petunia 
sealed the pact and by kicking him out, she would be breaking it. 

Voldemort and Dumbledore have both been very specific in explaining 
that Lily's death was a countercharm that lingers in Harry's blood 
protecting him personally from her killer. And the blood charm on 
Petunia's residence provides a location of sanctuary where Harry 
cannot be harmed by his mother's killer. In "Goblet of Fire" 
Voldemort gets around the first charm by using some of Harry's blood 
to recreate himself. He can now touch Harry, but he states that the 
other magic still prevents him from harming Harry in 4 Privet Drive.

So there is still one more refuge for Harry. This makes perfect sense 
given Dumbledore's insistence that Harry always go home for a while, 
and that he remain inside the house following the Dementor attack. If 
that protection was no longer in place, there would be no reason to 
send Harry back to the Dursleys at the end of "Goblet of Fire" 
and "Order of the Phoenix." 




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Wed Sep  3 14:10:32 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (B Arrowsmith)
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 15:10:32 +0100
Subject: Inside Dumbledore's Brain, but I digress.
Message-ID: <6118B31B-DE18-11D7-B253-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79637


Laura wrote:
 >>
I think you're reading too much into DD's behavior. I can support
the theory that DD's increasing fallibility is a manifestation of
Harry's growing maturity. But I don't see evidence of anything
beyond that. And I would be surprised if JKR was trying to enlarge
her world beyond what she describes. We'll just have to wait for the
last 2 books to find out what the story is, though.

I may not agree with everything you propose, but I sure do enjoy
reading your posts. Rock on, Kneasy!
 >>

I probably am reading too much into Dumbledore, but it's fun to 
speculate on the motives behind behaviour that seems incongruent.
Just accepting everything at face value is  not an option for those 
with a devious, sneaky, Machiavellian (even sly!) outlook on life.
Suspicion of motives allows for an expansion of the playground, a 
chance to try and out-guess the author; irresistible in a series so  
long and so detailed.

How often do we get an opportunity like this?

A work in progress, no-one leaning over your shoulder to say "Oh, it 
was all right, but I didn't like the ending." Characterisations that 
almost parallel familiar fictional constructs, but with enough of a 
difference to add the zest of uncertainty. A plot that branches and 
sub-divides into a delta of conjecture. So long as one stays within the 
bounds of existing canon, (a wide and surprisingly elastic limitation), 
the possible plot interpretations depend only on your own ingenuity. 
And then we get to do it all over again when the next book is published!

Of course, many of us will have to shamefacedly shovel our pet theories 
into the bin, hope no-one checks the back-posts and pray that fellow 
posters are sporting enough not to refer to the disaster that is our 
speculative record. There's little that is more fun than watching 
someone going out on a limb, only to see Nemesis, in the shape of JKR, 
come along and saw it off. That it has and will happen to so many of us 
only adds to the communal enjoyment. A quiet hum of satisfaction 
pervades the site. "Never did like that idea," you reflect smugly. 
"Told you so!" As De La Rochefoucault observed, "For true happiness it 
is not enough to succeed, your friends must also fail." Cynical, but 
with a grain of uncomfortable truth. At HPfGU it should be re-written: 
"True happiness is contemplating the myriad of ways in which everyone 
can be wrong."

In real life nobody enjoys being wrong. It's uncomfortable and one of 
the criteria for failure. Not here. Posters almost revel in it. "OK, I  
was wrong, but it was such fun I'm going to do it again." The mistakes 
don't matter. What does matter is the good feeling that comes when a 
new slant on some aspect of the stories gels in your mind. Then you 
have the masochistic pleasure of seeing it torn to shreds by a ravening 
horde of analytic piranha. Just wait awhile, it'll be your turn to 
return the compliment soon enough.

The books speak to each reader in a different voice; for some it is the 
emotional development of a teenager, for others - a tale of stout deeds 
and derring-do; a melting pot of possible romances; a fascination with 
minutiae; drama; humour; a world of wonder. Each bring their view to 
the site giving insights to others that may not have been considered 
before. (As a cynic, I think that it is this that distresses some of 
the mainstream writers. So many books classed as 'modern literature' 
have but a single 'message'. "This is important," they say, "and I'm 
going to pour it through your eyeballs until it squirts out of your 
ears." Yuk. Do they believe we can't think for ourselves?) Those fans 
who love Science Fiction will be familiar with the distinction between 
the 'Danes (the munDane) and the imagi-Nation. Not much doubt which 
tribe the posters on HPfGU owe their allegiance to.

The spectrum of fans is a wonder in itself. From obsessive LOON to 
free-wheeling FF enthusiast; from teenager to pensioner (getting close  
myself), no problem - log on, see what entertains you today. It's  a 
rare day when something doesn't catch your fancy. The diversity is the 
safe-guard against Fan-aticism, no in-group imposing their (perfectly, 
immutably, correct) cultish beliefs on poor unsuspecting members who 
joined with the mistaken idea that they were going to enjoy themselves. 
Your paraphrasing of Voltaire is proof positive of the success that the 
Elves have nurtured.

How did I get here? I started with Dumbledore and end up  with elves 
and Voltaire. Is this a cause for concern, I ask myself. Probably not. 
Where's the fun in thinking in straight lines?

Kneasy 
    

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From cressida_tt at hotmail.com  Wed Sep  3 14:29:57 2003
From: cressida_tt at hotmail.com (cressida_tt)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 14:29:57 -0000
Subject: pumpkin pasties
In-Reply-To: <20030903004359.27386.qmail@web14208.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bj4tt5+7bct@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79638

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Tyler Hewitt <tahewitt at y...> 
wrote:
> JDR asks
> ...are pumpkin pasties just pumpkin pies?
> 
Cressida replies: Pasties of a wide variety of types and flavours are 
widely eaten in all parts of the UK. The most traditional kind is the 
Cornish pasty which is filled with meat and potato and generally has 
shortcrust pastry folded around the filling. They can have any kind 
of savoury filling though and somethimes have puff pastry instead. 
You can buy them fresh from bakeries and pre-packed and frozen in all 
types of food shops.

Examples can be seen here:
http://www.pastybakery.com/pasty.htm







From eloiseherisson at aol.com  Wed Sep  3 14:32:22 2003
From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloiseherisson at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 10:32:22 EDT
Subject: ADMIN: Covering Old Ground
Message-ID: <1ec.f1622b8.2c875576@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79639

Greetings from Hexquaters!

The list is extremely busy these days, and many members are frustrated
to see the same questions being asked again and again. HPfGU does not
ban the discussion of old topics. What *is* very irritating to other
list members, however, is the repeating of points and questions that have
been discussed *very* recently. Therefore, we would like all posters
to do the following:

Please read the VFAQ and OoP FAQ (links on homepage) which will give
you an overview of the most frequently asked questions. Please check
to see if your questions have already been covered. Asking why Harry
couldn't see the Thestrals at the end of GoF, for instance, is not
acceptable, but giving a *new* theory as to *why* he couldn't, on the 
other hand, *is*.

Please at least glance at the Fantastic Posts site,
<A HREF="http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/faq/">http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/faq/</A> (also available via link on home page)
so that you know what is there and where to check up on various old
topics of conversation. If you want to discuss something which is
likely to have been discussed in the past (whether Snape is a Vampire,
for example) you can then refer to old posts on the subject and build
on these, rather than presenting as new ideas which have already been
documented.

Please, if you are not regularly keeping up to date with 
discussion at least glance over the subject lines of posts for the
last few days, preferably a week or so, so as to know whether what you
want to say may have been dicussed recently. If you want to reply to a
thread, then please read *all* of that thread first.

Please attempt to use the search function. It isn't great, but you
should get some results with persistence.

If you see someone bringing up a topic that has recently been
discussed, please don't get angry at that person. However, feel free
to guide that person towards previous discussions where relevant.

Thank you

The HPfGU Administration Team


    
    



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From eloiseherisson at aol.com  Wed Sep  3 14:31:37 2003
From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloiseherisson at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 10:31:37 EDT
Subject: ADMIN: Less Is More
Message-ID: <137.24703a35.2c875549@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79640

Greetings from Hexquarters!

As the initial excitement following the landing of the much fabled and long 
awaited phoenix begins to die down, may we take the opportunity to remind you 

of something?

Snipping.

No, no, *not* SHIPping, *snipping*!

Yes. That. Editing out unnecessary material from the posts to which you 
reply.

You know. You read your way through a long message:

He said.
She said.
So-and-so commented.
etc., etc...

And somewhere in the middle of it all is a point that you just *have* to 
answer.

Please folks, before you reply, will you cut down the original message to
*the minimum needed to place your own comments into context*?

At present we seem to be receiving a large number of posts where the quotes 
far, far exceed the new comments in length. We want to read what *you* have 
to 
say, not what s/he said for the fifth or fiftieth time.

This is a Very High Volume List. It helps our bandwidth, it helps those on 
Digest (who otherwise have to scroll repeatedly through the same posts over 
and 
over again to get to the new stuff) and it helps the sanity of your Elves if 
everyone abides by our snipping conventions.

And it makes *your* comments stand out much more clearly.

Please assume that anyone reading your post *is* following the thread, but 
remember that they are not mind-readers, so they will not know which precise 
point you are replying to unless you quote it.

Our convention here is to place quotes *before* comments. Please abide by 
this.

Would you also please clearly attribute quotes at the top, preferably cutting 

quotees signatures from the bottom, so that they are not later mistaken for 
the attribution of your own thoughts (trust us, it happens).

What do we mean by quotes before comments and cutting the signature 
and placing it at the top for attribution?  This:



Weezy Elf wrote:
> We have quite a lot of interesting, fun new members, don't we? >>>

We certainly do!  It's been a bit tricky keeping up with all the 
discussion, but it's great to have so many new people to discuss new 
canon with!

--Kelley Elf



With many thanks,

Your List Administration Team


    
    



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From eloiseherisson at aol.com  Wed Sep  3 14:31:54 2003
From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloiseherisson at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 10:31:54 EDT
Subject: ADMIN: Who Said That?
Message-ID: <1d3.105f10b1.2c87555a@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79641

Greetings from Hexquaters!

There seems to have been an increase recently in the number of posts which 
fail to attribute quotes.

Please would you make sure that you do this. 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"> <Harry at Pott..wrote:> ---In 
HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Dick > <dicktracy at y...> wrote:> > ---In 
HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tom" <triddle at y. > wrote:
>>>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 the 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.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From eloiseherisson at aol.com  Wed Sep  3 14:32:51 2003
From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloiseherisson at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 10:32:51 EDT
Subject: ADMIN: Now Me
Message-ID: <175.1f7a9d68.2c875593@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79642

Greetings from Hexquarters!

Recently we have noticed a huge increase in 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. ;-)

O.W.L. T.R.E.A.T

Our Wizarding Leaders: The Really Exasperated Admin Team ;-)



    
    



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From tuck668 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 23:16:38 2003
From: tuck668 at yahoo.com (tuck668)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 23:16:38 -0000
Subject: How long are the classes?
In-Reply-To: <bj36e2+eu23@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj38cm+rsof@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79643

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "michaelkgidlow" 
<Veritas771 at h...> wrote:
> I always assumed a standard class was 45 minutes, but in book 5, 
> both a single period and a dubble period are refered to as being one 
> and a half hours long. What's up with this?

I'm not sure about class length, but I think that a 'single period' 
refers to just Gryffindors (or Ravenclaws/Slytherins/Hufflepuffs.. 
one house) while a 'double period' refers to having a class with two 
houses such as Gryffindors and Slytherin together (potions, for 
example).

-Anna





From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  2 22:40:02 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 22:40:02 -0000
Subject: Elixir of Life/Stone/Voldemort's Mortephobia
In-Reply-To: <bj2v8f+dml2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj3682+9gtg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79644

"Tricia Hemans" <hardcoreukuk at y...> wrote:  Arguable: In the first 
book it said that by drinking the Elixir of Life it would make the 
drinker immortal, but later in the story Dumbledore says to Harry 
that the Flamel's had enough Elixir stored in them to set their 
affairs straight. But, if drinking the Elixir of Life makes you 
immortal then if you had some, you would never die, ever. You can't 
just be immortal as long as you have a certain item, then that would 
mean you could still die. You would be still mortal like Achilles. 
Immortality means you can never die.

---> "msbeadsley": I thought that's why Voldemort was after the 
Stone, and not a (Flamel's) stock of elixir.  He wanted to be able to 
continue to make the elixir indefinitely, so that he could drink it 
forever and be, in effect, immortal.

Or maybe, although not as likely IMO, Voldemort thought the elixir, 
on top of all the other immortality magic he had hunted up and doused 
himself with, might just nudge him over into god-never-die status.

Why *is* Voldemort so determined not to die, anyway?  Does he believe 
he will face some sort of other-side-of-the-veil Wizengamot?  Perhaps 
it's like the priori incantatem effect; if he dies (and someone else 
may have said this fairly recently; am I cribbing?) and goes beyond 
the veil he will be surrounded by all those he sent ahead.  He seems 
to have way more than the usual "my brain cannot deal with the 
concept of its own non-existence" fear of death.





From oodaday at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Sep  3 01:18:17 2003
From: oodaday at yahoo.co.uk (dooda)
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 18:18:17 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Patronuses Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: Things that will come into play later
In-Reply-To: <20030903010619.82137.qmail@web20509.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20030903011817.96470.qmail@web20711.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79645


--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mom31" <mom31 at r...> wrote:
>> Was Hermione's otter a clue like Sirius's code >>name "snuffles" 
>>(snuffed out)?  Add a P to otter, and what do you >>get?>  

bohcoo <sydenmill at msn.com> wrote: 
>When I read that Hermoine's Patronus was an otter 
>I immediately 
>thought of OTTER-y St. Catchpole, Ron's hometown.


Dooda says:

I always figured that Hermione had the Otter as her Patronus, because it was JKR's favorite animal. Since Hermione is loosely based on JKR it just made sense to me that an otter would be her Patronus. I guess I never really read much more into it. Sometimes an otter is just an otter.

Dooda ( whose patronus would be a giant pair of knitting needles <g>)





---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From ellyn337 at earthlink.net  Wed Sep  3 01:37:06 2003
From: ellyn337 at earthlink.net (mclellyn)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 01:37:06 -0000
Subject: Snape Vampire Theory
In-Reply-To: <bj2sea+7rfm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj3gk2+f8tt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79646

mclellyn wrote:
> > 
> > "Potions lessons took place down in one of the dungeons.  It was 
> > colder here than up in the main castle, and would have been quite 
> > creepy enough without the pickled animals floating in glass jars 
> all around the walls."
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> > Could be Vampire!Snape's prior meals?
> 
>> mel's question; Why would he save them? Do you save eggshells? 
> Chicken skin? Banana peels?
> 
> 

Gadfly McLellyn question;  Those pickled animals don't seem to be 
for use in potions class so why are they there?  I'd expect them for 
biology which does not seem to be taught at Hogwarts.  They always go 
to his locked cupboard for supplies, and not to any of those jars on 
the walls.  I was thinking it might be a Slytherin thing.  Like the 
Black's mounting all their house elves heads on the wall.  Snape 
displays all his victims too!!<vbg>

>  //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> > SS/PS Chapter 8 The Potions Master Page 137 of US paperback, 
Snapes famous introductory speech....
> > 
> > "I can teach you how to bottle fame, brew glory, even stopper 
> > death....."  
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Stoppering death kind of sounds vampirish to me.
> > 
> 
> Mel's comment: Sounds like brewing poison to me.
> 
> 

Gadfly McLellyn question:  Could it be read he could stop death?  
JKR does like to play with us.
> /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
<snipped canon of Snape missing meals>--
> --
> > Soooooo Snape isn't always eating at dinner time!
> 
> 
> Mel again: He was royally p*****. He was also royally elated that 
> he'd caught Potter in such flagrant disregard for the LAW.
> He was probably the Master "On Call" and as such had already eaten 
or planned to later. Without all the noise and bother of the sorting 
> going on around him. Maybe he just wasn't hungry. *I* don't always 
> eat at dinner time, and you'll have to take my word for it, but I'm 
> not a vampire.
> 
>

Gadfly McLellyn:  Is there canon to support any teacher is on call 
at mealtime?  Sounds like you get kind of grumpy when you miss a 
meal! <vbg>  Me too actually.
> /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
--
><more snipping> --
> > "I was just showing Harry my grindylow," said Lupin pleasantly, 
> > pointing to the tank.
> > 
> > "Fascinating," said Snape, without looking at it."
> 
> 
> Mel asks: Can't look at it? Why would he want to look at it? Remus 
> and Harry weren't even looking at it! That Grindylowe line was a 
> ruse, remember? Not much blood in a Grindylowe either, I don't 
think. I mean, it's not like Remus said, I was just telling Harry 
that Grindylowe goes very well with a nice Stilton.
> 
> Melpomene

Gadfly McLellyn:  You have to admit that Snape is always pretty 
murderous with Neville's toad!  Maybe he acts that way because of all 
those meals he has missed from being "on call".  <vbg>  Are you sure 
you are not a vampire?  It would never occur to me to have a nice 
Stilton with my Grindylowe. ;)  





From erinellii at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 15:11:15 2003
From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 15:11:15 -0000
Subject: How long are the classes?
In-Reply-To: <bj38cm+rsof@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj50aj+ngqg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79647

anna wrote:
  I think that a 'single period' refers to just Gryffindors (or 
Ravenclaws/Slytherins/Hufflepuffs..  one house) while a 'double 
period' refers to having a class with two houses such as Gryffindors 
and Slytherin together (potions, for example).
 

  
  I think that too, but it raises some questions.... Why do they 
never call the Care of Magical Creatures class "double" - it includes 
Slytherins and Gryffindors, right?  In fact, the only class I 
remember them ever calling double is Potions.  And that would make 
sense if double referred to the length of class, because there are 
probably some potions that it takes an extra long time to make.  Wait-
 maybe they did have double Herbology one year...

does anyone else have any insight on this?

Erin





From ellyn337 at earthlink.net  Wed Sep  3 01:52:04 2003
From: ellyn337 at earthlink.net (mclellyn)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 01:52:04 -0000
Subject: Harry's Powers
In-Reply-To: <bj2cdc+m69j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj3hg4+2uvs@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79648

> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Potterfanme" <fc26det at a...> 
> wrote:
> 
> > Now the prophecy states that the person with the power to 
> > vanquish the Dark Lord will have power the Dark Lord knows not. (not a 
> > direct quote).   
<pretty big snip>> 

Gadfly McLellyn:
see my post "79480" Why the Veil? & Harry's Power for one theory on 
what Harry's power could be.

> > 
> Emily wrote:
> That's a very interesting theory. Though I'm not sure what Harry's 
> power is, I agree with you in that I do not think that Harry was 
> actually meant to kill LV. Now why do I think this? You ask. Well, 
> after book four it was clear to me that LV was very much human and 
> I think that is why DD had that gleam of triumph in his eyes. 
<another big snip>

Gadfly McLellyn
I think too that DD feels when LV took Harry's blood it made him more 
vulnerable and human.  I think there is a little hint of it after he 
rises:

GOF Chapter 33 The Death Eaters, US paperback version page 646:

"Listen to me, reliving family history..." he (LV) said 
quietly, "why, I am growing quite sentimental...But look, Harry!  My 
true family returns..."

LV sentimental?  Hmmmm, could be why DD had hope in his eyes.






From watsola79 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 15:15:28 2003
From: watsola79 at yahoo.com (watsola79)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 15:15:28 -0000
Subject: Neville's broken nose
Message-ID: <bj50ig+5nbc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79649

In the battle scene in OOP, after Neville's nose gets broken and he 
is taunted by Bellatrix about his parents, he screams "I DOE YOU HAB" 
at her.   

I have always interpreted this as "I DO YOU HARM", but I recently got 
to thinking about it, and it seems a grammatically and syntactically 
*odd* thing to say.  

Are there any other thoughts or interpretations as to what Neville 
meant to say?  

- Lana Lovegood




From helen at odegard.com  Wed Sep  3 15:23:36 2003
From: helen at odegard.com (Helen R. Granberry)
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 08:23:36 -0700
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione SHIP question
In-Reply-To: <bj4g6t+l8cs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000001c3722f$58783c50$6401a8c0@helenw1>

No: HPFGUIDX 79650


Jim: I'll try.? I'm an H/H shipper, but I don't go around looking
for tiny clues ? I don't care whose pillow lands on whose in Charms
class.? I see Harry and Hermione converging all the time. They've
changed each other and are more complete together than apart.

<<<snip>>>

She understands him better than anyone else.

<<<snip>>>



Helen (me): Excellent, excellent post, Jim :)

I am an H/Hr shipper for similar reasons (though I am not opposed to
R/Hr). There is probably more evidence for R/Hr, especially when you
bring in JKR quotes, however, there is also plenty of evidence for H/Hr.
More importantly (at least for my own shipping preferences) is that H/Hr
is the more compatible pairing. I was really pleased to see the
progression in OotP, and Harry's growing appreciation of Hermione. He
has a voice in his head now that sounds like her -- she is his Voice of
Reason. 

One point I would like to address... that is, Hermione understanding
Harry better than anyone else. JKR may actually intend an R/Hr romance,
however, the fact that Hermione is JKR's admitted younger self and
someone who 'speaks for her' in the narrative, may explain why Hermione
understands Harry so well. Hermione understands Harry better than anyone
else because *JKR* understands Harry better than anyone else. 

One point some people seem to miss is that Hermione's feelings are
unclear at this point. Ron clearly has a romantic interest in Hermione
and Harry clearly doesn't (for now, at least). After GoF, I think a lot
of people expected some progression on this front, yet none was made.
There are indications that she may care for either boy or neither (she's
still writing long letters to Viktor Krum). 

I am inclined towards the Farmer in the Dell theory. That is, Ron has
feelings for Hermione, Hermione has feelings for Harry and Harry is a
free agent. I wonder if JKR's choice of names might be an indication of
a future love triangle. Hermione was the daughter of Helen of Troy and
was fought over by two men. An argument against this theory would be
that the romance in the story has never been a big enough part to
justify something as soap opera-ish as a love triangle.

At any rate, we shall see. You make some really excellent points, and my
shipping tends to fall along the lines of who makes the best team rather
than the hints and clues. Not that they aren't an indication of what may
happen, but that is just not how I ship. I pick the team I like best
rather than the team I think has the best chance of winning. 

Helen, who still ships Jo/Laurie




From eloiseherisson at aol.com  Wed Sep  3 15:22:58 2003
From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloiseherisson at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 11:22:58 EDT
Subject: How long are the classes?
Message-ID: <ad.32b477ae.2c876152@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79651


Anna:

>I'm not sure about class length, but I think that a 'single period' 
>refers to just Gryffindors (or Ravenclaws/Slytherins/Hufflepuffs.. 
>one house) while a 'double period' refers to having a class with two 
>houses such as Gryffindors and Slytherin together (potions, for 
>example).

Whilst this makes some sense, I'd have to point out that at least in British 
English, a 'double' period or lesson is the usual way to refer to a lesson 
which takes up two standard length lesson slots on the timetable. If JKR is using 
it as you suggest, to imply a combined lesson with another house, then she is 
using a standard English term to mean something non-standard and at variance 
with its received sense.

I also think that DADA is taught in single house groups (I do not recall 
mixed DADA lessons, but I may be wrong) and on their first day back at Hogwarts in 
OoP, Harry's class have "double" DADA.

I think I am not alone in suspecting that whilst JKR is obsessive about some 
details of her writing, there are other details (frequently to do with time) 
about which she simply does not care. For instance, way back I tried to fit 
Lupin's werewolf transformations to a lunar calendar and failed miserably. It 
just didn't work. 

~Eloise

    



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Sep  3 15:29:55 2003
From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Ivan=20Vablatsky?=)
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 16:29:55 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Neville's broken nose
In-Reply-To: <bj50ig+5nbc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030903152955.41169.qmail@web21507.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79652

Lana Lovegood wrote:

>>In the battle scene in OOP, after Neville's nose gets broken and he 
is taunted by Bellatrix about his parents, he screams "I DOE YOU HAB" 
at her.   

I have always interpreted this as "I DO YOU HARM", but I recently got 
to thinking about it, and it seems a grammatically and syntactically 
*odd* thing to say.  

Are there any other thoughts or interpretations as to what Neville 
meant to say?<<

Hans in Holland:

I think he's saying, "I know you have". (had the pleasure of meeting your
parents).



________________________________________________________________________
Want to chat instantly with your online friends?  Get the FREE Yahoo!
Messenger http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/



From xmezumiiru at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 15:31:00 2003
From: xmezumiiru at yahoo.com (An'nai Jiriki)
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 08:31:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Neville's broken nose
In-Reply-To: <bj50ig+5nbc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030903153101.63821.qmail@web12205.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79653


--- watsola79 <watsola79 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> In the battle scene in OOP, after Neville's nose
> gets broken and he 
> is taunted by Bellatrix about his parents, he
> screams "I DOE YOU HAB" 
> at her.   
> 
> I have always interpreted this as "I DO YOU
HARM",...

Chris:
I have read that as "I Know you Have." (From listening
to my lil sis talk with repeated sinus infections)

=====
"You irritate me. Kill me now." ~Javert, Les Miserables

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From erinellii at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 15:30:46 2003
From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 15:30:46 -0000
Subject: Neville's broken nose
In-Reply-To: <bj50ig+5nbc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj51f6+47dd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79654

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "watsola79" <watsola79 at y...> 
wrote:
> In the battle scene in OOP, after Neville's nose gets broken and he 
> is taunted by Bellatrix about his parents, he screams "I DOE YOU 
HAB"  at her.   
> 
> I have always interpreted this as "I DO YOU HARM", but I recently 
got to thinking about it, and it seems a grammatically and 
syntactically *odd* thing to say.  
> 
> Are there any other thoughts or interpretations as to what Neville 
> meant to say?  


  Yes, silly.  Bellatrix just finished saying she'd "met" Neville's 
parents, and Neville said "I know you have!" meaning he knew EXACTLY 
what Bellatrix had done to his parents...

Erin




From music4masses at earthlink.net  Wed Sep  3 15:36:20 2003
From: music4masses at earthlink.net (Erin)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 11:36:20 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Neville's broken nose
In-Reply-To: <bj50ig+5nbc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20030903113430.00a75728@pop.earthlink.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 79655

At 11:15 AM 9/3/2003, you wrote:

>In the battle scene in OOP, after Neville's nose gets broken and he
>is taunted by Bellatrix about his parents, he screams "I DOE YOU HAB"
>at her.
>
>I have always interpreted this as "I DO YOU HARM", but I recently got
>to thinking about it, and it seems a grammatically and syntactically
>*odd* thing to say.
>
>Are there any other thoughts or interpretations as to what Neville
>meant to say?
>
>- Lana Lovegood
>
>


Erin H.:

I thought Neville said "I know you have." Maybe I'm wrong, but I thought it 
was a very poignant moment in OotP.

Erin883514.jpg 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From hpfanmatt at gmx.net  Wed Sep  3 14:29:08 2003
From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 14:29:08 -0000
Subject: Aurors/Unforgiveable Curses (was "Aiming Wand at Bellatrix...")
In-Reply-To: <bj1s7t+e6cf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj4trk+uhsi@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79656

--- evangelina wrote:

> But, I don't feel comfortable thinking of 
> Aurors as people who enjoy causing pain... 

and went on for that reason to reject the
view that use of the unforgiveable curses
requires a degree of sadism.  

My response:

But one of the oft-repeated lessons of the 
series is that access to a position of
authority is no guarantee of a person's
character.  I would hope that the MoM tries
hard to recruit Aurors who are good people
and who will not abuse their positions of
authority, much as with our RW police forces.
Yet we know that, particularly in times of
struggle, authority does get abused (and
sometimes such abuses are even sanctioned).
There is police brutality in the RW, and
there doubtless were Aurors who carried 
things too far in the WW under Crouch.

To me, JKR's account of the Aurors being
authorized to torture and dominate suspects
(or witnesses), in order to better fight
crime, works powerfully as an allegory for
many more or less analogous RW situations.
It brings to bear, too, much of the moral 
complexity of those situations: although
JKR is pretty clearly espousing a value 
judgment that would reject such tactics, 
her older readers cannot help but be aware 
that the moral posture is more complicated
than Harry realizes.

-- Matt





From talisman22457 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 15:41:31 2003
From: talisman22457 at yahoo.com (Talisman)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 15:41:31 -0000
Subject: Neville's broken nose
In-Reply-To: <bj50ig+5nbc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj523b+ojvv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79657

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "watsola79" <watsola79 at y...> 
wrote:
> <snip> after Neville's nose gets broken and he  is taunted by 
Bellatrix about his parents, he screams "I DOE YOU HAB" at her.   
>  I have always interpreted this as "I DO YOU HARM", <snip>> > Are 
there any other thoughts or interpretations as to what Neville 
> meant to say?   
> - Lana Lovegood

Talisman, skipping by with her Stubby Boardman CD, suggests:

I believe Neville is saying "I KNOW YOU HAVE!" To wit:"I know you, 
Bellatrix, have had the pleasure of meeting my parents, and by 
implication, "I know what you did to them, you witch!" 

Do you know, the moment I saw Neville's nose break I thought of 
someone else's nose.

".. . his nose was very long and crooked, as though it had been 
broken at least twice.  This man's name was Albus dumbledore." (SS 8)


There have been JKR interview hints that could indicate that Neville 
will end up a Professor at Hogwarts.

If Neville gets another broken nose in book 6 . . . 

Talisman, now weeping openly, "Oh god, no time turners, 
please. . . ."




From morgan.cole at nf.sympatico.ca  Wed Sep  3 10:34:02 2003
From: morgan.cole at nf.sympatico.ca (T.J.)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 10:34:02 -0000
Subject: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj3g2m+m9hv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj4g2q+6fhd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79658

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Wanda Sherratt" 
<wsherratt3338 at r...> wrote:
I think [Dumbledore's] plan was a perfectly good one, and it's 
> not exactly his fault that Harry and Sirius thought they knew 
better 
> and tried something else.  Their plans didn't work out any better 
> than his, so why is he the only one apologizing at the end?  Maybe 
> because he's the only one with the guts to admit that he isn't 
> always right and always perfect; it would be refreshing to hear 
> something remotely similar coming from Harry for a change.
> 
> Wanda

As a complete neophyte on this list I just wanted to add that after 
11 years of teaching high school, if Harry HAD offered an apology in 
this situation, I would consider it highly unrealistic writing.  I 
don't think most 15-year-olds have the quality of detachment 
necessary to apologize in a situation like this...I think Harry 
probably does owe D. somewhat of an apology in return, but D., like 
any experienced teacher of teenagers, should know better than to 
expect one.

tj





From msn.tsf at hccnet.nl  Mon Sep  1 16:49:59 2003
From: msn.tsf at hccnet.nl (Joris)
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 18:49:59 +0200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Pensieves objectivity
References: <bivr4u+th7t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003f01c370a9$14e8f060$0200a8c0@Oldpc>

No: HPFGUIDX 79659

Pip!Squeak wrote:
<<In both cases, the Pensieve appears to not so much store the
person's *memory* as use the memory to access the actual event. <snip>
So, given the evidence that Pensieves provide an objective account
of the event the 'trigger memory' is evoking; we can almost
certainly trust the prophecy to be accurate in its wording.>>

Hmm Dumbledores pensieves in which Harry enters seem indeed very objective
but DD is pretty unemotioned in those scenes as I recall correctly and he's
wise enough to realise it is important to remember things like they happend,
whatever the emotions going with those events are. 

Snape in contrary is very emotioned in the event Harry watches & he seems less wise (at least at that time) to try to stay objective on the events so his memory of them might be changed due emotions after all in my opinion.

(btw this is my first post on this list so I hope I didn't mess up that
badly)

Ender





From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 09:27:17 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 09:27:17 -0000
Subject: Inside Dumbledore's Head (was Re: Prophets without Honour)
In-Reply-To: <6189A428-DCBE-11D7-B995-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bj4c5l+3l8o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79660

Kneasy:
To go back to the chess analogy, Harry is a pawn, maybe a knight,
no more. DD is the player. He will sacrifice a knight, if he has to.

Now Sarah:
Wow, I never thought about the chess analogy before, but this fits.  
And look at all the talk of chess we have in the books!  I agree 
almost 100 percent, except for this: Harry is the king of a chess 
game.  He can't be sacrificed, because if he is, the game is lost.  
The other side (here, Voldemort and his pure-blood only mania) has 
won.  We now know Dumbledore's view about Trelawney's prophecy: he 
thinks that Harry, and Harry alone, has the power to defeat 
Voldemort.  Only Harry can destroy Voldemort, and vice versa.  Kings 
of a chess game: capture the opponents king, and the game is won.  
If Harry gets captured, all is lost.

By the way, Dumbledore's not the oldest wizard we've encountered in 
the books: one of the OWL testers comments that he (or was it a 
she?) tested Dumbledore for Dumbledore's transfiguration NEWT.  
Dumbledore might be sippig on some elixir of life, but he is the age 
he appears to be.  

Sarah





From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 06:23:45 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 06:23:45 -0000
Subject: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj3hue+50k9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj41dh+2clr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79661

>>"kiricat2001" <Zarleycat at a... wrote:
If keeping Sirius locked up in that house was Dumbledore's idea of a 
great way for Sirius to be able to live, really live, then 
Dumbledore's not being either Macchiavellian or fatherly - he's 
being sadistic.  The only way to give Sirius a chance to live was to 
find Pettigrew and bring him to justice.  We heard not a peep about 
that in OoP because everyone was so busy with the prophecy stuff. 
>>

I agree that Sirius, locked up in the childhood home he hated and had 
already fled once successfully, was left with a piss poor excuse for 
a life.  I also think that a) Sirius wanted to help with the order; 
b) he wanted to remain reasonably close to Harry (as opposed to going 
off to Acapulco or wherever the exotic mail birds were originating 
early in GoF) and c) the only real way he could do both was by being 
in residence and in charge of the Black Mansion at Grimmauld Place 
(imagine the Order trying to deal with Kreacher with no Black in 
residence).  I also think Sirius might not have been prepared for the 
impact it had on him until he'd been there a few days and committed 
to the course of, er, inaction.  All things considered then, I think 
Dumbledore didn't have much other choice than to keep stuffing Sirius 
back into the house.

> >"Wanda Sherratt" <wsherratt3338 at r...> wrote: I understand that 
people who didn't want Sirius to die might think that Dumbledore has 
the broadest shoulders so he should carry the heaviest blame, but I 
just don't see it. <snip a bunch of very true stuff>  I think his 
plan was a perfectly good one, and it's not exactly his fault that 
Harry and Sirius thought they knew better and tried something else.  
Their plans didn't work out any better than his, so why is he the 
only one apologizing at the end?  Maybe because he's the only one 
with the guts to admit that he isn't always right and always perfect; 
it would be refreshing to hear something remotely similar coming from 
Harry for a change.
>>

Harry was way beyond apologetic; he was eaten up with guilt, and DD 
pretty deftly rerouted Harry's flagellation to himself instead.  
Sirius is dead; perhaps he is apologetic after all, wherever he is.  
Where I see Dumbledore at fault is where he sees himself at fault:  
for not sharing information, and for failing to remember what 
younger, impatient boys/men are likely to be feeling.  DD takes a lot 
on himself.  He thinks, probably correctly, that he is the one with 
the best chance of coming up with a strategy to wring a victory out 
of this whole mess with Voldemort.  But a good strategist knows his 
resources, his troops, and this is where DD fell short.  His strength 
and his failing may be the same:  lack of motivating passion.  Even 
his love for Harry seems wistful and faded, where a younger man's 
(like Sirius) is dramatic and impulsive.  DD seems absolutely past 
impulses.  He seems past imagining them as well.

>"jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> (Laura) wrote: The thing that's disappointing 
about DD in OoP is his utter lack of understanding of human 
psychology.  That's where he fails, and that's what leads to Harry's 
rescue mission and Sirius's death.  DD has always been shown before 
as someone with a great deal of empathy.  His unstinting support of 
Snape is a good example-he understands the conflicts Snape faces and 
the choices he's made, and he shows it.  He is very clear on what 
motivates people like Lucius and Fudge and he knows how to deal with 
them.  But when it comes to Harry and Sirius in book 5, it all falls 
apart.  He makes exactly the same mistake with both of them-as Harry 
says, people don't like to be locked up.  The cage Harry is in is a 
virual one-it's the ignorance of the situation that DD has forced on 
him.  And as for Sirius, well, we all know how he felt about 
Grimmauld Place.  Maybe DD had sound reasoning behind his decisions 
about how to treat H&S.  But once he put his theory into practice he 
had to see how destructive and counter-productive it was.  The fault 
is his-not Harry's, not Sirius's.
>>

IMO, as regards Harry & Sirius (and even Snape to some degree), 
Dumbledore seems to have forgotten what it is like to be at the mercy 
of ones emotions (or testosterone).  I think it also made it far 
worse for both Harry and Sirius that DD kept so much under his hat; 
if he'd given either of them more information, they might have been 
able to hold tight to some sort of handle on things instead of each 
raging alone in a vacuum.  Even at the end when DD told Harry so so 
much more than he ever had before, I didn't get a sense of sharing.  
It was more like:  here's what you need to know; internalize this and 
you'll feel better.  There is more going on than DD is telling 
anybody.  I think he still has secrets which could turn the whole WW 
upside down.  Sometimes I think he knows things that would absolutely 
relieve the players of their choices; and we all know how important 
choices are.

"msbeadsley"





From jferer at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 16:05:02 2003
From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 16:05:02 -0000
Subject: Hermione SHIP question
In-Reply-To: <000001c3722f$58783c50$6401a8c0@helenw1>
Message-ID: <bj53fe+olgn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79662

Helen of HPFGU, launching another SHIP:"I am an H/Hr shipper for
similar reasons (though I am not opposed to R/Hr). There is probably
more evidence for R/Hr, especially when you bring in JKR quotes.."

I think JKR's quotes are deliberately vague.  Remember that JKR is
Knight Grand Commander of the Order of the Red Herring.  When she said
of Ron and Hermione, "there's more tension there," I wondered what
kind of tension she meant, given their bickering.

I am opposed to R/Hr because I don't think they would be happy
together in the long run. Ron is a much better person than he was last
year, more confident in himself and with more of an identity of his
own than just Harry's sidekick, and that's a good thing, and Ron's a
good guy.

Ron doesn't want the challenge that Hermione represents.  He's going
to be more like Arthur than any of the other boys, I believe.  He's
going to want a loyal, affectionate, comfortable love for himself, a
woman to be a friend, lover, and mother.  Hermione, who certainly can
be those things, nevertheless will constantly be striving to challenge
herself and those around her, and I don't think that's for Ron.  Ron
would feel overstimulated and Hermione would become impatient with
him. She does already.

As to Hermione's feelings, her life is richer and more challenging
than she ever dreamed possible because of Harry Potter.  Without
Harry, she and Ron would be schoolmates.  Without Harry, she might be
another Percy, for whom rules are the masters instead of the servants.
Without Harry's quest, she would not have the higher purpose she has
now.  She is among the great of the wizarding world, and I bet she
knows it, and would feel the hole in her life if Harry wasn't in it.
(I wrote a very short ficlet once to illustrate the point.)  

Very few of us have something that powerful in our lives.

Jim





From so_totally_uncool at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 07:36:12 2003
From: so_totally_uncool at yahoo.com (Marcie)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 07:36:12 -0000
Subject: Harry's Grandparents
Message-ID: <bj45lc+rasb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79663

This is a question that has been bugging me for some time now. 
Throughout all the books, there has been very little mention of 
Harry's grandparents from either side of the family. Petunia Dursley 
bitterly mentioned to Harry her parents' elation when Lily got 
accepted into Hogwarts in the first book, and in TOOTP, Sirius 
reminisced how he was often over at the Potter's home for dinners and 
how James' father joked that he might as well adopt Sirius as the 
latter was always spending time there to get away from the Black 
family. What happened to them? There must be some significance to the 
Potter family in the Wizarding world. James, at the very least, must 
have had a pureblood parent who married a Muggle (this is just pure 
speculation) or had pureblood parents who were like the Weasleys and 
associated with Muggles. There is no mention that these parents were 
dead or killed by Voldemort. Lily must also have some Wizarding 
family somewhere in her ancestry, and I am assuming that Petunia has 
some magical abilities, too, but is more or less a Squib. It is 
understandable, too, that Petunia would estrange herself from her 
parents (if they were alive by the time Harry and Dudley were born) 
because she felt that they always favoured Lily, anyway. The way I 
look at it, James' parents would be in their 60s by the time Harry 
came to his adolescent years. Lily and James could have been married 
in their late teens or early 20s, and James' parents would have been 
in their 40s during that time. I'm curious to know if J.K. Rowling 
will expand further on Harry's ancestry, as she did with Sirius 
Black's family tree. Any speculation from anyone or ideas would be 
greatly appreciated. I understand that this query might have been 
touched on already but would like to know what else anybody thinks. 
Thanks.





From silverdragon at ezweb.com.au  Thu Sep  4 06:38:49 2003
From: silverdragon at ezweb.com.au (silverdragon at ezweb.com.au)
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 16:38:49 +1000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Things that will come into play later.
References: <bitovq+3ugc@eGroups.com> <000b01c37183$8b397980$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
Message-ID: <000701c372c1$da1b9080$6f984cca@Monteith>

No: HPFGUIDX 79664


>   I've been wondering how a patronus works.  The patronus comes at the
dementor once, and they go away and don't fight or try to come back.
Patronus' must be VERY powerful.  Does it even matter what animal it is or
how big it is?  I'm sure even Harry's stag looks small to 100 dementors.
>
>   Joj

Does anyone actually know what becomes of a dementor once it has been
charged by a patronus? Is it destroyed? Can it return? Is it immaterial as
there are so many of them and a constantly new supply? Does it just
dissapear and end up somewhere else (think Tartaru or somewhere)?

Just a question.

Nox





From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 09:16:53 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 09:16:53 -0000
Subject: Hermione SHIP question
In-Reply-To: <3F535B32.000003.29535@monica>
Message-ID: <bj4bi5+hlb8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79665

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" <kcawte at b...> 
wrote:
>  
>  Can one of the Hermione/Harry SHIPpers out there explain it to 
me? I don't
> see any clues towards it in the books at all. 

Sarah:
Ooh, I can see H/Hr!  For me, it's in the imagery that JKR puts 
between them.  Physically, they're always close together.  They 
instinctively go towards each other in times of trouble, even when 
others are around.  In OoP at the Department of Mysteries: Hermione 
clutched Harry's hand when the walls to the entry way began to 
spin.  Harry pulled Hermione along after the group smashed 
prophecies.  (Which is why Harry and Hermione ended up together in 
the fight scene.)  We saw Harry and Hermione instinctivley moving 
towards each other and protecting each other when alone on an 
adventure.  Harry catching a falling Hermione in the forest and 
pulling her to safety during the Grawp chapter.  Hermione clutching 
at Harry in fear during the same scene.  Harry pushing Hermione to 
the floor when she brought Umbridge to the forest and the centaurs 
attacked.  JKR wrote that they moved instinctively together when 
they heard the other approaching them after Grawp drove the centaurs 
away from them.  During the fight at the Department of Mysteries, we 
see how they react when others are around: they still instinctively 
move towards each other, to protect and comfort each other.

Also, there are some things that seem to be a little bit beyond just 
friendship.  Not quite romance yet, but a budding one.  For example, 
Harry noticed Hermione at the Yule Ball.  Look at the description; 
Harry goes into detail about what Hermione looked like: her hair, 
her posture, her teeth, and her robes.  He gave her a pretty 
thourough once over. A 14 year old boy is describing a 14 year old 
girl he thinks is pretty (he said this earlier).  He's checking her 
out here.  And he's so taken with noticing her, that he forgets 
about Cho and Cedric.  Then, we've got the kiss at King's Cross 
station, at the end of one of the most pivotal chapters in the 
series.  JKR has said she finds King's Cross Station to be romantic, 
and train stations in general are used as a romantic tool in classic 
movies and in some literature.  (Casablanca is the first one that 
comes to mind, but I know there are a lot more!)  The hug that 
Hermione gives Harry in OoP was a little too tight and went on a 
little too long: Hermione almost knocks him over, and Ron has to 
tell her to let Harry go.  Then on the next page, we find out that 
Harry had a warm glow (he notices when it goes away) when he first 
saw his friends.  Except when he walks into the room, Hermione jumps 
on him.  He only sees Hermione's hair.  So he's got a nice warm glow 
while he's hugging Hermione tightly and for a fairly long time.  Not 
romantic quite yet, but not completely devoid of romance either.  
Also, Pig was cirling overhead while the two were hugging.  Which 
made me think of a wedding, probably because I'm planning mine right 
now!  Circles feature prominently in weddings because of their 
symbolism: circles have no end and no beginning, representing the 
hope that the couple's love will be like that.

Then Hermione is jealous when she found out that Harry kissed Cho.  
Her tone of voice, her choice of words, and her frown all suggest 
that Hermione was not happy during this scene.  Here she was, being 
supportive about Harry liking Cho, and she does an about face when 
she is confronted with the idea that Harry and Cho might actually 
date.  Saying Cho cornered Harry seems to suggest that she thinks 
that Harry didn't have any choice but to kiss Cho.  Or wants to 
think this.  She frowns during the conversation, and seeks 
confirmation from Harry that he really has liked Cho for a long 
time.  Since when does Hermione need confirmation on anything?  
She's almost always the one with the knowledge, and very secure 
about knowing things.  She doesn't second guess herself.  Here, she 
does.  A little out of character.  And there's a little detail at 
the beginning of the scene that is easily missed: Harry was with Cho 
for about a half an hour.  (He returned to the common room half an 
hour after Cho first kisses him.)  Not just a little peck on the 
lips.  Hermione isn't happy with this and second guesses herself.

In this scene, Hermione is the one that gives Harry the impression 
that Cho's a little cry-baby.   (She gives us, the reader, the same 
impression.)  Why give him this impression when Cho would 
understandably be very upset at Cedric's murder? One possible 
explanation would be that Hermione is upset with Cho, thinks about 
her in a negative way that moment, and doesn't portray Cho in a 
sympathetic manner.  

Compare this to how Hermione acts towards Cho after the disaster 
date: Hermione is very sympathetic with Cho, even though she was 
happy that the date hadn't gone well.  She knew before asking that 
the date hadn't gone well.  Harry showed up earlier than expected to 
the Three Broomsticks, without Cho.  Everyone in Madame Pudifoots 
stopped what they were doing to watch Cho and Harry's little scene.  
(Literally.  Harry says that everyone was watching them.)  Hogwarts 
has a pretty fast rumor mill; the entire school knew about Harry 
blowing up in Umbridge's class within a day.  Hermione has shown in 
this book that she talks with the girls in her dorms; one of them 
had to have told her about the blow out.  Confirming her suspicion 
that the date didn't go well.  When she asks Harry about the date, 
Hermione is smiling.  She's one happy camper.  She's sympathetic 
towards Cho, explains a little about girls to Harry.  Very different 
feel from when Harry and Cho first kissed, and everything between 
the two was presumably OK.  

Also, Harry and Hermione's relationship has changed.  They argue 
together, actually fighting.  Not the bickering that Hermione does 
with almost every other character, most noticably Ron.  (She's 
bickered with Percy over house elves, the twins over there pranks, 
Ron with just about anything.)  Hermione and Harry fight.  In the 
fight over Sirius' where abouts and Voldemort's possible trap, they 
move towards each other while arguing.  (Nice little tension, there.)
Harry doesn't usually fight with people; but he does on several 
occassions with Hermione.

Now on Harry's part, he treats Hermione differently in OoP than he 
has before.  He seeks her out, something he only really did before 
if Ron wasn't around.  We see that Harry only sits between two other 
people if he wants to avoid Hermione.  (He sat between Dean and 
Neville while planning to talk to Sirius about seeing into Snape's 
thoughts.)  The fact that he actively thought about sitting between 
two different people shows that he expects to sit next to Hermione.  
Which he only started doing in GoF.  (In PoA, he didn't always sit 
near her; there's a couple of times we see him look down the table 
towards her.)  

Harry seems to dislike telling Hermione things that would lessen her 
view of him, innocently brought up over his grades to seem like he 
doesn't want a lecture.  But, Harry's reaction to not receiving a 
prefect's badge is a little bizzare.  After Hermione is extremely 
excited at the thought of being made a prefect with Harry, she can't 
believe at first that Ron was the one named.  (Open mouth, insert 
foot moment for Hermione.)  Hermione is left alone with Harry, and 
he can't look at her.  He congratulates her in a hearty voice that 
isn't his own.  Why?  We know he's thrown at Ron's being made 
prefect and not him, not because Harry was expecting to be named one 
(Harry had forgotten all about it).  He expected to be picked before 
Ron would be, but he didn't really expect it at all.  OK, reason for 
him to be uncomfortable around Ron.  But he's shown to be almost 
painfully uncomfortable around Hermione.  Why?

Harry won't show Hermione his poor marks, but he doesn't say that he 
doesn't show her because he doesn't want a lecture.  At other times, 
he does think about not telling Hermione something to avoid a 
lecture from her.  Not here.

Harry is protective of Hermione's feelings, as well.  He doesn't 
tell her that Dobby has taken all her knitted clothes, because he 
doesn't have the heart to disappoint her.  Very suspicious.

In the battle scene, we see Harry's reactions to seeing his friends 
fall to the death eaters, and his reaction to seeing Sirius die.  
Harry has a pattern of behaviour when seeing someone severely hurt, 
or when he thinks someone is severely hurt.  (Scenes include Ron 
getting hit by the queen chess piece in SS/PS; thinking Ginny might 
be dead in CoS; seeing Ron get knocked unconscious by Pettigrew in 
PoA; seeing Cedric die in GoF; watching his friends get injured and 
knocked out by death eaters in OoP)  Harry looks to see if his 
friend is OK.  He's upset, sometimes extremely so.  However, he has, 
in all but one instance, kept his head, his ability to think, and 
generally didn't panic.  When Hermione was hit by a death eater, 
Harry's reaction was different to all the other ones: he drops to 
his knees while the death eater that hurt Hermione is near him.  He 
panics, can't think, and blames himself for what happened to 
Hermione.  His reaction to the death eater is pure instinct; he 
doesn't think.  Now look at the other's: he sees Ron bleeding at the 
mouth, white, mentally losing it, and barely able to walk.  (To the 
point where Harry has to drag Ron.)  Harry asks what happened to 
Ron, wants to see if he's OK.  But Harry doesn't panic, despite that 
fact that Ron was very seriously injured here.  (Ron spent as much 
time as Hermione did in the hospital wing.)  He sees Luna get 
knocked out, lying as still as Hermione.  Same when Ginny gets 
knocked out by a death eater.  And he just saw Ron summon a brain 
that is squeezing Ron so hard Ginny's afraid Ron will suffocate.  
Yet he is still able to think; he never said that he was panicing 
and couldn't think as he did with Hermione.  Same when he saw Sirius 
die: Harry went to help Sirius (but was stopped by Lupin) and can 
still think.  About Sirius, yes, but he is able to think that Sirius 
never kept him waiting before.  No whine of panic like with 
Hermione, no blaming himself immediately, like with Hermione.  His 
reaction to seeing Hermione get attacked was unique.

Now all of these things: physically close to each other a lot, 
protecting each other and comforting each other (phsycially) while 
in danger, little moments of slightly more than friendship, etc, can 
be taken as friendship separately.  But, as a whole, it seems (to me 
at least) to be pointed towards a budding romance between the two.  
The imagery of the two when together, the deepening friendship, and 
some more-than-friendship moments show that Harry and Hermione could 
be beginning a romance here.  (Slowly noticing each other, getting 
to be closer friends, longer than normal hugs, protecting and 
comforting each other even when others are around.  Signs of friends 
turning into something more.)  Plus we've got some symbolism that's 
associated with romance.  The kiss at King's Cross.  An owl circling 
over them while hugging.  Hermione leaving her parents to speak to 
the Dursleys about Harry (along with the adults).  [Someone else 
said this could be symbolic of a girl leaving her parents for a 
man.]  Too much for me to think that they're not on the path to 
romance!  

But, then again, I could just be passing the time until the next 
book comes out.

Sarah





From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Wed Sep  3 15:58:52 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 15:58:52 -0000
Subject: Turncoat!Tonks (was: Aurors/Unforgiveable Curses)
In-Reply-To: <bj4trk+uhsi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj533s+g30o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79666

Matt:
> To me, JKR's account of the Aurors being
> authorized to torture and dominate suspects
> (or witnesses), in order to better fight
> crime, works powerfully as an allegory for
> many more or less analogous RW situations.
> It brings to bear, too, much of the moral 
> complexity of those situations: although
> JKR is pretty clearly espousing a value 
> judgment that would reject such tactics, 
> her older readers cannot help but be aware 
> that the moral posture is more complicated
> than Harry realizes.

I completely agree with this sentiment, Matt! JKR has trust issues 
regarding authority such as Mom/Fudge, and Aurors appear to be the 
WW equivalent of police or an army--both of which were used as tools 
of the state in Nazi Germany and most other authoritarian states. In 
fact, one can argue (OK, I'll do it) that JKR has now set us up for an 
Auror *betrayal*.

Yes, we have been led down the path of blind trust in Aurors, but just 
as all the other charcters hae started to become more complex/gray, so 
shall one of the Aurors demonstrate an un-Potterish bloodlust. Or LV 
sympaticos. Or pure self-interest.

My bet is with *Tonks* being the betrayer or mole. Why else make her 
so endearing to Harry? JKR also gave her a special power of 
matamorphmagus and much more character than, say, Shacklebolt. She's 
new, she's hip, she seems harmless, she's trusted by Harry, and she 
can look like anyone she wants (OK, maybe). Definitely grounds for 
suspicion!

By the way, I also think this would put Percy in the clear. He's too 
obvious as a betrayer, and much too insignificant. An Auror close to 
Harry would be *much* juicier.

-Remnant
"Let's have us a Tonks-fry!"





From hpfanmatt at gmx.net  Wed Sep  3 16:04:41 2003
From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 16:04:41 -0000
Subject: Length of class/"double" classes
In-Reply-To: <bj36e2+eu23@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj53ep+mbum@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79667

--- michaelkgidlow asks:
> I always assumed a standard class was 45 
> minutes, but in book 5, both a single period 
> and a dubble period are refered to as being 
> one and a half hours long. What's up with this?

I was thinking about this yesterday when I followed some link at the
Lexicon to a class schedule.  You (and the Lexicon) have interpreted
"double" as double in length.  I thought that it referred instead to
doubling the *size* of the class (q.v., "double Potions with the
Slytherins," "double Herbology with the Hufflepuffs").  If there is
anything in canon that conclusively resolves the difference, I missed
it.  





From sylviablundell at aol.com  Wed Sep  3 16:11:10 2003
From: sylviablundell at aol.com (sylviablundell2001)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 16:11:10 -0000
Subject: Neville's Broken Nose
Message-ID: <bj53qu+oftr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79668



So Neville and DD both have broken noses.  Didn't Ludo Bagman also 
have a broken nose.  I seem to remember Harry thinking it looked as 
though it had been squashed by a stray bludger.  Is there any 
sinister significance in this.?
Sylvia (who wouldn't trust Ludo further than she can spit)




From xmezumiiru at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 16:23:00 2003
From: xmezumiiru at yahoo.com (An'nai Jiriki)
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 09:23:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Length of class/"double" classes
In-Reply-To: <bj53ep+mbum@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030903162300.13388.qmail@web12203.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79669


--- Matt <hpfanmatt at gmx.net> wrote:
> --- michaelkgidlow asks:
> > I always assumed a standard class was 45 
> > minutes, but in book 5, both a single period 
> > and a dubble period are refered to as being 
> > one and a half hours long. What's up with this?
> 
> I thought that it
> referred instead to
> doubling the *size* of the class (q.v., "double
> Potions with the
> Slytherins," "double Herbology with the
> Hufflepuffs").

I thought there was refence in CoS that said that the
class was going to a long potion in double potions
later in the week, but it never said anything more
than that. (don't have the books right now)

I thought it would make sense to have a doubled class
time for potions, at the least, in order to make some
of the potions. Certainly, not all potions take just
45 minutes to make, or anyone could be good at that.

But then, I got the impression, aka: no canon, that
the classes got longer as the students aged.

Chris

=====
"You irritate me. Kill me now." ~Javert, Les Miserables

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From wsherratt3338 at rogers.com  Wed Sep  3 16:28:03 2003
From: wsherratt3338 at rogers.com (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 16:28:03 -0000
Subject: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj4g2q+6fhd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj54qj+t5bo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79670

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "T.J." <morgan.cole at n...> 
wrote:
> 
> As a complete neophyte on this list I just wanted to add that 
after 
> 11 years of teaching high school, if Harry HAD offered an apology 
in 
> this situation, I would consider it highly unrealistic writing.  I 
> don't think most 15-year-olds have the quality of detachment 
> necessary to apologize in a situation like this...I think Harry 
> probably does owe D. somewhat of an apology in return, but D., 
like 
> any experienced teacher of teenagers, should know better than to 
> expect one.
> 
>
WEll, actually, I agree with you.  I don't expect Harry to 
apologize, because I know he's just a dumb 15-year-old kid; but 
that's also what makes him a rather uninteresting hero to me.  (I 
meant to say that it would be NICE if he had the maturity to see 
himself more objectively, not that I realistically expect he will.) 
I don't think Dumbledore is surprised by his attitude, either.  
Someone in a long past post suggested that Dumbledore apologizes in 
this scene, to take the burden off Harry - to relieve him of his 
guilt for Sirius's death - and I think that's about right.  He's 
doing the old "the buck stops here" thing that a good leader does; I 
don't think his apology is meant to indicate that he is the MOST 
guilty person, the one who most needs to apologize, but just that he 
is the leader.  He is ultimately responsible, even if his 
subordinates are the ones who screw up.

Wanda





From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Wed Sep  3 16:32:26 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 16:32:26 -0000
Subject: Length of class/"double" classes
In-Reply-To: <bj53ep+mbum@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj552q+f6s5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79671

<Snip>
 "Matt" wrote 

> I was thinking about this yesterday when I followed some link at 
the
> Lexicon to a class schedule.  You (and the Lexicon) have 
> interpreted "double" as double in length.  I thought that it 
> referred instead to doubling the *size* of the class 
> (q.v., "double Potions with the Slytherins," "double Herbology  
> with the Hufflepuffs").  If there is anything in canon that 
> conclusively resolves the difference, I missed it.

You've just quoted it ;-)

In British school terminology 'double potions' *always* 
means 'double-length potions'. 

In Hogwarts, they seem to have just enough teachers to cover each 
House being taught separately. So a double period must have two 
Houses for a teacher to manage it without a Time-Turner.

So the Hogwarts students, instead of just saying 'double History' as 
a UK student normally would, have to say 'double potions *with*'

But that's why the Lexicon has interpreted 'double' as 'double in 
length'. It's standard British usage. It's the unusual practice of 
having two different Houses in the same class that needs the 
explanatory comment of 'with the Slytherins'. 

'Double potions' needs no further explanation to a British child.  
Everyone in the UK who's attended a UK school knows what it means. 
If you do end up with a double sized class due to teacher shortages, 
it would be *size* that you would mention specially.

So - 'double History'. Double length History. 

'Double History with 3a'. Double length History *with* an extra 
class of students (3a).

Pip!Squeak
 




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Wed Sep  3 16:50:34 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 16:50:34 -0000
Subject: Inside Dumbledore's Head (was Re: Prophets without Honour)
In-Reply-To: <bj4c5l+3l8o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj564q+a4t6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79672

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mochajava13" 
<mochajava13 at y...> wrote:
> Kneasy:
> To go back to the chess analogy, Harry is a pawn, maybe a knight,
> no more. DD is the player. He will sacrifice a knight, if he has to.
> 


Sarah:
> Wow, I never thought about the chess analogy before, but this 
fits.  
> And look at all the talk of chess we have in the books!  I agree 
> almost 100 percent, except for this: Harry is the king of a chess 
> game.  He can't be sacrificed, because if he is, the game is lost.  
> The other side (here, Voldemort and his pure-blood only mania) has 
> won.  We now know Dumbledore's view about Trelawney's prophecy: he 
> thinks that Harry, and Harry alone, has the power to defeat 
> Voldemort.  Only Harry can destroy Voldemort, and vice versa.  
Kings 
> of a chess game: capture the opponents king, and the game is won.  
> If Harry gets captured, all is lost.
> 

Geoff:
If Harry is a king, he can't win the game. A king cannot check a king.

The king has to be protected. The next most valuable piece which is 
obviously the centre of any strategy is the queen......




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Wed Sep  3 16:58:11 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 16:58:11 -0000
Subject: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj4g2q+6fhd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj56j3+gqhe@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79673

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "T.J." <morgan.cole at n...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Wanda Sherratt" 
> <wsherratt3338 at r...> wrote:
> I think [Dumbledore's] plan was a perfectly good one, and it's 
> > not exactly his fault that Harry and Sirius thought they knew 
> better 
> > and tried something else.  Their plans didn't work out any better 
> > than his, so why is he the only one apologizing at the end?  
Maybe 
> > because he's the only one with the guts to admit that he isn't 
> > always right and always perfect; it would be refreshing to hear 
> > something remotely similar coming from Harry for a change.
> > 
> > Wanda
> 


TJ:
> As a complete neophyte on this list I just wanted to add that after 
> 11 years of teaching high school, if Harry HAD offered an apology 
in 
> this situation, I would consider it highly unrealistic writing.  I 
> don't think most 15-year-olds have the quality of detachment 
> necessary to apologize in a situation like this...I think Harry 
> probably does owe D. somewhat of an apology in return, but D., like 
> any experienced teacher of teenagers, should know better than to 
> expect one.


Geoff:
Having read this and the further post on 79661, I couldn't agree more 
having taught UK teens for 32 years. It is very difficult for a 
middle teenager to apologise. It isn't cool.... it isn't good for 
their street cred.... it's very hard emotionally to accept that you 
are in the wrong. "It wasn't me guv, it was 'im wot did it!"




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Wed Sep  3 17:05:51 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 17:05:51 -0000
Subject: Things that will come into play later.
In-Reply-To: <000701c372c1$da1b9080$6f984cca@Monteith>
Message-ID: <bj571f+dedm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79674

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, <silverdragon at e...> wrote:
> 
> >   I've been wondering how a patronus works.  The patronus comes 
at the
> dementor once, and they go away and don't fight or try to come back.
> Patronus' must be VERY powerful.  Does it even matter what animal 
it is or
> how big it is?  I'm sure even Harry's stag looks small to 100 
dementors.
> >
> >   Joj
> 


Nox:
> Does anyone actually know what becomes of a dementor once it has 
been
> charged by a patronus? Is it destroyed? Can it return? Is it 
immaterial as
> there are so many of them and a constantly new supply? Does it just
> dissapear and end up somewhere else (think Tartaru or somewhere)?
> 
> Just a question.


Geoff:
I think they just go away. Canon.....

POA p.282 UK Bloomsbury edition..
"Something was driving the Dementors back....it was circling round 
him and Sirius and Hermione....the rattling, sucking sounds of the 
Dementors were fading. They were leaving..the air was warm again...."

and the same scene later (p.300)
"It wasgalloping sliently away from him, across the black surface of 
the lake. He saw it lower its head and charge at the swarming 
Dementors.... now it was galloping around and around the black shapes 
on the ground and the Dementors were falling back, scattering, 
retreating into the darkness...they were gone."
> 




From entropymail at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 17:15:53 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 17:15:53 -0000
Subject: The Riddle House
In-Reply-To: <bj00fo+ajcm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj57k9+nnr0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79675

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Potterfanme" <fc26det at a...> wrote:

> 
> My thoughts exactly.  Remember that Lucius Malfoy also is the one who 
> had TR's diary and stated that he had other items hidden in his 
> mansion.  Maybe that was his value to LV.  Keeper of the Keepsakes.
> Susan

I never thought it was Lucius Malfoy who was keeping the Riddle house
"for tax purposes".  I always assumed it was Voldemort himself.  His
(father's) family was quite rich and, although I doubt that his father
actually left his son anything after his death, Voldemort probably
could have found a way of getting his hands on it anyway.

Voldemort probably thought of this house as some sort of legacy which
he was owed by the father who abandoned him (old wizard families like
this sort of stuff: look at the Black house), and took it under this
pretense.

Entropy




From entropymail at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 17:24:05 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 17:24:05 -0000
Subject: Harry's Grandparents
In-Reply-To: <bj45lc+rasb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj583l+fobv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79676

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Marcie"
<so_totally_uncool at y...> wrote:
> This is a question that has been bugging me for some time now. 
> Throughout all the books, there has been very little mention of 
> Harry's grandparents from either side of the family. <snip>

I don't really have much of an idea about who Harry's grandparents
might be or, for that matter, who the rest of the family tree consists
of.  I just don't think that JKR has given us much in the way of clues
regarding Harry's family.  I do, however, believe that many, many
wizards were killed as a result of Voldemort's grab for power. It was
sort of a Black Plague that dessimated the wizarding community; in
this way it was actually quite like Hitler's reign. Anyone who didn't
agree with the party line was quickly "eliminated"; people were
probably disappearing left and right! So, I don't think it's unusual
that most of Harry's family, at least on James' side is gone.  I do,
however, wonder what's become of Lily's family, as they are, I
believe, Muggles, and don't know if Voldemort's murderous ways would
have extended to them.

Entropy




From erinellii at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 17:24:34 2003
From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 17:24:34 -0000
Subject: Snape's goatee?  NOOooooooooo!
Message-ID: <bj584i+jk1p@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79677

A few months ago, when I first joined this group, my attention was 
drawn to a picture of Professor Snape, drawn by J.K. Rowling, which 
is in the photos section of HP for Grownups.  In it, he has a 
goatee.  This startled me, as never in my wildest dreams had I ever 
pictured a bearded Snape.  He's never described as having one in the 
books, right?
I decided that JKR must have drawn that picture before she got down 
to seriously writing the first book, and she'd changed her mind about 
Snape's looks since.  
But then OoP came out, and I couldn't help but notice there was a 
picture, drawn by the American illustrator Mary Grandpre, of Snape in 
it which was too close to the Rowling drawing for comfort.  The 
picture, at the beginning of the chapter "Occlumency", shows Snape as 
about the height of Professor Umbridge, bald on top (I ask you!), and 
with the goatee.  He and Sirius are shown having their little almost-
duel over Snape teaching Harry occlumency. 
  Now I'm more likely to imagine Snape as the Alan Rickman type 
(except A. R. is too old, Snape is only supposed to be 36 or 37 in 
OoP) and in fact, the picture of Sirius at the beginning 
of "Occlumency" is more my idea of what Snape looks like (maybe a 
little longer nose).  So someone, please ease my mind!  JKR doesn't 
really want Snape to look like a short, fat, balding guy with a 
goatee, does she?  Had I mentioned the Mary Grandpre pic looked kind 
of chubby as well?  How does Mary Grandpre decide what to draw?  Does 
it get approved at all by JKR before it is included in the book?  
What is up with this? 


Erin




From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com  Wed Sep  3 17:30:39 2003
From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 17:30:39 -0000
Subject: Ms. Skeeter of The Prophet (filk)
Message-ID: <bj58fv+igih@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79678

Ms. Skeeter of The Prophet (GoF, Chap. 18-19, 21, 24, 31 & 37)

The eighth A!Kedavra filk to the tune of The Farmer and the Cowman 
from Rodgers and Hammerstein's Oklahoma!

Dedicated to Constance Vigilance

THE SCENE: Just before the Weighing of the Wands ceremony, RITA 
SKEETER makes a most unwelcome introduction to HARRY.

SKEETER (to HARRY):
Oh, Ms. Skeeter of The Prophet is your friend
Oh, Ms. Skeeter of The Prophet is your friend.
I would gladly slice your throat,
In exchange for a juicy quote,
But that's no reason why we cain't be friends.

Harry Potter yarns help sell newspapers
Harry Potter tales give folks a thrill.
Harry Potter, what's your latest capers?
Tell it all to the Quick-Quotes Quill

CHORUS OF REPORTERS
Harry Potter yarns help sell newspapers
Harry Potter tales enthrall us still
Harry Potter, you're the cutest scraper,
Tell it all to the Quick-Quotes Quill

(Segue to several days later, in Potions Class, where we find HARRY 
with a copy of the Daily Prophet )

HARRY:
I'd like to say a word `bout Ms. Skeeter.

HERMIONE:
You said it!

HARRY:
She wrote this piece but made a lot of stuff up

HERMIONE:
That's right!

HARRY:
She left out the names of the other champions,
And made me sound like I am real puffed up.

DRACO (spoken)
Want a hanky, Potter, in case you start crying in Transfiguration?

PANSY (spoken):
Since when have you been one of the top students?

(Slytherins break out in derisive laughter)

HARRY (spoken): 
Shut up! (Oops, sorry, Cho!)
(music) That Rita ain't no honest commentator
She's telling folks I cry myself to sleep
She's making people think that Herm's my honey
Her Daily Prophet's givin' me the creeps

(Segue to HAGRID'S garden, as SKEETER prepares to introduce herself)

SKEETER (watching HAGRID)
Oh, Ms. Skeeter of The Prophet wants ya framed
Oh, Ms. Skeeter of The Prophet wants ya framed
I will rip that savage brute,
Who likes to breed illicit skrewts,
Against that giant half-breed I'll take aim 

CHORUS
Harry Potter yarns help sell The Prophet
Harry Potter tales help pay our bills
Harry Potter helps us turn a profit
When he speaks to your Quick-Quotes Quill

SKEETER
I'd to say a word to ya, Hagrid--

HAGRID (blushing with pleasure):
You would?

SKEETER
The Skrewts you raise are fascinatin' critters  
My readership so vast
Will think that Skrewts are such a blast

TRIO:
We're sure the aftermath will be quite bitter!

HERMIONE
So Skeeter did her expose on Hagrid
And she done landed him in some hot water

SKEETER:
He is brutal and he's weird
An' he's got poor Draco skeered
But he's such terrific chums with Harry Potter  

(Segue to the Three Broomsticks, as HERMIONE confronts SKEETER)

SKEETER (spoken): Harry! How lovely! Why don't you come and join- 

HARRY (spoken): I wouldn't come near you with a ten-foot broomstick.  
What did you do that to Hagrid for, eh

HERMIONE (spoken):  You horrible woman you don't care, do you, 
anything for a story, and anyone will do, wont they?  

(music)
Oh, Ms. Skeeter of The Prophet should be `shamed
Oh, Ms. Skeeter of The Prophet should be `shamed
You just like to libel folk
Who've done nothin' to provoke 
And that's the reason why I'm so inflamed

(SKEETER involuntarily crushes her martini glass in her hand, which 
give out a sound like a gunshot. Everyone ducks for cover except 
HERMIONE & SKEETER.)

SKEETER (spoken):
Sit down, you silly little girl, and don't talk about things you 
don't understand.  This here's a pub Alright, everybody, sing it!

(Customers emerge from under their tables )

ALL
Dum-dah-dee-um-dum-dum!

TRIO 
Oh, Ms. Skeeter of The Prophet must be stopped,

(Segue back to The Great Hall, as the owl post arrives)

HARRY & RON
Oh, Ms. Skeeter of The Prophet must be stopped,
She went after Hermy next,
With slanders worse than a hurling Hex,
And then upon her all that mail dropped

(Segue to the grounds off Hogwarts, as SKEETER again dictates to her 
Quick-Quotes Quill)

SKEETER
That Potter boy's becomin' unstable
`Cause in his upper story, he is sure bent
He screams about his curse scar all a-flamin'
And then runs off to jabber with the serpents

HERMIONE:
I've figured out how Rita gets her info
And how she does the mischief she does
She turns into a beetle and goes around unseen
So it's time for me to end ol' Rita's buzz!

TRIO & HAGRID
She turns into a beetle and goes around unseen
So it's time for me/her to end ol' Rita's buzz!

Animagic folks should not be gossips
Animagic folks, stay true and pure
If Animagic folks cannot be good, though,
Animagic folks should register

(During the long instrumental passage, HERMIONE, dressed in 
lepidopterist gear, pursues SKEETER (in beetle form) with a butterfly 
net, up and down the stairs and corridors of Hogwarts. Finally, 
SKEETER flies into a darkened corridor, with HERMIONE right behind. A 
moment later, HERMIONE emerges from the other end of the corridor 
holding a jar triumphantly aloft. )

TRIO & HAGRID
Harry Potter yarns she'll not be spinning
Harry Potter's beans she cannot spill
This is now the end of Rita's sinning
And of her famous Quick-Quotes Quill!
    
-	CMC

HARRY POTTER FILKS
http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm 

BTW, there will be five more A!Kedavra filks, plus a concluding 
reprise of "Beautiful Morning"





From entropymail at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 17:37:00 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 17:37:00 -0000
Subject: Snape's goatee?  NOOooooooooo!
In-Reply-To: <bj584i+jk1p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj58rs+9opl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79679

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "erinellii" <erinellii at y...> wrote:
> A few months ago, when I first joined this group, my attention was 
> drawn to a picture of Professor Snape, drawn by J.K. Rowling, which 
> is in the photos section of HP for Grownups.  In it, he has a 
> goatee.  This startled me, as never in my wildest dreams had I ever 
> pictured a bearded Snape.  He's never described as having one in the 
> books, right?

Blech! My son recently brought up the fact that Snape was balding and
had a goatee. It must have been because he saw that picture in OoP.
After I protested for a while, he showed me the picture and I had to
relent.  But no, I don't think Snape is ever described in that way in
the books; he is, of course, described as having lank, greasy hair and
often being "waspish", but no mention is made of the goatee or the bald.

I think JKR has her own idea of what Snape looks like (as any writer
has a mental picture of her characters) and the illustrator
collaborates with her on her pictures. (I'm an illustrator; many of my
illustrations are a combination of my vision and the writer's vision
-- unless I'm extremely lucky and the writer gives me free reign!
Yay!).  The directors of the Harry Potter movies have their own ideas,
of course. And we readers have yet a slightly different version in our
own minds.  

Nonetheless, I sure do hate "Goatee Man". I've successfully
"obliviated" him from my mind.

Entropy, who will never let anyone mess with her vision of Snape!




From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Sep  3 18:04:21 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 18:04:21 -0000
Subject: Snape's goatee?  NOOooooooooo!
In-Reply-To: <bj584i+jk1p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5af5+jdb6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79680

Erin:
> A few months ago, when I first joined this group, my attention was 
drawn to a picture of Professor Snape, drawn by J.K. Rowling, which 
is in the photos section of HP for Grownups.  In it, he has a 
goatee.  This startled me, as never in my wildest dreams had I ever 
pictured a bearded Snape.  He's never described as having one in the 
books, right?> 

Right. I just went to have a quick look, and I don't think it's a 
goatee, just some misleadingly heavy shading which the resolution 
hasn't brought out properly. I know it's tricky, but I think the 
pointy bit you're referring to is the shadow from his collar.
Those are the illustrations she drew for the final book, though, 
which her British publishers refused to use because they thought that 
illustrations would make the books appear to be aimed at younger 
children. (I think this was in the Comic Relief chat, see the Lexicon)

Erin again:
> But then OoP came out, and I couldn't help but notice there was a 
picture, drawn by the American illustrator Mary Grandpre, of Snape in 
it which was too close to the Rowling drawing for comfort.  The 
picture, at the beginning of the chapter "Occlumency", shows Snape as 
about the height of Professor Umbridge, bald on top (I ask you!), and 
with the goatee.  He and Sirius are shown having their little almost-
duel over Snape teaching Harry occlumency. 
<snip> How does Mary Grandpre decide what to draw?  Does 
it get approved at all by JKR before it is included in the book?>  

I've never read the American editions, but I've seen a few of the 
illustrations, and I really don't like the Mary GrandPre drawings at 
all. I don't think she's a particularly talented artist -the US OoP 
cover is awful (there are hundreds of infinitely better realised 
versions of characters on Artistic Alley, and I include many 
character depictions which are nothing like the images I personally 
formed when reading them). I think she employs too much artistic 
licence in her depictions, as your post above bears out. Perhaps 
artistic licence is the wrong sort of phrase - she almost appears to 
be imposing her own ideas over Rowling's, as though attempting to 
have her own, final, influence over the fans. I'm fine with fanfic 
writers putting Draco in Armani, becasue that's a fan reaction, and a 
tribute. It picks up a hint in the text and plays with it, has fun 
with it, celebrates it. But this sort of apparant negation of JKR's 
creation (Ooh, I rhyme), and I think it is a negation, smacks of 
something a little more sinister to me. 

As to whether JKR has any influence, there was an interview with Mary 
GrandPre on the Leaky Cauldron just before OoP came out where she 
mentioned that she'd never had any contact with JKR. JKR has very 
little sway with Scholastic, I think, or she certainly didn't at the 
time PS was released as SS (was that the point when Mary GrandPre was 
brought on board?) as she mentions in the Comic Relief chat that she 
wasn't entirely happy about the name change, but went along with it 
because she was simply grateful that anyone at all was publishing her.
Surely, if they'd consulted her at all about illustrations, she would 
have proffered her own?
JKR *did* have a hand in the appearance of the film, remember. I 
think that Alan Rickman in the films bears an extremely close 
resmblance to the (sans goatee) Snape sketch in the photos section. 

Actually, what I wanted to ask was whether or not fans in the US find 
the pictures influenced their own visualisation of the characters at 
all, or whether they simply find them something of a irritant. I know 
this question occured recently, however, and I think it's a bit 
tricky to keep this sort of thing on topic. If anyone has any 
especially strong views, get in touch off list. I'm particularly 
interested in subjective perceptions at the moment.

Kirstini




From margdean at erols.com  Wed Sep  3 14:40:36 2003
From: margdean at erols.com (Margaret Dean)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 10:40:36 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Neville's broken nose
References: <bj50ig+5nbc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F55FD64.412A62E4@erols.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79681

watsola79 wrote:
> 
> In the battle scene in OOP, after Neville's nose gets broken and he
> is taunted by Bellatrix about his parents, he screams "I DOE YOU HAB"
> at her.
> 
> I have always interpreted this as "I DO YOU HARM", but I recently got
> to thinking about it, and it seems a grammatically and syntactically
> *odd* thing to say.
> 
> Are there any other thoughts or interpretations as to what Neville
> meant to say?

I read that as, "I know you have [tortured people/my parents]!"


--Margaret Dean
  <margdean at erols.com>



From n_longbottom01 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 18:19:38 2003
From: n_longbottom01 at yahoo.com (n_longbottom01)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 18:19:38 -0000
Subject: Neville's broken nose
In-Reply-To: <bj523b+ojvv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5bbq+qj2e@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79682

> Talisman, skipping by with her Stubby Boardman CD, suggests:
> 
snip
> 
> Do you know, the moment I saw Neville's nose break I thought of 
> someone else's nose.
> 
> ".. . his nose was very long and crooked, as though it had been 
> broken at least twice.  This man's name was Albus dumbledore." (SS 
8)
> 
> 
> There have been JKR interview hints that could indicate that 
Neville 
> will end up a Professor at Hogwarts.
> 
> If Neville gets another broken nose in book 6 . . . 
> 
> Talisman, now weeping openly, "Oh god, no time turners, 
> please. . . ."

now me (n_longbottom01):

Two things that make me think that Neville doesn't become Dumbledore 
by way of a time turner:

1)  Neville is gifted at Herbology, and I don't think we've seen any 
hints that Dumbledore has a green thumb.  Dumbledore doesn't ever 
teach Herbology, that we know of, and that seems like the logical 
subject for Neville to teach.

2)  When Harry first learns that Neville's parents are in St. Mungos 
(through one of the scenes in Dumbledore's pensive), Dumbledore is 
surprised that Harry has roomed with Neville for four years and 
didn't already know about Neville's parents.  If Dumbledore *was* 
Neville, he would have known that Neville never tells anyone about 
his parents.

I'm not 100% against the idea of another big time turner plot 
twist... If there is a big Neville becomes Dumbledore with Time 
Turner plot twist, I really hope I can go back and spot a bunch of 
little clues in each book that lead up to that conclusion.  This sort 
of plot twist would be fun, in that regard... but I'm sort of hoping 
we are done with the time turner for the rest of the series.   






From erinellii at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 18:26:59 2003
From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 18:26:59 -0000
Subject: What Neville would teach (Was:Neville's broken nose)
In-Reply-To: <bj5bbq+qj2e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5bpj+nmv0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79683

 "n_longbottom01"  wrote:
  Neville is gifted at Herbology, and I don't think we've seen any  
hints that Dumbledore has a green thumb.  Dumbledore doesn't ever  
teach Herbology, that we know of, and that seems like the logical  
subject for Neville to teach.
 

 I don't know that Herbology would have to be it.  He's been getting 
mighty good at DADA lately.  I could see Neville being the DADA 
teacher who breaks the curse. (I wonder, did anyone ever think of 
getting Bill in there to look at that job and see if there IS 
actually a curse on it, and if it could be broken?)

Erin




From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Wed Sep  3 18:31:44 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 19:31:44 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Neville's broken nose
References: <bj5bbq+qj2e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F563390.000001.04067@monica>

No: HPFGUIDX 79684

 K - 
this isn't directed at anyone in particular, especially since the post I'm
replying too isn't one of the ones I'm talking about, but - is it me or are
people signing posts a lot less often recently? The number of times I've
tried to reply to something and had to go searching for the poster's name
seems to be increasing.
 
> Talisman, skipping by with her Stubby Boardman CD, suggests:
> 
<snipped>
> 
> 
> Talisman, now weeping openly, "Oh god, no time turners, 
> please. . . ."

n_longbottom01:
 
Two things that make me think that Neville doesn't become Dumbledore 
by way of a time turner:
 
1) Neville is gifted at Herbology, and I don't think we've seen any 
hints that Dumbledore has a green thumb. Dumbledore doesn't ever 
teach Herbology, that we know of, and that seems like the logical 
subject for Neville to teach.
 

Me (K) -

I am *not* getting into another timeturner theory, I'm not! Honest, this
post is a figment of everyone's imagination.

Neville!Dumbledore would know that Neville's schoolmates would associate him
with Herbology so maybe that's why he seems to so studiously avoid it.

n_longbottom01:

2) When Harry first learns that Neville's parents are in St. Mungos 
(through one of the scenes in Dumbledore's pensive), Dumbledore is 
surprised that Harry has roomed with Neville for four years and 
didn't already know about Neville's parents. If Dumbledore *was* 
Neville, he would have known that Neville never tells anyone about 
his parents.
 
Albus is 150 years old, I have trouble remembering what I told people last
week! He would know that Harry found out about Neville's parents at some
point but since, for him, it would have been  well over a hundred years ago
maybe he was surprised because he forgot *when* Harry found out and thought
he already knew by then.  Neville wouldn't have known how Harry found out
originally about his parents and may have thought that Hagrid or Remus or
someone mentioned it to him earlier.

K



From urghiggi at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 18:37:02 2003
From: urghiggi at yahoo.com (urghiggi)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 18:37:02 -0000
Subject: Love vs. eros (was Harry Potter is a CHILDREN'S BOOK)
In-Reply-To: <bj4iea+9s6e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5cce+himl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79685


> Sue: "Why is it that it's ok for JKR to write about war, death,
> racism, oppression, torture, cruelty etc etc, but some people seem to
> think that it's not ok for her to write about sexuality?">>

Jim replied with a lot of interesting snipped stuff, plus this:
> JKR can, does, and will write about love.  Great literature has long
> dealt with love without getting sexual, or at least with sex in the
> background.  In canon, we have many kinds of love already: Lily's love
> for her son; Dumbledore's for Harry; Harry's for Sirius; the Trio's
> for each other; and the beginning of attraction as the characters get
> older. It's love we don't spend enough time considering these days ?
> the kinds of love, who we love, and how we express it. Getting into
> sexuality might even overshadow some of the excellent points about
> love we're seeing.  It's an example of JKR's genius that we're seeing
> so much about love.>>
> 

And now urghiggi adds:
James Baldwin once said "All art is a kind of confession, more or less 
oblique."  If you look at the Potterverse as JKR's personal "confession" --=
 her 
recitation of the stuff she believes most necessary at a core human level, =
not 
just a commercially crafted work -- then I think it is somewhat easier to 
understand her emphasis on philea (friendship/brotherly love) and agape 
(selfless/divine love) at the expense of storge (affection for stuff/people=
, esp 
your family) and eros (sexual love).

It's not that eros is dispensable -- it's just that heaven knows kids are 
bombarded with eros messages in every aspect of pop culture. (Lordy, they 
sell thong underwear for 7-year-old girls at Abercrombie & Fitch....) What =
I 
think JKR must think tweens, preteens, and teens are not getting enough 
lessons about are philea and -- most especially -- agape varieties of love.=
 

As adults we're all (presumably) pretty danged interested in eros. But we'r=
e 
not the primary targets for the message. That we love it and are fascinated=
 by 
it seems to indicate to me that we, too, have some kind of thirst for model=
s of 
true philea and agape love -- as well as an obsessive interest in bizarre p=
lot 
twists and obscure predictive clues, of course.

urghiggi, chgo




From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Wed Sep  3 06:24:04 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 06:24:04 -0000
Subject: Hogwarts Dorms ?
In-Reply-To: <biskgj+d1f7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj41e4+c4ub@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79686

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Shaun Hately" <drednort at a...> 
wrote:
> 
> OK - it seems they keep the same dormitory. The clearest info on 
this 
> is in Chamber of Secrets:
> 
> 
   Jeff:

    Yeah, I'd forgotten about that, but thanks to you and a few 
others, now I know. ;) This bad memory is getting worse, God only 
knows what'll happen when the last book is done, I'll have to recall 
way too much info for my poor ickle brain. ;)



> 
> It's also clear that the room only contains five beds:
> 
> 
  Jeff:
    This had figured, but I was curious as to if all the rooms were 
this way, or not. I'm sure the house elves arranged things after the 
sorting ceremony, but I had wondered if they did have an extra bed or 
two in there incase of visitors or transfers. 


> 
> They seem to be on the top floor.
> 
> We don't really have any certain information on whether there are 
> different sized dormitories, etc, nor if the girls have the same 
> facilities etc. I assume that there are seven male dormitories, and
> seven female ones for Gryffindor each occupying one floor of two sub
> towers attached to the main Gryffindor common room/tower. But that's
> assumption.
> 
   Jeff:
    Yes, being too vague makes me more curious. Is there some sort of 
storage room there? Are the loos on the same floors, or different 
ones to prevent temptation? IIRC, the stairs to the girl's dorm turns 
into a slide, if a boy tries to use it, but what about the boy's 
stairwell?


> I've placed bathrooms, etc, for my mapping purposes but that's 
mostly
> just guessing.
> 
  Jeff:

    Well, good guesses, imho. I like you layout. My purpose for 
asking more questions is to get a general idea about what the others 
think. I think the map is great, and will certainly help a lot for 
fanficts, and for helping readers visualize the layout of the castle 
better. ;)

   Jeff







From entropymail at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 18:54:43 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 18:54:43 -0000
Subject: Trevor, Neville, and SILK GOWNS
Message-ID: <bj5ddj+prbi@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79687

I heard recently that, traditionally, toads have been known to ward
off evil and to prevent illness by absorbing toxins into their skin.
Can Neville's toad Trevor be a clue regarding the whole Droobles Best
Blowing Gum mystery?

If Mr. and Mrs. Longbottom really are being drugged in some way at St.
Mungo's, perhaps Trevor is related to this in some way.  Is he
providing some sort of protection to Neville by absorbing his dose of
the stuff?  Is that why Trevor is known for "wandering off"; has the
toad absorbed enough from being constantly close to Neville to "addle"
his own brain? It sure would be interesting to know if Neville is
doing something with all those wrappers, like lining part of Trevor's
tank in them!

Entropy




From talisman22457 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 18:59:49 2003
From: talisman22457 at yahoo.com (Talisman)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 18:59:49 -0000
Subject: Neville's broken nose
In-Reply-To: <bj5bbq+qj2e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5dn5+3vgk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79688

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "n_longbottom01" 
<n_longbottom01 at y...> wrote> 
>  (n_longbottom01):
>> Two things that make me think that Neville doesn't become 
Dumbledore  by way of a time turner:

Talisman, skipping back the other way with a basket of humorous-
toffees, snorks:

Well, I DID think of DD's nose, but I was REALLY REALLY kidding 
about the time turner.

Talisman, ready to break any freaking time-turner she sees:) 




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 16:14:24 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 16:14:24 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj4qu7+rsvq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5410+fkng@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79689

> "bluesqueak" <pipdowns at e...> wrote: It may have been, but it's 
> partly Harry's problem as well as Snape's. Harry has a rather 
> strong dose of 'people who don't like me must be bad people' <snip> 
> and 'they don't like me because *they're* bad'. <snip> 

Harry's "problem"? <looking politely incredulous>  He perhaps 
thinks 'people who *abuse* me (or who abuse anyone else) must be bad 
people'; BIG difference:  Harry has a sense of justice.  I see no 
evidence that he judges anyone with antipathy toward him as "bad".  
When people were gaping at him in CoS after he demonstrated his 
parseltongue abilities, he didn't decide they were bad.  Nor did he 
decide *he* was bad, although he wondered. I don't think he's been 
that simplistic for a long time, that people not liking him 
meant "bad" on one side or the other.  In GOF, when even Hufflepuffs 
were wearing "Potter Stinks" badges, he didn't decide those dogging 
him were bad.  Liking/not liking is often ephemeral; Ron and Harry 
didn't even like Hermione much early in PS/SS but they certainly do 
now.  Harry knows there's more to it than blame/badness.

<snip> Despite consistent evidence in PS/SS, CoS, PoA, GoF and OOP 
> that Snape cares so deeply for *all* the Hogwarts students that he 
> will fight trolls for them, fight werewolves and (he thinks) 
> escaped murderers for them, charge into the office of a powerful DE 
> for them, and face a Forbidden Forest full of angry centaurs for 
> them. 

Snape cares about wrangling himself an Order of Merlin, and any other 
hero's laurels he can scrape together.  He seems to have a bit of 
that "saving people thing" that Harry has been accused of, only in 
Snape's case, it's overcompensation.  He can't be bothered to adhere 
to even the most basic standards of politeness and social decency, 
especially when it comes to his students; oh yes, he cares "so deeply 
for all the Hogwarts students..."  Snape wants to be *right*, even if 
it gets others killed.  He is so invested in shoring up his deformed 
ego that he doesn't even see anybody else as more than a shadow 
figure around him; he's a legend only in his own mind and that's all 
the applause he's ever going to get.

> And there's all the little protective-of-students side comments, as 
> well. 'Crabbe,loosen your hold a little...' 'We'll be carrying 
> what's left of Finch-Fletchley to the Hospital Wing in a 
> matchbox' 'Snape gripped the back of a chair very hard' [when Ginny 
> has been kidnapped in CoS.]

The first two instances are removed from context which explains then 
far more reasonably:  the comment to Crabbe included a reference to 
avoiding paperwork; the one about the matchbox had far more to do 
with deriding Neville yet again.  And his reaction upon hearing about 
Ginny was, I thought, more of a "Voldemort is here and I'm trying not 
to lose bladder control."

<snip> 
> And it culminates in Sirius's death. If Harry had remembered that 
> Snape was an Order member, Snape could have contacted Sirius for 
> him, safely. Harry subconciously discounts Snape because 'he's 
> nasty to me. I don't trust nasty people.' [not a quote]

I wonder why it didn't occur to Harry to depend on Snape to save 
Sirius, yes, considering that it was only two years ago that Snape 
tried to have Sirius executed (dementor's kiss, an execution of the 
soul if not of the body) even in the face of reasonable doubt that he 
deserved it.  And Sirius is Snape's *other* whipping boy in OoP.
 
<snip>
> Just imagine Voldemort's bargaining power if the DE's had captured 
> the real Sirius in the fight!] 
<snip>

What to do about Sirius as hostage would officially have been up to 
Dumbledore.  Would he have treated with terrorists, with hostage-
takers?  A chilling scenario any way you look at it, and one I think 
Snape would have ensured would come to pass if not for the 
ramifications to the Order, where he is trying, again, pathetically, 
to be a hero to people he has maneuvered into having to tolerate him.

> Snape is a nasty son-of-a-sorceror, and he and Harry don't like 
> each other one little bit.

But Snape set Harry up to despise him (just as if he'd followed the 
rules in Making Enemies for Dummies).  Harry was set up by a history 
he wasn't even on the planet for.

> But when the order comes through that Snape and Harry have to work 
> together, it's Snape who makes-sarcastic-comments-and-soldiers. 
> Harry is the one who obstructs the lessons as much as he can by the 
> passive method of I-haven't-done-my-homework-Sir and the active 
> method of breaking into the pensieve.

Harry is instructed to entrust the sanctity of his dreams, his 
thoughts, and the rest of his mind itself to the person who, second 
only to Voldemort or the Dursleys, has consistently offered him the 
most spite, abuse, and injustice (and at least in the case of 
Voldemort and the Dursleys, they are pretty up front about why).  So 
I'm amazed Harry showed up for lessons at all; in the face of 
Dumbledore's coldness I might have assumed this was DD under Imperio! 
and refused; in any case, I would have sent DD an owl inquiring or 
protesting.  Snape soldiers, yes, largely because he enjoys having 
one more way he can bend Harry over the proverbial footlocker.

I wonder if this failure on Dumbledore's part to predict behavior on 
the part of his staff/student/soldiers, as well as he should, can be 
chalked up to his own ability to see into a person as needed; does he 
forget others (especially Harry) cannot?

> It is Snape who tries as much as he can to be adult about the 
> Occlumency lessons. It is Harry who behaves like the 15 year old he 
> is, shuffling his feet, doing as little as he can, and finally
> breaking the rules so badly that Snape chucks him out. But Harry's 
> reaction to this is 'I don't care'. When he's asked to talk to 
> Snape and ask to be taken back, he doesn't.

What rules?  <I think you're taking the extremist position to bait 
those of us who passed the "ad nauseum" stage in response to Snape 
apologia a long time ago.>  Who said there were rules?  Snape's never 
followed any.  Why should Harry assume there are any? <Yeah, it's 
working.>  Why should Harry ask to be taken back?  At the time he was 
hauled out of the pensieve he was about as close to reaching out to 
Snape as he had ever been; Snape used *that* opportunity to shirk his 
own responsibilities just because something had made him 
uncomfortable, and literally took a shot (fired a projectile) at 
Harry to boot.

<snip> ... the idea that an apology might do wonders is never 
> considered.

Snape has never shown anything but disdain/disgust at "weak" (a soft 
answer turneth away wrath) behavior, so far as Harry (and we) can 
tell; there's no canon (for us in the books or for Harry in his life) 
that an apology to Snape would get him anything but a(nother) blow.  
I'm with him:  he's got enough to dodge.  Donning a target is 
superfluous, even stupid.

<snip>
> The trouble is, that he's now in the middle of a war. And he really 
> has to get it into his head that people who are nice to him (fake!
> Moody, anyone?) are not necessarily on his side; and conversely, 
> those who are nasty to him might be doing their best to keep him 
> alive (Petunia, anyone?)

I think, since hearing BC Jr.'s veritaserum confession, Harry *got* 
that friendly behavior can hide a murderous agenda.  That makes 
sense; your enemy *wants* you to trust, underestimate him.  Why, on 
the other hand, someone "on his side" would be ugly/nasty/hateful is 
a question that needs an answer before any trust is warranted.

And it's interesting:  Dumbledore says repeatedly that he *trusts* 
Severus Snape; nowhere does he say he *likes* him or approves of his 
attitude.  I think DD is referring to "trusting" Snape to act in his 
own enlightened best interests, and DD knows, as no one else does, 
what Snape considers his own best interests.

<snip particularly inflaming jab>
> You can bet it will be all Snape's fault [grin].

No, but he bears much *responsibility*. <cocked eyebrow>





From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Wed Sep  3 16:17:46 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 16:17:46 -0000
Subject: Inside Dumbledore's Head (was Re: Prophets without Honour)
In-Reply-To: <bj4c5l+3l8o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj547a+jng7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79690

Sarah:
> Wow, I never thought about the chess analogy before, but this fits.  
> And look at all the talk of chess we have in the books!  I agree 
> almost 100 percent, except for this: Harry is the king of a chess 
> game.  He can't be sacrificed, because if he is, the game is lost.  
> The other side (here, Voldemort and his pure-blood only mania) has 
> won.  We now know Dumbledore's view about Trelawney's prophecy: he 
> thinks that Harry, and Harry alone, has the power to defeat 
> Voldemort.  Only Harry can destroy Voldemort, and vice versa.  Kings 
> of a chess game: capture the opponents king, and the game is won.  
> If Harry gets captured, all is lost.

Let's not take this analogy too far.

First, Dumbledore is an active player on this "board," as is LV. In 
fact, they have both attacked not only each other, but other "chess 
pieces." So are they the queens? (uh oh, I see a slash-ing SHIP 
nearing port in TBAY).

Second, in chess it's impossible for a king to capture a king. They 
would have to be right next to each other, but that would mean one 
moved into checkmate. In practice, a king can be part of a trap, but 
some other piece generally forces checkmate. And kings are never 
actually captured.

So what does this mean? Beats me! IF LV and DD are the players, then 
LV must have a king like Harry--or maybe Harry is *his* king, too! Two 
smoke serpents, both Harry?

OK, more likely, LV & DD are just generals for their respective 
armies.

-Remnant
"Or maybe the right analogy is croquet, Albus, with you and Lord 
Thingy as the beaters and all of us as the wickets!" said Remnant, 
excitedly. Dumbledore replies drily, "I think you need a good beating, 
Remnant."





From mpjdekker at hotmail.com  Wed Sep  3 16:23:05 2003
From: mpjdekker at hotmail.com (mightymaus75)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 16:23:05 -0000
Subject: KITTENS & RAINBOWS (was Voldemort will win)
In-Reply-To: <bihrj6+uptf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj54h9+erh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79691



Since no one else apparently is going to do it, I've finally taken 
some time to come up with a name for my pet theory. I'm proud to 
present you:

KITTENS & RAINBOWS (Key Is The Transferred Essence Now Seeking 
Reunion. Affection Is Not Beyond Our/Obsessively Wicked Sorcerer)

The name reflects our solemn believe that if Voldemort would only 
sometimes try to think happy thoughts everything would turn out to be 
a lot better for everyone involved. It also nicely covers up for the 
fact that we are convinced Harry will die a painful death at the 
hands of Voldemort. 

Besides Harry dying a painful death we on the KITTENS & RAINBOWS are 
convinced that: 
I - Voldemort is a very misunderstood man. He is a tragic figure with 
a horrible childhood, who deserves our pity instead of the scorn and 
insults he usually receives. We're not apologising for the many bad 
choices he has made, but it's Voldemort's inability to feel love and 
pain that is actually the fate worse than death.
II - The reason Voldemort cannot feel love or pain is that he's not 
truly alive. In his somewhat misguided quest for everlasting life, 
Voldemort has actually lost his ability to live. Not being truly 
alive, he cannot be killed.
III - When some of Voldemort's powers were transferred to Harry the 
night Voldemort's Avada Kedavra curse backfired, it wasn't just 
Voldemort's powers that were transferred. A small part of Voldemort's 
disembodied mind (the essence of Voldemort) has somehow ended up 
inside of Harry. Harry's scar marks the place where this part of 
Voldemort's mind dug its way into Harry's head. 
IV - When Harry eventually dies, the separated part of Voldemort will 
finally be free to return to Voldemort, taking with it everything it 
experienced while it was trapped inside Harry. The two parts of 
Voldemort's mind will then battle inside Voldemort, eventually 
resulting in Voldemort becoming human and mortal again. Vindicating 
us in our believes that there still was a little bit of good left in 
Voldemort. 
V - At which point Voldemort will probably be killed by either 
Neville or Wormtail.

I believe we got the can(n)on(s) to defend all this. I'm still 
working on a complete list of all the canon references that support 
the KITTENS & RAINBOWS, but it already looks like it's going to be a 
nice long list. And this theory would certainly explain a lot of 
things: the meaning of "neither can live while the other survives", 
the "in essence divided" remark, what the one thing in CoS is that 
will turn out to be important, why Harry's scar hurts whenever 
Voldemort is nearby, Harry's growing anger in OotP. And I wonder... 
the gleam in Dumbledore's eye, was that perhaps because Voldemort can 
now kill Harry? 

So, who of you is with me?

-Maus


(See message 78982 for the complete theory)






From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 16:38:55 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 16:38:55 -0000
Subject: Neville's broken nose
In-Reply-To: <bj50ig+5nbc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj55ev+bere@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79692

"watsola79" <watsola79 at y...> wrote:
> In the battle scene in OOP, after Neville's nose gets broken and he 
> is taunted by Bellatrix about his parents, he screams "I DOE YOU 
> HAB" at her.   
 
> I have always interpreted this as "I DO YOU HARM", but I recently 
> got to thinking about it, and it seems a grammatically and 
> syntactically *odd* thing to say.  <snip>

The scene, below:

"Longbottom?" repeated Bellatrix, and a truly evil smile lit her 
gaunt face.  "Why, I have had the pleasure of meeting your parents, 
boy..."

"I DOE (know) YOU HAB (have)!" roared Neville, and he fought so 
hard...

Although I can't duplicate this K to D and V to B distortion, I have 
heard really stuffed up people (like with a cold) sound this way.





From wildfire_517 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 16:23:44 2003
From: wildfire_517 at yahoo.com (wildfire_517)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 16:23:44 -0000
Subject: Things that will come into play later.
In-Reply-To: <000701c372c1$da1b9080$6f984cca@Monteith>
Message-ID: <bj54ig+942p@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79693

Nox asked:-

> >>Does anyone actually know what becomes of a dementor once it has 
been charged by a patronus? Is it destroyed? Can it return? Is it 
immaterial as there are so many of them and a constantly new supply? Does it just disapear and end up somewhere else (think Tartaru or somewhere)?<<<
 

Of course I don't have any reference materials handy, but I believe 
that a Patronus only drives the dementors back.  There is never any 
mention of them being destroyed, whether it is the singular boggart 
posing as a dementor or the hundreds attracted to Sirius, Harry and 
Hermione by the lake.  

Now, since the key requirement to producing a Patronus is to think 
about a moment of extreme happiness, I would guess that the reason 
dementors shie away from one is that the emotions produced cause 
an "overload" in their circuits.  The happiness, which they would 
normally feed off of, is too great for the dementors to bear, driving 
them away.

Following that, it would seem that they are forced to flee the 
scene from the emotional overload caused by the Patronus, but could 
return at a later time, when the power (emotional signature?) of the 
Patronus has diminished.

   Wyld





From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 17:00:50 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 17:00:50 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj4qu7+rsvq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj56o2+l437@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79695

> Pip!Squeak
> It is Snape who tries as much as he can to be adult about the 
> Occlumency lessons. It is Harry who behaves like the 15 year old 
he 
> is, shuffling his feet, doing as little as he can, and finally 
> breaking the rules so badly that Snape chucks him out. But Harry's 
> reaction to this is 'I don't care'. When he's asked to talk to 
Snape 
> and ask to be taken back, he doesn't.

Now me (Sarah):
I have to respectfully disagree that Snape is the one trying to by 
an adult while Harry is breaking every rule he can.  First off, 
Harry does practice emptying his mind of emotion.  Not as much as he 
should, true, but he does do it.  However, he doesn't have the 
answer as to how he's supposed to empty his mind of all emotion.  
Especially since he's a hormonal teenager: all emotions are so much 
more extreme to a teen.  He even mentions that he doesn't know what 
to do, and that he feels Snape hasn't told him exactly what to do.  
Yes, Harry could have asked Snape more, but Snape has a tendancy to 
snap at Harry whenever Harry asks a question, and it even nastier 
when Snape feels the answer is obvious.

And Harry does begin to see Snape in a new light after seeing his 
memories for the first time after using the protego spell.  Seeing 
Snape get teased as a child, cowering while his parents fight, etc.  
He's uncomfortably aware that he's been through similar situations, 
and doesn't particularly like it.

Snape is unnecessarily harsh to Harry during the lessons.  He 
demands to be called sir or professor.  Not to mention his reaction 
to seeing Harry in the pensieve.  Snape physically abused Harry 
here.  Snape grabbed Harry's arm so hard that Harry notices the 
pain.  Snape pushes Harry away from him so hard that Harry is 
knocked over.  Then Snape throws stuff at Harry while Harry's 
leaving his office.  All the while, Harry is trying to answer 
Snape's questions, but Snape won't let Harry explain.  

Harry leaves this encounter shaken, and refuses to go back to 
Snape's office.  I don't blame him; Snape just hurt Harry 
physically.  Also, Harry's not the adult here; Snape is.  Snape 
should have taken Harry back for lessons; he did not.  Harry was 
wrong to go into Snape's penseive without permission, but the last 
time he did this (with Dumbledore), he wasn't punished for it, only 
got a stern talking-to.  Also, it never once enters Snape's mind 
that Harry might just want to see any image of the parents he's 
never seen and doesn't remember.  It never enters the realm of 
Snape's thoughts that Harry is anything but a spoiled brat/bully 
like James was.  Snape doesn't think like an adult in this 
situation. 
Sarah





From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 17:25:52 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 17:25:52 -0000
Subject: Harry's Grandparents
In-Reply-To: <bj45lc+rasb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5870+ognt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79696

<<<Marcie:
Lily must also have some Wizarding 
family somewhere in her ancestry, and I am assuming that Petunia has 
some magical abilities, too, but is more or less a Squib. It is 
understandable, too, that Petunia would estrange herself from her 
parents (if they were alive by the time Harry and Dudley were born) 
because she felt that they always favoured Lily, anyway. >>>
 

Now me (Sarah):
I am always at a loss whenever anyone speculates that Lily had a 
magical anscestor, to the point that Petunia would be a Squib.  
Genetically, if the wizarding gene is recessive, then Lily only 
needed her parents to both have one copy of the wizard gene.  That 
doesn't necessarily mean that Lily had two magical ancsestors 
somewhere in her background (one for each parent), just that this 
gene has been passed on through the ages.  I always took it that 
Lily came from a completely non-magical family.  (If any magical 
ancestors, so long ago that no one remembers them.)  Personally, I 
think that Lily and Petunia's parents are dead.  Petunuia definitely 
seemed jealous of Lily, but she also seemed to dislike her too much 
for the dislike to be mere sibling jealousy.  My pet theory, and of 
course I have no proof of this, is that their parents were murdered 
because of Lily.  (Maybe during one of her and James' escapes from 
Voldemort?)

I would similarly think that the Potters were also murdered.  If 
they were still alive, someone in the magical community would have 
mentioned it to Harry by now.  To not tell him that his grandparents 
were alive would be unnecessarily cruel.    I assume that they were 
murdered by Death Eaters for sport because of their association with 
a muggle-born witch.  The fact that they raised a son who alway 
hated the dark arts also leads to the thought that they also hated 
the dark arts.  An added insentive to dispose of them.

Sarah





From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 17:33:27 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 17:33:27 -0000
Subject: Turncoat!Tonks (was: Aurors/Unforgiveable Curses)
In-Reply-To: <bj533s+g30o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj58l7+kii0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79697


> -Remnant

> My bet is with *Tonks* being the betrayer or mole. Why else make 
her 
> so endearing to Harry? JKR also gave her a special power of 
> matamorphmagus and much more character than, say, Shacklebolt. 
She's 
> new, she's hip, she seems harmless, she's trusted by Harry, and 
she 
> can look like anyone she wants (OK, maybe). Definitely grounds for 
> suspicion!
> 
> By the way, I also think this would put Percy in the clear. He's 
too 
> obvious as a betrayer, and much too insignificant. An Auror close 
to 
> Harry would be *much* juicier.

Now me (Sarah):
Well, I can't see Tonks turning, given that she herself is a half-
blood (her dad was muggle born), and I can't see her being accepted 
into the death eater fold.  Tonks isn't even on the Black family 
tapestry, and her dear Auntie Bella hates half-bloods like Harry 
(and like Tonks).  My bet on Tonks is that she's there to teach 
Harry how to be a metamorphmagus.  Remember in the first book how 
Harry made his hair grow after a particularly bad haircut from 
Petunia?  Sounds like Harry's parceltongue ability: he didn't 
realize that everyone else couldn't do this, and so hasn't exactly 
mentioned it to anyone.  Since we might be seeing human 
transfigurations next year (according to Hermione in GoF), we might 
see Harry develop some metamorphmagus ability.

Plus, we've already had an evil auror in a way: fake Mad-Eye in 
GoF.  My bets are still on Percy being on the side of the not-good.  
(Either the Ministry's fight-evil-with-evil or the death eaters.)
Sarah





From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 18:12:19 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 18:12:19 -0000
Subject: Harry Apologize?  Was: Pensieves objectivity/DD's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj56j3+gqhe@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5au3+3h4n@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79698

<wsherratt3338 at r...> wrote:
> I think [Dumbledore's] plan was a perfectly good one, and it's 
> not exactly his fault that Harry and Sirius thought they knew 
> better and tried something else.  Their plans didn't work out any 
> better than his, so why is he the only one apologizing at the end?  

> Maybe because he's the only one with the guts to admit that he 
> isn't always right and always perfect; it would be refreshing to 
> hear something remotely similar coming from Harry for a change.

<morgan.cole at n...> wrote:
> As a complete neophyte on this list I just wanted to add that after 
> 11 years of teaching high school, if Harry HAD offered an apology 
> in this situation, I would consider it highly unrealistic writing. 
> I don't think most 15-year-olds have the quality of detachment 
> necessary to apologize in a situation like this...I think Harry 
> probably does owe D. somewhat of an apology in return, but D., like 
> any experienced teacher of teenagers, should know better than to 
> expect one.

<gbannister10 at a...> wrote:
> Having read this and the further post on 79661, I couldn't agree 
> more having taught UK teens for 32 years. It is very difficult for 
> a middle teenager to apologise. It isn't cool.... it isn't good for 
> their street cred.... it's very hard emotionally to accept that you 
> are in the wrong. "It wasn't me guv, it was 'im wot did it!"

And it all this goes along with what Phineas Nigellus says from his 
portrait:  "You see, Dumbledore?  <snip>  Never try to understand the 
students.  They hate it.  They would much rather be tragically 
misunderstood, wallow in self-pity, stew in their own--"

*Drama* plays so much better with the hormone soup in which their 
teenaged brains are marinating.  There's no *flourish* in 
apologizing.)

And apologies are somewhat over rated, IMHO.  Lip service and/or 
calculated abasement?  Instead, show through your future behavior & 
conversation that you *got* it.  The satisfaction comes from never 
having to deal with the same sort of crap from the same person over 
again.  [As a matter of fact, something like this was illustrated 
when Harry and Ron made up after the first task in the TWT; Harry 
knew Ron "got" it and no longer needed the apology.]  Especially with 
adults dealing with kids, isn't that what is really underneath, isn't 
that the goal:  your behavior was off, get a clue, grow up.  And in 
Dumbledore's case, I can't see him needing an apology from Harry to 
ease his own hurt feelings; I can't see Dumbledore internalizing one 
iota of Harry's need to lash out.

Furthermore, Dumbledore can't have it both ways:  either he is the 
omniscient (even in the end of OoP he's still doing it:  "...I have 
watched you more closely than you can have imagined--") voice of 
wisdom, experience and reason for Harry (and others), in which case 
one should reasonably assume that he is making decisions based on 
full information (the end of Harry's Occlumency lessons--NOT!), or he 
needs to lose the superiority, detachment, and "the responsibility 
lies on my shoulders" mantle and *discuss* things with members of the 
Order (and other involved persons) rather than just issuing commands 
(via Molly:  "...oh, for heaven's sake, Sirius, Dumbledore said no!"  
She did not say "advised against it," I note.)

Then again, maybe Dumbledore allowed the mystique for the value it 
had in daunting the enemy, then ended up hoisted on that particular 
petard.  He has admitted a "mistake" to Harry; how will that play out 
later on with Harry *and* members of the Order? 

"msbeadsley"





From jeanes at maxitd.com  Wed Sep  3 18:13:26 2003
From: jeanes at maxitd.com (friendjoshua)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 18:13:26 -0000
Subject: Voldemort destroyed by Harry's power 
Message-ID: <bj5b06+1fnb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79699

...and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live 
while the other survives...

I don't believe that this has been put before you yet, so I wanted to 
throw out my own prediction on the final ending of the book.  It is 
based on the quote above and some other facts:

-Voldemort is an evil man - you could say he is pure evil with no 
ability to love.
-Harry's power is love, something that Voldemort knows nothing about.
-Voldemort sent some of his power into Harry after the initial 
attack.  This power connects Harry and Voldemort in a way that is 
beyond the normal powers of magic (which allows each to read each 
other's emotions at any distance - not something that normal 
Legilimency doesn't seem to allow).
-JK has said that Harry may not survive the 7th book - or at least 
there will be no more books after the 7th.

Combined all these ideas and you come up with an option for the end of 
the book:  Voldemort and Harry combind together in one person.

"Wha?" you say?  I agree, the idea is outlandish, but it would fit 
the facts - for "neither can live, while the other survives".  Harry 
and Voldemort cannot truly live while the other one is out there - 
their whole life would be devoted to destroying each other.  But what 
if they combind?  Voldemort's power and Harry's love would create a 
new person that would make a difference in the magic world.  This 
would also be the sort of trick ending that would make everyone sit 
up and wonder what happened.  (Right up there with my brother's 
theory that Zion in the matrix is actually another Matrix, so Neo 
needs to awaken from the "reality" of Zion.)

The only thing I wonder with this theory is what would 
Harry/Voldemort be called?  Holdemort?  Varry?  but I do know one 
thing - a possible ending of the books:

"...looking into the mirror, and he could still see the scar."








From n_longbottom01 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 19:40:05 2003
From: n_longbottom01 at yahoo.com (n_longbottom01)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 19:40:05 -0000
Subject: Neville's broken nose
In-Reply-To: <bj5dn5+3vgk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5g2l+pot@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79700

> Talisman, skipping back the other way with a basket of humorous-
> toffees, snorks:
> 
> Well, I DID think of DD's nose, but I was REALLY REALLY kidding 
> about the time turner.
> 
> Talisman, ready to break any freaking time-turner she sees:)

Now me (n_longbottom01):

Ah... good, you were kidding.  I just saw you there weeping openly :) 
about the thought of Neville time-turning into Dumbledore, and I 
thought I would try to provide some comfort.  :)

Be careful how you kid.  :)  You make a joking connection between 
Neville and Dumbledores broken noses, and 500 posts later someone 
comes up with INN BATHROOM or something like that.  If Neville's Nose 
Breaks At least Twice He ... oh this is too hard, how do you guys do 
this?  :)

The idea that Dumbledore is Time-Turned Neville just doesn't click 
for me.  A long while back I read some posts about Ron using a time 
turner to become Dumbledore.  I enjoyed thinking that one through.  I 
think I could see Ron progressing into a wise-old Dumbledore type 
somewhere way down the road.  I'm not saying that it would be 
impossible for Neville to develope into a wise-old Dumbledore type--I 
guess I just have a different picture in my mind of what a grown-up 
Neville might be like.

n_longbottom01 




From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Wed Sep  3 06:38:42 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 06:38:42 -0000
Subject: Harry's Sexual preference- Sue
In-Reply-To: <BAY2-F13XLU9778dvMD00003777@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <bj429i+9gt2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79701

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sue Porter" <sues0101 at h...> 
wrote:
Sue:
> Yes, Harry and Ron may be joined at the waist, but for the life of 
me I cannot remember him describing Ron's appearance in glowing terms, 
so - just friends I think.
> 
> If I think about it rationally, I can't honestly say that I think 
Harry will be gay or even bi. I just don't think JK will do that to 
poor Harry. He has enough problems in his life without having to deal 
with the bigotry of any anti - gay wizards. Not to mention that if 
the Daily Prophet got hold of the news that the Boy Who Lived was gay, 
there would probably be a run on new Death Eaters waiting to join LV!
> 

  Jeff:

   Yes, I have to agree that Harry doesn't think as highly of Ron as 
he does of Harry. True, Ron doesn't gloat over Harry, but he has 
bragged a bit about his exploits, iirc.  I also do have to agree that 
JRK won't want to make Harry's life anymore complicated than it 
already is. He's already in double jepordy, and to add worries about 
his sexual identity, would really make him crack. Something I don't 
want to see. His actions in OOtP were disturbing enough, imho.


> I too have read lots of fics with both Dean and Seamus being gay, 
and don't get it. There doesn't seem to be any supporting canon to 
even suggest this, although because we see the WW from Harry's POV, 
we probably wouldn't as Harry is so clueless (lovable but clueless).
> 

  Jeff:

   Yeah, it is funny. I think that they seemed to be paired off even 
more than Harry and Ron!! I guess thinking D/S is funny, is how 
others thing of H/R, but at least we do see enough of those two 
hanging around together to support some theories. It's not that I'm 
against it, as I'm not. I just don't like Seamus being made so 
slutty. I love the idea of the pairing, totally, just not Seamus 
being so randy. ;) Now, as for Poor Neville, he'd have to be included 
in some group stuff, or at least having Seamus invite him to play 
with him and/or Dean. :) It is true that Harry is so clueless, that 
even if he saw those two getting out of the bath together in an 
excited state, he would merely turn red and look the other way, and 
wouldn't have a clue as to what might have caused that reaction. ;)
 

> Seamus and Dean seem always to be together, maybe just paired off 
as best friends because there is only five boys in their year level, 
but I can imagine Seamus initating that little jerk off session as 
you said *impish grin*. He seems exactly the cheeky type that would 
do that. Ha - 'show me yours and I'll show you mine - Weasley might 
be a 'howler''. Oh, God I crack myself up. Better go now and behave 
myself. This is my very first non-moderated post. I might get shunted 
back to moderated for this if I'm not careful.
>

   Jeff:

    Yes, I think the pairing makes sense. They are best mates, so it 
could happen, and true, little Seamus is very cheeky, so if he would 
want to risk making rum in the great hall, I don't think any nightly 
comparing would bother him a bit. ;)
    Ekk!! I hope I don't cause you problems. I'm still being 
moderated, so I have to wait to see if my posts make it or not, so 
it's no problem to me. This can go OL if necessary.


   Jeff





From two_flower2 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 16:37:26 2003
From: two_flower2 at yahoo.com (two_flower2)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 16:37:26 -0000
Subject: Neville's broken nose
In-Reply-To: <20030903152955.41169.qmail@web21507.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bj55c6+fkn5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79702


> Hans in Holland:
> 
> I think he's saying, "I know you have". (had the pleasure of 
meeting your
> parents).
> 


Hi everybody, this is my first post to this group.  

I am wondering if "I know you have" might be a part of a phrase, like 
in "I know you have it!"  Maybe, Neville knows that Bellatrix is in 
possession of something belonging to his parents, something she took 
from them by torture...  something which should belong to Neville and 
which Mrs. Longbottom in her insanity tries to give him during 
hospital visits... over and over again... when she gives him gum 
wrappers, that is (far-fetched).

Good day to you all, 

and Hans:  I loved your long post about HP, Occlumency matters and 
occult.  Very interesting.  Just wondering if Rowling put all this in 
her book concsiously or not.

Twoflower2 





From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 17:38:43 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 17:38:43 -0000
Subject: Inside Dumbledore's Head (was Re: Prophets without Honour)
In-Reply-To: <bj564q+a4t6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj58v3+r89d@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79703

<<<<Geoff:
If Harry is a king, he can't win the game. A king cannot check a 
king.

The king has to be protected. The next most valuable piece which is 
obviously the centre of any strategy is the queen......>>>

Now me (Sarah):
Ah, but I don't think Harry is the one playing the game here.  I 
think Dumbledore is.  Maybe Voldemort is the opposing queen, so 
Harry as the chess-king could take Voldemort the queen out.  
(Snickering slightly to myself at the thought of Voldemort as a drag 
queen parading himself down the streets of San Francisco during the 
gay pride parade.)
Sarah





From greatelderone at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 19:51:33 2003
From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 19:51:33 -0000
Subject: Neville's broken nose
In-Reply-To: <bj523b+ojvv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5go5+h1hj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79704

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Talisman" <talisman22457 at y...> 
wrote:

> Do you know, the moment I saw Neville's nose break I thought of 
> someone else's nose.
> 
> ".. . his nose was very long and crooked, as though it had been 
> broken at least twice.  This man's name was Albus dumbledore." (SS 
8)
> 
> 
> There have been JKR interview hints that could indicate that 
Neville 
> will end up a Professor at Hogwarts.
> 
> If Neville gets another broken nose in book 6 . . . 
> 
> Talisman, now weeping openly, "Oh god, no time turners, 
> please. . . ."

:rolleyes: How utterly original. You are forgetting that Dumbledore 
also happens to have a brother which Neville lacks and has red hair. 
It's far more plausible for Albus and Alberforth to be Hermione and 
Ron's kids from the future which would explain Dumbledore's skill in 
transfiguration and his red hair.




From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Wed Sep  3 20:02:20 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 21:02:20 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's Sexual preference- Sue
References: <bj429i+9gt2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F5648CC.000001.65585@monica>

No: HPFGUIDX 79705

 

Jeff:
 
Yes, I think the pairing makes sense. They are best mates, so it 
could happen, and true, little Seamus is very cheeky, so if he would 
want to risk making rum in the great hall, I don't think any nightly 
comparing would bother him a bit. ;)
Ekk!! I hope I don't cause you problems. I'm still being 
moderated, so I have to wait to see if my posts make it or not, so 
it's no problem to me. This can go OL if necessary.
 
 K -

Besides it is an irresistible urge (especially for fanfic writers, I know I
catch myself doing it) to have everyone happily paired off. So we have
Harry/Hermione, Ron/Luna, Neville/Ginny; OR Ron/Hermione, Harry/Ginny,
Neville/Luna; OR Harry/Draco, Ron/Hermione, Neville/Ginny; or Harry/Ron,
Hermione/Ginny, Neville/Severus etc etc - whatever your personal arrangement
is and then Dean and Seamus who we don't know much about (Dean is artistic?
or is that fanon, and a Hammers fan and Seamus is Irish and possibly a
quidditch fan) just sort of sitting there on the edge of the group and
people want to pair them off so - pair them off together since they seem to
be friends anyway - two birds; one handy stone.
 
It's similar to the way your happily married friends always want to pair you
off with someone, once your 'star' Harry, Hermione, Ron, whoever it is you
re writing about, is happily discovering the joys of love, romance and hot
sex ;) you suddenly get the urge to have everyone else discover them too.

K



From talisman22457 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 20:08:24 2003
From: talisman22457 at yahoo.com (Talisman)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 20:08:24 -0000
Subject: Neville's broken nose
In-Reply-To: <bj5go5+h1hj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5hno+4p4p@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79706

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "greatelderone" 
<greatelderone at y...> wrote> 
> :rolleyes: How utterly original. <snip>

Talisman, who actually thinks this is quite funny, notices:

1) You didn't understand it was humor;

2) You didn't understand it was humor when I explained it was humor; 
but,

3) At least you got to feel like you had something to contribute.

Thanks for the laugh.







From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 20:09:02 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 20:09:02 -0000
Subject: How long are the classes? -variation
In-Reply-To: <bj36e2+eu23@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5hou+j5p7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79707

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "michaelkgidlow"
<Veritas771 at h...> wrote:
> I always assumed a standard class was 45 minutes, but in book 5
> , both a single period and a dubble period are refered to as being 
> one and a half hours long. What's up with this?

bboy_mn:

Having read the other posts, it seems your question has been answered,
and I agree, 'double' to me has always meant double length.

But I pose another variation of your question. If a single class, is
45 minutes with 15 minutes to get to the next class, then would a
double be 45x2=1hr 30 min. with a half hour (15x2) between classes, or
would a double be 1hr 45 minutes leaving the standard 15 minutes
between class? The double class would end at 15 minutes to the hour
just like all the other classes. 

I would think that all classes whether double or single would end at
15 minutes to the top of the hour. But then I remember
Harry/Ron/Hermione periodically going out into the courtyard between
classes. Is this for the long 1/2hr gap at the end of a double class,
or is this just full class period during which they have no class. I
didn't get the impression when I read it that is was as long as a full
class period. 

So basically, I'm lost. Any help?

bboy_mn




From melclaros at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 20:11:15 2003
From: melclaros at yahoo.com (melclaros)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 20:11:15 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj4qu7+rsvq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5ht3+liv3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79708

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bluesqueak" <pipdowns at e...> 
wrote:
\> 
> No, no, no, no. This is a classic example of the reader falling 
> under the spell of Harry's POV.
> 
> Ahem.
> 
> Read the scene in GoF Ch.28 again.
> 

 <snip scene> 

>>> And what does Harry remember this sequence as? 'If Snape hadn't 
held 
> me up, we might have got there in time.' [Ch. 29]
> 
> And that's what we, the reader, remember, because we're locked into 
> Harry's POV. Snape didn't delay Harry at all. Snape calling Harry 
> back (to find out what he was doing in front of Dumbledore's 
office) 
> probably saved a lot of time. Certainly a lot more than the 20 
> seconds he 'wasted'.


Mel gapes in shock:
You got me. A pre-eminent Snape apologist and *this* was the scene 
over which I was ready to slap Severus! I sincerely thank you for 
pointing out the error of my thinking!



to continue:

> 
> And there's all the little protective-of-students side comments, as 
> well. 'Crabbe,loosen your hold a little...' 'We'll be carrying 
> what's left of Finch-Fletchley to the Hospital Wing in a 
> matchbox' 'Snape gripped the back of a chair very hard' [when Ginny 
> has been kidnapped in CoS.]
> 
> But no. This is less important to Harry than the fact that Snape is 
> *nasty* to him. He gives him detentions. He makes *sarcastic 
> comments*. He marks him unfairly. He's *horrible* to him!
> 
> And it culminates in Sirius's death. If Harry had remembered that 
> Snape was an Order member, Snape could have contacted Sirius for 
> him, safely. Harry subconciously discounts Snape because 'he's 
nasty 
> to me. 


me:
YES! You know I almost woke up everyone in my house yelling GO TO 
SNAPE! at my copy of OoP and was *profoundly* shocked at the number 
of people I've spoken to--and posts I've read here and elsewhere by 
people who say they never considered that Harry should have gone to 
Snape. Snape was pointed out to be a member of the order from the get-
go. Not just any old member either, but apparently a bit of a star. 
Remember the excitement as Harry and his entourage arrived at 
Grimmaud when Molly announces "He's just arrived" and everyone goes 
rushing off to this important meeting? Remember the center of 
attention in the crush of excited order members in the hallway? HOW 
could so many people have discounted him?
I console myself by telling myself that that's the way HE wants it, 
he's safer that way.



pip:
> It is Snape who tries as much as he can to be adult about the 
> Occlumency lessons. It is Harry who behaves like the 15 year old he 
> is, shuffling his feet, doing as little as he can, and finally 
> breaking the rules so badly that Snape chucks him out. But Harry's 
> reaction to this is 'I don't care'. When he's asked to talk to 
Snape > and ask to be taken back, he doesn't.


Me:
Absolutely, and let us not forget the astonishingly high praise he 
gives Potter when he (potter) manages to break into his Snape's 
memories. "That certainly was an improvement" and "I don't remember 
telling you to use a shield charm...but there is no doubt it was 
effective..." This from SEVERUS SNAPE to HARRY POTTER?? And after 
what Potter had just witnessed? This is EXTRAORDINARY! Glory, Praise 
and honor indeed.


> 
> And when Sirius dies, he blames Snape for stopping the lessons ...

<snip>

> Harry's dislike of Snape has just killed the person he most loved. 
> But that's OK. 
> 
> You can bet it will be all Snape's fault [grin].

Me:
Everything is okay as long as the "greasy oddball" is around to take 
the blame. That's why the good lord *made* greasy oddballs.


Melpomene, seeing the gargoyle scene in a ray of golden sunshine--
despite the teasing--ok sadistic verbal abuse.




From przepla at ipartner.com.pl  Wed Sep  3 20:15:43 2003
From: przepla at ipartner.com.pl (Przemyslaw Plaskowicki)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 22:15:43 +0200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione SHIP question
In-Reply-To: <bj4bi5+hlb8@eGroups.com>
References: <bj4bi5+hlb8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F564BEF.5030805@ipartner.com.pl>

No: HPFGUIDX 79709

On 2003-09-03 11:16, mochajava13 (Sarah) wrote:

><very heavy snipping here>
>
 >Then on the next page, we find out that

>Harry had a warm glow (he notices when it goes away) when he first 
>saw his friends.  Except when he walks into the room, Hermione jumps 
>on him.  He only sees Hermione's hair.  So he's got a nice warm glow 
>while he's hugging Hermione tightly and for a fairly long time.  Not 
>romantic quite yet, but not completely devoid of romance either.  
>Also, Pig was cirling overhead while the two were hugging.  Which 
>made me think of a wedding, probably because I'm planning mine right 
>now!  Circles feature prominently in weddings because of their 
>symbolism: circles have no end and no beginning, representing the 
>hope that the couple's love will be like that.
>  
>
But isn't it that because:
1. Ron & Hermione are closest persons in the world to Harry;
2. Two males don't hug, unless situation is VERY difficult,
3. Females are emotional (I know those are cultural stereotypes but 
still that's the way various gender reacts)?

And why Ron is not jealous of this hugging?

>Then Hermione is jealous when she found out that Harry kissed Cho.  
>Her tone of voice, her choice of words, and her frown all suggest 
>that Hermione was not happy during this scene.  
>
<and here...>

I made a dissection of this in post #77427 
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/77427 or on my 
personal webpage: http://www.przemyslaw.plaskowicki.name/hpfgu). You may 
as well read post #77466, too for some Ron/Hermione facts.

In short, Hermione was not interested in Harry's love life.


>  Not the bickering that Hermione does 
>with almost every other character, most noticably Ron.
>
See  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/77466 ;-)

<and here too...>

> When Hermione was hit by a death eater, 
>Harry's reaction was different to all the other ones: he drops to 
>his knees while the death eater that hurt Hermione is near him.  He 
>panics, can't think, and blames himself for what happened to 
>Hermione.  His reaction to the death eater is pure instinct; he 
>doesn't think.  Now look at the other's: he sees Ron bleeding at the 
>mouth, white, mentally losing it, and barely able to walk.  (To the 
>point where Harry has to drag Ron.)  Harry asks what happened to 
>Ron, wants to see if he's OK.  But Harry doesn't panic, despite that 
>fact that Ron was very seriously injured here.  (Ron spent as much 
>time as Hermione did in the hospital wing.)  He sees Luna get 
>knocked out, lying as still as Hermione.  Same when Ginny gets 
>knocked out by a death eater.  
>
Hermione's hit so bad it looked as she was dead. Ron was seriously 
wounded but he was still conscious. Luna received a blow from a door -- 
obviously not fatal, the same for Ginny -- it was stunning spell ("red 
light"). As for caring for Ron, here goes quote "[Harry run from 
others], inwardly praying that Neville would stay with Ron and find some 
way of releasing him."

Regards,
Pshemekan


-- 
Men are wise in proportion, not to their experience, but to their capacity for experience. (James Boswell, Life of Samuel Johnson, 1791)






From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Sep  3 20:30:48 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 20:30:48 -0000
Subject: Plausibility and Neville's broken nose
In-Reply-To: <bj5go5+h1hj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5j1o+gie7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79710

The Aptly-Named Great Elder One>> It's far more plausible for Albus 
and Alberforth to be Hermione and Ron's kids from the future which 
would explain Dumbledore's skill in transfiguration and his red 
hair.>>

Ah, you see, but I am of the school who finds it far more plausible 
that Sorting Hat turns out to be the lovechild of Kreacher and Daddy 
Black's besnogged trousers Polyjuiced to look like a Metamorphmagus 
Crookshanks, implanted with the wisdom of Dennis Creevy and *then* 
Timeturned back to 1023 or whenever, where Godric Gryffindor had to 
be Imperio'd into wearing it by Dumbledore, who's been lying about 
his age all along, the old codger. But then, hey, plausability's a 
subjective thing, obviously.

Kirstini, who *loves* it when people take themselves too seriously, 
and vaguely wonders if Hermione isn't better known for her Charm 
work.   




From entropymail at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 20:31:19 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 20:31:19 -0000
Subject: What Destroyed Godric's Hollow?
Message-ID: <bj5j2n+sqgi@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79711

Okay, folks. Humor me for a moment, because I'm not exactly sure where
I'm going with this.  I've always wondered what happened to Harry's
parents' house in Godric Hollow. Apparetnly, it was completely
destroyed. Of course, it could have been destroyed by Voldemort's
failed and misdirected Avada Kedavra.

But lately I've noticed that failed curses generally don't do that
sort of thing. When Harry fought Voldemort in the cemetary, the two
curses were so powerful that they should have caused some kind of
explosion, but instead they created a glittering cage of energy.  Is
it possible that it was not Voldemort's failed curse that caused the
destruction of the Potter home? Could Harry himself have done this?
It's  possible that Harry is far more powerful that we (or Voldemort)
have realized (what was it the prophecy says? a power he knows not?). 

I've just been re-reading SS, and Chapter Two seems like it's full of
clues regarding this possibility.  We find that just a bit of
annoyance at Dudley (without any training or even the knowledge that
he is a wizard), is enough to enable Harry to remove the snake's glass
and make Dudley fall through. (Later on in the series, a bit of
annoyance allows him to "blow up" Dudley's aunt.)  Perhaps, even at a
year old, Harry possessed the power (if not the understanding) to
create a powerfully dangerous curse. If anything could elicit this
type of rage, surely the act of seeing Voldemort viciously murder his
parents would do it. 

Finally, in what is perhaps a bit of JKR sneaky-clue-placing, there is
an interesting exchange in this chapter as well: 

"You could just leave me here, Harry put in hopefully....
Aunt Petunia looked as though she'd just swallowed a lemon.
"And come back and find the jouse in ruins?" she snarled.
"I won't blow up the house," said Harry...

Whaddya think? Has anyone noticed any other clues regarding the
destruction of Godric's Hollow?

Entropy




From melclaros at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 20:47:29 2003
From: melclaros at yahoo.com (melclaros)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 20:47:29 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj56o2+l437@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5k11+rovh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79712

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mochajava13" 
<mochajava13 at y...> wrote:
--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mochajava13" 
<mochajava13 at y...> wrote:
> 
> Snape is unnecessarily harsh to Harry during the lessons.  He 
> demands to be called sir or professor.  Not to mention his reaction 
> to seeing Harry in the pensieve.  Snape physically abused Harry 
> here.  Snape grabbed Harry's arm so hard that Harry notices the 
> pain.  Snape pushes Harry away from him so hard that Harry is 
> knocked over.  Then Snape throws stuff at Harry while Harry's 
> leaving his office.  All the while, Harry is trying to answer 
> Snape's questions, but Snape won't let Harry explain.  


me:
I have to step in here..just have to. I've already mentioned Snape's 
reaction to Harry's Protego charm in my response to pip so I won't 
repeat it here. What I will say is this. Snape has EVERY right 
to 'demand' to be called "sir" or "professor". He IS "Sir". He 
IS "Professor". What would you have him do? "Well Harry, we're here 
in private, we can drop the act, call me Sevvy. Want a beer?" Sheesh. 
This is STILL a student/teacher relationship. Snape does not change 
his manner of address to Potter. (There, I've given you something to 
run with.)
This "abuse": Harry is now FIFTEEN. We have to stop seeing him as 
ELEVEN. Should Snape have grabbed and pushed? No. But was it child 
abuse? I think not. I think had Severus wanted to abuse Harry he 
could have done a HELL of a lot better than that. He did not throw 
things "at" Harry, he threw ONE jar OVER his head. 
This is a kid who plays Quidditch and has fallen off his broom, been 
hit by a rougue bludger, battled mountain trolls--hell battled 
VOLDEMORT and we're supposed to get weepy because a man he's 
witnessed his esteemed godfather call "snivellus" *grabbed his arm 
and tossed a jar of roachies over his head?" PULEEZ!
NO, it was not a mature grown up thing for a teacher--any adult to 
do. But he retained enough control not to send it right through his 
head, a feat I have no doubt he was capeable of.
Am I making excuses? No not really. But I am tired of this argument 
sounding like Big Huge Severus beat up on ickle innocent baby Harry 
AND took away his lolly.


> 
> Harry leaves this encounter shaken, and refuses to go back to 
> Snape's office.  I don't blame him; Snape just hurt Harry 
> physically.  Also, Harry's not the adult here; Snape is.  Snape 
> should have taken Harry back for lessons; he did not.  Harry was 
> wrong to go into Snape's penseive without permission, but the last 
> time he did this (with Dumbledore), he wasn't punished for it, only 
> got a stern talking-to.  Also, it never once enters Snape's mind 
> that Harry might just want to see any image of the parents he's 
> never seen and doesn't remember.  It never enters the realm of 
> Snape's thoughts that Harry is anything but a spoiled brat/bully 
> like James was.  Snape doesn't think like an adult in this 
> situation. 

There was NO excuse for Harry to look in that Pensieve. NONE. I don't 
care if Snape was baiting him. I don't care if he'd hung a big 
blinking sign over it saying "Don't look in here, Potter! wink wink 
nudge nudge" He should NOT have looked. He wanted to see something 
about his parents? What in heaven's name makes you think he had *any 
idea* there was anything to do with his parents in there? Why would 
it enter Snape's mind that Potter was looking in that pensieve for 
information on James and Lily? Oh no, Potter wasn't looking for 
Potters, he was looking for more "Fun with Snivellus" and we all know 
it. 

You mention the fact that he was not punished when he looked in DD's 
pensieve. Don't get me started on what DD lets those kids get away 
with...well it's catching up with him now, even he sees that.



Melpomene, digging that hole deeper and deeper.





From tallulah_sam at hotmail.com  Wed Sep  3 17:15:23 2003
From: tallulah_sam at hotmail.com (tallulah_sam)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 17:15:23 -0000
Subject: Leaked Book Names
Message-ID: <bj57jb+seqn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79713

Oooh! Did everybody hear and wonder as I did when they heard 
the "leaked" names of book 6 & 7? "Harry Potter and the Mudblood 
Revolt" and "Harry Potter and the Quest of the Centaurs"? What does 
everybody think? I had a feeling that the centaur's prophecies might 
come up again (the two wars bit) and I like the idea that 
the "mudbloods" might start a revolt against the "purebloods". Im 
wondering though whether we can start debating future storylines yet 
or if its a hoax....?

Tallulah X

[Admin note: can people remember that the copyrighted titles are 'leaks', not canon. Some of the copyrighted titles for Book Five turned out to be deliberately misleading.

If you want to discuss possibilities based on the 'leaked' titles, please do as Tallulah did, and base your comments mainly on the *published* books. ]




From pokeypokey at comcast.net  Wed Sep  3 19:57:21 2003
From: pokeypokey at comcast.net (angelberri56)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 19:57:21 -0000
Subject: Harry's New Fear
Message-ID: <bj5h31+4o1r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79714

This is just a random question, sorry if it's already been 
contemplated:

Harry's greatest fear in PoA, was dementors (or fear itself). But 
now, though I could be wrong, it seems as though he has gotten 
over this fear. He fights the dementor-boggart in the maze (third 
task, GoF), and in the beginning of OOtP, he defeats the two 
dementors pretty easily. If he has overcome his fear, what is now 
his greatest fear? 

(It could possibly be people he loves dying... after what 
happened to Sirius)

But let me know what you think!
Thanks!

-angelberri56-





From mpjdekker at hotmail.com  Wed Sep  3 20:54:10 2003
From: mpjdekker at hotmail.com (mightymaus75)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 20:54:10 -0000
Subject: Birth, Doubt, Fear, Pride, Disillusionment
Message-ID: <bj5kdj+6bcq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79715



One of the things that struck me most when I read OotP was the fact 
that the book seemed to have a very clear-cut theme: disillusionment. 
It made me wonder if not perhaps each of the Harry Potter books has 
one single defining theme. It seems to me that they do; In each book 
Harry faces a new obstacle, overcomes that obstacle, and goes back to 
the Dursleys a little wiser and a little stronger. 

Here's what I found so far:

Book 1 ? Birth. This is in fact the book I'm least sure about. But 
most of the book seems to deal with Harry's introduction in the 
Wizarding World. Everything is new to him and he has to learn a lot 
before he can come into his own, and finally face Voldemort. This 
theme is then visualised by the birth of Norbert the Dragon. 

Book 2 ? Doubt. The book starts right away with Harry's doubts about 
his friends, and whether he really belongs in the Wizarding World. 
And for a large part it deals with Harry's doubts about being the 
heir of Slytherin, and whether he really belongs in Gryffindor. Harry 
then finally conquers these doubts when Dumbledore explains to him 
that it is our choices that show what we truly are, far more than our 
abilities.

Book 3 ? Fear. Harry spends most of the book conquering his fear of 
dementors, as well as his fear of death and his fears about his 
destiny. Something which he does when he finally is able to create a 
powerful Patronus during the Quidditch game. As a visualisation of 
this theme there are the bogards who become precisely that which you 
fear most. 

Book 4 ? Pride. Harry's pride prevents him from accepting help from 
his friends. Pride also prevents him from making up with Ron. Only 
during the last task is able to leave his pride behind him when he 
lets go of the mental image of him winning the Triwizard Tournament 
and proposes to take the cup together. There is also the pride of 
Barty Crouch which ultimately caused his son to end up in Azkaban.

Book 5 ? Disillusionment. During the book Harry finds out that his 
role as the hero who always neatly solves everything isn't that 
simple. In life it doesn't always end with a happy ending, and Harry 
certainly cannot solve everything by playing the hero. There is of 
course also Sirius' death. The fact that Harry leads the Dursleys out 
of the train station at the end of the book seems to suggest he has 
overcome his disillusionment, and that he's now more confident with 
his own role. As a visualisation of this theme there is the 
Disillusionment charm at the begin of the book.

Book 6 ? Anger ??? / Hate ??? The death of Sirius and the growing 
influence of Voldemort may well cause Harry to become even angrier 
than he already was in OotP.

Book 7 ? Death ???  If the theme of the first book is birth, the last 
book could be about death. To those of you who have read my theory on 
the outcome of Harry's final fight with Voldemort it won't come as a 
surprise that I believe Harry might well die before the end of the 
series.

Now, I'm not at all sure that these are in fact the themes JKR had in 
mind when she was writing the books. Book 1 and 4 especially I am not 
so certain about. Also in book 2 and 4 I haven't been able to find an 
object or spell or creature that really embodies the main theme, like 
the birth of Norbert, the bogards, or the Disillusionment charm. So 
any suggestions of possible alternative main themes or visualisations 
of those themes would be very welcome. Is JKR perhaps following some 
standard list of stages we all go through in order to grow up? 

-Maus






From MadameSSnape at aol.com  Wed Sep  3 21:10:07 2003
From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 17:10:07 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Wizarding World Fauna, Potions, Pasties, & Pies
Message-ID: <41.33491b0e.2c87b2af@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79716

In a message dated 9/3/2003 2:01:48 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
bboy_mn at yahoo.com writes:

> Pasties actually started out as Cornish Pasties. Apparently there are
> coal mines in Cornwall, and the coal miners had to eat there lunch
> down in the mines. So their wives would put the entire lunch into a
> pastie or pie crust rolled so it was closed into a small sandwich. 

The term is actually much older than that - check TO THE KING'S TASTE by Dr. 
Lorna J. Sass.  It's a translation/adaptation of a cookbook from the court of 
Richard II (r. 1377-1399 - the period of Chaucer).  The word "pasty" (in 
various spellings) is used in the names of several dishes.  (We often found them 
handy for taking to SCA feasts when we went off-board...)

I've always pictured Pumpkin Pasties as looking rather like the hot apple 
pies from fast food restaurants, only filled with pumpkin.

Sherrie


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 21:12:45 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 21:12:45 -0000
Subject: Neville - Broken Nose & Time Turned
In-Reply-To: <bj50ig+5nbc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5lgd+mhbu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79717

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "watsola79" <watsola79 at y...> wrote:
> In the battle scene in OOP, after Neville's nose gets broken and he 
> is taunted by Bellatrix about his parents, he screams "I DOE YOU
> HAB" at her.   
> 
> ...edited...
> 
> Are there any other thoughts or interpretations as to what Neville 
> meant to say?  
> 
> - Lana Lovegood

bboy_mn:

I originally read it as, 'I DOUBT you have', but now that you mention
it, 'I know you have' makes more sense and is certainly more heart
wrenching.

As far as Neville being TimeTurned!Dumbledore, or would that be
Dumbledore is TimeTurned!Neville? I'm pretty sure just a few weeks ago
a large contingent of posters thoroughly established (at least in
their own minds) that Dumbledore was really TimeTurned!Ron who went
back in time to do something or save someone or whatever, and is now
living his way into the future, guiding Harry with the personal
knowledge he gained as Ron, or something like that.

I find it hard to believe there will be any more time turning in the
story. I think that card has been played. Any other uses of Time
Travel would be a little too easy as a solution for anything, both
from a quality of writing perspective, and from an effective narrative
function; it would be the easy way out. 

JKR seems avoid using magic as the solution for everything which she
could have easily done, but she probably wouldn't have sold any books.
 So I think as far as time travel goes; been there, done that. 

I confess that if JKR does use time travel again, I'm sure my head
will explode.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn





From pokeypokey at comcast.net  Wed Sep  3 19:50:30 2003
From: pokeypokey at comcast.net (angelberri56)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 19:50:30 -0000
Subject: Minor Hermione Rant ( Was Re: Things that will come into play later.)
In-Reply-To: <bivaal+e2s0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5gm6+8gjf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79718

mom31 wrote:
> > 
> > >4.  Why was Ron's role somewhat weakened in this book 
and Hermione's 
> > >elevated?  I'm not talking about shipping here.  Yes, Ron 
was off doing 
> > >his own stuff, which has to be important later.  Why couldn't 
he have 
> > >succeeded on his own, and still contributed more with Harry 
and everyone 
> > >else.  He was at the MoM, but he was put with Ginny and 
Luna, not Harry 
> > >and Hermione.  Plus, JKR had him acting all stupid there.  
He also kept 
> > >himself distant from Harry by refusing to offer his opinion 
several times, 
> > >even when Harry was about to do something dangerous.  
Hermione and 
> Harry 
> > >were very close in this book.  Why did JKR need to 
strengthen their bond 
> > >even more?  It makes me worry for Hermione in the next 
book!

Angelberri56 (me!) now:

My theory on this is pretty simple: Hermione has come to 
represent what she loves and values so much: a library. When 
Harry needs anwers, (such as on the Cho thing) Hermione was 
the one who provided them for him. And of course, her never 
ending knowledge about magic that she gets from books, and 
the way she often talks as if out of a dictionary. I think Hermione 
came out more in the fifth book, because JKR needed someone 
to replace Sirius, as he was going to die. Sirius was always the 
one who Harry went to for advice, and now that he's gone, Harry 
needs somewhere to turn: Hermione. Anyway, Ron always gave 
more of suggestions, rather than actual advice. I see him more 
as a best friend to just hang out with, adding his views once in a 
while, but there for basically just moral support. Hermione, on 
the other hand, offers practical advice, which Harry could really 
use. And we all know that we should probably listen to Hermione 
now! ( The guess at what LV was doing when he showed Harry 
the image of torturing Sirius)

So this my reason for Hermione becoming closer to Harry in 
OOtP.

-angelberri56-





From foxmoth at qnet.com  Wed Sep  3 21:15:54 2003
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 21:15:54 -0000
Subject: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj37i8+moof@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5lma+bk4c@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79719

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kiricat2001" 
<Zarleycat at a...> wrote:
 I 
> know, I know, Dumbledore had to stay away from Harry  so 
Voldemort wouldn't find out when strolling through Harry's mind 
that the good  guys had figured out about the connection 
between Harry's mind and  Voldemort.  But, Dumbledore could 
have had Remus or Moody or  McGonagall be the one to talk to 
Harry alone to explain all of this,  and also explain why Snape 
has to be the one to teach Harry.  <

Er, maybe I'm dense, but how does Harry getting the information 
from Remus or Moody instead of Dumbledore make it any more 
difficult for Voldemort to glean it from Harry's mind?  It's Harry's 
mind that's unsafe, not Dumbledore's.

And this idea that Dumbledore had no understanding of what 
Sirius was going through...where does that come from? Well, 
that's what Harry thinks, "Dumbledore, who had plainly not 
understood Sirius at all, how brave he was, how much he had 
suffered..." 

But Harry is a fifteen year old boy, and youth, as Dumbledore 
says, often does not understand age. One thing that Harry does 
not understand in this case, I think, is how much of his own 
feelings of isolation and hostility he is projecting onto Sirius.

 Dumbledore did not  *make* Sirius stay at Grimmauld Place. 
Sirius was  an adult, free to leave at any time. He wouldn't have 
stayed if he hadn't understood the reasons that Dumbledore 
wanted him to do it.  He does grumble about Dumbledore's 
orders occasionally, but all soldiers do that.

Certainly Sirius suffered at Grimmauld Place, but is there any 
reason to think he was suffering as much as Harry imagined? 
There is this feeling on the list that Sirius ended up at the 
Department of Mysteries because he was so stir-crazy with 
being taunted and cooped up at Grimmauld Place that he 
suicidally disregarded the danger he would face. That is illogical. 
Sirius understood the danger well enough, otherwise he 
wouldn't have wanted to rescue Harry in the first place. 

Sirius is a troubled man, but it is a bit of a stretch to conclude he 
must be a mental case because he got a bit drunk and 
dishevelled on Christmas Eve, or because he found it hard to 
endure Harry going back to Hogwarts without him. 

When Harry sees him the last time before the end, in 
Umbridge's fire, there's no indication that Sirius looked worse 
than before. The idea that Sirius had become so desperate that 
he went to Harry's rescue out of a need to prove something is 
purely Harry's fantasy. 

Pippin




From prof_uloth at hotmail.com  Wed Sep  3 21:41:20 2003
From: prof_uloth at hotmail.com (Fred Uloth)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 13:41:20 -0800
Subject: Umbridge's Intent (was Re: Special Qualities of Auror Magic?)
In-Reply-To: <bj3c5l+t818@eGroups.com>
References: <bj385n+10ac6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20030903133210.00a691b0@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 79720

At 12:21 AM 9/3/2003 +0000, Melody wrote many interesting things, but I 
chose only to comment on the following:
>Now, we know Umbridge sent those dementors.  She wants to capture
>Harry doing magic.

Was that her motivation? Did she know that he could perform the Patronus 
charm? I doubt it. I think she wanted to have Harry's soul sucked out of 
his body and be done with it. I base this on her nasty character and the 
looks exchange exchanged between Umbridge and Harry when he performed the 
Patronus charm during the OWLs.

I'm sure this topic has already been discussed, but I have the tendency to 
ignore old threads after a while...and for several weeks there I had to 
delete huge amounts of posts without reading them just because I'd fallen 
so far behind. 




From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Wed Sep  3 21:50:30 2003
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 21:50:30 -0000
Subject: Umbridge's Intent (was Re: Special Qualities of Auror Magic?)
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20030903133210.00a691b0@localhost>
Message-ID: <bj5nn6+7o9r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79721

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Fred Uloth <prof_uloth at h...> 
wrote:
> At 12:21 AM 9/3/2003 +0000, Melody wrote many interesting things, 
but I 
> chose only to comment on the following:
> >Now, we know Umbridge sent those dementors.  She wants to capture
> >Harry doing magic.
> 
> Was that her motivation? Did she know that he could perform the 
Patronus 
> charm? I doubt it. I think she wanted to have Harry's soul sucked 
out of 
> his body and be done with it. I base this on her nasty character 
and the 
> looks exchange exchanged between Umbridge and Harry when he 
performed the 
> Patronus charm during the OWLs.
> 

I agree with you. If she wanted him to do magic, she could have sent 
something more harmless. Or maybe send a houseelf, who can do a spell 
their without Harry even noticing, and he would probably be suspected 
doing magic (at least he was, when Dobby did the spell).

I also have no problems, to imagine that Umbridge would kill 
everybody, whom she considered to be a thread for a career.

Hickengruendler 




From watsola79 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 21:54:49 2003
From: watsola79 at yahoo.com (watsola79)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 21:54:49 -0000
Subject: What Destroyed Godric's Hollow?
In-Reply-To: <bj5j2n+sqgi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5nv9+to46@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79722

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "entropymail" 
<entropymail at y...> wrote:
> Okay, folks. Humor me for a moment, because I'm not exactly sure 
where
> I'm going with this.  I've always wondered what happened to Harry's
> parents' house in Godric Hollow. Apparetnly, it was completely
> destroyed. Of course, it could have been destroyed by Voldemort's
> failed and misdirected Avada Kedavra.
> 
> But lately I've noticed that failed curses generally don't do that
> sort of thing. 

<snip> 

>From pg 813 of OOP:  "He [Voldemort] sent another killing curse at 
Dumbledore but missed, instead hitting the security guard's desk, 
which burst into flame."

- Lana Lovegood 






From eberte at vaeye.com  Wed Sep  3 21:56:22 2003
From: eberte at vaeye.com (ellejir)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 21:56:22 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj5k11+rovh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5o26+qugp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79723

Melpomene wrote:>
> <snip> 
> This "abuse": Harry is now FIFTEEN. We have to stop seeing him as 
> ELEVEN. Should Snape have grabbed and pushed? No. But was it child 
> abuse? I think not. I think had Severus wanted to abuse Harry he 
> could have done a HELL of a lot better than that. He did not throw 
> things "at" Harry, he threw ONE jar OVER his head. 
> <more snipping>
> NO, it was not a mature grown up thing for a teacher--any adult to 
> do. But he retained enough control not to send it right through his 
> head, a feat I have no doubt he was capeable of.
> Am I making excuses? No not really. But I am tired of this argument 
> sounding like Big Huge Severus beat up on ickle innocent baby Harry 
> AND took away his lolly.
 
Me (Elle):
It is amazing to me how *far* the Snape apologists will go to excuse 
his bad behavior.  Snape basically threw a two-year-old toddler 
tantrum when he found Harry snooping in the pensieve ("but that's OK 
because he was mad", sayeth the Snape apologists.)  Why do so many 
people see him as either black or white?  IMO, Snape's complexity and 
contradictions are what make him so interesting.

I find SS an absolutely fascinating character, but that doesn't mean 
that I think that his behavior is correct or mature.  He verbally 
abuses Harry from Day 1 out of jealousy over Harry's status as a 
living hero and hatred of Harry's father (obviously things over which 
Harry had no control.)  He verbally abuses Neville from Day 1 
(presumably because he is such an *easy* target.)  He constantly is 
trying to humiliate Hermione.  Generally, he is a *super-nasty* guy 
with a streak of insecurity/immaturity a mile wide.  

Does that mean that there is no good at all in Snape?  *Of course* 
there is good in him.  He (apparently) is risking his life spying for 
the Order, he agrees to teach Harry Occlumency even though he hates 
him, he saves Harry's life in SS, he gets sassy with Umbridge (you 
gotta love that!), and he basically launches the rescue effort in OoP.

The glimpses that we were given in OoP into Snape's memories show us 
a lonely, awkward boy with a sad home-life.  It is not too hard to 
pity Snape for his childhood, but I do not think that the trials of 
his youth can excuse all his adult nastiness.      



Melpomene again:
> There was NO excuse for Harry to look in that Pensieve. NONE. I 
> don't care if Snape was baiting him. <snip>
> Why would it enter Snape's mind that Potter was looking in that 
> pensieve for information on James and Lily? Oh no, Potter wasn't
> looking for Potters, he was looking for more "Fun with Snivellus"
> and we all know it. 

Me again (Elle):
I think that Harry was just being nosey (as usual.)  If he were 
really looking to have some "Fun with Snivellus" to laugh about later 
with Ron and Hermione, he totally *hit paydirt* with what he saw in 
the pensieve.  But he never even told Ron and Hermione what he 
saw, now did he?

Elle (not a Snape-hater, not a Snape apologist)




From talisman22457 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 22:02:16 2003
From: talisman22457 at yahoo.com (Talisman)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 22:02:16 -0000
Subject: Plausibility and Neville's broken nose
In-Reply-To: <bj5j1o+gie7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5od8+mjji@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79724

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kirstini" <kirst_inn at y...> 
wrote:
> ><snip> Sorting Hat turns out to be the lovechild of Kreacher and 
Daddy Black's besnogged trousers <snipping more so I don't pee my 
pants laughing>
> 
Talisman, who thinks Kirstini is a GENIUS:
That was delightful. :)You have solved the central mystery of the HP 
saga!  And, for my part, I won't rest until Hat is recognized and 
given his due. 
Move over JKR, Kirstini's here.
Talisman, seeing a whole spin-off series here.




From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Wed Sep  3 22:25:02 2003
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 22:25:02 -0000
Subject: Birth, Doubt, Fear, Pride, Disillusionment
In-Reply-To: <bj5kdj+6bcq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5pnu+1tth@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79725

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mightymaus75" <mpjdekker at h...> 
wrote:
> 
> 
> One of the things that struck me most when I read OotP was the fact 
> that the book seemed to have a very clear-cut theme: 
disillusionment. 
> It made me wonder if not perhaps each of the Harry Potter books has 
> one single defining theme. It seems to me that they do; In each 
book 
> Harry faces a new obstacle, overcomes that obstacle, and goes back 
to 
> the Dursleys a little wiser and a little stronger. 
>SNIPPAGE: 
>> Book 5 ? Disillusionment. During the book Harry finds out that his 
> role as the hero who always neatly solves everything isn't that 
> simple. In life it doesn't always end with a happy ending, and 
Harry 
> certainly cannot solve everything by playing the hero. There is of 
> course also Sirius' death. The fact that Harry leads the Dursleys 
out 
> of the train station at the end of the book seems to suggest he has 
> overcome his disillusionment, and that he's now more confident with 
> his own role. As a visualisation of this theme there is the 
> Disillusionment charm at the begin of the book.
> 
SNIPPAGE
>> -Maus

I want to take issue with the idea that Harry is always playing the 
hero. I think that is a red herring sort of charge to make against 
him. He has been in situations in the past that demanded he take 
action and he did. In some instances he was drafted. In POA, it was 
only him (and Hermione) who could effect any different outcome (at 
least as it was presented to him by Dumbledore). In GOF, he never 
asked to be placed in the Tournament and he did as he was told to do 
for the most part. It was only at the end that he tried to be 
honorable and it got him thrust into a horrific situation. The first 
two books demonstrate his most heroic acts. No one asked him to 
confront Lord Voldemort but he saw himself as having unique knowledge 
and felt he must act. Playing the hero is something calculated to 
gain attention. Harry never did that. He wanted to save people, Ginny 
for instance. He'd have gone along with Ron to the Chamber had 
circumstances not separated them. Harry never played the hero. Maybe 
he miscalculated the best course of action in OOP but he never played 
the hero.
Jennifer




From rredordead at aol.com  Wed Sep  3 22:36:27 2003
From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 22:36:27 -0000
Subject: What Destroyed Godric's Hollow?
In-Reply-To: <bj5nv9+to46@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5qdb+1uvh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79726

I've always wondered what happened to Harry's
parents' house in Godric Hollow. Apparetnly, it was completely
destroyed. Of course, it could have been destroyed by Voldemort's
failed and misdirected Avada Kedavra. But lately I've noticed that 
failed curses generally don't do that
sort of thing.  <snip> 

Lana Lovegood said:
>From pg 813 of OOP:  "He [Voldemort] sent another killing curse at 
Dumbledore but missed, instead hitting the security guard's desk, 
which burst into flame."


Now me:
Yes, but was LV's Avada Kadavra 'miss directed'?  Dumbledore's full 
curse hit the desk, LV's in Godric's Hollow hit Harry first, its 
target, and failed. Perhaps the excess energy did rebound into the 
house and destroy it but it doesn't seem likely to me. An exploding 
desk is very different from a house being completely destroyed.
 
I firmly believe there was at least one other person at the house 
with the Potter's and LV that night. I think one of them destroyed 
the house in an attempt to finish off what LV failed to do, kill 
Harry. Remember we need a witness to retell the story of really 
happened in Godric's Hollow that night.

But that's all for now as I know this has been discussed before, 
Mandy.





From abigailnus at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 22:40:18 2003
From: abigailnus at yahoo.com (abigailnus)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 22:40:18 -0000
Subject: Sirius and Dumbledore (Was: Pensieves objectivity & Dumbledore's integrity)
In-Reply-To: <bj5lma+bk4c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5qki+9ouj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79727

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" <foxmoth at q...> wrote: 
> There is this feeling on the list that Sirius ended up at the 
> Department of Mysteries because he was so stir-crazy with 
> being taunted and cooped up at Grimmauld Place that he 
> suicidally disregarded the danger he would face. That is illogical. 
> Sirius understood the danger well enough, otherwise he 
> wouldn't have wanted to rescue Harry in the first place. 

I completely agree, Pippin, and this actually ties in to something that 
I've been thinking about for a while.  There seems to be a consensus 
on the group that Sirius is dead because Dumbledore forced him to 
stay at Grimmauld place.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  
This is the tragedy of Sirius' death.

Sirius gives Harry the mirror when Harry returns to Hogwarts after 
Christmas break, in a chapter so loaded with gloomy foreshadowing that 
I spent the rest of the book convinced that JKR would never do something 
as obvious as killing Sirius.  Harry decides never to use the mirror 
because he fears that if he causes Sirius to leave Grimmauld, Sirius could 
be caught and killed.

Sirius does indeed end up leaving Grimmauld Place, and he is killed, but 
not because he was caught.  Sirius' death in fact has nothing to do with the 
reason he was hiding.  Any one of the rescue party might have been the one 
to die.  Sirius chose to leave Grimmauld - whatever his reasons were - but 
his death had nothing to do with that choice except in the most basic way, 
that if he had stayed home he wouldn't have died.  Sirius was not, as Harry 
feared, recaptured because he left his hiding place.  He died in battle, which 
could have happened at any time.

Dumbledore knows this.  He never apologizes for keeping Sirius in 
Grimmauld - he only offers an explanation.  Dumbledore's failing is not 
towards Sirius but towards Harry - by not giving him complete information 
Dumbledore allowed Harry to be manipulated by Voldemort, and that was 
the cause of Sirius' death.  If someone else - Tonks, or Moody, who were 
always going to be in the rescue party - had died instead of Sirius, it still 
would have been Dumbledore's fault for the same reason.

Abigail




From shirley2allie at hotmail.com  Wed Sep  3 22:43:27 2003
From: shirley2allie at hotmail.com (Shirley)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 22:43:27 -0000
Subject: Did Voldemort try to kill Dumbledore? (was Re: green eyes ... killing curse)
In-Reply-To: <bj1bvr+h0o0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5qqf+phnq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79728

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "slgazit" <slgazit at s...> wrote:
Salit:   Recall that when Voldemort decided to kill someone he always 
succeeded (with the exception of HP of course, and perhaps 
Dumbledore).

Now Shirley (me):

Well, that's an interesting thought that I haven't pondered before.  
Do we know if Voldy has ever tried to kill Dumbledore?  We know that 
several people have said that DD is the only wizard that Voldy ever 
feared, but we don't really know why, do we?

Shirley, who thought she had sworn off reading these posts until she 
finished re-reading all 5 books, in order to come to her own 
conclusions.... (sadly, she failed on the first part :-))




From siskiou at earthlink.net  Wed Sep  3 18:16:03 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 11:16:03 -0700
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione SHIP question
In-Reply-To: <bj53fe+olgn@eGroups.com>
References: <bj53fe+olgn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <762702686.20030903111603@earthlink.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 79729



Hi,

Wednesday, September 03, 2003, 9:05:02 AM, Jim wrote:

> Without Harry's quest, she would not have the higher purpose she has
> now. 

And this is what sometimes makes me wonder how well Harry
and Hermione go together.

Take that quest away, and what is there to keep them
together? What would they do and talk about?

Hermione seems (to me) to be a person who loves and needs
challenges, and she also enjoys helping people (whether they
want that help or not) and tries to push them to do things
the way she thinks they should be done.

If she thinks her idea or conclusion is right (which is
always <g>), she can be very forceful and doesn't really
take other peoples' feelings into account.

Harry, because of his situation, feels he needs to fulfill
this quest. He feels responsible for the crimes Voldemort
commits, since he seems to be the *one* who can defeat him.

But what once Voldemort is vanquished and Harry is alive?

Maybe in the next two books JKR will show us Harry and
Hermione talking about other things besides Harry's
problems.

They just don't seem to do anything together that isn't
somehow connected to the latest problem or mystery.

I'm also hoping that Harry will develop a little more common
sense and use his brain to solve some of his problems
himself.

It's getting a bit tiresome to wait for Hermione to once
again have the solution to whatever comes up ;)

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net

Visit our two pet bunnies: http://home.earthlink.net/~siskiou/





From thomasmwall at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 22:55:13 2003
From: thomasmwall at yahoo.com (Tom Wall)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 22:55:13 -0000
Subject: Special Qualities of Auror Magic?
In-Reply-To: <bj3c5l+t818@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5rgh+hi8b@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79730

Melody wrote:
But they do not put his little name, or a hair sample, or whatever
they need to track his magic. They seem to not be able to track him
in that method. To take this up a step, if they can track a person,
then seems to me that Dumbledore can track Voldemort. Track when he
does magic. And if that is also true, then they can track the DE's
back in the day when the MoM wanted to catch them and capture them
when they do an Unforgivable.

Tom:
Great point - wouldn't that be handy if you could just put a special 
homing device on Voldemort's magic? Too handy.


Melody:
So seems to me, that once you get off Moderated Status, your magic is
untrackable. :D

The adults have passed the status. They cannot be rewatched. Maybe
is a something along the lines that once a magic child is born, they
are in a special state until they move on when they graduate. That is
why the MoM can track Hagrid. He never graduated.
END QUOTE.

Tom replies:
I think your analysis makes quite a bit of sense, especially when I 
sat down and really thought about it. After all, we're talking about 
Harry's offenses under the Decree for the Restriction of "Underage" 
Sorcery, right?

So, if that's the case, then it would seem logical that the Ministry 
would be keeping track of all students' homes, and the locations of 
known "non-graduates."

So, they're keeping track of Harry's "area," but more specifically, 
only cases of 'non-adult' magic in the area, right? So, wizards and 
witches (like Mundungus and any other members of the Order who are 
watching Harry) wouldn't register, but House Elves and Harry would. 
Hmmm...

Still, in light of that, I'm stumped a little bit about people like 
the Weasleys (who clearly use magic at home over the summer) and 
Hermione, who says (I think, in the first book) that she practiced 
magic at home. Why don't they have to deal with Hearings?

I guess, using the previous logic, they probably aren't 'listening' 
to Hermione's area, although they probably should be. Then again, 
(off canon entirely) maybe they cut pre-first-years some extra 
slack, or perhaps some kind of parental permission could be given. 

And they'd probably ignore the Burrow completely, right, 'cause it's 
a wizarding household.

-Tom




From Zarleycat at aol.com  Wed Sep  3 23:00:59 2003
From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 23:00:59 -0000
Subject: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj3g2m+m9hv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5rrb+143b@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79731

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Wanda Sherratt" 
<wsherratt3338 at r...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kiricat2001" 
<Zarleycat at a...> 
> wrote:
> > If keeping Sirius locked up in that house was Dumbledore's idea 
of 
> a 
> > great way for Sirius to be able to live, really live, then 
> > Dumbledore's not being either Macchiavellian or fatherly - he's 
> being 
> > sadistic.  The only way to give Sirius a chance to live was to 
> find 
> > Pettigrew and bring him to justice.  We heard not a peep about 
> that 
> > in OoP because everyone was so busy with the prophecy stuff. 
> > 
> > I think your points are quite valide with Harry, but I just don't 
> see 
> > it with Sirius.
> > 
> I understand that people who didn't want Sirius to die might think 
> that Dumbledore has the broadest shoulders so he should carry the 
> heaviest blame, but I just don't see it.  "Sadistic" is a pretty 
> extreme word.  Umbridge is sadistic; I don't see how any reasonable 
> person can class Dumbledore with her. 

My reply to the original post had nothing to do with assuming or 
wanting or expecting Dumbledore to have the broadest shoulders, or to 
shoulder the heaviest blame.  I was merely replying to the other 
poster's assertion that Dumbledore was being fatherly by insisting 
that Sirius stay in locked up in that house.  Yes, "sadistic" is a 
strong word, but to paint Sirius' situation as the result of fatherly 
impulses struck me as very far off the mark.  Forgive me for using a 
bit of hyperbole.  And for being an unreasonable person.

Marianne




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 23:05:47 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 23:05:47 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj5o26+qugp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5s4b+dgb4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79732

Wow, you Snape apologists need your own version of the DENIAL. Is 
there nothing the man can do that you would find objectionable?

 Pip!Squeak said:
Snape didn't delay Harry at all. Snape calling Harry 
back (to find out what he was doing in front of Dumbledore's office) 
probably saved a lot of time. Certainly a lot more than the 20 
seconds he 'wasted'. From our POV, we cannot actually see if Snape 
was 'gratuitously interfering'. It's entirely within Snape's revealed 
characterisation for him to enjoy the spectacle of Harry hopping up 
and down, whilst knowing that Dumbledore is coming down the stairs 
right now. 

Laura:

Nice save, Pip.  On re-reading the scene it does seem possible that 
SS knew DD was right behind him.  But really, that gratuitous 
nastiness to Harry, especially when Harry is *not* trying to smart 
off to SS but is trying his best to convey crucial information.  It's 
not the time delay that I wanted to bring up, it's the behavior.

 Pip again:

Despite consistent evidence in PS/SS, CoS, PoA, GoF and OOP 
that Snape cares so deeply for *all* the Hogwarts students that he 
will fight trolls for them, fight werewolves and (he thinks) escaped 
murderers for them, charge into the office of a powerful DE for 
them, and face a Forbidden Forest full of angry centaurs for them. 

Even when its the students he likes least.

And there's all the little protective-of-students side comments, as 
well. 'Crabbe,loosen your hold a little...' 'We'll be carrying 
what's left of Finch-Fletchley to the Hospital Wing in a 
matchbox' 'Snape gripped the back of a chair very hard' [when Ginny 
has been kidnapped in CoS.]

Laura:

Tell me, what do you think Snape would do with himself if Hogwarts 
closed?  Losing students is a sure way to get the place shut down, 
as, indeed, it almost does in CoS. All this alleged protective 
behavior is not as it seems, imo.  Let's see-fight trolls for them?  
He didn't have to do anything, as it turned out, and if he had had 
to, he had Quirrell (yeah, I know but he didn't at that point) and 
McGonagall with him.  Fight werewolves and escaped murderers?  Oh, 
come now-he couldn't wait to nail Remus and Sirius.  Once he saw them 
together on the map, *nothing* would have stopped him from going 
after them.  Who's the dangerous DE?  If it's fake!Moody, DD already 
has him well under control.  If you think it's Umbridge, I believe 
that has yet to be proven.  The centaurs?  Well, if he wants to keep 
his place in the order, what choice did he have?

As for protective remarks about students, that's a matter of 
interpretation, but I think you're giving him much more than the 
benefit of the doubt here.  Except for the Ginny reaction, they just 
seem like typical mean-spirited jabs.  

Pip:
If Harry had remembered that Snape was an Order member, Snape could 
have contacted Sirius for him, safely. 

Laura:

Assuming he would have cooperated.  Can you imagine how that little 
chat would have gone?

HP:  Professor Snape, I just saw Sirius being tortured in the MoM by 
LV!  Please, can you check at Grimmauld Place and see if he's there?

SS:  Potter, if you'd done your Occlumency lessons properly you 
wouldn't have to be bothering me about your helpless, nasty, pathetic 
godfather.  Now get out.  

Notice that not even Hermione thinks to check with SS before Harry 
breaks into Umbridge's office.  Usually she can be counted on for 
clear thinking, even about people she doesn't like.  But despite her 
belief that SS is one of the good guys, she doesn't suggest asking 
him for help.  Maybe she understands that when it comes to Sirius, 
Snape just can't be trusted.  

Sevvie does what he has to do to make sure Hogwarts will stay open, 
even if it means exerting an effort on behalf of non-Slytherin 
students.  Snape wants 2 things, I think: to teach at Hogwarts, where 
he can have a lot of power and authority (and thus try to redress the 
humiliations he suffered there as a student)and to defeat LV, which I 
think he's doing out of principle (no LOLLIPOPS here!).  Everything 
he does is directed at those 2 ends.  Verbally abusing students won't 
get the school shut down nor will it get him fired, as long as DD's 
in his corner, so he can get away with it.

Pip:
when the order comes through that Snape 
and Harry have to work together, it's Snape who makes sarcastic 
comments-and-soldiers. Harry is the one who obstructs the lessons as 
much as he can by the passive method of I-haven't-done-my-homework-
Sir and the active method of breaking into the pensieve. It is Snape 
who tries as much as he can to be adult about the Occlumency lessons. 

Laura:

There's wrong-headed behavior on both sides here, I concede.  Harry 
is going to have a heck of a hard time getting to neutral on Snape 
after 4+ years of persecution.  Granted, he doesn't make much of an 
attempt.  And there's no excuse for looking into the pensieve-that 
was just rude, and stupid as well.  But I agree with Sarah and 
msbeadsley that learning Occlumency wasn't just another lesson.  It 
requires the learner to make himself completely vulnerable to the 
teacher.  How could DD ever have thought that Harry could do that 
with Snape?  That's why it would have been so much more constructive 
to have just about anyone else teach Harry.  Snape barely makes an 
effort to explain what the technique is-well, it's kind of like 
throwing off Imperius, kind of.  

And Snape let himself get way out of control.  If a teacher in the RW 
behaved toward a student the way Snape behaves toward Harry in that 
pensieve 2 scene, he'd be fired in a red-hot minute.  I don't see 
that Snape behaved in a particularly adult way at all.  Maybe he 
started out with good intentions (hah), but the first remark out of 
his mouth is "I can only hope that you prove more adept at 
[Occlumency] than Potions."  He then spends the next 4 pages berating 
and baiting Harry instead of simply answering his questions and 
instructing him.  He should be ashamed of himself.  That's where his 
complicity in Sirius's death comes in-and if you think he has had a 
moment's guilt about that, think again.  He's perfectly happy to have 
Sirius dead-he just wishes he could have been the one to do it. 






 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ellejir" <eberte at v...> wrote:
> Melpomene wrote:>
> > <snip> 
> > This "abuse": Harry is now FIFTEEN. We have to stop seeing him as 
> > ELEVEN. Should Snape have grabbed and pushed? No. But was it 
child 
> > abuse? I think not. I think had Severus wanted to abuse Harry he 
> > could have done a HELL of a lot better than that. He did not 
throw 
> > things "at" Harry, he threw ONE jar OVER his head. 
> > <more snipping>
> > NO, it was not a mature grown up thing for a teacher--any adult 
to 
> > do. But he retained enough control not to send it right through 
his 
> > head, a feat I have no doubt he was capeable of.
> > Am I making excuses? No not really. But I am tired of this 
argument 
> > sounding like Big Huge Severus beat up on ickle innocent baby 
Harry 
> > AND took away his lolly.
>  
> Me (Elle):
> It is amazing to me how *far* the Snape apologists will go to 
excuse 
> his bad behavior.  Snape basically threw a two-year-old toddler 
> tantrum when he found Harry snooping in the pensieve ("but that's 
OK 
> because he was mad", sayeth the Snape apologists.)  Why do so many 
> people see him as either black or white?  IMO, Snape's complexity 
and 
> contradictions are what make him so interesting.
> 
> I find SS an absolutely fascinating character, but that doesn't 
mean 
> that I think that his behavior is correct or mature.  He verbally 
> abuses Harry from Day 1 out of jealousy over Harry's status as a 
> living hero and hatred of Harry's father (obviously things over 
which 
> Harry had no control.)  He verbally abuses Neville from Day 1 
> (presumably because he is such an *easy* target.)  He constantly is 
> trying to humiliate Hermione.  Generally, he is a *super-nasty* guy 
> with a streak of insecurity/immaturity a mile wide.  
> 
> Does that mean that there is no good at all in Snape?  *Of course* 
> there is good in him.  He (apparently) is risking his life spying 
for 
> the Order, he agrees to teach Harry Occlumency even though he hates 
> him, he saves Harry's life in SS, he gets sassy with Umbridge (you 
> gotta love that!), and he basically launches the rescue effort in 
OoP.
> 
> The glimpses that we were given in OoP into Snape's memories show 
us 
> a lonely, awkward boy with a sad home-life.  It is not too hard to 
> pity Snape for his childhood, but I do not think that the trials of 
> his youth can excuse all his adult nastiness.      
> 
> 
> 
> Melpomene again:
> > There was NO excuse for Harry to look in that Pensieve. NONE. I 
> > don't care if Snape was baiting him. <snip>
> > Why would it enter Snape's mind that Potter was looking in that 
> > pensieve for information on James and Lily? Oh no, Potter wasn't
> > looking for Potters, he was looking for more "Fun with Snivellus"
> > and we all know it. 
> 
> Me again (Elle):
> I think that Harry was just being nosey (as usual.)  If he were 
> really looking to have some "Fun with Snivellus" to laugh about 
later 
> with Ron and Hermione, he totally *hit paydirt* with what he saw in 
> the pensieve.  But he never even told Ron and Hermione what he 
> saw, now did he?
> 
> Elle (not a Snape-hater, not a Snape apologist)




From Zarleycat at aol.com  Wed Sep  3 23:13:11 2003
From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 23:13:11 -0000
Subject: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj41p0+86bg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5si7+tghr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79733

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "slgazit" <slgazit at s...> wrote:

> Dumbledore knew that once he can convince the wizarding world that
> Harry's account of the events is correct, getting Sirius exonerated
> would be a cinch. 

I'm not so sure about that. There would still be no proof.  Harry and 
Dumbledore might sway some minds, but without proof, there would 
always be a portion of the population that thinks Sirius is a 
murderer.  Just think of the conspiracy theories that spring up 
around horrific events involving the deaths of people, especially if 
the government is somehow involved.  There always seems to be a group 
of people that are convinced that the government is lying to them.


> It seems to me that Dumbledore's greatest error that while he
> had the best interests of the people he was leading in his mind,
> he ignored the impact of the events on them emotionally. Harry
> was extremely traumatised by the events in the graveyard and
> then put under pressures from all sides (slandering, MoM campaign
> against him, Umbridge, Dumbledore ignoring him, Voldemort's
> manipulations, etc.). Sirius was already unbalanced after 12 years
> in Azkaban and then put effectively in jail again. Snape was still
> not over the conflict with Harry's father and with Sirius.
> Dumbledore was too focused on the big picture to notice all that or
> account for it in his plans and so invited disaster.
 
And, that's certainly a nice, succinct summation to which I can 
agree.  

Marianne





From urghiggi at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 23:21:53 2003
From: urghiggi at yahoo.com (urghiggi)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 23:21:53 -0000
Subject: underage magic (WAS Special Qualities of Auror Magic?)
In-Reply-To: <bj5rgh+hi8b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5t2h+h9nm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79734

Tom wrote:
> So, they're keeping track of Harry's "area," but more specifically, 
> only cases of 'non-adult' magic in the area, right? So, wizards and 
> witches (like Mundungus and any other members of the Order who are 
> watching Harry) wouldn't register, but House Elves and Harry would. 
> Hmmm...
> 
> Still, in light of that, I'm stumped a little bit about people like 
> the Weasleys (who clearly use magic at home over the summer) and 
> Hermione, who says (I think, in the first book) that she practiced 
> magic at home. Why don't they have to deal with Hearings?
> 

urghiggi replied:
I think you must be referring to the 'hogwarts express' scene early in SS/PS 
where Herm says she has already "tried a few simple spells for practice." I'm 
thinking she was not yet officially enrolled in Hogwarts at the time, was 
unaware of the rule about underage magic (at least no such rule appeared in 
HARRY's first Hogwarts letter, so if she got the same letter, she wouldn't know 
about it either), and thus was not bound by the rule. By OoP she's certainly 
aware of the rule, and complains that she was not able to make good house-
elf clothes over the summer because she had to do all the knitting by hand.

Re Ron, I don't remember any instances of him doing magic at the Burrow 
during holidays at all. We do see Fred & George doing lots of it in OoP, but by 
this time they are 17, and no longer "underage." In GoF they can't apparate at 
the World Quiddich Cup, have to take a portkey, because they are both 
underage and haven't passed the test. Their experiments with magical food, 
like the ton-tongue toffee, must not count as "underage magic" in the same 
way as magic with a wand and a spell, because certainly they've been doing 
that for quite a while. They also don't get called down for driving their dad's 
enchanted Anglia in CoS -- but they didn't enchant the car, they were just 
driving it -- did this really count as "underage magic?" Apparently not.

Hmm. Maybe you have to use a wand for it to count?

urghiggi, Chgo




From prof_uloth at hotmail.com  Wed Sep  3 23:30:02 2003
From: prof_uloth at hotmail.com (Fred Uloth)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 15:30:02 -0800
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Pensieves objectivity AND:
  Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj41p0+86bg@eGroups.com>
References: <bj37i8+moof@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20030903152215.00a8f7c0@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 79735

At 06:29 AM 9/3/2003 +0000, slgazit wrote:
>I think Dumbledore wanted Snape to teach Harry for two reasons:
>
>1. Snape was the best for the job and also right there at Hogwarts
>    (as Dumbledore felt he himself could not do it).
>
>2. He was hoping that by more one-on-one contact, and by letting
>    Snape see what life has really been like for Harry, that the
>    relationship between Harry and Snape will improve. Since
>    both Harry and Snape are central to his battle plans, it
>    makes sense to try to improve their relationship.
>    Once the decision to have Snape teach was reached and Snape
>    accepted, it would be undermining his authority to have
>    another person act as intermediary.

Might I suggest a third reason:
3. As it is well know that enmity exists between Snape and Harry he was the 
BEST choice (even if DD hadn't feared Voldemort realizing he and Harry had 
a kinship). I say this because Harry would have found it easier to clear 
his mind for DD as there is no hatred between them...but how would he fair 
in a more hostile environment where he faces LV. By practicing with Snape, 
Harry is getting unique opportunity to go head to head with someone who 
makes his blood boil...this gives him the chance to learn to control this 
anger. I think this was a great added benefit of Snapes lessons...too bad 
Harry's curiosity ruined it all. 




From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Sep  3 23:32:43 2003
From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Ivan=20Vablatsky?=)
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 00:32:43 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [HPforGrownups]How conscious is JKR? (was: Deville's broked dose)
In-Reply-To: <bj55c6+fkn5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030903233243.9849.qmail@web21504.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79736

Twoflower2:
>>Hans:  I loved your long post about HP, Occlumency matters and 
occult.  Very interesting.  Just wondering if Rowling put all this in 
her book consciously or not.<<

Hans' response:
Yes indeed! That's the 640 million dollar question! Just exactly what is
"Queen Joanne" really thinking? All we know is that she said she was
inspired at the age of 24 while sitting in a train. This tends to give the
impression that it was a "once only" experience she had; a sort of day-dream
that she recorded in an exercise book later that day and now uses as the
main plot outline. However this just doesn't seem right when one reads the
books. When I read them I have an experience like I'm wandering in a huge
palace with endless corridors full of doors and dressers with lots of
drawers. Every sentence JKR uses seems to have either a drawer full of
interesting objects you could do years of research on, or a door into a
great gallery full of books and more doors, doors, doors. Witness our
thousands of posts!

In other words JKR is just so very conscious of what she's doing. If she's
inspired then this is a continuous thing. It just seems impossible to me
that a mortal human being could have so much energy to write such powerful
books on such a sublime spiritual level, at the same time writing on so many
other levels, and in such a way that people of so many persuasions can see
their own philosophy reflected in the books. Even if she had an IQ of 200 it
still doesn't seem possible. So I'm afraid this question will have to go
unanswered. I really don't know.

However there are two possibilities that I can speculate on. 

The first possibility is that she is being guided in some way by entities
who have reached liberation. Such entities are not restricted in time and
space and have "direct knowledge". It is also possible that she herself is
one of those. She may have what Lao Tzu calls "The Mysterious Virtue". That
is a cosmic consciousness which some great writers have had throughout
history. I'm talking about people like Jacob Boehme, Dante, Rudolf Steiner,
Blavatsky and others.

I'm quite conscious of the fact that some of you will be shrugging your
shoulders and thinking, "here's Luna Lovegood talking again". Well so be it,
but I want to assure you that this Alchemical Path of Liberation I'm always
talking about wasn't invented by me! It can be read about in a treasure of
books written over many centuries. All I've done is studied the Path of
Liberation and, with that knowledge, read the HP books, only to find to my
great astonishment that the whole Path of Liberation from A to Z is hidden
in these books. At first I thought it was only a coincidence, but as I
continued reading the books over and over again I found so many obvious
clues and symbols of Alchemy. As I have repeatedly pointed out there are so
many similarities between HP and the Alchemical Wedding of Christian
Rosencreutz that it just CAN'T be coincidence. That doesn't mean in my
opinion that JKR has read the Alchemical Wedding. I'm saying that she and
the writers of the AW are drawing from the same source. 

What source? That is my second possibility.

To understand this we have to realise that this universe is a vast prison
for wayward entities who have "fallen" from the Divine Universe of the
Original Spirit. Read the parable of the Prodigal Son to find out more.

Just a warning before I go on. If you don't see this world as a prison
keeping us away from God then please don't read on. There is no point
whatsoever. We'll be talking in different languages and you won't understand
a word I'm saying. 

This prison is not a penitentiary but a self-made hell from which we can
escape. There is actually a detailed Plan of escape in existence. Where is
this Plan? It is in a plane of existence which esoteric people call
"reflecting ether". I guess it's a kind of morpho-genetic field which has
existed since the fall. Anyway, people who have a very pure and noble
spiritual mind can "read" this plan and tell about it. However this Plan is
not written in words but in symbols and archetypes. I think it's quite
likely that people like Shakespeare, Goethe, Victor Hugo, Mikhail Naimy
("The Book of Mirdad"), Emerson, etc. could read all or some of that Plan
and write about it. I guess that some people can read the Plan more clearly
and write more clearly than others. JK Rowling seems to be able to read that
Plan very clearly indeed and she also has the ability to express the symbols
in a narrative the genius of which is beyond comprehension as far as I'm
concerned.

So just to summarise the two possibilities I can see:
a. JKR is either being guided by entities with a cosmic consciousness, or
has such a consciousness herself.
b. JKR has a mind that is open to the Plan of Liberation.

Anyway, all this is speculation, because I just don't know how she does it.
What I can say is that Harry Potter and the Alchemical Wedding are really
just the same story. Both these stories outline in symbolical form the
journey of the seeker from imprisonment to liberation from "Voldemort".

Once you see the pattern of liberation in the books so many things that
other members are wondering and arguing about become crystal clear. Take the
prophecy for example. There have been hundreds and hundreds of posts
exploring what could possibly be meant by the prophecy. The trouble is that
people are looking at the words literally without being able to see the
radiant archetype. Seen in the context of the Plan of Liberation the
prophecy becomes very clear and easy to understand. Harry Potter symbolises
the new soul that is born when a person becomes a seeker for the Kingdom of
Righteousness. He symbolises the Messiah of the Old and New Testaments.
Before Jesus was born there were prophecies about his coming: "Unto is a Son
is born, unto us a child is given." Herod, ruler of this prison, tries to
kill Jesus, Voldemort tries to kill Harry. The prophecy says that only one
of the two can survive. When the new soul is born in the seeker it will grow
in grace; it will spread its power and influence in the life of the prisoner
and it will go through seven stages of liberation as described in both the
AW and HP. Then there will come a stage where the new soul and the power of
this world face each other, just as Jesus faced Satan in the Wilderness.
There is nothing ambiguous or unclear about this. When Harry is fully grown
he will face Voldemort. When a person goes the Path his new soul will grow
daily if he is willing to "die daily" as Paul puts it. One day the new soul
will be mature and it and the Power of Lucifer that dwells in all of us will
have to face each other. There is no alternative. Then we have to make the
final choice. Voldemort/Lucifer will offer us power, wealth and life. If we
choose Harry, Voldemort will die for ever. If we choose Voldemort the new
soul will die. It will shrivel back to a seed. Quite simple. I quote again
the words from "The Voice of the Silence": "The Self of matter and the SELF
of Spirit can never meet. One of the twain must disappear; there is no place
for both."

Members may recall that I correctly predicted in April that in book 5 Harry
would achieve the liberation of the mental ego. I also predicted then that
in the next three books Harry would go through the Venus, Jupiter and Saturn
initiations. Jupiter was the leader of the Gods, and the Jupiter
(self-)initiation means leadership. Right on cue Harry became the leader of
Dumbledore's Army.

I predict that in book 6 Harry will go through the Venus initiation. As I
pointed out recently Harry's link to the secret room in the MoM is almost
identical to the Sepulchre of Venus in the Alchemical Wedding. (I'm not
making this up you know! Go and read the AW; it's on Internet). Just as CRC
went into Venus' room, so Harry at some stage will enter the Room of Love
and "suffer" the consequences like CRC. As Book 6 will deal with the
Liberation of the emotional ego this will all tie together very neatly. 

Book 7 will deal with the liberation of the consciousness ego and the Saturn
initiation. This initiation signifies "Passing through the Gate of Saturn".
In other words, overcoming death, triumphing over death. Well, dear friends,
we have already seen that gate in book 5! Sirius Black has passed through
it. It's even got a veil to add extra emphasis that this is the gate of
death. It all adds up. The whole story of Harry Potter makes perfect sense
when seen in this light. Just as Jesus triumphed over death so Harry will
triumph over death. Harry will pass through the Gate of Saturn, but it won't
mean a temporary sojourn in the hereafter in preparation for a next
incarnation, like it does for us unliberated mortals. It will mean Harry
Potter will be for ever liberated from death and suffering, and in an
imperishable body he will work for the liberation of humanity until the last
prodigal child has returned to the arms of the father.

And here's some very bad news for all you shippers: In the AW there is a
very amorous episode where CRC and the other liberated people are promised a
night in bed with some very attractive virgins. The chief virgin proposes
that the men get in a circle and the ladies distribute themselves randomly
among the men. The idea is that they start counting in sevens from this
chief virgin and every time the seventh person will partner with the next
seventh person and so on. However CRC finds to his great disappointment that
starting from the chief virgin, every seventh person ends up being a woman.
They realise they've been tricked and the ladies must have worked out
beforehand where to stand in the circle.

What this means for HP is no doubt that there will be no SHIPS for Harry,
Ron and Hermione. Maybe for a few minor characters.

What does this actually symbolise in spiritual terms? On the Alchemical Path
of Liberation there can be no intermarriage between things of the fallen
universe and the original divine universe. When a seeker goes the Path
everything of the old universe must be left behind. Divine things and
natural things cannot mix. Sorry about that.

However Harry, Ron and Hermione will stay together because they are all
aspects of the person going the Path. Harry is the heart, Hermione is the
head and Ron is the earthly personality. The earthly personality must be
prepared to sacrifice itself, as Ron did in the chess game.

Everybody has a right to read the books any way they please, and I certainly
wish all the members a lot of fun in their posting. However I believe that
as long as people take HP literally they won't understand the purpose of it,
just like people who interpret the Bible literally.

The Power be with you!

Hans in Holland 

________________________________________________________________________
Want to chat instantly with your online friends?  Get the FREE Yahoo!
Messenger http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/



From severusbook4 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 00:13:43 2003
From: severusbook4 at yahoo.com (severusbook4)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 00:13:43 -0000
Subject: Voldemort destroyed by Harry's power (very long)
In-Reply-To: <bj5b06+1fnb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj603o+f92u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79737

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "friendjoshua" <jeanes at m...> wrote:
> ...and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live 
> while the other survives...
> 
> I don't believe that this has been put before you yet, so I wanted to 
> throw out my own prediction on the final ending of the book.  It is 
> based on the quote above and some other facts:
> 
> -Voldemort is an evil man - you could say he is pure evil with no 
> ability to love.
> -Harry's power is love, something that Voldemort knows nothing about.
> -Voldemort sent some of his power into Harry after the initial 
> attack.  This power connects Harry and Voldemort in a way that is 
> beyond the normal powers of magic (which allows each to read each 
> other's emotions at any distance - not something that normal 
> Legilimency doesn't seem to allow).
> -JK has said that Harry may not survive the 7th book - or at least 
> there will be no more books after the 7th.
<Very, very snipped>

Sevvie here:

Ah, the end of a wonderful series of books.  Your's sounded very "Ghost in a shell", a 
melding of two to make one.  How about this end?  I takes from the first battle 
between Harry and voldemort, when Harry was just one.

Harry is beaten, his friends bodies are sprawled across the ground.  The only thought 
that crosses his mind is "Please don't let them be dead." As if he had spoken them 
aloud Voldemort walks to him and looks down on Harry sitting on his knees as if 
prayer.  "Your precious friends are not dead, merely unconscious, as Nagini prefers 
her food to be alive."  "Please.  Don't kill them,  I won't fight. Kill me instead, just not 
them."  Harry pleads with him.  "Spare them?  Why?  I plan to kill you all!"  Voldemort 
laughs cold and hauntily.  Voldemort drops his wand to Harry's head and speaks the 
unforgivable curse.  Harry braces for the inevitable and only thinks of his friends, 
wanting more than ever to be able to save them.  And all goes black.

     Harry awakens in a very familiar bed.  It is in the school hospital wing, he raises 
his extremely painful head and looks down the row of beds, and to his relief his 
friends are there, a little worse for wear but most definitly alive.  Dead people don't 
lie in hospital beds.  A comforting voice catches his attention, Dumbledohr is 
speaking to nurse Pomfrey, but Harry can't understand what they are saying, his head 
just hurts too much to try.  Dumbledohr exits her office and looks toward Harry's bed.  
"Ah, you're awake."  He smiles at Harry.  "What happened?" "Where's Voldemort?" 
Harry asked even though each word cut through his head like a knife. "The most 
peculiar thing happened, Harry." Dumbledohr said. "It seems that your sacrifice saved 
you and your friends.  The last thing you thought about was not your safety, but that 
of your friends, and this turned Voldemort's spell back on him again, but this time, 
since your blood resided within his own, he was mortal.  Voldemort was completely 
destroyed." Harry strained against his pain "But how? How could I do that with a 
thought?"  "It wasn't the thought in itself but what birthed the thought in the first 
place Harry.  It was the selfless love behind it.  Your mother saved you the first time 
withthat love and you saved your friends with it this time."  "But why did I survive 
Proffessor?" "Harry, I can't answer that question, because I do not know.  It could be 
your mothers love that saved you, or the love your friends have for you, and what 
ever it was, it saved you again. You are the boy who lived again."  "Is he really dead 
this time? I mean he isn't going to come back again is he?" These last few words 
brought tears to Harry's eyes, the pain was just too great for him to fight any longer.
"Harry, you need to rest. We will talk more after you are stronger." "Please." Harry 
strained. "Alright. Yes his is dead, and he will never come back.  We are sure of this 
because this time we found his body.  We took no chances though and it brought to 
Azkaban so the dementors could watch over it.  And, in the end, it decayed. So 
Voldemort is no longer."  Harry relaxed and looked over at his friends, battered and 
bruised, but all there.  "You sleep now Harry." "How long?" Harry asked.  "A month, 
you and your friends have been here for a month.  They will be fine, your are the last 
to awaken.  You and your friends did a great thing, but almost died.  It will be awhile 
longer before you are back to yourselves. No more questions, just sleep.  And don't 
worry about your new scar, girls like scars."  And on his head, almost right in line 
with the scarthat had made him famous, was another just like it.  Harry put his hand 
very tenderly to his head and traced his finger over a very sore place, and he could 
feel it.  His fame had started with the creation of the first scar and he fufilled the 
prophesy with the creation of his second one.

Just a mental meandering.  Sorry it was so long.

Sevvie   
    




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Thu Sep  4 00:21:54 2003
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 10:21:54 +1000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hogwarts Dorms ?
In-Reply-To: <bj41e4+c4ub@eGroups.com>
References: <biskgj+d1f7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F571242.24566.2FF1710@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 79738

On 3 Sep 2003 at 6:24, jeffl1965 wrote:

>   Jeff:
>     This had figured, but I was curious as to if all the rooms were 
> this way, or not. I'm sure the house elves arranged things after the 
> sorting ceremony, but I had wondered if they did have an extra bed or 
> two in there incase of visitors or transfers. 

Yeah, I'd like to know as well - but the limited info we have just 
doesn't tell us what other rooms are like.

>    Jeff:
>     Yes, being too vague makes me more curious. Is there some sort of 
> storage room there? Are the loos on the same floors, or different 
> ones to prevent temptation? IIRC, the stairs to the girl's dorm turns 
> into a slide, if a boy tries to use it, but what about the boy's 
> stairwell?

Well, on the stairway/slide we do have information - from Order of the 
Phoenix.

'I wonder if Hermione's seen this yet?' Harry said, looking round at the 
door to the girls' dormitories.

'Let's go and tell her,' said Ron. He bounded forwards, pulled open the 
door and set off up the spiral staircase.  

He was on the sixth stair when there was a loud, wailing, klaxon-like 
sound and the steps melted together to make a long, smooth stone slide 
like a helter-skelter. There was a brief moment when Ron tried to keep 
running, arms working madly like windmills, then he toppled over 
backwards and shot down the newly created slide, coming to rest on his 
back at Harry's feet.  

'Er - I don't think we're allowed in the girls' dormitories,' said 
Harry, pulling Ron to his feet and trying not to laugh.  

Two fourth-year girls came zooming gleefully down the stone slide. 
'Oooh, who tried to get upstairs?' they giggled happily, leaping to 
their feet and ogling Harry and Ron.  

'Me,' said Ron, who was still rather dishevelled. 'I didn't realise that 
would happen. It's not fair!' he added to Harry, as the girls headed off 
for the portrait hole, still giggling madly. 'Hermione's allowed in our 
dormitory, how come we're not allowed -?'  

'Well, it's an old-fashioned rule,' said Hermione, who had just slid 
neatly on to a rug in front of them and was now getting to her feet, 
'but it says in Hogwarts: A History, that the founders thought boys were 
less trustworthy than girls. Anyway, why were you trying to get in 
there?'  
 
>     Well, good guesses, imho. I like you layout. My purpose for 
> asking more questions is to get a general idea about what the others 
> think. I think the map is great, and will certainly help a lot for 
> fanficts, and for helping readers visualize the layout of the castle 
> better. ;)

Soon be updated as well - hopefully this weekend. I just bought a whole 
new CD of mapping symbols for my program last night, some of which will 
be very useful.

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 Zarleycat at aol.com  Thu Sep  4 00:30:42 2003
From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 00:30:42 -0000
Subject: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj5lma+bk4c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj613i+cokl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79739

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" <foxmoth at q...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kiricat2001" 
> <Zarleycat at a...> wrote:
>  I 
> > know, I know, Dumbledore had to stay away from Harry  so 
> Voldemort wouldn't find out when strolling through Harry's mind 
> that the good  guys had figured out about the connection 
> between Harry's mind and  Voldemort.  But, Dumbledore could 
> have had Remus or Moody or  McGonagall be the one to talk to 
> Harry alone to explain all of this,  and also explain why Snape 
> has to be the one to teach Harry.  <
> 
> Er, maybe I'm dense, but how does Harry getting the information 
> from Remus or Moody instead of Dumbledore make it any more 
> difficult for Voldemort to glean it from Harry's mind?  It's 
Harry's 
> mind that's unsafe, not Dumbledore's.

I guess I didn't make myself clear.  The original poster stated that 
he/she thought that, even if Harry had all the info DD gave him at 
the end of the book earlier in the story, that events would not have 
changed.  My point was that if Harry had the information, and if he 
had been given a better explanation of why Occlumency was important 
and why Snape was the best one to teach him, and if this explanation 
was given to him by someone he trusted, then things might have indeed 
turned out differently.  


> And this idea that Dumbledore had no understanding of what 
> Sirius was going through...where does that come from? Well, 
> that's what Harry thinks, "Dumbledore, who had plainly not 
> understood Sirius at all, how brave he was, how much he had 
> suffered..." 

>  Dumbledore did not  *make* Sirius stay at Grimmauld Place. 
> Sirius was  an adult, free to leave at any time. He wouldn't have 
> stayed if he hadn't understood the reasons that Dumbledore 
> wanted him to do it.  He does grumble about Dumbledore's 
> orders occasionally, but all soldiers do that.
> 
> Certainly Sirius suffered at Grimmauld Place, but is there any 
> reason to think he was suffering as much as Harry imagined? 
> There is this feeling on the list that Sirius ended up at the 
> Department of Mysteries because he was so stir-crazy with 
> being taunted and cooped up at Grimmauld Place that he 
> suicidally disregarded the danger he would face. That is illogical. 
> Sirius understood the danger well enough, otherwise he 
> wouldn't have wanted to rescue Harry in the first place. 

Ah, no, that's not my interpretation.  My reading is that JKR 
portrayed Sirius in a very much different manner in OoP than in GoF.  
She had the Greek chorus of Molly and Hermione telling us Sirius is 
rash, Sirius is reckless.  Molly makes this point several times.  
Hermione, who constantly told Harry in GoF to tell Sirius what's 
going on, write to Sirius, get Sirius' advice etc., now tells Harry 
she thinks Sirius is rash, gives bad advice, is so lonely he's not 
seeing things clearly.  

JKR consistently describes Sirius as being moody, volatile, surly, 
unkempt, angry, sensitive to the criticsms of others, prone to 
locking himself up with Buckbeak, restless at not being able to 
contribute to the cause.  I don't think she was trying to get us to 
believe his rush to the Ministry was a suicidal disregard of danger.  
I think she was making sure we got the point that he would instantly 
act in a rash, reckless manner and charge off to the MoM when Harry 
was in danger. That danger to Harry would be the trigger that would 
ignite the volatile, rash, reckless, person she painstakingly built 
up in OoP so that she could conveniently maneuver him into the 
position where she could kill him off.  

If Sirius had remained the thoughtful, considered, voice of reason he 
was in GoF, then he'd have stayed parked in 12 Grimmauld Place.  He 
would have snarked with Snape when Snape told him to stay there and 
fill Dumbldedore in on what the kids were doing on their way to the 
Minsitry.  But, he may very well have stayed put. That was never 
going to happen, as he had to be the one to die, so JKR made sure 
he'd act as he did. 

> Sirius is a troubled man, but it is a bit of a stretch to conclude 
he 
> must be a mental case because he got a bit drunk and 
> dishevelled on Christmas Eve, or because he found it hard to 
> endure Harry going back to Hogwarts without him. 

Well, maybe we'd have to dissect what you mean by mental case.  Or 
where Sirius is on the scale of troubled-depressed.  I definitely 
read the descriptions we've been given and the comments of other 
characters regarding Sirius as signs that he is not doing well 
emotionally. And, from there, one can say that Dumbledore may not 
have recognized what Sirius was going through, or did recognize it, 
but felt that it could not be helped.

Again, I find  differences in Sirius as he's portrayed in GoF and OoP 
to be quite startling. I can recall someone (I think it was Judy 
Serenity) posting a long time ago about how the Sirius of GoF had no 
bearing on the person portrayed in PoA, that traumatized PoA!Sirius 
could not suddenly be rational GoF!Sirius. The character seemed to be 
two different people to her. That's the feeling I get between GoF!
Sirius and OoP!Sirius. 

Marianne




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 00:38:46 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 00:38:46 -0000
Subject: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20030903152215.00a8f7c0@localhost>
Message-ID: <bj61im+eb2e@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79740

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Fred Uloth <prof_uloth at h...> 
wrote:
 As it is well know that enmity exists between Snape and Harry he was 
the 
> BEST choice (even if DD hadn't feared Voldemort realizing he and 
Harry had 
> a kinship). I say this because Harry would have found it easier to 
clear 
> his mind for DD as there is no hatred between them...but how would 
he fair 
> in a more hostile environment where he faces LV. By practicing with 
Snape, 
> Harry is getting unique opportunity to go head to head with someone 
who 
> makes his blood boil...this gives him the chance to learn to 
control this 
> anger. I think this was a great added benefit of Snapes 
lessons...too bad 
> Harry's curiosity ruined it all.

Laura:

But that's like saying that Harry couldn't have learned Patronus from 
Lupin, when he clearly did.  He knew perfectly well that 
the "dementors" weren't real, so by your argument there shouldn't 
have been enough challenge for him to learn the spell.  But he did, 
and very effectively too.




From jferer at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 00:58:45 2003
From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 00:58:45 -0000
Subject: Hermione SHIP question
In-Reply-To: <762702686.20030903111603@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <bj62o5+ejr8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79741

Susanne, quoting me:' Without Harry's quest, she would not have the
higher purpose she has now.'

And then Susanne responded," And this is what sometimes makes me
wonder how well Harry and Hermione go together.

"Take that quest away, and what is there to keep them together? What
would they do and talk about?"

Actually, this is going to be Harry and Hermione's problem as
individuals, no matter who they end up with. Many people who have gone
through extremely intense experiences have trouble dealing with
ordinary life afterwards ? nothing seems important compared with The
Experience.  Harry hasn't been able to discover himself, what he
likes, or what interests him, besides Quidditch. He seems to be
interested in being an Auror at least partly because it's most similar
to what he's doing right now.

Susanne;' Maybe in the next two books JKR will show us Harry and
Hermione talking about other things besides Harry's problems.. They
just don't seem to do anything together that isn't somehow connected
to the latest problem or mystery."

Sad but true, and I don't see relief for them soon.

Susanne:" I'm also hoping that Harry will develop a little more common
sense and use his brain to solve some of his problems himself.. It's
getting a bit tiresome to wait for Hermione to once again have the
solution to whatever comes up ;)"

That's a little harsh, and the only observation you've made I disagree
with. (Although I suspect your tongue was *slightly* in your cheek.)
Harry is a "man of action," someone who makes decisions instinctively
? stabbing Riddle's diary is the best example.  While Harry is a great
talent, a "natural," Hermione demonstrates what hard work and
application can do.  She prepares Harry for many of his challenges and
tempers his instinct to action, while he tempers her tendency to
overprocess things and look for a perfect solution.

So I agree ? the H/Hr road is not perfect.  You've made the best
argument yet, IMO, on the problems that the H/Hr ship presents for the
participants.  I'm optimistic they can overcome it.  In this I believe
Hermione will lead the way; she will approach her relationship with
Harry with the intensity and commitment she brings to everything. 
She's going to need that, because Harry is going to be beat to hell by
the time this is over.

Jim Ferer





From wsherratt3338 at rogers.com  Thu Sep  4 01:06:47 2003
From: wsherratt3338 at rogers.com (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 01:06:47 -0000
Subject: Birth, Doubt, Fear, Pride, Disillusionment
In-Reply-To: <bj5pnu+1tth@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj6377+g88j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79742

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" <rdas at f...> 
wrote:
> I want to take issue with the idea that Harry is always playing 
the 
> hero. I think that is a red herring sort of charge to make against 
> him. He has been in situations in the past that demanded he take 
> action and he did. In some instances he was drafted. In POA, it 
was 
> only him (and Hermione) who could effect any different outcome (at 
> least as it was presented to him by Dumbledore). In GOF, he never 
> asked to be placed in the Tournament and he did as he was told to 
do 
> for the most part. It was only at the end that he tried to be 
> honorable and it got him thrust into a horrific situation. The 
first 
> two books demonstrate his most heroic acts. No one asked him to 
> confront Lord Voldemort but he saw himself as having unique 
knowledge 
> and felt he must act. Playing the hero is something calculated to 
> gain attention. Harry never did that. He wanted to save people, 
Ginny 
> for instance. He'd have gone along with Ron to the Chamber had 
> circumstances not separated them. Harry never played the hero. 
Maybe 
> he miscalculated the best course of action in OOP but he never 
played 
> the hero.

I do think, however, that in OotP there is a change of tone in 
Harry's heroics; he suddenly seems *self-conscious* in a rather 
unpleasant way.  He broods bitterly about his experiences; he loudly 
recites his exploits to his friends when they all arrive at 
Grimmauld Place; he makes a point of emphasizing that HE is the one 
who did everything, ignoring the help he received from others.  He's 
no longer the self-effacing Harry Potter who just thinks of others - 
he's developed an ego, and it's not a pretty sight.  I think 
Hermione is picking up on this change in tone when she comments on 
his "hero" tendency; it's not just that Harry wants to help others, 
it's that he can't imagine himself in any other role.  It's not for 
him to sit still and be obedient - he's *Harry Potter*, and that 
means rushing into action no matter what.  He's right when she first 
suggests the DA, and he tells her that most of the time he had no 
idea what to do, he had help, or he just got lucky.  Unfortunately, 
that clarity of thought is all too brief, and soon he's his old, 
impulsive self again.

Wanda





From dwoodward at towson.edu  Thu Sep  4 01:32:17 2003
From: dwoodward at towson.edu (Deirdre F Woodward)
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 21:32:17 -0400
Subject: H/H SHIP
References: <1062605874.4156.21971.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <001301c37284$621fb300$79092244@parkvl01.md.comcast.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 79743

>>>sarah writes a long list of possible ship hints between Harry and
Hermione

Deirdre writes:
That list is long and impressive, but I'm still not convinced there's
anything budding between Harry and Hermione.  I think that more than
anything, all the instances Sarah mentions are further indications of how
close Harry and Hermione are as friends -- there is no teenage ackwardness
between them as is so common between young people who are romantically
attracted to each other.

I think that JKR has painted a portrait of wonderful friendship between the
two of them.  I don't believe that either of them thinks of the other in a
romantic fashion *at all*.

Harry and Hermione love each other, undoubtedly, but as brother and sister,
I think.  And I think that relationship needs to stay that way because Harry
needs Hermione as a friend.  Harry needs Ron as his best buddy, but he needs
Hermione as a friend even more.  She understands what it's like to be
Muggle-raised and to have no idea of the wizarding world.  She stands in as
his source of knowledge -- if he figured everything out on his own, it
wouldn't be nearly as convincing a story.  In fact, he'd be a bit of a prat.
(I really love the British language!  Let's all use prat and git on an
everyday basis!)  Hermione is also the voice of reason and logic for
Harry -- he turns to her for advice because she's smart and level headed and
has always guided him well, not because of some unrecognized urge to make
out with her.

And finally, when Katie Couric asked JKR if Harry and Hermione were going to
have a romantic relationship, JKR's face crumpled up and she said "Really?
You think so?  I see Hermione with Ron, not Harry."

Frankly, I think Harry's likely to hook up with Luna than with Hermionie.

Deirdre
Eight of Eight





From jferer at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 01:42:30 2003
From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 01:42:30 -0000
Subject: What Destroyed Godric's Hollow?
In-Reply-To: <bj5qdb+1uvh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj65a6+4d3g@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79744

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ghinghapuss" <rredordead at a...>
wrote:
> I've always wondered what happened to Harry's
> parents' house in Godric Hollow. Apparetnly, it was completely
> destroyed. Of course, it could have been destroyed by Voldemort's
> failed and misdirected Avada Kedavra. But lately I've noticed that 
> failed curses generally don't do that
> sort of thing.  <snip> 
> 
Mandy: "Yes, but was LV's Avada Kadavra 'miss directed'? Dumbledore's
full curse hit the desk, LV's in Godric's Hollow hit Harry first, its
target, and failed. Perhaps the excess energy did rebound into the
house and destroy it but it doesn't seem likely to me. An exploding 
desk is very different from a house being completely destroyed.

I firmly believe there was at least one other person at the house with
the Potter's and LV that night. I think one of them destroyed the
house in an attempt to finish off what LV failed to do, kill Harry.
Remember we need a witness to retell the story of really happened in
Godric's Hollow that night."

It's an interesting hypothesis, but it has no basis at all. We've seen
on many occasions that spells that don't perform their intended
function cause physical damage.  We see many examples of that in the
MoM fight, but we also see it in the graveyard scene in GoF, where the
many stunning spells that miss Harry damage grave markers and so on. 
We know spells have physical power.

Why was the destruction caused by Voldemort's AK spell so much
greater?  Harry was the only person ever to have an AK spell bounce
off of him, and the "recoil" must have been tremendous.

If there was another DE in the house, why didn't he help his master,
or kill Harry himself? It doesn't make sense. 

Jim Ferer





From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 02:11:14 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 02:11:14 -0000
Subject: Sirius and Dumbledore (Was: Pensieves objectivity & Dumbledore's integrity)
In-Reply-To: <bj5qki+9ouj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj6702+1e8k@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79745

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "abigailnus" <abigailnus at y...> 
wrote:
  There seems to be a consensus 
> on the group that Sirius is dead because Dumbledore forced him to 
> stay at Grimmauld place.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  
> This is the tragedy of Sirius' death.
> 
> Sirius gives Harry the mirror when Harry returns to Hogwarts after 
> Christmas break, in a chapter so loaded with gloomy foreshadowing 
that 
> I spent the rest of the book convinced that JKR would never do 
something 
> as obvious as killing Sirius.  Harry decides never to use the 
mirror 
> because he fears that if he causes Sirius to leave Grimmauld, 
Sirius could 
> be caught and killed.
> 
> Sirius does indeed end up leaving Grimmauld Place, and he is 
killed, but 
> not because he was caught.  Sirius' death in fact has nothing to do 
with the 
> reason he was hiding.  <snip> 
  Dumbledore's failing is not 
> towards Sirius but towards Harry - by not giving him complete 
information 
> Dumbledore allowed Harry to be manipulated by Voldemort, and that 
was 
> the cause of Sirius' death.  If someone else - Tonks, or Moody, who 
were 
> always going to be in the rescue party - had died instead of 
Sirius, it still 
> would have been Dumbledore's fault for the same reason.
> 
Laura:

Gee, a consensus among this group?  <g>

I suggest that your statement that Sirius's death didn't have 
anything to do with the reason he was hiding is incomplete.  It was 
where and how he was hiding that was the problem. Sirius was in 
hiding because he would have had a very difficult time proving his 
innocence without Peter around to give evidence.  But while he was in 
hiding abroad, he was calm, rational, thoughtful and helpful.  Even 
when he came back to Britain, his advice was so reliable that 
Hermione continually insisted that Harry keep him informed.  So it 
wasn't hiding itself that was making Sirius crazy (speaking 
colloquially).  It was being in hiding *at Grimmauld Place*. 

 Sirius was completely committed to the Order.  So Sirius offered his 
house.  It was big enough, it was close to the MoM and it was well-
protected.  I'm sure that Sirius never thought that DD would make him 
stay in the wretched place 24/7.  He could have hidden somewhere else 
or he could have lived at Grimmauld and had freedom of movement, and 
in either case he would have been the Sirius we saw in GoF.  But the 
combination was a sure recipe for emotional disaster.  Someone 
pointed out a few days ago that there had to be lots of ways for 
Sirius to get out of the house-Invisibility Cloaks, Polyjuice Potion, 
you name it.  And this was a very smart, clever man-couldn't DD have 
used his mind in some way?  Granted that the Order wasn't hugely busy-
they were still underground and the full-scale war hadn't broken out 
yet.  But it was only a matter of time, and there had to be planning 
and strategy that DD could have used help with.  Having Sirius do 
*nothing* was not only stupid and cruel, it was shortsighted.

 Harry needed the Sirius of GoF, the person who could think coolly 
and clearly.  He needed his godfather.  But DD's decision to keep 
Sirius shut up in Grimmauld eroded Sirius's ability to find that part 
of himself.  When Harry went to Sirius's at Christmas, he ended up 
anxious enough about Sirius's state of mind to decide to protect 
Sirius, even if it cost him his closest advisor.  If Sirius had been 
doing something useful with his time, I doubt that Snape's taunts 
would have had the effect on him they did.  So it was the 
circumstances under which the mirror was given to Harry that made him 
refuse to use it.  What if Sirius had said, "Harry, this mirror will 
allow us to talk privately any time we want to, and it can't be 
compromised like owls or fireplaces.  I want to hear from you at 
least once a week."  But instead, Sirius had nothing better to think 
about than how useless he was being and how much Snape was enjoying 
baiting him about it.

Sure, anyone could have died at the MoM, but everyone else went into 
the battle with a clear mind and a full understanding of the 
situation.  By letting Sirius get to the state he was in, DD may as 
well have put the wand in Bellatrix's hand.




From fc26det at aol.com  Thu Sep  4 02:20:34 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 02:20:34 -0000
Subject: Hermione SHIP question
In-Reply-To: <bj62o5+ejr8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj67hi+jhug@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79746

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jim Ferer" <jferer at y...> wrote:
> Susanne, quoting me:' Without Harry's quest, she would not have the
> higher purpose she has now.'
> 
> And then Susanne responded," And this is what sometimes makes me
> wonder how well Harry and Hermione go together.
> 
> "Take that quest away, and what is there to keep them together? What
> would they do and talk about?"
>  
> Susanne;' Maybe in the next two books JKR will show us Harry and
> Hermione talking about other things besides Harry's problems.. They
> just don't seem to do anything together that isn't somehow connected
> to the latest problem or mystery."
> 
> Sad but true, and I don't see relief for them soon.
>
 
> Jim Ferer

Now Susan:
I think you have to realise that they probably do talk more than we 
are let in on.  There are sometimes weeks that go by where we are not 
given a day by day account of what is going on.  Yes, we are told 
what they are talking about when it pertains to the story but what 
about the other days?  If they were only going over the events of the 
tasks or Harry's problems, then we would be in on them also.  Just 
like when Ginny lets Ron and Harry know that Hermoine really does 
have a date for the Yule ball.  We were not let in on the 
conversation between Hermoine and Ginny.  Obviously they are better 
friends than we think if Hermoine trusts her with that big of a 
secret.  I think that there is a lot of trivial stuff we just don't 
know about.
Susan
Susan




From two_flower2 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 19:53:55 2003
From: two_flower2 at yahoo.com (two_flower2)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 19:53:55 -0000
Subject: Snape's goatee?  NOOooooooooo!
In-Reply-To: <bj584i+jk1p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5gsj+97lg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79747

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "erinellii" <erinellii at y...> 
wrote:
> 
> But then OoP came out, and I couldn't help but notice there was a 
> picture, drawn by the American illustrator Mary Grandpre, of Snape 
in it which was too close to the Rowling drawing for comfort.  The 
> picture, at the beginning of the chapter "Occlumency", shows Snape 
as about the height of Professor Umbridge, bald on top (I ask you!), 
and with the goatee.  He and Sirius are shown having their little 
almost- duel over Snape teaching Harry occlumency. JKR doesn't 
> really want Snape to look like a short, fat, balding guy with a 
> goatee, does she?  Had I mentioned the Mary Grandpre pic looked 
kind of chubby as well?  How does Mary Grandpre decide what to draw?  
Does it get approved at all by JKR before it is included in the book?  


Hi everybody, this is my second post to this group (the first one got 
eaten).

Rowling's own drawing of Snape shows neither bald spot, nor goatee.  
He is thin, big-nosed, with long dark hair and rather vampire-like 
looking.

I think Grand Pre attributed to Snape the goatee and bald spot, 
because she wanted to make him look repulsive.  Also, in the kitchen 
scene you mention had she might have wanted to make him look unlike 
his adversary Sirius.  Snape's looks as described in the books are 
not too different from Sirius'.

"two_flower2"




From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Wed Sep  3 20:30:48 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (JeffL1965)
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 15:30:48 -0500
Subject: Hogwarts Dorms ? (RoomSizes)
References: <bj520b+bqjj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <002c01c3725a$43802300$9c72aa18@sport.rr.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79748

udder_pen_dragon <udderpd at y...> wrote:
> My take on this is that the new first years move into the vacated 
> seventh year dorm'.
> 
> As for the size of the dorm's, this is a magic castle ergo they 
> become whatever size they need to be. I also think that 
> this "magic" applies to the classrooms, Great Hall,etc.


    Jeff:
 
    Thanks for your comments. I tend to agree that they'd take over 
from the vacating graduates. It makes sense. I was wondering if they 
did that, or made each year have its own floor as a treat or what 
have you.
 
   Jeff









From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 21:57:14 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 21:57:14 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj5k11+rovh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5o3q+lkqi@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79749

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "melclaros" <melclaros at y...> 
wrote:

<snip> Snape has EVERY right to 'demand' to be called "sir" 
> or "professor". He IS "Sir". He IS "Professor".

The *words* can be demanded (and that will result in tremendous 
success, I'm sure), but the respect the words imply must be *earned*; 
something Snape seems oblivious to or bent on ignoring.

<snip>
> What would you have him do? "Well Harry, we're here in private, we 
> can drop the act, call me Sevvy. Want a beer?" Sheesh. This is 
> STILL a student/teacher relationship.

And how do you expect the student to remember that this "is STILL a 
student/teacher relationship" when the teacher side of that pair has 
consistently stepped outside of appropriate behavior *for that 
relationship*?  Snape has behaved like a schoolyard bully, drawing 
lines in the sand and daring Harry to step over.  (I suppose now 
you'll say he learned that from James.  No matter; it isn't JAMES 
he's retaliating against.)

> Snape does not change his manner of address to Potter.

Good point; generally one-on-one interactions *are* less formal than 
one-to-group (if I remember some of my foreign grammar correctly, the 
terms for "you" plural and "you" formal are same/similar, while the 
words for "you" singular and "you" intimate/family are also).  And 
children learn what they live; you want respect from them, you show 
it TO them (as demonstrated by the staff who (Umbrage excepted) 
use "mister" and "miss" with all the students, not just those whom 
they favor).

> <snip> This "abuse": Harry is now FIFTEEN. <snip>

Not old enough to vote, shave, soldier, drive, apparate, compete in 
the Triwizards tourney, leave school, live independently, or bear an 
equal share of the responsibility in dealings with (supposed) adults, 
especially those in a position of authority over them.

> We have to stop seeing him as ELEVEN. <snip>

Snape (dam*ed if *I'll* call him by any title) set the tone for 
what's followed when Harry WAS eleven.

> He did not throw things "at" Harry, he threw ONE jar OVER his head. 
<snip> 

Not clear; Snape's probably just a lousy shot.  (*Canon* says the jar 
exploded over Harry's head, *not* that Snape didn't aim lower.)

> NO, it was not a mature grown up thing for a teacher--any adult to 
do. <snip>

My understatement alarm (now added to my formerly shrieking dark 
detectors ^-^) is blaring now.

> But I am tired of this argument sounding like Big Huge Severus beat 
up on ickle innocent baby Harry AND took away his lolly. <snip>

The historic wrongs Snape did Harry have not been resolved.  To me, 
Snape will be a baby-bashing thug until they are.

> There was NO excuse for Harry to look in that Pensieve. NONE. I 
> don't care if Snape was baiting him. I don't care if he'd hung a 
> big blinking sign over it saying "Don't look in here, Potter! 
<snip> 

No excuse needed.  Just human nature.  (OT note:  statistics show 
that a large percentage of guests peruse hosts' medicine cabinets out 
of curiosity; kids are even snoopier because they are still trying to 
discover "the truth" behind how people in their world work.)  
Admittedly bad manners on Harry's part, but not even approaching the 
low level of same he has been conditioned to expect from "Professor" 
Snape.

> He should NOT have looked. Oh no, Potter wasn't looking for 
> Potters, he was looking for more "Fun with Snivellus" and we all 
> know it. <snip>

"More" fun? Harry didn't even know the name "Snivellus" before he 
looked in the pensieve; ergo, he could not have been "looking for 
more fun with" anyone by that name.  (So, no, *we* don't "all know 
it.")

> Melpomene, digging that hole deeper and deeper.

"msbeadsley", tossing dirt in after (and, oops, on top of digger) 
<just trying to help>

P.S. Possible epiphany tucked in here:  if, as I have read a theory 
stating, Harry is actually carrying a part of Voldemort around with 
him behind his scar, could it be that Snape's abuse of Harry is 
intended as an object lesson (from BOTH perspectives) for that scrap 
of Voldemort (as well as Harry, and, uh, us)?  (That no matter what 
happens to you, no matter how much you have to put up with, deciding 
on murder and mayhem is not the appropriate "choice" to make.)

"msbeadley"





From jones.r.h.j at worldnet.att.net  Wed Sep  3 22:01:12 2003
From: jones.r.h.j at worldnet.att.net (Robert Jones)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 22:01:12 -0000
Subject: Hermione SHIP question (love triangle?)
Message-ID: <bj5ob8+49ou@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79750

Jim Ferrer and "Sarah" are making a stronger case than I thought 
there was for Harry and Hermione at least beginning to get closer as 
more than just friends.  Helen Granberry raises the issue of whether 
a love triangle will develop between Harry, Hermione, and Ron.  I 
don't care whom Harry ends up with (if anyone), but a love triangle 
is something I hope won't develop unless it somehow plays into the 
main story line of HP versus LV (e.g., the boys fight and Ron isn't 
there for the final showdown).  If JKR makes some cheesy romance 
novel out of their social lives, I'll be disappointed.    
  

Boris the Bewildered  




From fc26det at aol.com  Thu Sep  4 02:29:09 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 02:29:09 -0000
Subject: Sirius and Dumbledore (Was: Pensieves objectivity & Dumbledore's integrity)
In-Reply-To: <bj5qki+9ouj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj681l+p4ib@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79751

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "abigailnus" <abigailnus at y...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" <foxmoth at q...> 
wrote: 
> > There is this feeling on the list that Sirius ended up at the 
> > Department of Mysteries because he was so stir-crazy with 
> > being taunted and cooped up at Grimmauld Place that he 
> > suicidally disregarded the danger he would face. That is 
illogical. 
> > Sirius understood the danger well enough, otherwise he 
> > wouldn't have wanted to rescue Harry in the first place. 
> 
> I completely agree, Pippin, and this actually ties in to something 
that 
> I've been thinking about for a while.  There seems to be a 
consensus 
> on the group that Sirius is dead because Dumbledore forced him to 
> stay at Grimmauld place.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  
> This is the tragedy of Sirius' death.
> 
> Abigail

Now Susan:
Personally, I feel Sirius died because he was Sirius.  He cared 
deeply for Harry.  In GOF he came out of hiding to hide in Hogsmeade 
to be closer to Harry.  He showed up at the TWT as a dog to see 
Harry.  In OOP he went to Kings Cross as the dog to be with Harry.  
He shows up in the fireplace to talk to Harry.  I follows his 
personality to run out of Grimauld Place to try to help Harry.  No, 
he was not happy in Grimauld Place at all but I don't think it would 
have mattered where he was, if he knew what was going on he would 
have gone to the MOM to help Harry.
Just my take on Sirius.
Susan




From wildfire_517 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 22:32:29 2003
From: wildfire_517 at yahoo.com (wildfire_517)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 22:32:29 -0000
Subject: Harry's New Fear
In-Reply-To: <bj5h31+4o1r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5q5t+o58m@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79752

-angelberri56-:
> This is just a random question, sorry if it's already been 
> contemplated:
> 
> Harry's greatest fear in PoA, was dementors (or fear itself). But 
> now, though I could be wrong, it seems as though he has gotten 
> over this fear. He fights the dementor-boggart in the maze (third 
> task, GoF), and in the beginning of OOtP, he defeats the two 
> dementors pretty easily. If he has overcome his fear, what is now 
> his greatest fear? 
> 
> (It could possibly be people he loves dying... after what 
> happened to Sirius)
> 
> But let me know what you think!
> Thanks!

My turn:

  This is an interesting point.  Harry seems to have little trouble 
fighting off the dementors in the beginning of OotP.  Has he overcome 
his fear of..fear?  Personally, I believe so.  Your idea that it 
could now be the death of those he loves is exactly what my thoughts 
were on this.
  Consider his reactions both when he thought Hermione was dead and 
after the death of Sirius.  Both times, Harry basically went 
ballistic.  His earliest memory is of losing those he (conceivably) 
loved the most: his parents.  His entire life is based around death 
and loss.  Losing someone close to him seems to be the one thing that 
can still upset him greatly, even to the point where he abandons 
common sense to try to take revenge. 
  (And let's be honest, there's no way he could have taken out 
Bellatrix, even without LV's entrance)
  If Harry has conquered his fear of fear (in the form of the 
dementors), then it would seem he has progressed to a fear of loss.  
Seems natural enough to me.

  Wyld





From Malady579 at hotmail.com  Thu Sep  4 02:29:37 2003
From: Malady579 at hotmail.com (Melody)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 02:29:37 -0000
Subject: Tracking Magic  (was:Special Qualities of Auror Magic?)
In-Reply-To: <bj5rgh+hi8b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj682h+jq6a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79753

Tom wrote:
> wouldn't that be handy if you could just put a special 
> homing device on Voldemort's magic? Too handy.

At least that might help to prove he is actually using it.  You know,
I wonder now how they know an unforgivable is done.  Is it by witness
only?  We have cases now of unforgivables performed, and those witches
and wizards are not tracked down.  It seems, to me, that spells cannot
be tracked that well, and yet the times Harry has received notices,
the MoM knows precisely what spell was cast.  This baffles me.  The
only thing I could come up with is that "the nongraduated" or rather
"incompletely educated" are watched somehow.


Tom wrote:
> I think your analysis makes quite a bit of sense, especially when I 
> sat down and really thought about it. After all, we're talking about 
> Harry's offenses under the Decree for the Restriction of "Underage" 
> Sorcery, right?
> 
> So, if that's the case, then it would seem logical that the Ministry 
> would be keeping track of all students' homes, and the locations of 
> known "non-graduates."

Why thank you.  I had listed Hagrid as one of those that are tracked,
but I have to take that back.  I was lying in bed last night and it
hit me.  He did magic in the first book when he got Harry from the
Hut-on-the-Rock.  (Which by the way, after rereading OoP, I think
Hagrid got there by a thestral.  ::grin:: )  So, if the MoM has little
red sensors buttons on a big screen of all the "nongraduated" then
seems to me Hagrid little bulb would light up.  But if it is actually
"underage" then I guess not.  But it seems it is not tracked using the
individual but by the area.

I really do not know.  

In OoP:
We have Harry getting in trouble away from his house but near the
dementors that Umbridge sent.  He is underage and it was powerful,
impressive magic.  Dumbledore did not know.

Also in that scene, Harry called out "lumos" to his wand when it was
inches from his hand and it lit up (Ch 1, pg 17).  Technically that
too was a breech to the decree, but it was not also listed.  It was
done right before the patronus.

We then have the OoP barging in a couple days later.  We have only
aurors recorded doing basic magic, and there was not situation.  Well,
disillusionment probably is not so basic.  We also know that the MoM
does not know they are there, but Dumbledore does.

Oh I found another one--Harry gave Vernon an "electric shock" when
Vernon was choking him when they found him in the flowerbed (Ch 1, pg
5).  Harry did this without a wand.  It was not reported like blowing
up his aunt was.

In GoF:
We have Arthur repairing the room with magic.  Seemed nothing was
said.  The MoM knew he had hooked up the Dursley's fireplace to the
floo network, and probably knew they was going to get Potter around
the time they did.  Dumbledore definitely did.

In PoA:
In the third book, Harry blows up his aunt, well she is not *his* aunt
but I am babbling, but that was done *without* a wand.  The MoM knew
and sent help...but then again they could have been watching to see if
Black was near the house.  Dumbledore could not have known about the
Aunt blow up but he did about Black.

In CoS:
We then have Dobby levitating a dessert then apparating from the
house.  The levitating registers.  But we also have Dobby wanting
Harry to be "safe" from the bad things that were going to happen at
school, so there is a possibility Dobby kind of made it where they
found out.  Dumbledore could not have known Dobby was going to Privet
Drive.

Frankly I find it an interesting pattern.  Seems when they are looking
for odd activity, they can tune in to the place and detect it.  I am
beginning to really think in CoS, Dobby tried to frame Harry.  In PoA,
they were watching for Sirius' magic, so they watched period for
anything, and especially non-wand magic since Sirius did not have a
wand.  GoF, they did not care.  In OoP, Umbridge wanted to frame
Harry.  She got what she wanted and that was it.  She ignored the
"wandless" magic and the simple "lumos".

So my question is still...how can they keep track of that and not
others?  Is it simply because he is underage, or is it watching the
area?  Or is it as Tom suggested, and Dumbledore has a way of covering
his OoP's tracks?  Is it like a surveillance camera?  

Whatever the method, when Harry's trial began, it was never refuted
how the MoM tracked down that Harry did the patronus.  Seems to be
common knowledge how they do it and that it is reliable.  


Melody




From wildfire_517 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  3 22:39:21 2003
From: wildfire_517 at yahoo.com (wildfire_517)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 22:39:21 -0000
Subject: Umbridge's Intent (was Re: Special Qualities of Auror Magic?)
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20030903133210.00a691b0@localhost>
Message-ID: <bj5qip+e1a6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79754

Fred:
> Was that her motivation? Did she know that he could perform the 
Patronus 
> charm? I doubt it. I think she wanted to have Harry's soul sucked 
out of 
> his body and be done with it. I base this on her nasty character 
and the 
> looks exchange exchanged between Umbridge and Harry when he 
performed the 
> Patronus charm during the OWLs.

Me:

  If I remember correctly, she explains herself by saying something 
to the effect of, "They wouldn't do anything about you, so I took the 
situation into my own hands." (I'm paraphrasing rather badly with 
that, but you get the idea.)  I took this to mean that she was 
attempting to remove Harry from the picture, i.e. have his soul 
sucked out by the dementors.  When that failed due to the Patronus, 
she had another chance to, at the very least, remove him from 
Hogwarts, stopping him from spreading his "nonsense" about the return 
of LV.

  Wyld





From hpfanmatt at gmx.net  Wed Sep  3 23:38:33 2003
From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 23:38:33 -0000
Subject: Length of class/"double" classes
In-Reply-To: <bj552q+f6s5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj5u1p+4eua@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79755

Matt: 

> > You (and the Lexicon) have interpreted 
> > "double" as double in length.  I thought that 
> > it referred instead to doubling the *size* of 
> > the class ....  If there is anything in canon 
> > that conclusively resolves the difference, I 
> > missed it.


Pip: 
> You've just quoted it ;-)
> 
> In British school terminology 'double potions' 
> *always* means 'double-length potions'. 
> 

OK, then, so long as I'm only ignorant about the RW, and not about the
books!  :)

-- Matt





From PhoenixCharms at Aol.com  Thu Sep  4 00:56:09 2003
From: PhoenixCharms at Aol.com (PhoenixCharms at Aol.com)
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 20:56:09 EDT
Subject: GetTheGalleons!?
Message-ID: <141.1856dad4.2c87e7a9@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79756

Does anyone ever wonder where Hermione gets her Galleons? or where the other 
muggle borns get it? The though just occurred to me, after reading for the 
100th time how she paid the owl for the daily prophet. I mean, Harrys parents 
left him a small fortune, that's where he gets his money. Ron's parents are 
wizards, that's how he gets his wizard money... But Hermione's parents are muggles. 
They have muggle money... and Hermione doesn't have a job, so how does she 
get the wizard money?

Is there a place to trade muggle money for wizard money?? But why would there 
be when a wizard in need of muggle money can simply magic some up?

And is that why us muggles have such a hard time with counterfeit bills?


"PhoenixCharms"





From hpfanmatt at gmx.net  Wed Sep  3 23:49:22 2003
From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 23:49:22 -0000
Subject: Umbridge's Intent
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20030903133210.00a691b0@localhost>
Message-ID: <bj5um2+hl52@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79757

--- Fred Uloth wrote (responding to double >>'d Melody):
>
> > Now, we know Umbridge sent those dementors.  
> > She wants to capture Harry doing magic.
> 
> .........
> I doubt it. I think she wanted to have Harry's 
> soul sucked out of his body and be done with it. 
> I base this on her nasty character and the 
> looks exchange exchanged between Umbridge and 
> Harry when he performed the Patronus charm 
> during the OWLs.

You could also base it on the fact that she says exactly that to Harry
in the scene in her office after she catches him using her fire.

-- Matt





From silverdragon at ezweb.com.au  Thu Sep  4 21:27:55 2003
From: silverdragon at ezweb.com.au (silverdragon at ezweb.com.au)
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 07:27:55 +1000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
References: <bj5k11+rovh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000201c37336$363a1430$7d984cca@Monteith>

No: HPFGUIDX 79758

Melpomene wrote:
> No. But was it child abuse? I think not. I think had Severus 
> wanted to abuse Harry he could have done a HELL of a lot better 
> than that. He did not throw things "at" Harry, he threw ONE jar 
> OVER his head.

It is unclear even whether the jar was actually thrown at all. Harry
evidently assumed the jar had been thrown when he was thinking about the
event afterwards ("What was making Harry feel so horrified and unhappy was
not being shouted at or having jars thrown at him;..." p 572 - Oz edition
etc) but what the book actually reads at the time it happens is... "And as
Harry hurtled towards the door, a jar of dead cockroaches exploded over his
head." Harry has used unintentional magic in the past, especially when under
exteme stress. Perhaps the jar simply exploded.

Nox





From tuck668 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 01:16:01 2003
From: tuck668 at yahoo.com (tuck668)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 01:16:01 -0000
Subject: Birth, Doubt, Fear, Pride, Disillusionment
In-Reply-To: <bj6377+g88j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj63oh+b9f2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79759

> Wanda said:
> I do think, however, that in OotP there is a change of tone in 
> Harry's heroics; he suddenly seems *self-conscious* in a rather 
> unpleasant way.  He broods bitterly about his experiences; he 
loudly 
> recites his exploits to his friends when they all arrive at 
> Grimmauld Place; he makes a point of emphasizing that HE is the 
one 
> who did everything, ignoring the help he received from others.  
He's 
> no longer the self-effacing Harry Potter who just thinks of 
others - 
> he's developed an ego, and it's not a pretty sight.  
> -SNIP-

I agree, for the most part, with the rest of your post, but you have 
to keep in mind that when he flipped out and started listing all of 
the things that *he and he alone* accomplished at Grimmauld Place, 
he was letting out the tons and tons of frustration that had built 
up from being kept in the dark for a month. I did notice, however, 
that he was a bit more egotistical and impulsive in this book than 
in others... which could just be due to his teenage hormones...

-Anna





From tuck668 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 01:33:59 2003
From: tuck668 at yahoo.com (tuck668)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 01:33:59 -0000
Subject: Harry's New Fear
In-Reply-To: <bj5h31+4o1r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj64q7+hg8f@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79760

"angelberri56" <pokeypokey at c...> wrote:
> This is just a random question, sorry if it's already been 
> contemplated:
> 
> Harry's greatest fear in PoA, was dementors (or fear itself). But 
> now, though I could be wrong, it seems as though he has gotten 
> over this fear. He fights the dementor-boggart in the maze (third 
> task, GoF), and in the beginning of OOtP, he defeats the two 
> dementors pretty easily. If he has overcome his fear, what is now 
> his greatest fear? 
> 
> (It could possibly be people he loves dying... after what 
> happened to Sirius)


Just because he can produce a Patronus more easily than before 
doesn't necessarily mean that dementers are no longer his greatest 
fear. It could just mean that he is getting better at using the 
charm. If I remember properly, he had a bit of trouble producing a 
Patronus at the beginning of OOP. We'll just have to wait until he 
encounters another boggart to know for sure!

-Anna





From fc26det at aol.com  Thu Sep  4 02:41:41 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 02:41:41 -0000
Subject: GetTheGalleons!?
In-Reply-To: <141.1856dad4.2c87e7a9@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bj68p5+pv96@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79761

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, PhoenixCharms at A... wrote:
> Does anyone ever wonder where Hermione gets her Galleons? or where 
the other 
> muggle borns get it? The though just occurred to me, after reading 
for the 
> 100th time how she paid the owl for the daily prophet. I mean, 
Harrys parents 
> left him a small fortune, that's where he gets his money. Ron's 
parents are 
> wizards, that's how he gets his wizard money... But Hermione's 
parents are muggles. 
> They have muggle money... and Hermione doesn't have a job, so how 
does she 
> get the wizard money?
> 
> Is there a place to trade muggle money for wizard money?? But why 
would there 
> be when a wizard in need of muggle money can simply magic some up?
> 
> And is that why us muggles have such a hard time with counterfeit 
bills?
> 
> 
> "PhoenixCharms"

Now Susan:
In COS Hermoine's parents are in Gringotts exchanging muggle money 
for wizard money.  In POA Hermoine tells Ron and Harry that her 
parents gave her her birthday money early to buy herself a gift.  It 
appears that her parents give her money and then she exchanges it at 
Gringotts.
Susan




From jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 03:08:43 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 03:08:43 -0000
Subject: You're Getting To Be a Habit With Me (a filk)
Message-ID: <bj6abr+pkdd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79762

This is a filk of the song by the same title from the musical Forty-
Second Street, and the second filk in the new filk musical version 
of 42nd Street, "At 12 Grimmauld Place.

I dedicate this filk to Frankie.


You're Getting To Be a Habit With Me 

SCENE: DADA Professor Dolores Umbridge remarks on how many 
detentions Harry Potter has incurred in so short a time.

DOLORES UMBRIDGE:
I don't know exactly why you shouted,
But you shouted so loud;
I thought sending you to your Head of House
Would make you less proud.
But now I realize that you could never let it go,
And I'm bound to tell you so.  (*hem, hem*)

Ev'ry class, I surmise
That you just keep telling lies;
You're getting to be a habit with me.

Despite tears, despite cries,
Your behavior I'll chastise;
You're getting to be a habit with me.

I used to think your behavior I could fix
By sheer force of my will,
But now I know that you must feel the pricks 
Of my special black quill.

Oh, you can't break away.
I must have you ev'ry day
To teach you to speak the truth properly.
.
I've got you in detention
And you can't break free.
You're getting to be a habit with me.

Oh, you can't break away.
I must have you ev'ry day
To teach you to speak the truth properly.

I've got you in detention
And you can't break free.
You're getting to be a habit with me.

-Haggridd





From dwoodward at towson.edu  Thu Sep  4 03:18:32 2003
From: dwoodward at towson.edu (Deirdre F Woodward)
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 23:18:32 -0400
Subject: Why the time turner stinks
References: <1062544190.9048.72121.m17@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <001201c37293$3aa114e0$79092244@parkvl01.md.comcast.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 79763

Here's why the time turner stinks.

Presuming there isn't only one time turner (and if there is, why does
McGonnegel have it?) then why doesn't Lord Voldemort have one?

Or better yet, why hasn't Dumbledore or someone else gone back and killed
pre-powerful Voldemort?

I know the whole "time turner is powerful magic and you mustn't misuse it"
but that's hooey -- McGonnegel gave it to Hermione to affect future events
(Hermione's education), and Dumbledore allowed Harry to use it to change
just happened events (Harry's death by kissing -- now there's a death!). So
if it's ok to let Harry save himself from the dementor, surely it would be
ok to turn back time when Voldy starts making his
killing-you-all-I-am-evil-leader moves?

The more I think about the time-turner, the more the time turner stinks.

Deirdre
Eight of Eight





From lkadlec at princeton.edu  Thu Sep  4 03:31:12 2003
From: lkadlec at princeton.edu (curly_of_oster)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 03:31:12 -0000
Subject: Sirius and Dumbledore (Was: Pensieves objectivity & Dumbledore's integrity)
In-Reply-To: <bj681l+p4ib@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj6bm0+7u3i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79764

Okay, let me try to get these quotes at least close to correct <g>:

Pippin:
There is this feeling on the list that Sirius ended up at the 
Department of Mysteries because he was so stir-crazy with 
being taunted and cooped up at Grimmauld Place that he 
suicidally disregarded the danger he would face. That is illogical. 
Sirius understood the danger well enough, otherwise he 
wouldn't have wanted to rescue Harry in the first place. 

Abigail: 
I completely agree, Pippin, and this actually ties in to something 
that I've been thinking about for a while.  There seems to be a 
consensus on the group that Sirius is dead because Dumbledore forced 
him to stay at Grimmauld place.  Nothing could be further from the 
truth.  

This is the tragedy of Sirius' death.

Susan:
Personally, I feel Sirius died because he was Sirius.  He cared 
deeply for Harry.  In GOF he came out of hiding to hide in Hogsmeade 
to be closer to Harry.  He showed up at the TWT as a dog to see 
Harry.  In OOP he went to Kings Cross as the dog to be with Harry.  
He shows up in the fireplace to talk to Harry.  I follows his 
personality to run out of Grimauld Place to try to help Harry.  No, 
he was not happy in Grimauld Place at all but I don't think it would 
have mattered where he was, if he knew what was going on he would 
have gone to the MOM to help Harry.
Just my take on Sirius.

Now me (Lisa):
Thank you, Susan, for a nice post.  Personally, I think that there 
are actually two issues here, one being why Sirius rushed to the 
Ministry (and, in the end, to his death), and the other being 
Dumbledore's understanding (or lack thereof) of Sirius (and Harry) 
and his treatment of them in OOP.  I don't think that they're 
necessarily that closely related, and neither have I gotten the 
impression that there is a consensus on the list that they are 
clearly causally related.

A number of posters have expressed the idea that Dumbledore failed 
to see and/or understand what his strategies were doing emotionally 
to either Harry or Sirius, and I think this is true.  Or, if he did 
see/understand, maybe he didn't think it was important.  Marianne 
pointed out the changes in character she saw in Sirius in OOP vs. 
GoF.  I have a good friend who is a fan of the HP books but not 'in 
the fandom,' and while talking about OOP one of the things she said 
was, "Who was this guy who everyone kept calling Sirius Black?"  In 
my opinion, it seemed that staying in that house was doing bad 
things to Sirius' mental state.  I'm not saying he was a 'mental 
case,' but I do think one reasonable explanation for the change from 
the rational, caring person who advised Harry to be careful and 
spoke reasonably about Snape to the sullen and sometimes petulant 
person who encouraged risk-taking could be (at least in part) the 
ill-effects of confinement to his hated childhood home (complete 
with it's own Dementor substitute).  

Yes, it's true that Sirius *could* have left.  Dumbledore wasn't 
physically forcing him to stay there.  But there are multiple 
references to Dumbledore 'saying no' or Sirius not being able to go 
on Order business or 'so Dumbledore thinks.'  Dumbledore is in 
charge of the Order.  Sirius is part of the Order, and is therefore 
following Dumbledore's orders.  The fact that he isn't literally 
*forced* to do so doesn't really have anything to do with whether or 
not Dumbledore handled the situation well.  But, I digress...

That said, I also agree with Susan that Sirius' unhappiness about 
being stuck in Grimmauld Place was not what ultimately caused him to 
go off to rescue Harry.  Whatever his faults, the Sirius of all 
three books seems to be someone who will go to any length for those 
he cares about.  In GoF, he doesn't hesitate to risk his life/soul 
to come back to England to help Harry.  I think Pippin is right to 
say that Sirius understood the danger quite well when he went to the 
Department of Mysteries.  I also think Susan is right that it 
wouldn't have mattered where Sirius was.  He could have been cleared 
and been free to go off on missions of some sort for the Order.  He 
could have been less stir crazy because they found some way to get 
him away from Grimmauld Place some of the time.  He could have felt 
useful because Dumbledore came up with something other than cleaning 
the house for him to do.  I don't think any of it would have 
necessarily mattered if he found out Harry was facing a pack of 
Death Eaters at the Ministry.  Sirius loved Harry and wanted to 
protect him, and I find it hard to believe that he could be 
convinced to sit around and wait while Harry was in grave danger.  

Lisa




From elizabeth1603 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 03:31:20 2003
From: elizabeth1603 at yahoo.com (elizabeth1603)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 03:31:20 -0000
Subject: Why the time turner stinks
In-Reply-To: <001201c37293$3aa114e0$79092244@parkvl01.md.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <bj6bm8+j58c@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79765

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Deirdre F Woodward" <
dwoodward at t...> wrote:
> Here's why the time turner stinks.
> 
> Presuming there isn't only one time turner (and if there is, why does
> McGonnegel have it?) then why doesn't Lord Voldemort have one?
> 
> Or better yet, why hasn't Dumbledore or someone else gone back and killed
> pre-powerful Voldemort?

> snip<

> The more I think about the time-turner, the more the time turner stinks.
> 
> Deirdre
> Eight of Eight

I completely agree with you. These are all the reasons why I have problems 
with the Time Turner.

My way of coping with the whole thing is to imagine that time turners are very 
difficult to make and that there are only so many, and they are all kept locked 
away in the Dept. of Mysteries, except for ones given out in special 
circumstances, like Hermione's lessons. Wizards like Dumbledore wouldn't 
use them because they're too noble, but why didn't Voldemort try to use one? 
Seems like it might be a little more powerful than the prophecy. After all, 
Voldie could use one to go back and listen to the prophecy himself.

I can only guess that there is more to these time turners than we know so far. I 
hope so, anyway.

Elli




From elizabeth1603 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 03:44:21 2003
From: elizabeth1603 at yahoo.com (elizabeth1603)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 03:44:21 -0000
Subject: Sirius and Dumbledore (Was: Pensieves objectivity & Dumbledore's integrity)
In-Reply-To: <bj6bm0+7u3i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj6cel+fk7n@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79766

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "curly_of_oster" <lkadlec at p...> 
wrote:
> Okay, let me try to get these quotes at least close to correct <g>:
> 
> Pippin:
> There is this feeling on the list that Sirius ended up at the 
> Department of Mysteries because he was so stir-crazy with 
> being taunted and cooped up at Grimmauld Place that he 
> suicidally disregarded the danger he would face. That is illogical. 
> Sirius understood the danger well enough, otherwise he 
> wouldn't have wanted to rescue Harry in the first place. 
> 
> Abigail: 
> I completely agree, Pippin, and this actually ties in to something 
> that I've been thinking about for a while.  There seems to be a 
> consensus on the group that Sirius is dead because Dumbledore forced 
> him to stay at Grimmauld place.  Nothing could be further from the 
> truth.  
> 
> This is the tragedy of Sirius' death.
> 
> Susan:
> Personally, I feel Sirius died because he was Sirius.  He cared 
> deeply for Harry.  In GOF he came out of hiding to hide in Hogsmeade 
> to be closer to Harry.  He showed up at the TWT as a dog to see 
> Harry.  In OOP he went to Kings Cross as the dog to be with Harry.  
> He shows up in the fireplace to talk to Harry.  I follows his 
> personality to run out of Grimauld Place to try to help Harry.  No, 
> he was not happy in Grimauld Place at all but I don't think it would 
> have mattered where he was, if he knew what was going on he would 
> have gone to the MOM to help Harry.
> Just my take on Sirius.
> 
> Now me (Lisa):
> Thank you, Susan, for a nice post.  Personally, I think that there 
> are actually two issues here, one being why Sirius rushed to the 
> Ministry (and, in the end, to his death), and the other being 
> Dumbledore's understanding (or lack thereof) of Sirius (and Harry) 
> and his treatment of them in OOP.  I don't think that they're 
> necessarily that closely related, and neither have I gotten the 
> impression that there is a consensus on the list that they are 
> clearly causally related.

Sirius loved Harry and wanted to 
> protect him, and I find it hard to believe that he could be 
> convinced to sit around and wait while Harry was in grave danger.  
> 
> Lisa

Now Me:

Sirius was in no greater danger than anyone else at the Department of 
Mysteries. He didn't die because he left the house and wasn't supposed to. 
The reason he was not supposed to leave the house was that he could be 
captured at any moment by a Minestry official, but he wasn't captured by a 
Minestry official. He died in a duel with a death eater, and it could have 
happened to anyone else there. Sirius didn't die because Dumbledore 
wouldn't let him get any air. He died because Bellatrix out-dueled him.

Elli




From eberte at vaeye.com  Thu Sep  4 03:52:20 2003
From: eberte at vaeye.com (ellejir)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 03:52:20 -0000
Subject: Birth, Doubt, Fear, Pride, Disillusionment
In-Reply-To: <bj6377+g88j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj6ctk+en9l@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79767

Wanda wrote: 
> I do think, however, that in OotP there is a change of tone in 
> Harry's heroics; he suddenly seems *self-conscious* in a rather 
> unpleasant way.  He broods bitterly about his experiences; he
> loudly recites his exploits to his friends when they all arrive at 
> Grimmauld Place; he makes a point of emphasizing that HE is the one 
> who did everything, ignoring the help he received from others.  
> He's no longer the self-effacing Harry Potter who just thinks of
> others - he's developed an ego, and it's not a pretty sight. <snip>


Elle (Me):
Well stated Wanda; I have to agree with you. However, IMO this change 
in Harry's personality and self-awareness is necessary for the series 
to develop.  To some readers, the "self-effacing Harry Potter" who 
only thought of others was something of a cipher.  Here is a boy who 
is known to all in the wizarding world for defeating LV as a baby, 
who wins almost every quiddich game he every plays, who secures the 
House Cup for Gryffindor 3 years in a row, and who saves the 
school/WW/his friends and defeats evil and/or LV like clock-work 
every June.  It would be a bit unrealistic if Harry was *not* 
developing an ego. (Even so, he is not as much of a *Big Head* as 
Percy, James or Sirius, all of whom have much less cause to be 
conceited.)  

It is never a pretty sight when the sweet innocence of childhood is 
gobbled up by the hormones of adolescence, but that is part of 
becoming an adult.  At the end of OoP, I think that Harry *does* 
realize that his own recklessness and ego have contributed to 
Sirius's death. I hope that this gradually will lead to a more 
thoughtful and mature Harry in the next 2 books. IMO, this 
development of his character is natural and makes the books more 
interesting than they would be if Harry's personality remained 
basically static for seven years despite the mayhem and tragedy that 
seem to be his fate.   

Fortunately, the basic sweetness that is the core of Harry's nature 
is still intact, despite all the surface anger in OoP.  When he 
offers to help Luna find her lost belongings during the end of term 
feast, he is not "playing the hero" at this point--he is just 
offering to help a (really geeky) friend.  That is the Harry that I 
love--brave, loyal and kind.  I think that he will learn to deal with 
his ego in time.

Elle




From greatelderone at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 04:15:04 2003
From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 04:15:04 -0000
Subject: Hermione SHIP question
In-Reply-To: <bj62o5+ejr8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj6e88+fgio@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79768

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jim Ferer" <jferer at y...> wrote:
> So I agree ? the H/Hr road is not perfect.  You've made the best
> argument yet, IMO, on the problems that the H/Hr ship presents for 
the
> participants.  I'm optimistic they can overcome it.  In this I 
believe
> Hermione will lead the way; she will approach her relationship with
> Harry with the intensity and commitment she brings to everything. 
> She's going to need that, because Harry is going to be beat to hell 
by
> the time this is over.
> 
> Jim Ferer

But this is also a good argument on why Harry might end up with no 
one since after defeating Voldemort and losing so many friends and 
mentors nobody not even Hermione would even be able to empathize or 
understand what he has experienced. I mean unlike Harry, Hermione has 
had parents and hasn't experienced being unloved and locked in a 
cupboard nor would she ever feel the pain that Harry felt when he 
lost Sirius. Her attempts to understand and try to resolve his many 
issues would be as successful of Marie Antoinette's attempt at 
understanding her citizens.




From talisman22457 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 04:22:32 2003
From: talisman22457 at yahoo.com (Talisman)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 04:22:32 -0000
Subject: Going for the Vold (was: Why the time turner stinks
In-Reply-To: <001201c37293$3aa114e0$79092244@parkvl01.md.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <bj6em8+dmo2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79769

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Deirdre F Woodward" 
<dwoodward at t...> wrote:
> Deirdre
> Here's why the time turner stinks. <snip> why hasn't Dumbledore or 
someone else gone back and killed pre-powerful Voldemort?
<snip> surely it would be ok to turn back time when Voldy starts 
making his killing-you-all-I-am-evil-leader moves?
 
Talisman, assiduously ignoring the dirty "T" word, notes:

DD isn't trying to kill LV.
I'm quite certain that DD knew Vapormort was protruding from the 
back of Quirrell's head in SS, yet he made no attempt to swat him.

In CoS, DD reveals that his "sources" (328) keep him appraised of 
the barely-clinging-to-existence Moldyvort's whereabouts.  It seems 
like a good Scourgifying Spell would mop the blighter up, but DD 
takes no offensive action.

DD was monitoring the Little Hangleton papers because he expected LV 
to appear there on his come-back trail.  Nonetheless, there was no 
intervening attempt to squash Pupamort.

And, of course, in the Atrium LV notices that DD is not using fatal 
Spells against him. "You do not seek to kill me, Dumbledore? . . . 
[T]here are other ways of destroying a man, Tom . . . Merely taking 
your life would not satisfy me . . .."  (814) 

Is it the Prophecy hoo-haw?  Does DD have a plan for LV, too?

Talisman, who is just too sleepy to get into it all now, but can 
guarantee it has nothing to do with those icky turning things.






From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com  Thu Sep  4 05:09:59 2003
From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 05:09:59 -0000
Subject: Underwear (filk)
Message-ID: <bj6hf7+rvkj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79770

Underwear (OOP, Chap. 28)

To the tune of George M. Cohan's Over There

Hear the original at:

http://www.americaslibrary.gov/cgi-bin/page.cgi/jb/gilded/cohan_1

THE SCENE: Hogwarts circa the mid 70s ? HARRY, via the Pensieve, 
observes a traumatic scene that SNAPE most wanted to keep hidden from 
him.

SIRIUS
Jamesy, let's have fun, 
Let's have fun, let's have fun
Let us get some one, 
Get some one, some git stun
Bored out of our gourd we see
Snapey skulking furtively
Make him flop around on the ground as he's down
Snivvy we'll expose from his nose to his toes
This a moment, oh so sweet,
To hang Snape up by his feet!

SIRIUS, JAMES, REMUS & PETER
Underwear, underwear
Color gray, color gray, an old pair
We shall make all privy 
To see ol' Snivvy 
Stripped to his skivvies, c'est le guerre!
Vicious glare, greasy hair
Against us he has not got a prayer
We've turned him over, he's up and over
And he's undergoing fits in underwear

(Enter LILY EVANS, deeply angered)

LILY
Jamesy, as your hand, through your hair, hair it runs
Loosen Snapey's bonds, lose the wand, please respond
He's done nothing, I insist 

JAMES
It's simply that he exists

LILY
You make my teeth grate, never date those I hate

HARRY
Father was so rank, what a mean ugly prank
Now my Mother's mad at you and I'm disillusioned too.

(Abruptly, HARRY finds the mature SNAPE standing alongside him. SNAPE 
removes HARRY from the Pensieve memory.)

SNAPE
Did you dare here to stare
To observe, oh what nerve, 
This affair?
That your Dad so charming
His pals disarming
Whose armed harm swarming rips & tears!
This nightmare
Of despair
Say no word
Say no word, do not dare!
With my reproaches, I'm throwing roaches,
And don't you dare come back `cause it's over everywhere!

(Exit HARRY, prestissimo possible, `midst splintering glass, towards 
Gryffindor Tower)

   -	CMC

HARRY POTTER FILKS 
http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm 





From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 06:50:04 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 06:50:04 -0000
Subject: Tracking Magic 
In-Reply-To: <bj682h+jq6a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj6nas+qamn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79771

Apologies for cutting everything from the previous post; I just wanted
to make some general comments on magic tracking that are part of an
old theory of mine.

I think general magic tracking is like weather radar. There are mild
magic 'fronts' or instances going on all the time, but they barely
register on the Magic Radar. Mainly, the Ministry is monitoring and
looking for large surges of magic that would indicate the possibility
that a magical reversal team may need to be sent to the location.

Also, we find out in the latest book that the home location of wizards
and witches is kept in some type of Registry. In the court scene when
Mrs. Figg testifies, Fudge says they have no record of a witch living
in that location. That implies they DO have record of the home
location of all the other people. 

So, if they detect an unusually strong surge of magic in a particular
location, they check that against the Registry, and determine if there
are normally wizards in that location. If things look suspicious, they
may send someone to check it out. 

I must also assume that deeper analysis of what they detected can
yield the specific spell or the specific nature of the spell that was
cast. In that sense, it would be more like military radar, where ship
and plane to a limited extent can be identified by their 'blips' on
the radar screen. 

This could also allow the basic detection of underage magic. But I
don't think underage magic in the wizard world, is monitored as
closely as we are trying to imply that it is. In the wizard world, in
wizardly places, and at wizard homes, underage magic is not bid deal.
True it is against the law, but it's more of a mischief law; very
misdemeanor. Underage magic in the muggle world is a very big deal
from a legal perspective. In a sense, we are talking about a big time
crime that undermines the secrecy of the whole wizard world. That must
be deal with severly. But Fred and George at home, in their bedroom,
somewhat under their parents supervision is no big deal, and the
Ministry has far more important things to dedicate their resources too. 

Student who consider violating the Restriction for Underage Wizardry
are more the thought or the threat of what might happen if they do
perform magic, than they are by the actual likelihood of that
punishment happen. Think about how many times Harry and Ron have been
threatened with expulsion? Then consider how many times it has
actually happened. As with many rules, fear of punishment is the
deterrent and not the actual punishment itself.

Harry, however, is a very special case. Even if the Ministry doesn't
know the details of the prophecy, they definitely know that Harry is a
very special case. A special wizard, with special powers, who has
special needs, and who is facing very special and extraordinary
threats. The Ministry keeps a very close and detailed eye on Harry
because a sudden surge of magic at Privet Drive could signal the
return of Voldemort, or the presents of Death Eaters acting on
Voldemortt's behalf. 

They also know to some degree that when Voldemort returns, they are
definitely going to need Harry for the fight. They may not know why,
but I'm certain they realize that Harry is vitally important to the
wizard world and it's future. Because he is watched closer, they see
magic at his location in more detail. That means he is much easier to
catch doing magic than most students. 

Just a few thoughts.

bboy_mn




From prof_uloth at hotmail.com  Thu Sep  4 06:58:52 2003
From: prof_uloth at hotmail.com (Fred Uloth)
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 22:58:52 -0800
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Neville's Broken Nose
In-Reply-To: <bj53qu+oftr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20030903225144.00ae0830@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 79772

At 04:11 PM 9/3/2003 +0000, sylviablundell2001 wrote:
>So Neville and DD both have broken noses.  Didn't Ludo Bagman also
>have a broken nose.  I seem to remember Harry thinking it looked as
>though it had been squashed by a stray bludger.  Is there any
>sinister significance in this.?

I guess it means that if Owen Wilson can improve his Brit accent, he could 
be a good candidate for playing Ludo Bagman. Seriously though...I don't 
like Bagman enough to throw him in to a category with Neville and DD...he'd 
just too dogie. That will require some pondering. I can't help but think 
that Neville and Dumbledore broke their noses doing something heroic, while 
Bagman got his broke for welshing on a bet.... 




From sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 07:02:26 2003
From: sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com (sevenhundredandthirteen)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 07:02:26 -0000
Subject: Time, Repetition and the Uber-Dimension (was: Narrative Function
In-Reply-To: <bj4t4b+r108@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj6o22+d65v@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79774

Talisman wrote:

>Laurasia, you seem to have spent a good deal of time 
>crafting "authoritative" tomes on the "Two Options In
>Time Travel," 
>in which you explain your theory vs. what you assert to be my 
>theory. The problem is that you have not yet understood, or at 
>least not yet iterated, my theory. I hope you'll understand why
>I 
>don't provide a specific response to your posts, as they are not 
>germane to any actual view I hold.

Actually, in my post: #79043 I wasn't *specifically* referring to 
your theory at all. I wasn't trying to refer to *anyone's* theory. 
Rather, I was just discussing time-travel in general. So, of course 
you you'll find that I haven't detailed my understanding of *your* 
time-travel theory, because I was trying to keep my post separate 
from the many varied and dynamic time-travel theories out there.  I 
was talking about the *outcome* and what that means, regardless of 
the specific means that people have chosen to reach that outcome.


Talisman wrote:

>Acctually, the "it-was-always-that-way" theory seems to
>largely 
>render the narrative work of Time-Travel superfluous. Laurasia 
>maintains that Travelers have always achieved their goals, before 
>ever using the Turner, and that they don't actually change
>anything. 

Correct. They don't actually change anything, but they understand why 
it happens. They understand their own actions a lot better. Rather 
than Harry understanding that `he was saved by Dementors' he begins 
to understand that `*he* saved himself from Dementors.' 

Most of the time you won't be aware that you have gone back in time 
until you actually do. So you aren't looking for instances of time-
travel in everyday occurrences.  In, for instance, the `Bill and Ted' 
movies they *do* know that they will go back in time before they do, 
so begin to look at every moment with the idea `What could be 
evidence of me going back in time?' In Harry Potter we don't see this 
happen at all. We don't see Harry think `If I go back in time in half 
and hour and bury some binoculars here, then I can dig them up now 
and find them.' The point I'm trying to make is that *Harry* doesn't 
consider his goals already achieved. From the external point of view 
of `time' then, yes, they are already achieved, but from the 
character's point of view he still could fail at any time, he still 
has to put in all the work. He's still working in the *present* after 
all.

For all we know Harry could've lost his nerve at any time and may 
have to go back in time a second time, or third time until he finally 
is able to cast the Patronus over the lake and become the Harry he 
saw from the opposite bank. Just because he's seen the unchangeable 
effects in the past does not mean that he knows the *exact* cause. 
Seeing the effects before the cause doesn't ensure that you are 
assured the complete journey which was "A to B." The struggle that 
Harry faces *before* he casts the Patronus is what is interesting: 
thinking it was his father; getting excited; getting disappointed and 
scared when no one comes; realising it was him all along; getting 
excited and THEN he casts it.


Talsiman wrote:

>Under these circumstances, one doesn't wonder why the Ministry 
>controls Time-Turners, one wonders why they bother to produce them 
>at all.

Why produce Time-Turners, you ask? Because sometimes only after the 
event do you realise that you could have done something. Take the 
Buckbeak fiasco from Dumbledore's point of view. Buckbeak goes 
mysteriously missing at sunset. Later on in the night we realise that 
Sirius needs to escape. If only you'd gone back in time, borrowed 
Buckbeak and were currently hiding him out in the Forbidden Forest. 
Then you could've flown him up to the window to help Sirius escape. 
No one at the time of the execution (presumably) would have had the 
knowledge to anticipate Sirius's need for Beaky. Only someone with 
the knowledge of the next three hours could know to save Beaky. Enter 
the time-turner. It basically casts Dumbledore in the `Bill and Ted' 
role where they think `If only I'd gone back in time and tied a 
sandbag above your head- then I could pull this rope here and make it 
fall on you.'

And besides, Hermione's use of a time-turner shows another ordinary 
use of a time-turner. Magic still has ordinary day-to-day practical 
uses, even if it can be very dangerous and controlled. Time-Turners 
are dangerous for a number of reasons:

What happens if you *force* time to happen differently? By that I 
mean, what if Harry disregarded Hermione's advice and went charging 
into Hagrid's to catch Wormtail? We know that he didn't, `time' knows 
that he didn't but what if he *forced* it to happen? It is something 
that time knows *did* *not* happen, so forcing it to occur would 
destroy time. It would destroy the world. That's a pretty big weight 
on your shoulders. A pretty big reason to control Time-Turners. If 
you do something `time' knows doesn't happen, then you destroy time.

There are other ordinary reason why time-turners are dangerous: 
People can escape the law (for example) by tipping over their time-
turner. You can't apparate/disapparate inside Hogwarts, but you *can* 
tip over a time-turner. It moves you from the physical place you were 
(Hospital Wing to Entrance Hall) and into a time when no one is 
looking for you. It's an incredibly powerful transportation. Theives, 
people making mischief, etc- all could use one.


Talisman wrote:

>And, bboy, don't you go anywhere. I know that you and Laurasia
>are 
>not the same person (at least I think not)

*blushes* You actually considered the thought that bboy_mn and I are 
the same person? I'm flattered! I respect bboy_mn very much. He 
always jumps into the time-travel fray and supports me! Alas, I'm 
*not* the same person as he is... :-D

Talisman wrote:

>As to the grayness of HP's moral landscape, I am on record,
>previous 
>to the TBAY posts you laud, Laurasia, as to its being very gray, 
>indeed. This is not at all altered by Snape's helping Harry. 
>(Although, your being Kirstini's alter-ego WOULD explain a few 
>things. )

Yes, I'm aware that the greyness has been explored before. I just 
threw in those references because I thought they were good posts. 
Alas, I'm not Kirstini's alter-ego *either.* So, wrong again... Maybe 
third time lucky, eh? ;-D


Talisman wrote:
<snip>
>Time-Travelers will experience the "always" presence of
>themselves, 
>because whenever they act in the Relevant Span, they are back inside 
>of Time, once again subject to its rules, and it's denial of 
>the "return trip."

So, are you saying then that Harry really did see himself (himself-
plus-3-hours, that is) over the lake? Harry really did experience 
the "always" presences of himself being there? That's what it sounds 
like. Your whole kitchen table analogy really just proved the `it-
happened-once' theory. It proved how when you're standing outside 
time Harry really can be on one side of the lake, while Harry-plus-3-
hours can be on the other side simultaneously.  If you yourself have 
just proved that Harry can be on both sides of the lake at the exact 
moment and that time happens only once and can't go backwards, then 
where has the Snape!Theory gone? I see no need for your Snape-saved-
Harry theory, because you've just proved that Harry really can be 
standing on opposite sides of the lake at the exact same moment.

Where is the need for Snape to use some other form of repelling 
Dementors when Harry is right there with his wand out and ready? And 
if time happened only once and can't be rewound, when did he save 
Harry? When? The time that we saw *Harry* cast the Patronus? That's 
the only time you've said exists! And we *know* that Harry saved 
himself then. We were standing right next to him as he 
roared `Expecto Patronum' over the lake! Or, are you suggesting that 
the Patronus Charm *didn't* save Harry that night? That the Patronus 
just distracted everyone's attention while Snape did the *real* 
saving with some spell that we don't even know exists? That's the 
only option I can work out. That Harry really did see himself across 
the Lake, but his Patronus did nothing at all. It was the guy back up 
at the castle who did it all? silmariel's version of how Snape can 
save them all is watertight because she uses multiple timeline which 
can override one another.


Talisman wrote:

>You cannot exist as a savior-self that is even one metabolic-second 
>older than you were when you would have perished without it.
<snip>
>Therefore, older Harry could not initially save younger Harry--even 
>though Time insists that he was "always" present in both
>roles.

Why is that? Are you saying:

Harry2 and Harry1 are both at the lake. Harry2 can't save Harry1 
because Harry1 needs Harry 2 to survive?

That is: X and Y are simultaneous. 
X can't save Y because Y needs X? 

That makes no sense. 

It should be: 
X *must save* Y because X needs Y.
And this is where the problems start. 

Am I right in assuming that what you really are having an issue with 
is the idea that Harry *must* save his former self? It's not that you 
disagree with the fact that Harry and Harry-plus-3-hours are standing 
right next to each other, it is just that that now means that Harry 
had no choice in going back in time? 
Are you having an issue with choice: you think that Harry should 
always be allowed to choose? If Harry really did save himself it 
means that it already happened before he decided to do it. You have 
no issues saying that it could have physically happened (you said 
that they were both there), rather that it now renders time-travel 
stupid because every time you go back in time you have no choice in 
your actions any more? 

Well, technically Hermione threw the time-turner chain around Harry's 
neck and tipped over the hourglass on Dumbledore's orders no matter 
which way you look at it. I mean, even if you believe Snape saved 
them all at the lake, Harry didn't choose to go back in time at all: 
Hermione had done it before he even knew what was happening or given 
his consent. It was a choice that was completely out of his hands.  
Harry was thrust back in time- something he didn't count on or ask 
for. *Dumbledore* chose for Harry to go back in time. Harry just 
happened to work with the circumstances- and those included saving 
himself. 

Okay, so the choice issue is something that slipped my mind when I 
was writing my post about Narrative Function. I really should have 
included it in that post, but... Anyway, the choice issue is another 
reason why people discount the `it-happened-once' time-travel theory 
because it seemingly takes away the character's freewill, especially 
significant when given JKR's strong theme of choices. However, as I 
said previously in this post- you can still *force* time to occur 
differently, except the second you force it you cause an impossible 
paradox which ends the world. Causing something to occur (which time 
knows did not) *destroys time.*  So, Harry's actions weren't 
superfluous- there was a heavy weight on his shoulders at all times. 
If you force time to occur differently, the whole world goes down 
with you. Especially heavy when considering that time is a mysterious 
factor.

I should also point out that Harry has been thrust into many things 
without his consent (the least of which is three hours of time-
travel). *James and Lily's* choices meant that Harry was born 
according to the prophecies requirements. *Voldemort's* choice meant 
that Harry was marked his equal. Both of these choices have seriously 
shaped the way the storyline of the series has progressed, but 
neither of them belonged to Harry. Those choices have given Harry 
immense responsibility which he now must choose how to face, but he 
never chose the responsibility in the first place. In exactly the 
same way that *Dumbledore* gave Harry the responsibility of saving 
himself (by sending him back in time) and Harry *chose* to accept it, 
although never actually choosing the responsibility in the first 
place.


~<(Laurasia)>~





From sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 07:26:56 2003
From: sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com (sevenhundredandthirteen)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 07:26:56 -0000
Subject: Why the time turner stinks
In-Reply-To: <001201c37293$3aa114e0$79092244@parkvl01.md.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <bj6pg0+25sm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79775

Deidre asked:
> Or better yet, why hasn't Dumbledore or someone else gone back and 
killed
> pre-powerful Voldemort?

(Unlike Talisman, I'm jumping right in :-D.)

It depends on if you believe a time-turner can change time or not.
If you can not physically change time not matter how many times you 
go back, then that explains why no-one has done away with Voldemort. 
On the other hand, if you *can* change time until your heart's 
content, then we have no series of books :-)

So, there's the idea that even if you go back in time you are still 
trapped by the events that have already occurred. You go back in time 
with the objective to kill Voldemort. Killing him would mean that he 
never got powerful, so you never had any need to stop him, so you 
never would have gone back in time in the first place. But then, if 
you didn't go back in time, then Voldemort would have never been 
killed, so he *would* have lived to become powerful. Which brings us 
back to the start. In other words, it means that because Voldemort 
lives, it's proof that no-one *can* go back in time and kill him- 
that is: you can't change time at all; the past is fixed.

Alternatively, if you *do* believe that time can be changed, then 
Voldemort must be protected by other means- we know that the 
reflected AK didn't kill him. In fact, if Dumbledore's recount of his 
life is accurate, directly after school he started working on 
becoming immortal. That leaves us with the only option of killing him 
whilst he's still a child. If you ask me, killing an innocent child 
(he must have been innocent at one point) is still awful, no matter 
how many people they may or may not grow up to murder.

~<(Laurasia)>~
Who is dreadfully sorry for accidentally posting her last message 
twice. I will apologise profusely and continually because that's how 
bad I feel. :-(




From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Thu Sep  4 08:31:29 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 08:31:29 -0000
Subject: Did Voldemort try to kill Dumbledore? (was Re: green eyes ... killing curse)
In-Reply-To: <bj5qqf+phnq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj6t91+4tsl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79776

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Shirley" <shirley2allie at h...> 
wrote:
> Well, that's an interesting thought that I haven't pondered 
before.  
> Do we know if Voldy has ever tried to kill Dumbledore? 

Yes, in their duel in OoP he tried to use the AK curse on him
several times, but was always thwarted by either missing him or
miscellanous statues and the phoenix sacrificing themselves for him.

Salit




From cressida_tt at hotmail.com  Thu Sep  4 08:40:21 2003
From: cressida_tt at hotmail.com (cressida_tt)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 08:40:21 -0000
Subject: H/H SHIP
In-Reply-To: <001301c37284$621fb300$79092244@parkvl01.md.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <bj6tpl+d0d3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79777

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Deirdre F Woodward" 
<dwoodward at t...> wrote:
> >>>sarah writes a long list of possible ship hints between Harry and
> Hermione
> 
> Deirdre writes:
> That list is long and impressive, but I'm still not convinced 
there's
> anything budding between Harry and Hermione.  I think that more than
> anything, all the instances Sarah mentions are further indications 
of how
> close Harry and Hermione are as friends -- there is no teenage 
ackwardness
> between them as is so common between young people who are 
romantically
> attracted to each other.
> 
> I think that JKR has painted a portrait of wonderful friendship 
between the
> two of them.  I don't believe that either of them thinks of the 
other in a
> romantic fashion *at all*.
> 
> Harry and Hermione love each other, undoubtedly, but as brother and 
sister,
> I think.  And I think that relationship needs to stay that way 
because Harry
> needs Hermione as a friend.  Harry needs Ron as his best buddy, but 
he needs
> Hermione as a friend even more.  She understands what it's like to 
be
> Muggle-raised and to have no idea of the wizarding world.  She 
stands in as
> his source of knowledge -- if he figured everything out on his own, 
it
> wouldn't be nearly as convincing a story.  In fact, he'd be a bit 
of a prat.
> (I really love the British language!  Let's all use prat and git on 
an
> everyday basis!)  Hermione is also the voice of reason and logic for
> Harry -- he turns to her for advice because she's smart and level 
headed and
> has always guided him well, not because of some unrecognized urge 
to make
> out with her.
> 
> And finally, when Katie Couric asked JKR if Harry and Hermione were 
going to
> have a romantic relationship, JKR's face crumpled up and she 
said "Really?
> You think so?  I see Hermione with Ron, not Harry."
> 
> Frankly, I think Harry's likely to hook up with Luna than with 
Hermionie.
> 
> Deirdre
> Eight of Eight

Cressida replies:

Actually I had an amusing moment when I read H/H and thought it meant 
Harry/Hagrid! 

Bravo Deidre, I couldn't agree more with what you have written on 
Harry and Hermione. Hermione is Harry's friend as is Ron although 
each of Harry's friends fulfil subtly different needs for him and 
perhaps this is what people interpret as a romance between Harry and 
Hermione as he treats her in a different way to Ron.

My theory as to Luna is that she is written into the plot as much as 
anything to contrast with Hermione as the two are diametrically 
opposed. Again I see no romance between the two of them but I think 
the real purpose of Luna is to open Harry's eyes to the possibility 
of the absurd and to the benefits of lateral thinking rather than 
Hermione's dogmatic book regurgitation as an answer to all problems.

As for romantic partnership I think that we need to consider the plot 
and it's direction as a whole rather than to keep concentrating and 
tirsomely disecting every nuance. Apart from the fact that as 
personalities Harry and Hermione are kippers and custard rather than 
yin and yang their romance would contribute nothing to the plot. I 
also, if JKR were working up to a romance between Harry and Hermione 
then they wouldn't be spending casual time together in book 5 they 
would be either awkward together and blushing or purposefully not 
being written together so we didn't get the hint.

I note that recently in a poll at a committed H/Hr site that H/Hr
was acknowledged to be the most cliched ship. Whatever your views on 
the matter you have to admit that JKR would try very hard to avoid 
falling in to that most obvious of traps hero gets main female 
character. I sincerely hope that she has something a little more 
surprising up her sleeve than that old chestnut.





From princesspeaette at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 08:41:03 2003
From: princesspeaette at yahoo.com (princesspeaette)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 08:41:03 -0000
Subject: Snape's goatee?  NOOooooooooo!
In-Reply-To: <bj584i+jk1p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj6tqv+bkto@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79778

:
> A few months ago, when I first joined this group, my attention was 
> drawn to a picture of Professor Snape, drawn by J.K. Rowling, which 
> is in the photos section of HP for Grownups.  In it, he has a 
> goatee.  This startled me, as never in my wildest dreams had I ever 
> pictured a bearded Snape.  He's never described as having one in 
the 
> books, right?
> Erin



Erin, there was a bit of discussion about a month ago on this same 
topic (most of us agree with you!) starting with Allyson's post 
#77485, if you want to take a look. The original title thread was Re: 
UK vs US Editions I believe.

The general concensus (as close as we'll ever come to one here, 
anyway ;-) was Crime a Humanity (or at least Illustration)


~Margaret, 

off to look for good deeds of Professor Snape (I saw that! Who said 
the Snape apologists need their own version of DENIAL? Do not! He IS 
good!)




From pen at pensnest.co.uk  Thu Sep  4 09:19:27 2003
From: pen at pensnest.co.uk (Pen Robinson)
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 10:19:27 +0100
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj5o3q+lkqi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <E19F8245-DEB8-11D7-A1C6-0030654DED6A@pensnest.co.uk>

No: HPFGUIDX 79779


On Wednesday, Sep 3, 2003, at 22:57 Europe/London, msbeadsley wrote:
>
> No excuse needed.  Just human nature.  (OT note:  statistics show
> that a large percentage of guests peruse hosts' medicine cabinets out
> of curiosity; kids are even snoopier because they are still trying to
> discover "the truth" behind how people in their world work.)
> Admittedly bad manners on Harry's part, but not even approaching the
> low level of same he has been conditioned to expect from "Professor"
> Snape.

Just to nitpick a bit, I'd say that equating between snooping in the 
Pensieve and nosing through someone's medicine cabinet is a bit 
generous.

What Harry did equates more nearly with a guest reading his host's 
personal journal/diary.  If a guest *did* do so, would the guest (or 
anyone?) think it unreasonable for the host to be mightily peeved?  
Particularly if the diary was a truly *personal* document detailing the 
writer's feelings.  I don't think it matters if the diary was left on a 
desk in the living room while the host went to answer the door, or 
whatever - the guest has *no right* to open it.

In the circumstances - a violation even worse than reading someone's 
diary - Snape's emotional reaction is not surprising.  Certainly as a 
responsible adult he *should* have better self-control, but Harry 
Potter has just done something well-nigh unforgiveable.  I can't bring 
myself to classify it as mere 'bad manners'.

Pen




From scootingalong at bellsouth.net  Thu Sep  4 10:22:56 2003
From: scootingalong at bellsouth.net (scooting2win)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 10:22:56 -0000
Subject: Tracking Magic  (was:Special Qualities of Auror Magic?)
In-Reply-To: <bj682h+jq6a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj73q0+n7g5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79780

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Melody" <Malady579 at h...> 
wrote:
> Tom wrote:
> > wouldn't that be handy if you could just put a special 
> > homing device on Voldemort's magic? Too handy.
> 
> At least that might help to prove he is actually using it.  You 
know,
> I wonder now how they know an unforgivable is done.  Is it by 
witness
> only?  We have cases now of unforgivables performed, and those 
witches
> and wizards are not tracked down.  It seems, to me, that spells 
cannot
> be tracked that well, and yet the times Harry has received notices,
> the MoM knows precisely what spell was cast.  This baffles me.  The
> only thing I could come up with is that "the nongraduated" or 
rather
> "incompletely educated" are watched somehow.
> 
> 
> Tom wrote:
> > I think your analysis makes quite a bit of sense, especially 
when I 
> > sat down and really thought about it. After all, we're talking 
about 
> > Harry's offenses under the Decree for the Restriction 
of "Underage" 
> > Sorcery, right?
> > 
> > So, if that's the case, then it would seem logical that the 
Ministry 
> > would be keeping track of all students' homes, and the locations 
of 
> > known "non-graduates."
> 
> Why thank you.  I had listed Hagrid as one of those that are 
tracked,
> but I have to take that back.  I was lying in bed last night and it
> hit me.  He did magic in the first book when he got Harry from the
> Hut-on-the-Rock.  (Which by the way, after rereading OoP, I think
> Hagrid got there by a thestral.  ::grin:: )  So, if the MoM has 
little
> red sensors buttons on a big screen of all the "nongraduated" then
> seems to me Hagrid little bulb would light up.  But if it is 
actually
> "underage" then I guess not.  But it seems it is not tracked using 
the
> individual but by the area.
> 
> I really do not know.  
> 
> In OoP:
> We have Harry getting in trouble away from his house but near the
> dementors that Umbridge sent.  He is underage and it was powerful,
> impressive magic.  Dumbledore did not know.
> 
> Also in that scene, Harry called out "lumos" to his wand when it 
was
> inches from his hand and it lit up (Ch 1, pg 17).  Technically that
> too was a breech to the decree, but it was not also listed.  It was
> done right before the patronus.
> 
> We then have the OoP barging in a couple days later.  We have only
> aurors recorded doing basic magic, and there was not situation.  
Well,
> disillusionment probably is not so basic.  We also know that the 
MoM
> does not know they are there, but Dumbledore does.
> 
> Oh I found another one--Harry gave Vernon an "electric shock" when
> Vernon was choking him when they found him in the flowerbed (Ch 1, 
pg
> 5).  Harry did this without a wand.  It was not reported like 
blowing
> up his aunt was.
> 
> In GoF:
> We have Arthur repairing the room with magic.  Seemed nothing was
> said.  The MoM knew he had hooked up the Dursley's fireplace to the
> floo network, and probably knew they was going to get Potter around
> the time they did.  Dumbledore definitely did.
> 
> In PoA:
> In the third book, Harry blows up his aunt, well she is not *his* 
aunt
> but I am babbling, but that was done *without* a wand.  The MoM 
knew
> and sent help...but then again they could have been watching to 
see if
> Black was near the house.  Dumbledore could not have known about 
the
> Aunt blow up but he did about Black.
> 
> In CoS:
> We then have Dobby levitating a dessert then apparating from the
> house.  The levitating registers.  But we also have Dobby wanting
> Harry to be "safe" from the bad things that were going to happen at
> school, so there is a possibility Dobby kind of made it where they
> found out.  Dumbledore could not have known Dobby was going to 
Privet
> Drive.
> 
> Frankly I find it an interesting pattern.  Seems when they are 
looking
> for odd activity, they can tune in to the place and detect it.  I 
am
> beginning to really think in CoS, Dobby tried to frame Harry.  In 
PoA,
> they were watching for Sirius' magic, so they watched period for
> anything, and especially non-wand magic since Sirius did not have a
> wand.  GoF, they did not care.  In OoP, Umbridge wanted to frame
> Harry.  She got what she wanted and that was it.  She ignored the
> "wandless" magic and the simple "lumos".
> 
> So my question is still...how can they keep track of that and not
> others?  Is it simply because he is underage, or is it watching the
> area?  Or is it as Tom suggested, and Dumbledore has a way of 
covering
> his OoP's tracks?  Is it like a surveillance camera?  
> 
> Whatever the method, when Harry's trial began, it was never refuted
> how the MoM tracked down that Harry did the patronus.  Seems to be
> common knowledge how they do it and that it is reliable.  
> 
> 
> Melody

IMO: you both have very good points, and there is something else 
that is cropping up that was not mentioned here, Harry did the lumos 
spell in PoA as well, but that never came up then either, and he 
used his wand that time. Harry and I don't say this lightly, is much 
more powerful then Voldemort thinks he is. I don't think that 
Voldemort can do any kind of "wandless" magic, where Harry can sort 
of think it and make it happen. I know that this has been brought 
into loads of FanFiction but just from the books, Harry still seems 
to be able to perform magic with or without his wand. The MoM would 
indeed be tracking underage wizards but it makes me wonder how and I 
think it has something to do with "magic" tracking like when Harry 
said in GoF that Rita had bugged Hogwarts. Maybe to some extent the 
MoM has underaged wizards houses bugged, which would make sense. and 
how does the MoM know about Muggle born witches, well maybe not the 
MoM but most certainly Dumbledore, maybe the Sorting Hat has more 
than just songs to do, maybe they use it to give a list of children 
that are magical? you never know do we really? Lori




From deemarie1a at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 10:24:11 2003
From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 10:24:11 -0000
Subject: Where is Ludo?
Message-ID: <bj73sb+n462@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79781

I have tried to use the search, but it doesn't seem to work properly 
for me, so if this question has been discussed, please forgive me.

I was wondering...

In GoF, LV says about 3 missing Death Eaters that one has fled.  Has 
anyone noticed that aside from Karkarof going missing, Ludo has also 
disappeared.  Rita Skeeter herself stated she knew things about 
Ludo.  Wonder if he will turn out to be a very powerful Death Eater?

Given his popularity from Quidditch and the fact that ordinary 
wizards believe he's seen one bludger too many, does anyone think 
that he is much more clever than he appears?  Perhaps he played on 
that and is a much better actor than Karkarof.  

I did distrust Ludo the moment he was introduced and have a sneeking 
suspicion that he will play a greater role in the future.  Even if 
Snape is a spy and could find out this information, Karkarof did say 
that the only person who knew all the identities of the DE was LV.  
And as devious as LV is, that is one card that LV is keeping up his 
sleeve.

Wonder what you all think...
D




From scootingalong at bellsouth.net  Thu Sep  4 10:45:58 2003
From: scootingalong at bellsouth.net (scooting2win)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 10:45:58 -0000
Subject: Umbridge's Intent (was Re: Special Qualities of Auror Magic?)
In-Reply-To: <bj5qip+e1a6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj7556+2fb4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79782

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "wildfire_517" 
<wildfire_517 at y...> wrote:
> Fred:
> > Was that her motivation? Did she know that he could perform the 
> Patronus 
> > charm? I doubt it. I think she wanted to have Harry's soul 
sucked 
> out of 
> > his body and be done with it. I base this on her nasty character 
> and the 
> > looks exchange exchanged between Umbridge and Harry when he 
> performed the 
> > Patronus charm during the OWLs.
> 
> Me:
> 
>   If I remember correctly, she explains herself by saying 
something 
> to the effect of, "They wouldn't do anything about you, so I took 
the 
> situation into my own hands." (I'm paraphrasing rather badly with 
> that, but you get the idea.)  I took this to mean that she was 
> attempting to remove Harry from the picture, i.e. have his soul 
> sucked out by the dementors.  When that failed due to the 
Patronus, 
> she had another chance to, at the very least, remove him from 
> Hogwarts, stopping him from spreading his "nonsense" about the 
return 
> of LV.
> 
>   Wyld

AND: she did seem to be trying to get Harry killed by doing that, 
and remember what was said about people being under imperius, if 
they already have the intention and then you curse them to make them 
do just what they were going to do it becomes (don't remember how 
they put it) more of a certainity that you will do it. Maybe, and 
it's a big maybe, but Lucuis has been to The Minister's office and 
Umbridge would have been there, so who's to say that all this about 
Harry he used Imperius on Umbridge and it just made her want to do 
it even more, like a passion rather than a passive idea. Just a 
thought on it anyway, Lori




From scootingalong at bellsouth.net  Thu Sep  4 10:58:37 2003
From: scootingalong at bellsouth.net (scooting2win)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 10:58:37 -0000
Subject: Why the time turner stinks
In-Reply-To: <001201c37293$3aa114e0$79092244@parkvl01.md.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <bj75st+dd78@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79783

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Deirdre F Woodward" 
<dwoodward at t...> wrote:
> Here's why the time turner stinks.
> 
> Presuming there isn't only one time turner (and if there is, why 
does
> McGonnegel have it?) then why doesn't Lord Voldemort have one?
> 
> Or better yet, why hasn't Dumbledore or someone else gone back and 
killed
> pre-powerful Voldemort?
> 
> I know the whole "time turner is powerful magic and you mustn't 
misuse it"
> but that's hooey -- McGonnegel gave it to Hermione to affect 
future events
> (Hermione's education), and Dumbledore allowed Harry to use it to 
change
> just happened events (Harry's death by kissing -- now there's a 
death!). So
> if it's ok to let Harry save himself from the dementor, surely it 
would be
> ok to turn back time when Voldy starts making his
> killing-you-all-I-am-evil-leader moves?
> 
> The more I think about the time-turner, the more the time turner 
stinks.
> 
> Deirdre
> Eight of Eight

No, that's not right, there are lots of time turners, but, you can't 
change things that have happened, meaning, when Harry and Hermoine 
saved Buckbeak, and Hagrid howled, Harry, Hermoine, and Ron were 
also standing in the front of Hagrid's, they heard the axe hit 
something, and then Hagrid's Howl, but they did not actually see 
Buckbeak escape or killed so they only thought that Buckbeak was 
killed. Harry and Hermoine were told by Dumbledore that they could 
save two lives. Sirius' and Buckbeak's because Dumbledore already 
knew that they had indeed saved Buckbeak's life. So I think if 
something has already happened you can not change "a future" event 
to take place another way because other people saw or witnessed that 
event happening the first time, and I am pretty sure that's all that 
counts. Harry saving himself and Hermoine, that was completely 
different, Dumbledore, 1st did not know about that, and 2nd Harry 
thought it was his father who saved them, not himself, he figured 
out that he could do it because he had seen himself do it, that was 
almost like something that seems almost weird. like Harry was going 
in a circle, Harry knows he can do it and he does.  The time turner 
is very dangerous, i don't think it should be used to change past 
events or future events and Hermoine did not use it to change her 
future, she would have taken those classes anyway, she just added 
some to her schedule with the use of the time-turner. Lori




From scootingalong at bellsouth.net  Thu Sep  4 11:16:25 2003
From: scootingalong at bellsouth.net (scooting2win)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 11:16:25 -0000
Subject: Where is Ludo?
In-Reply-To: <bj73sb+n462@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj76u9+bs5p@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79784

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Donna" <deemarie1a at y...> 
wrote:
> I have tried to use the search, but it doesn't seem to work 
properly 
> for me, so if this question has been discussed, please forgive me.
> 
> I was wondering...
> 
> In GoF, LV says about 3 missing Death Eaters that one has fled.  
Has 
> anyone noticed that aside from Karkarof going missing, Ludo has 
also 
> disappeared.  Rita Skeeter herself stated she knew things about 
> Ludo.  Wonder if he will turn out to be a very powerful Death 
Eater?
> 
> Given his popularity from Quidditch and the fact that ordinary 
> wizards believe he's seen one bludger too many, does anyone think 
> that he is much more clever than he appears?  Perhaps he played on 
> that and is a much better actor than Karkarof.  
> 
> I did distrust Ludo the moment he was introduced and have a 
sneeking 
> suspicion that he will play a greater role in the future.  Even if 
> Snape is a spy and could find out this information, Karkarof did 
say 
> that the only person who knew all the identities of the DE was 
LV.  
> And as devious as LV is, that is one card that LV is keeping up 
his 
> sleeve.
> 
> Wonder what you all think...
> D

I agree with you, since Voldemort said that one fled, and the MoM 
doesn't seem to have him in their employ anymore it just seems to 
fit that Bagman is a death Eater, and maybe he really did like Harry 
because it brought Voldemort down once, but when he returned maybe 
Ludo is running from more than just the Goblins, of course there is 
something else. and we dont' know for sure, Karkroff ran too, so who 
fled and who was killed. Lori




From xmezumiiru at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 11:29:59 2003
From: xmezumiiru at yahoo.com (An'nai Jiriki)
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 04:29:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: What Destroyed Godric's Hollow?
In-Reply-To: <bj65a6+4d3g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030904112959.17333.qmail@web12204.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79785


--- Jim Ferer <jferer at yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ghinghapuss"
> <rredordead at a...>
> wrote:
> > I've always wondered what happened to Harry's
> > parents' house in Godric Hollow. Apparetnly, it
> was completely
> > destroyed. 

JimFerer:
> 
> If there was another DE in the house, why didn't he
> help his master,
> or kill Harry himself? It doesn't make sense. 
> 


Another take on this would be (assuming) Snape was the
other DE, he sees Voldie cast the killing curse, and
in Voldie's moment of weakness, he casts some type of
curse himself, say a binding. He would then be praised
as a hero for capturing Voldie.

He would not have known, in that instant, that Harry
was not killed. The rebounded curse reacts bad with
the binding and through the release of energy by
Voldie, the house blows. It would have to be in that
instant that Snape would realize that he had to get
out. Naturally, Harry as a baby would have cried and
Snape grabbed the child and ran.

Chris (I like ideas that stretch reality)



=====
"You irritate me. Kill me now." ~Javert, Les Miserables

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 03:54:53 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 03:54:53 -0000
Subject: Why the time turner stinks
In-Reply-To: <001201c37293$3aa114e0$79092244@parkvl01.md.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <bj6d2d+gbrt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79786

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Deirdre F Woodward" 
<dwoodward at t...> wrote:

> Here's why the time turner stinks.
> Presuming there isn't only one time turner (and if there is, why 
> does McGonnegel have it?) 

I was under the impression (as of PoA) that McGonagall *got* it only 
to pass on to Hermione for her use with her studies and (as of OoP I 
thought) that it must have come from the MoM, DoM.

> then why doesn't Lord Voldemort have one?
> Or better yet, why hasn't Dumbledore or someone else gone back and 
> killed pre-powerful Voldemort?

How and where would Voldemort get one?  He was a little under the 
weather, and then, once he had his body back, he couldn't even manage 
to get the *prophesy* out of the MoM, and *it* (quite literally) had 
his name on it.  And regarding the pre-emptive strike on Voldemort:  
if you go back and kill the arch villain before he *becomes* the arch 
villain, haven't you murdered an innocent man?  At that point, he 
hasn't yet *made* the choices which will later warrant executing him.

I wonder if maybe someone did try to kill Tom Riddle before he became 
Voldmort, and that's part of how the WW is in the mess it's in now.  
And I wonder if the "unspeakables" spend part of their time cleaning 
up temporal (time-mucking) messes.

> I know the whole "time turner is powerful magic and you mustn't 
> misuse it" but that's hooey -- McGonnegel gave it to Hermione to 
> affect future events (Hermione's education), and Dumbledore allowed 
> Harry to use it to change just happened events (Harry's death by 
> kissing -- now there's a death!). 

I doubt that the MoM would have allowed Hermione to possess one if 
Voldemort had already been re-embodied.  The MoM was completely 
wrapped up in the search for Sirius Black; as a matter of fact, one 
of the arguments McGonagall might subtly have used to get it could 
have been, "What if he (Black) gets Harry?  At least if Miss Granger 
had the time turner she/we could turn back time and save Harry."

> So if it's ok to let Harry save himself from the dementor, surely 
it would be ok to turn back time when Voldy starts making his killing-
you-all-I-am-evil-leader moves? <snip>

When Harry saved himself (and Sirius and Hermione) from the 
dementors, it was a case of "easier to get forgiveness than 
permission," in other words, do what seems to need doing now and 
explain later, rather than trying to get authorization ahead of 
time.  And the differences in Dumbledore's (he who primed Harry and 
Hermione to save Sirius and Buckbeak) philosophies and the Ministry's 
(which was eager to execute both "criminals") are legion and legend; 
whether or not "it's okay" depends on whom you ask:  Dumbledore or 
the Ministry.

> The more I think about the time-turner, the more the time turner 
stinks.

Actually, in general I agree with you; too much potential for _deus 
ex machina_ (which I will explain if anyone asks).  But I think 
Rowling has handled it (time travel) as well or better (so far) than 
a lot of long-time writers in the SF/Fantasy field (later Heinlein 
leaps to mind).  So far, I don't have a problem with how she's used 
it.





From wildfire_517 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 04:06:50 2003
From: wildfire_517 at yahoo.com (wildfire_517)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 04:06:50 -0000
Subject: Why the time turner stinks
In-Reply-To: <001201c37293$3aa114e0$79092244@parkvl01.md.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <bj6doq+enls@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79787

>Deirdre: 
> Presuming there isn't only one time turner 

Wyld:
  
  There's definitely more than one time turner.  There's a whole 
shelf of them in the MoM, as we see in OotP.
 
>Deirdre:
> Or better yet, why hasn't Dumbledore or someone else gone back and 
killed
> pre-powerful Voldemort?
(snips)
>So
> if it's ok to let Harry save himself from the dementor, surely it 
would be
> ok to turn back time when Voldy starts making his
> killing-you-all-I-am-evil-leader moves?

Wyld:

  Doing that would severely change history and, most likely, would 
violate the major precept of Time Turner use: Thou must not be seen.  
Harry was able to save himself because in "the past," when he saw 
himself, he thought he was seeing his father.  Therefore, he was 
never technically seen by anyone in "the past."  However, if someone 
went back in time to destroy LV, it's almost certain they would, at 
the very least, be seen...not to mention the huge change that would 
have on the history of the Wizarding World (and the Muggle World, for 
that matter!)  It's like the Ray Bradbury story about going back in 
time to hunt dinosaurs.  One tiny, insignificant change drastically 
changed the entire world.  Imagine what removing one of the most 
important figures in the world would do!

>Deirdre:
> The more I think about the time-turner, the more the time turner 
stinks.

Me again:

  Well, yes.  It almost seems like a plot point that wasn't thought 
all the way through when it was introduced.  It served its purpose 
and let us all hope that we never see it again.

  Wyld





From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 07:21:13 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 07:21:13 -0000
Subject: H/H SHIP
In-Reply-To: <001301c37284$621fb300$79092244@parkvl01.md.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <bj6p59+q7h8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79788

> Deirdre writes:
> That list is long and impressive, but I'm still not convinced 
> there's anything budding between Harry and Hermione.  I think that more 
> than anything, all the instances Sarah mentions are further indications 
> of how close Harry and Hermione are as friends -- there is no teenage 
> ackwardness between them as is so common between young people who are 
> romantically attracted to each other.

Sarah: But not every teen romance (or adult ones for that matter) 
have any ackwardness involved.  Especially when two friends become 
romantically involved.  (All my relationships began as friendships; 
never had the ackwardness.  Ackwardness comes when you don't know 
the person you're interested in very well.)  And Harry has noticed 
Hermione; checked her out pretty thouroughly at the Yule Ball.

> Deirdre writes:
> Harry and Hermione love each other, undoubtedly, but as brother 
> and sister, I think.  
 
Sarah: Brother and sister?  They don't argue nearly enough to be 
siblings, especially teenage ones.  No real bickering, no teasing, 
no over-protectiveness over each other's love lives.  I can accept a 
just-very-good-friends (for now) relationship between the two, but 
not a sibling relationship.

> Deirdre writes:
And I think that relationship needs to stay that way because Harry
> needs Hermione as a friend.  Harry needs Ron as his best buddy, 
> but he needs Hermione as a friend even more.  She understands what it's like 
> to be Muggle-raised and to have no idea of the wizarding world.  She 
> stands in as his source of knowledge -- if he figured everything out on his 
> own, it wouldn't be nearly as convincing a story.  In fact, he'd be a bit 
> of a prat. (I really love the British language!  Let's all use prat and git 
> on an everyday basis!)  Hermione is also the voice of reason and logic 
> for Harry -- he turns to her for advice because she's smart and level 
> headed and has always guided him well, not because of some unrecognized urge 
> to make out with her.

Sarah: Actually, that's why I think the two are perfect for each 
other.  They have the same background, more or less.  They 
complement each other.  He's instinctive; she's logical.  He is 
intuitive, she thinks things through.   Harry's instinct in OoP, 
except for thinking that Sirius was in danger, were spot on in OoP.  
Wary of Kreacher and wondering where Kreacher was during Christmas.  
Thinking that he could be possessed by Voldemort until Ginny falsely 
said if he remembered anything, he wasn't possessed.  (When Harry is 
possessed at the Ministry, Harry remembers everything; no black 
out.)  When Harry's instinct fails, Hermione's reasoning can be 
relied on.  The make a very good team;  a partnership.  (If there 
are any other Agatha Christie fans on the list, Harry and Hermione 
remind me of Tommy and Tuppence.)

> Deirdre writes:
> 
>And finally, when Katie Couric asked JKR if Harry and Hermione were 
> going to have a romantic relationship, JKR's face crumpled up and she 
> said "Really? You think so?  I see Hermione with Ron, not Harry."
>

Um, she didn't say "I see Hermione with Ron, not Harry."  She did 
say something like "do you think they're suited?" and then "Hermione 
and Ron, that's where the tension is."  And I truly didn't think 
that JKR's face crumpled.  I thougt it was more a look of shock at 
the tone of Katie Couric's voice: JKR just said that she would give 
the characters hormones and such, and Katie Couric said something 
(Very confidently and stated as a fact, not a question) like "Like 
Harry and Hermione snogging."  Plus JKR doesn't exactly give the 
most forthcoming answers.  Someone asked her if Mrs. Figg was the 
same Arabella Figg that Dumbledore talked about at the end of GoF.  
People assumed that she was a witch.  And she turns out to be a 
squib!  A big fan will die, etc, etc.  JKR doesn't like telling us 
what will happen in books; she throws out little tibits now and 
again to keep up fascinated, and then lets us theorize like mad!  
 
> Frankly, I think Harry's likely to hook up with Luna than with 
Hermionie.

Eh, everyone's got the person they want Harry to end up with.  I 
like Luna with Ron or Neville, personally.  (Luna and Ron because of 
the comic relief: Ron would tease her mercilessly.  And there's so 
much to tease over!  Neville and Luna because they could be hunting 
for snorkrags or whatever together, Neville stumbling around like 
his clutsy self, Luna being Luna.)  Me, I'm a sap for a deep 
friendship like Harry and Hermione's turning into romantic love.  
(Ala Jane Austen, Agatha Christie's Tommy/Tuppence and one other 
pair I can't remember, Anne of Green Gables series, etc. etc.  Not 
to mention my fiance and I started out as very good friends.)
Sarah






From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 07:39:38 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 07:39:38 -0000
Subject: Hermione SHIP question (love triangle?)
In-Reply-To: <bj5ob8+49ou@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj6q7q+a0hk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79789

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Robert Jones" 
<jones.r.h.j at w...> wrote:
> Jim Ferrer and "Sarah" are making a stronger case than I thought 
> there was for Harry and Hermione at least beginning to get closer 
> as more than just friends.  Helen Granberry raises the issue of 
> whether a love triangle will develop between Harry, Hermione, and Ron.  I 
> don't care whom Harry ends up with (if anyone), but a love 
> triangle is something I hope won't develop unless it somehow plays into the 
> main story line of HP versus LV (e.g., the boys fight and Ron 
> isn't there for the final showdown).  If JKR makes some cheesy romance 
> novel out of their social lives, I'll be disappointed.    
>   
> 
> Boris the Bewildered

Sarah:
Definitely don't want a triangle, either!  But I don't think there 
will be; JKR's not making a romance novel.  Plus, Ron seems to 
suspect about twice in OoP that there might be something between the 
two.  Ron's reaction to Hermione saying Harry's not a bad kisser: he 
jumps and asks how she knows. When they miss the big quidditch 
match, he's a little suspicious as to where they went and why before 
they told him about Grawp.  I don't think Ron would be completely 
shocked if the two hooked up; he'd be hurt, but not devastated.  
He's jealous over Krum/Hermione, and obviously thinks Hermione likes 
Krum.  He asks Harry what Hermione sees in Krum after the post-
Harry/Cho kiss scene.  He's dealing with Hermione liking someone 
else.  He's maturing more, to the point that he didn't seem jealous 
of Harry at all in OoP.  (Not that there was much to be jealous over 
in OoP, but still.)  Sure, Ron's got a crush on Hermione, but people 
get over crushes and rejections all the time.  

And one of the group has to get rejected by someone romantically!  
Cho's rejection of Harry was temporary, and she went after him in 
OoP.  Hermione had Krum going after her.  Ginny never pursued Harry 
even though she liked him, so no rejection there.  And she's the one 
that dumped the guy in OoP.  When is one of them going to be given a 
resounding "I don't think so" by someone they're interested in?  Not 
a "no, for now"?  So far we've only seen one rejection, Cho's 
temporary rejection of Cho, and that's it.  I'm thinking Ron getting 
rejected by someone (or even Harry, but I think Ron's reaction would 
be more comical).  A slap across the face when one of the guys tries 
to kiss a girl.  (Sorry, but a teen boy throwing off a girl about to 
kiss him is just too unrealistic.  Unless she was Eloise Midgen or 
Milistrode Bulstrode.)  Some nicely mean and low rejection to keep 
with JKR's realistic portrayal of teens.  Or even just a nice, firm, 
and permanent rejection would be nice.  

Sarah





From Ridicully at gmx.net  Thu Sep  4 08:11:36 2003
From: Ridicully at gmx.net (Ridicully)
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 10:11:36 +0200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape and Harry 
References: <bj5s4b+dgb4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <04ba01c372bc$29d83840$0702a8c0@sportimecq5000>

No: HPFGUIDX 79790

Laura:
> It's not the time delay that I wanted to bring up, it's the behavior.
>
> Except for the Ginny reaction, they just 
> seem like typical mean-spirited jabs.  
> 

Ridicully (that's me :)
But that's the whole point -- Snape is a nasty, mean-spirited
man. He enjoys to verbally torture Harry and his friends, 
*while he is helping them*.
Doing good things without being a nice person is what makes
Snape an interesting character.

Laura
> And Snape let himself get way out of control.  If a teacher in the RW 
> behaved toward a student the way Snape behaves toward Harry in that 
> pensieve 2 scene, he'd be fired in a red-hot minute. 

Ridicully again:
I don't think so, but my understanding of how teachers are supposed to 
behave in Britain is more than vague.
I wouldn't fire him if it was my decision to make -- Harry was completely
out of line in entering the pensieve. 
Of course Snape could have behaved more maturely but he could also 
have done a lot worse.

Smile
Ridi - ending a professional lurking career with this post- cully




From jamess at climax.co.uk  Thu Sep  4 09:58:21 2003
From: jamess at climax.co.uk (James Sharman)
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 10:58:21 +0100 
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why the time turner stinks
Message-ID: <495A161B83F7544AA943600A98833B53013E1094@mimas.fareham.climax.co.uk>

No: HPFGUIDX 79791

Deirdre:
Or better yet, why hasn't Dumbledore or someone else gone back and killed
pre-powerful Voldemort? 

James:
The mechanic they work proberbly impose limitations on their use that have
not been mentioned. A couple of ideas I've had are:

a)We know time in the wizarding world can be stored (remember the bell jar
the DE fell into). The turners may contain a small store of time that
'fuels' the time travel. The turners only have a finite store and the source
may be limited (I can imagine a huge machine in the ministry that churns out
a few minutes a day, slowly stockpileing time that is rationed out where
needed).

b)The time turners may not be able to transport back in time past their own
creation. Modern physics can (on paper at least, it's all still theory) use
worm holes to travel back in time, but not past the creation point of the
worm hole, something similer may be at work with the turners. It's possible
that the time turners are only a recent invention and none exist that could
be used to go back that far.

J,




From wsherratt3338 at rogers.com  Thu Sep  4 12:05:11 2003
From: wsherratt3338 at rogers.com (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 12:05:11 -0000
Subject: Birth, Doubt, Fear, Pride, Disillusionment
In-Reply-To: <bj6ctk+en9l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj79pn+n8ij@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79792

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ellejir" <eberte at v...> wrote:
> Fortunately, the basic sweetness that is the core of Harry's 
nature 
> is still intact, despite all the surface anger in OoP.  When he 
> offers to help Luna find her lost belongings during the end of 
term 
> feast, he is not "playing the hero" at this point--he is just 
> offering to help a (really geeky) friend.  That is the Harry that 
I 
> love--brave, loyal and kind.  I think that he will learn to deal 
with 
> his ego in time.
> 
>
I agree - I think that moment was Harry's best hour in the whole 
book. He really was nice and likeable then, because he was able to 
forget himself and really see another person.  And I liked the way 
he took her refusal of help - it's quite a new thing for Harry 
Potter to hear that he's not needed, and he seemed puzzled but 
peaceful.  Almost as if it were a relief not to always have the 
starring role in every drama.  I hope the next book starts at this 
point and goes on.  I think we've learned all we can from 
Harry's "angry" stage.

Wanda





From maneelyfh at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 13:03:10 2003
From: maneelyfh at yahoo.com (maneelyfh)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 13:03:10 -0000
Subject: Where is Ludo?
In-Reply-To: <bj73sb+n462@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj7d6e+fnjc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79793

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Donna" <deemarie1a at y...> wrote:
> I have tried to use the search, but it doesn't seem to work 
properly 
> for me, so if this question has been discussed, please forgive me.
> 
<snip> In GoF, LV says about 3 missing Death Eaters that one has 
fled.  Has 
> anyone noticed that aside from Karkarof going missing, Ludo has 
also 
> disappeared.  Rita Skeeter herself stated she knew things about 
> Ludo.  Wonder if he will turn out to be a very powerful Death Eater?
> 
> Given his popularity from Quidditch and the fact that ordinary 
> wizards believe he's seen one bludger too many, does anyone think 
> that he is much more clever than he appears?  Perhaps he played on 
> that and is a much better actor than Karkarof.  
> 
<snip.  Even if 
> Snape is a spy and could find out this information, Karkarof did 
say 
> that the only person who knew all the identities of the DE was LV.  
> And as devious as LV is, that is one card that LV is keeping up his 
> sleeve.
> 
> Wonder what you all think...

I have posted this theory before about Ludo....remember in GOF that 
he was always dressed in his Wibourne Wasp uniform...... 2 instances 
where a WASP was flying around, 1 in GOF when Harry is praticing 
stunning spells and he stuns a wasp.  Then in OOP, when the students 
are taking OWLS, there is a WASP buzzing around a window.....
IMO Ludo is evil. In the first instance he was checking on Harry's 
prgoress as he had a bet on him to win the Triwizards Tourney. Now in 
the 2nd instance of the wasp, I think Ludo is checking on Harry to 
report back to LV. Harry is his most vulnerable when very tired and 
under stress.  After Harry noticed the wasp he fell asleep and saw 
Sirius being tortured through LV's mind control.  Also I think Windky 
called Ludo a bad wizard as well.
Fran
> D




From Meliss9900 at aol.com  Thu Sep  4 13:28:58 2003
From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 09:28:58 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Neville's broken nose
Message-ID: <b9.35da873c.2c88981a@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79794

In a message dated 9/3/2003 2:55:05 PM Central Standard Time, 
greatelderone at yahoo.com writes:

> :rolleyes: How utterly original. You are forgetting that Dumbledore 
> also happens to have a brother which Neville lacks and has red hair. 
> It's far more plausible for Albus and Alberforth to be Hermione and 
> Ron's kids from the future which would explain Dumbledore's skill in 
> transfiguration and his red hair.


Actually its far more likely that Albus Dumbledore is just who he says he is: 
 Albus Dumbledore.  And his only connection to them is that he's their 
headmaster.  

However while we are on this tangent it seems to me that IFsome sort of time 
travel is involved then Albus is more Arthur-like in temperment and interests, 
IMO.  


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From melclaros at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 13:41:50 2003
From: melclaros at yahoo.com (melclaros)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 13:41:50 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj5o3q+lkqi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj7feu+c2oa@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79795

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> 
> The *words* can be demanded (and that will result in tremendous 
> success, I'm sure), but the respect the words imply must be 
*earned*; 
> something Snape seems oblivious to or bent on ignoring.

me:
Mea Culpa. Silly me insisting that my own children address their own 
teachers by their titles starting on the very 1st day of school. 
Silly me for Never, ever (are you listening, Sirius?) using the name 
I used for my son's 2nd grade teacher in private or among other 
parents of children in that witch's class to pass my lips in a 
child's presence.
Silly, silly me. Those kindergarten teachers damned well should have 
EARNED the right to be called MISS Espey and Miss (damn i can't even 
remember her name!) Stupid of me to insist that he addrewss the 2nd 
grade nazi as MRS (name witheld--only because if i type it i'll start 
screaming).
But it doesn't surprise me, I took flack for years for being the 
only "Mommy" in the playgroup who insisted her children address EVERY 
adult with a courtesy title until instructed otherwise by THAT adult.



>> 
> And how do you expect the student to remember that this "is STILL a 
> student/teacher relationship" when the teacher side of that pair 
has 
> consistently stepped outside of appropriate behavior *for that 
> relationship*?  

me:
This hardly news for Harry. He'd have had far more trouble keeping 
his teacher/student priority wits about him had Snape suddenly gone 
all warm and fuzzy on him. :::shudders in disgust:::




Snape has behaved like a schoolyard bully, drawing 
> lines in the sand and daring Harry to step over.  (I suppose now 
> you'll say he learned that from James.  No matter; it isn't JAMES 
> he's retaliating against.)

me:
Nope, Snape's a b*st*rd all on his own. I've never claimed otherwise 
despite what I've said to defend him.



> 
> Snape (dam*ed if *I'll* call him by any title) set the tone for 
> what's followed when Harry WAS eleven.
> 

me:
Which is why it never ceases to amaze me why people are always so 
surprised when Snape lives up to his own standards. I could see it if 
he'd suddenly turned bi-polar, but this started on Day One (as 
listees continuously point out to me and others. We KNOW!) What we 
don't know is why, after FIVE years of this Harry (and others) are 
still surprised.



> 
> My understatement alarm (now added to my formerly shrieking dark 
> detectors ^-^) is blaring now.

ke:
Dark alarms, sneakoscopes, I'm sure they're all howling. 



>> 
> The historic wrongs Snape did Harry have not been resolved.  To me, 
> Snape will be a baby-bashing thug until they are.
> 

me: 
"He'd never forgive Snape." I don't have the book here, but you know 
to what I'm referring. Harry has a LOT of reasons to hate Snape. But 
he has very, very few (I'm being generous) to mistrust him. Snape did 
not in any way, shape or form, kill Sirius. If Harry had used his 
head for one minute and gone to Snape OR ingored Snape and used the 
tool Sirius HIMSELF provided him, there's a good chance SB would 
still be sulking around 12 Grimmaud. 
Yup, there are issues here, that is for damned sure. But there's a 
LOT of work to be done on Both Sides.



> 
> No excuse needed.  Just human nature.  


No, no NO! You know what? If my son (13) had come home whining that a 
teacher had tossed him (physically) out of his office, I'd ask 
him "What did YOU do to deserve that?"
If the answer was, "Read his diary the minute he was called out of 
his office on an emergency" you can rest assured a jar of roaches 
would have been the LEAST of his worries. You'd be amazed how fast a 
kid can march when followed by an irate parent. Severus Snape has 
nothing on a p*ss*d off Mom. 
He'd have stood in that office until he'd managed a suitable apology 
and I'd have signed the "referral" papers for his 
detention/suspension right in front of him. 
YES, I have. IRL. Want the details? And it was for nothing like 
reading a diary either.

But this is likely generational. When I was in school if we got in 
trouble we got in trouble again, worse, at home. Now (and I work in a 
school, I see this every day) if a student so much as looks at a 
student cross-eyed (in the student's opinion) we have parent's 
marching into the office with lawyers.

A medicine cabinet is not a diary--and a pensieve is in my mind a 
diary squared.
Inexcusable. Absolutely inescusable. I blame Dumbledore, quite 
honestly. Harry'd never seen a Pensieve before he snooped in DDs. It 
should have been explained then (to the little idiot) that SOME 
people MIGHT consider them PRIVATE.




> 
> "More" fun? Harry didn't even know the name "Snivellus" before he 
> looked in the pensieve;> 



Me
Oh yes he did. Sirius used that name at Grimmaud when the Occlumency 
topic was 1st brought up. Interesting that in all the endless 
comments of the "overgrown teenager Snape" and "arrested development 
Snape" he never resorted to namecalling with "Paragon of Maturity 
Sirius". Even as snarky as he got, he never descended to that level 
IN FRONT OF A STUDENT. Let's talk inexcusable. Sirius, as much as he 
hates Snape, is an adult <snort>. He should NEVER, EVER have used 
that name in front of Harry. If you argue that point I'm going to go 
tell my son what I called his 2nd grade teacher while he wasn't 
around.


> 
> P.S. Possible epiphany tucked in here:  if, as I have read a theory 
> stating, Harry is actually carrying a part of Voldemort around with 
> him behind his scar, could it be that Snape's abuse of Harry is 
> intended as an object lesson (from BOTH perspectives) for that 
scrap 
> of Voldemort 

Me:
That's interesting, but honestly I think if Snape wants to abuse 
Voldemort he's waiting for a really good opportunity to do so 
properly. Hurling roaches won't do. It is possible however that 
he "pours it on"  in front of Harry/Voldy to keep his cover up.


Melpomene, who really can't understand why people keep expecting 
Snape to be nice. I LIKE him and I don't expect him to be nice.





From melclaros at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 13:45:13 2003
From: melclaros at yahoo.com (melclaros)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 13:45:13 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <000201c37336$363a1430$7d984cca@Monteith>
Message-ID: <bj7fl9+a20q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79796

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, <silverdragon at e...> wrote:
> Harry hurtled towards the door, a jar of dead cockroaches exploded 
over his
> head." Harry has used unintentional magic in the past, especially 
when under
> exteme stress. Perhaps the jar simply exploded.
> 

You are absolutely correct. Wouldn't that be something if Harry had 
burst the roaches himself? I think I assumed the jar was thrown 
because *I* would have been angry enough to throw whatever came to 
hand first.

Melpomene, who would have really liked to have watched what happened 
in that office *after* Harry ran out.




From ameliagoldfeesh at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 13:52:18 2003
From: ameliagoldfeesh at yahoo.com (A. Delavan)
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 06:52:18 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <000201c37336$363a1430$7d984cca@Monteith>
Message-ID: <20030904135218.98256.qmail@web21110.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79797


--- silverdragon at ezweb.com.au wrote:
<SNIP> It is unclear even whether the jar was actually
 thrown at all. <Snip>...but what the book actually
reads at the time it happens is... "And as Harry
hurtled towards the door, a jar of dead cockroaches
exploded over his head." Harry has used unintentional
magic in the past, especially when under exteme
stress. Perhaps the jar simply exploded.
 
> Nox
----

A Goldfeesh:
I've seen it suggested on this list in the past that
perhaps Snape accidently exploded the jar himself.
(I'm not sure if you {silverdragon} were referring to
Harry or Snape exploding the jar.)

Also from earlier on in this thread Melpomene said:
---
There was NO excuse for Harry to look in that
Pensieve. NONE. I don't care if Snape was baiting him.
<snip> Why would it enter Snape's mind that Potter was
looking in that pensieve for information on James and
Lily? Oh no, Potter wasn't looking for Potters, he was
looking for more "Fun with Snivellus" and we all know
it. 

 (Elle):
I think that Harry was just being nosey (as usual.) 
If he were really looking to have some "Fun with
Snivellus" to laugh about later with Ron and Hermione,
he totally *hit paydirt* with what he saw in the
pensieve.  But he never even told Ron and Hermione
what he saw, now did he?

Elle (not a Snape-hater, not a Snape apologist)
----
A Goldfeesh:
I believe Melpomne is being misunderstood here:  I
believe she means that *Snape* thinks that  "Oh no,
Potter wasn't looking for Potters, he was looking for
more "Fun with Snivellus" and we all know it."   Not
that Harry was looking for a way to get at Snape.

A Goldfeesh
(Throwing out a "Good job, good post" to Pip!Squeak)


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From foxmoth at qnet.com  Thu Sep  4 13:54:05 2003
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 13:54:05 -0000
Subject: Why did Sirius change? was Re: Sirius and Dumbledore 
In-Reply-To: <bj6bm0+7u3i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj7g5t+20ec@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79798

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "curly_of_oster" 
<lkadlec at p...> wrote:
>> In  my opinion, it seemed that staying in that house was doing 
bad  things to Sirius' mental state.  I'm not saying he was a 
'mental  case,' but I do think one reasonable explanation for the 
change from  the rational, caring person who advised Harry to be 
careful and  spoke reasonably about Snape to the sullen and 
sometimes petulant  person who encouraged risk-taking could 
be (at least in part) the  ill-effects of confinement to his hated 
childhood home (complete  with it's own Dementor substitute).  
<<

I've been mulling over the puzzle of Sirius's inconsistent behavior 
and it dawned on my that I know someone exactly like Sirius. 
He's one of my dearest friends, in fact. Since we've become 
friends, he's always been calm and gentle with me, but he  flies 
into a frenzy if he detects an enemy. He is utterly reckless in a 
fight. He doesn't give a fig for his appearance. He'd rather live 
rough than be cooped up in a house all day. He mopes around 
like a drama queen if he knows I'm going out of town. You won't 
find his name on a pedigree chart, and of course, his mother 
was a real bitch. <g> Yeah, I'm talking about my dog.

Dogs don't get upset about abstract dangers (unless they pick 
the anxiety up from you). The threat in GoF was formless,  so 
Sirius (and Dumbledore) didn't have to deal with  the doggy 
instinct to charge anything that threatened. In OOP, as in PoA, the 
situation was different. 

If I'm right, then it wouldn't have mattered where Sirius was 
hidden. Once Voldemort registered as an intruder in his territory 
and a threat to the pack, Sirius's doglike instincts  would have 
made him want to get out there and fight.

Pippin




From urghiggi at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 14:07:04 2003
From: urghiggi at yahoo.com (urghiggi)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 14:07:04 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj7feu+c2oa@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj7gu8+l2ea@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79799

Melpomene wrote:
>> If my son (13) had come home whining that a 
> teacher had tossed him (physically) out of his office, I'd ask 
> him "What did YOU do to deserve that?"
> If the answer was, "Read his diary the minute he was called out of 
> his office on an emergency" you can rest assured a jar of roaches 
> would have been the LEAST of his worries. You'd be amazed how fast a 
> kid can march when followed by an irate parent. Severus Snape has 
> nothing on a p*ss*d off Mom. 
{snip}> 
> But this is likely generational. When I was in school if we got in 
> trouble we got in trouble again, worse, at home. Now (and I work in a 
> school, I see this every day) if a student so much as looks at a 
> student cross-eyed (in the student's opinion) we have parent's 
> marching into the office with lawyers.>>


urghiggi replied:
You go, girl! Snape is an annoying amalgam of big nasty git and hero, and 
damn, it's tough to constantly be wrestling with the contrasts. But fun, for sure.

Harry, alas, has never had a decent parent to teach him this whole "respect 
your elders" stuff -- no decent parent, period, at least not one he's ever been 
able to live with. Thus he's having to figure out so many behavior cues on his 
own; it doesn't surprise me that the result sometimes is a mess. And heaven 
knows he's usually come out smelling like a rose when he's broken the school 
rules, which of course breeds a healthy disregard for ALL rules. ("It's a war, 
dammit, it's the end of the world, dammit, why do you want me to follow your 
stinkin' rules, SIR?")

I can understand why Harry behaves the way he does re:Snape, occlumency, 
and pensieve. Esp in OoP he sees himself as a free agent in many respects, 
considering that his mentor Dumbledore has clammed up on him, and his 
mentor Sirius is inaccessible. When you're 15 it's pretty easy to discount all 
authority figures if there is not a parent or other benign guardian RIGHT IN 
YOUR FACE continuing to listen/guide, and Harry has no guide other than his 
own conscience and the voices of his peers, particularly Hermione. If you're at 
a stage where you doubt even your most benign elders, you're sure going to 
discount malevolent ones even more.

I don't condone the behavior of Snape. He's a mess. But I strongly agree with 
those who say it's not a complete solution to lay all the blame on Snape 
because he's a sadistic jerk. Clearly the primary function of OoP was Harry's 
progress through the arc of developing ego, conflict, subsequent painful 
humiliation, and (I hope) maturation. If he's going to be a credible leader 
these stages were necessary. (And I'm part of the "dumbledore must die or at 
least disappear" crowd, so the need for Harry to become a less me-centered, 
less impulsive, more self-controlled, and more credible leader is acute.)

urghiggi, Chgo





From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Thu Sep  4 14:26:49 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 14:26:49 -0000
Subject: Birth, Doubt, Fear, Pride, Disillusionment
In-Reply-To: <bj5pnu+1tth@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj7i39+nagl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79800

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" <rdas at f...> 
wrote:
> 
> I want to take issue with the idea that Harry is always playing the 
> hero. I think that is a red herring sort of charge to make against 
> him. He has been in situations in the past that demanded he take 
> action and he did. In some instances he was drafted. In POA, it was 
> only him (and Hermione) who could effect any different outcome (at 
> least as it was presented to him by Dumbledore). In GOF, he never 
> asked to be placed in the Tournament and he did as he was told to 
do 
> for the most part. It was only at the end that he tried to be 
> honorable and it got him thrust into a horrific situation. The 
first 
> two books demonstrate his most heroic acts. No one asked him to 
> confront Lord Voldemort but he saw himself as having unique 
knowledge 
> and felt he must act. Playing the hero is something calculated to 
> gain attention. Harry never did that. He wanted to save people, 
Ginny 
> for instance. He'd have gone along with Ron to the Chamber had 
> circumstances not separated them. Harry never played the hero. 
Maybe he miscalculated the best course of action in OOP but he never 
played the hero.


Personally, I don't think being a hero has to have a bad connotation. 
Like you said, when Harry acts he is usually thinking about others 
rather than dwelling on his own fears or personal gain, and to me a 
person with that kind of selfless motivation is a true hero. 

The "hero's journey" in myth depicts acts of great courage, but it's 
also about the inner journey of the hero from boy to man, innocent to 
wordly, student to master. Harry personifies this quest as he moves 
from being totally naive about the WW to potentially playing the role 
of saving many innocent lives through his actions. 

Harry is a hero because he can actually effect change through his own 
actions, and more importantly, by building the support of a 
community.  A character like Sirius has aspects of a hero, trying to 
save the Potters and Harry at risk to his own life, but he does so 
singlehandedly and is ineffective, ultimately disillusioned and 
paralyzed. Harry has many detractors, but he doesn't focus on them 
and magnetically draws the support he needs, when he needs it.

Jen Reese






From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Thu Sep  4 14:28:41 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 15:28:41 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Neville's broken nose
References: <b9.35da873c.2c88981a@aol.com>
Message-ID: <3F574C19.000001.88591@monica>

No: HPFGUIDX 79801

*grumble* I know I said this yesterday as well - but please sign messages or
at least attribute your own comments. Sick of having to try and hunt for a
sender name.

Meliss9900 -
 
Actually its far more likely that Albus Dumbledore is just who he says he
is: 
Albus Dumbledore. And his only connection to them is that he's their 
headmaster. 
 
However while we are on this tangent it seems to me that IFsome sort of time

travel is involved then Albus is more Arthur-like in temperment and
interests, 
IMO. 
 
 K -

Well yeah, I don't think any of us seriously believe Albus is a time
travelling version of anyone, even the followers of REDHEAD ALWAYS would
admit it's farfetched and highly unlikely - but it is 'possible' and it's
fun speculating and finding the canon 'evidence' for it. (and yes this is
mainly directed at the person you were responding to rather than you, I
guess). 

But there you go - more evidence for the Ron theory - he acts in an
Arthur-like manner, well I'm sure a mellowed and much older Ron would act
more like his father :)

I love these more lighthearted theories, it makes a nice change from the
intense pro/anti Severus debates and the shipping threads (not that I don't
enjoy those too)

K



From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Thu Sep  4 14:34:26 2003
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 14:34:26 -0000
Subject: Why the time turner stinks/Hermione's homework
In-Reply-To: <bj6d2d+gbrt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj7ihi+cd5v@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79802

"Deirdre F Woodward" 
> <dwoodward at t...> wrote: Here's why the time turner stinks....(huge 
snip)

> "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> wrote:
(big snip)
I was under the impression (as of PoA) that McGonagall *got* it only 
> to pass on to Hermione for her use with her studies  (snip)
I think Rowling has handled it (time travel) as well or better (so 
far) than a lot of long-time writers in the SF/Fantasy field (later 
Heinlein leaps to mind).  So far, I don't have a problem with how 
she's used it. (snip)

CW comments:

(hoping I attributed correctly above). What irritates me about 
Hermione's use of the timeturner is why she didn't/wasn't allowed (?) 
to use it to do her homework as well. Why could she not add extra 
hours to her evenings, so she could catch up with all the work from 
the extra lessons ? No wonder she was exhausted.




From melclaros at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 14:52:23 2003
From: melclaros at yahoo.com (melclaros)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 14:52:23 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <20030904135218.98256.qmail@web21110.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bj7jj7+e7bh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79803

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "A. Delavan" 
<ameliagoldfeesh at y...> wrote:
> 
>  (Elle):
> I think that Harry was just being nosey (as usual.) 
> If he were really looking to have some "Fun with
> Snivellus" to laugh about later with Ron and Hermione,
> he totally *hit paydirt* with what he saw in the
> pensieve.  But he never even told Ron and Hermione
> what he saw, now did he?
> 
> Elle (not a Snape-hater, not a Snape apologist)
> ----
> A Goldfeesh:
> I believe Melpomne is being misunderstood here:  I
> believe she means that *Snape* thinks that  "Oh no,
> Potter wasn't looking for Potters, he was looking for
> more "Fun with Snivellus" and we all know it."   Not
> that Harry was looking for a way to get at Snape.
> 


Mel:
Yes Goldy, thanks. But *I* also believe Harry was looking for more 
Snape in the Penieve. I doubt he was looking to "get at" him with it, 
but to perhaps see just how far the situation went--or maybe he just 
wanted to see what was under those grey pants? LOL.  But you're 
right. I was writing from Snape's perspective as well as my own 
suspicions.

As to "But he never even told Ron and Hermione what he saw, now did 
he?" 
No, he didn't. But I'm absolutely SURE he would have done if Snape 
hadn't caught him in the act and thrown his tantrum. That scared him 
into silence.

I'd also like to take this oppty to edit/correct a typo in one of my 
last posts. 
I wrote:
"Now (and I work in a school, I see this every day) if a student so 
much as looks at a 
student cross-eyed (in the student's opinion) we have parent's 
marching into the office with lawyers."
Obviously I meant "Now (and I work in a school, I see this every day) 
if a TEACHER so much as looks at a student cross-eyed (in the 
student's opinion) we have parents marching into the office with 
lawyers.

I'd also like to mention, to those who think I'm living in fantasy 
world (well more of one than the list in general ) that I am well 
aware that despite my strident efforts to understand and defend the 
man, Severus Snape would very likely sneer at my attempts, tell me 
I'm wasting my time, ask  "when did I ask  for *your* help?"  and  
find great pleasure in squashing me like a bug. 

Melpomene, the bug









From eberte at vaeye.com  Thu Sep  4 15:18:30 2003
From: eberte at vaeye.com (ellejir)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 15:18:30 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj7jj7+e7bh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj7l46+l6te@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79804

Melpomene wrote (regarding Harry/Snape and the pensieve):
> As to "But he never even told Ron and Hermione what he saw, now did 
> he?" 
> No, he didn't. But I'm absolutely SURE he would have done if Snape 
> hadn't caught him in the act and thrown his tantrum. That scared 
> him into silence.

Elle (Me):
I absolutely disagree with that.  Harry did not tell Ron and Hermione 
what he saw in the pensieve because he was *ashamed* of his father 
and Sirius's behavior, *not* because he feared repercussions from 
Snape.  Harry sees himself in Snape (as Dudley-the-bully's former 
victim of choice) and finds himself feeling sorry for Snape. 

Melpomene again:
> I'd also like to mention, to those who think I'm living in fantasy 
> world (well more of one than the list in general ) that I am well 
> aware that despite my strident efforts to understand and defend the 
> man, Severus Snape would very likely sneer at my attempts, tell me 
> I'm wasting my time, ask  "when did I ask  for *your* help?"  and  
> find great pleasure in squashing me like a bug. 


Elle (Me):
Perhaps, but I bet that he would be secretly pleased.  

Elle (finding herself defending Harry *again* -- and by the way, 
Snape *did* throw that jar of cockroaches at Harry, you guys, so get 
over it and start making excuses for him again  :>)  )




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Thu Sep  4 15:26:36 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 15:26:36 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj09dv+n844@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj7ljc+6hog@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79805

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bluesqueak" <pipdowns at e...> wrote:
> 
> 
> Pip!Squeak:
> But, as I hope I've shown above, there *are* signs that Dumbledore 
> is capable of calculation. He risks his students in CoS. Presumably 
> in the hope that Harry can defeat Voldemort and put a final end to 
> the Basilisk. I think it's been said by JKR that CoS is more 
> important than people realise. That is one of the clues, IMO. 
> Dumbledore will risk the lives of innocents if the stakes are high 
> enough.
> 

I agree whole-heartedly re Dumbledore, in fact my obsessions 
regarding his plot status has caused some sad shaking of heads.

But, you may be pleased to know, that's not the reason for this post.

The slow revelations of his calculations start right in book 1 and
can then be traced throughout the series.
I have doubts that this is one of the big clues that apparently lurk 
in CoS.
IIRC, JKR said that in CoS she nearly "gave the whole thing away".
(I know I can rely on a rapid correction if I'm wrong.) CoS has
something(s) apparently much more important buried in it. But
we consistently ignore the biggest clue JKR has given and chase off
down side alleys. We should be ashamed of ourselves.

Kneasy







From silmariel at telefonica.net  Thu Sep  4 15:46:00 2003
From: silmariel at telefonica.net (Carolina)
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 17:46:00 +0200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why the time turner stinks
In-Reply-To: <bj75st+dd78@eGroups.com>
References: <bj75st+dd78@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <200309041746.00498.silmariel@telefonica.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 79806

scooting2win:
 <<So I think if something has already happened you can not change 
"a future" event to take place another way because other people saw 
or witnessed that event happening the first time, and I am pretty
 sure that's all that counts.>>

It isn't all that counts, not really, you are just adhering to one 
theory, of course you can change future or past events (that's me 
adhering to the 'it happened twice' camp). If you change them, 
people's memory of that events will change, just that.

Both theories have been debated recently. See 79774, 79635, 79009, 
79068, 79045, 79043, 79019, 79016, 79000, 78980, 78976, 78975, 
78971, 78953. (The first page of Yahoo results searching for 
Time-Travel).

silmariel




From severusbook4 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 16:53:52 2003
From: severusbook4 at yahoo.com (severusbook4)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 16:53:52 -0000
Subject: Why the time turner stinks/Hermione's homework
In-Reply-To: <bj7ihi+cd5v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj7qn0+g1ma@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79807

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003" 
<carolynwhite2 at a...> wrote:
> "Deirdre F Woodward" 
> > <dwoodward at t...> wrote: Here's why the time turner stinks....
(huge 
> snip)
> 
> > "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> wrote:
> (big snip)
> I was under the impression (as of PoA) that McGonagall *got* it 
only 
> > to pass on to Hermione for her use with her studies  (snip)
> I think Rowling has handled it (time travel) as well or better (so 
> far) than a lot of long-time writers in the SF/Fantasy field 
(later 
> Heinlein leaps to mind).  So far, I don't have a problem with how 
> she's used it. (snip)
> 
> CW comments:
> 
> (hoping I attributed correctly above). What irritates me about 
> Hermione's use of the timeturner is why she didn't/wasn't allowed 
(?) 
> to use it to do her homework as well. Why could she not add extra 
> hours to her evenings, so she could catch up with all the work 
from 
> the extra lessons ? No wonder she was exhausted.

Severus here:

Hermione did use it for homework, that is why she was so exhausted 
all the time, it wasn't just the fact of adding 2 hours to her day, 
it was also the 2 - 3 hours she was adding for homework.  And to 
answer another question, the reason an individual cannot travel back 
in time and change a major event that already took place is. They 
can, but at an extreme cost,  their minds would be bombarded with 
new memories if the event was not kept linear as it was with Harry 
and Hermione.  What I am saying is, could you imagine what would 
happen to your brain if it was re-written to acount for the new 
memories?  Let's us say DD went back 40 years to when LV was TR just 
before the CoS was opened, and DD killed TR and got away with it.  
When he travelled back to the present time, when LV was just 
becoming powerful the first time, there would be no LV and DD's mind 
would be assaulted with 40 years of new memories in an instant.  DD 
would probably be in St. Mungos with severe brain damage.  This is 
just my take on time travel and please feel free to pick it apart.

Sevvie




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Thu Sep  4 17:13:44 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (B Arrowsmith)
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 18:13:44 +0100
Subject: Sirius reservations
Message-ID: <23C7FC38-DEFB-11D7-BE0B-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79808

Things have been quiet, my life insurance is fully paid up and no-one 
has rubbished me for, oh, at least a week. I tried checking past posts 
for previous thoughts on these lines, but there's thousands of entries 
for Sirius. No matter. Time to stir up a hornets nest.

I'm really not impressed by Sirius.

I couldn't understand the cries of anguish, the desperate grasping at 
straws, the sense of loss that flowed from keyboards across the globe. 
No, I don't hate him, I found him a distraction; un-necessary padding 
between books 2 and 4 and an intrusion thereafter. But since we're 
stuck with him, and since it appears fashionable at the moment to 
reassess the major characters, let's have a closer look.

The results of a highly scientific survey (incorporating two pieces of 
grubby paper, a Post Office pencil and a trawl through back posts) 
showed a definite, but hardly surprising bias. The overwhelming 
majority (close to 100%, but some list names defied analysis) of the 
mourners were female. Presumably adult female. They obviously find him 
sympathetic; but they are  not the market the book is aimed at. Could 
it be that they have allowed sympathy to out-weigh JKR's plot 
requirements?

To most male fans Sirius is not a sympathetic or credible character, 
not in the same way that Snape or DD or Arthur Weasley is. If they try 
to put themselves in his position it doesn't work. His behaviour  
doesn't tie in with male expectations or projections. Not only that, as 
soon as he appears, so do holes all over the plot.

His account of his escape from Azkaban is more than a bit threadbare.

"So one night when they opened my door to bring food, I slipped past 
them as a dog....it's so much harder for them to sense animal emotions 
that they were confused....I was thin, very thin....thin enough to slip 
through the bars....I swam as a dog back to the mainland....I journeyed 
north and slipped into the Hogwarts grounds as a dog....I've been 
living in the forest ever since..."

Points to ponder:

Is there any evidence, apart from this passage, that Dementors are 
confused by animal emotions?  Other evidence indicates that they ignore 
animal emotions and concentrate on the human.  The Dementor on the 
Hogwarts Express does not seem in the least confused despite the 
presence of a highly agitated Crookshanks (Neville tries to sit on him 
in the dark). No, the first thing the Azkaban Dementors would sense was 
a lack of Sirius. Or would they? I was under the impression that 
Animagi retain their human intelligence and presumably emotions; isn't 
that the whole point of Animagi? Otherwise transfiguration suffices. So 
why didn't they notice Sirius sliding out the door?

Swim back to the mainland? In that physical condition? The Lexicon 
places Azkaban  in the middle of the North Sea, not Hogwarts lake. It's 
at least 100 miles from shore.

"I journeyed north" (to Hogwarts). OK He might have landed on the 
Scottish coast south of Hogwarts. Note there  is no mention of his side 
trip to Privet Drive (another 500+ miles, there and back). Sirius as  
the 'Grim" is described as 'hulking'. Not thin, skeletal, worn or 
starved. And no, not enough time has elapsed for him to feed himself up 
again.

It is just possible that before the confrontation with Pettigrew or 
while awaiting trial, Sirius heard that Harry had been placed with the 
Dursleys. But why go there? First, foremost and apparently exclusively 
he wanted revenge. It wasn't Harry he moaned about in his sleep at 
nights, it was Pettigrew. Scabbers was the obsession. Why didn't he try 
and find the Weasleys? They are an apparently well known family and 
that's where Scabbers was. If he was going to be heading anywhere 
before Hogwarts it was the Piggery.

Godfather - Godson relationships vary. But Sirius' actions in going to 
Privet Drive are more those of a parent than those of a close, even 
intimate friend of the family. More believable would be an all-out 
effort to knock off Scabbers and then contact Harry to try and explain 
himself, if he had time before recapture.

As an ex-pupil of Hogwarts, why did Sirius think the Fat Lady would 
admit him without the password?

Since when have Animagi been able to communicate with other animals as 
Sirius said he did with Crookshanks? Even as a dog, can he talk cat? 
Hermione is the closest to Crookshanks and she doesn't have this level 
of understanding or communication. How come Sirius does?

"I've been living in the forest ever since.."
Nearly an entire school year. With no problems from Acromantula, 
Centaurs, Werewolves or other friendly forest folk. Hagrid never 
noticed either, despite being the forest expert. Still, it explains his 
gaunt and hairy look.

After the Shrieking Shack fracas the Dementors mass and close in. There 
is Harry, Sirius and Hermione. Sirius passes out, so does Hermione. The 
Dementors ignore them and go for Harry. Why not Sirius? Isn't he the 
one they are implacably hunting? Why Harry? It's almost a repeat  of 
the  Quidditch match incident. Ignore everyone  else, we like the smell 
of Potter!

Hmm. More holes than the local golf course.

Needless to say -  I have a theory. Well, a partial theory. What if 
Sirius is not just an Animagus but also an unwitting catspaw. Maybe he 
was sprung from Azkaban - 'accidentally'  let loose by the influence of 
friends of You-know-who in the Ministry and hotly pursued by Dementors. 
The Ministry instructs Dementors after all. And what  a coincidence! We 
think Black will be around Hogwarts, just where Harry is!   But the 
Dementors have modified orders. Don't worry about Black - Get Potter!
Umbridge must have got her idea from somewhere, she's nasty but hardly 
an original thinker.

Kneasy




From EnsTren at aol.com  Thu Sep  4 17:27:17 2003
From: EnsTren at aol.com (EnsTren at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 13:27:17 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why the time turner stinks/Hermione's homework
Message-ID: <75E75D16.52AA437F.00170183@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79809

In a message dated 9/4/2003 10:34:26 AM Eastern Daylight Time, carolynwhite2 writes:

> CW comments:
> 
> (hoping I attributed correctly above). What irritates me about 
> Hermione's use of the timeturner is why she didn't/wasn't allowed (?) 
> to use it to do her homework as well. Why could she not add extra 
> hours to her evenings, so she could catch up with all the 
> work from 
> the extra lessons ? No wonder she was exhausted.

Here here!  Or even between lessons, finding a nice seculded spot, even back in her dorm room, and taking a nap or two.  And if she over sleeps, well she has the Time Turner.

I can understand WHY she couldn't use it for her homework though.  She'd be in her dorm doing it.  And you aren't allowed to see your past self, right?  So it's a no go.

Doesn't mean she still couldn't have used it between classes, or right after all of the classes were done, time turn back a few hours hide, do her home work.

Course, what might have been really getting to her is the Food thing, but then, the house elves are rather nice...

Seems to me Hermione just wasn't thinking.


Nemi



From przepla at ipartner.com.pl  Thu Sep  4 17:39:28 2003
From: przepla at ipartner.com.pl (Przemyslaw Plaskowicki)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 19:39:28 +0200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] SHIP cliches (Was: Re: H/H SHIP)
In-Reply-To: <bj6tpl+d0d3@eGroups.com>
References: <bj6tpl+d0d3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F5778D0.6080904@ipartner.com.pl>

No: HPFGUIDX 79810

On 2003-09-04 10:40, cressida_tt wrote:
[...]

>I note that recently in a poll at a committed H/Hr site that H/Hr
>was acknowledged to be the most cliched ship. Whatever your views on 
>the matter you have to admit that JKR would try very hard to avoid 
>falling in to that most obvious of traps hero gets main female 
>character. I sincerely hope that she has something a little more 
>surprising up her sleeve than that old chestnut.
>  
>
Like hero's sidekick gets the girl? ;-).

On the other hand I'd like to know why it is often stated that X 
situation in Potterverse is cliche, and JKR would not write it that way. 
This seems to be most repeated in the SHIPping discussions.
H/Hr Ship -- no it's hero gets the girl cliche, FITD situation -- no, 
that is the love triangle cliche, R/Hr Ship -- bickering friends 
cliche... So it seems all mainstream trio solutions are cliche -- JKR 
should pair Ron/Hagrid, Snape/Hermione and Harry/Angelina so to avoid 
clicheism.

I mean cliches are called cliches just because they happen so often. 
They happen often, because they are based on real life peoples emotions 
and experiences: hero gets the girl, because heroics is very attractive 
to women; love triangles are caused by blindness of heart;  bickering 
require great deal of interest in other person in order to find those 
petty things to bicker about, and such interest may eventually lead to 
romance.

So, if JKR is going to give us realistic description of teen romance 
(and from what she wrote so far we can deduce that she is), this must 
inadvertly lead to cliche ending.

Regards,
Pshemekan





From cressida_tt at hotmail.com  Thu Sep  4 17:51:45 2003
From: cressida_tt at hotmail.com (cressida_tt)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 17:51:45 -0000
Subject: SHIP cliches (Was: Re: H/H SHIP)
In-Reply-To: <3F5778D0.6080904@ipartner.com.pl>
Message-ID: <bj7u3h+2pbl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79811


> I mean cliches are called cliches just because they happen so 
often. 
> They happen often, because they are based on real life peoples 
emotions 
> and experiences: hero gets the girl, because heroics is very 
attractive 
> to women; love triangles are caused by blindness of heart;  
bickering 
> require great deal of interest in other person in order to find 
those 
> petty things to bicker about, and such interest may eventually lead 
to 
> romance.
> 
> So, if JKR is going to give us realistic description of teen 
romance 
> (and from what she wrote so far we can deduce that she is), this 
must 
> inadvertly lead to cliche ending.

Cressida replies: 

I think that you are forgetting here that the cliche of the hero 
getting the girl is HOLLYWOOD which is about as far from real life as 
it is possible to get. This scenario was created as a sop because 
things like that really do not happen in real life. If JK Rowling is 
trying to portray realistic teen romance in her sub-plot then the 
ending of the book will be as unlikely as real life itself. I am sure 
that she will show more spark of imagination than most of 
the 'shipping' arguments I have recently seen on this board.

D.

D.
 




From mhersheybar at hotmail.com  Thu Sep  4 17:54:02 2003
From: mhersheybar at hotmail.com (mhershey2001)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 17:54:02 -0000
Subject: Neville's broken nose
In-Reply-To: <bj5g2l+pot@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj7u7q+lrag@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79812

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "n_longbottom01" 
<n_longbottom01 at y...> wrote:
> > Talisman, skipping back the other way with a basket of humorous-
> > toffees, snorks:
> > 
> > Well, I DID think of DD's nose, but I was REALLY REALLY kidding 
> > about the time turner.
> > 
> > Talisman, ready to break any freaking time-turner she sees:)
> 
> Now me (n_longbottom01):
> 
> Ah... good, you were kidding.  I just saw you there weeping 
openly :) 
> about the thought of Neville time-turning into Dumbledore, and I 
> thought I would try to provide some comfort.  :)

MHershey:
If each turn of a time turner sets you back just one hour, can you 
imagine how many turns it would take to turn DD into Neville (or vice 
versa, I get confused).  Plus, the second version of the person 
couldn't be seen by the first version without causing confusion - DD 
would see Neville (who would in fact be DD as a child) and possibly 
injure or kill him.  Glad the tt mention was a joke.






From erinellii at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 18:13:37 2003
From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 18:13:37 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <E19F8245-DEB8-11D7-A1C6-0030654DED6A@pensnest.co.uk>
Message-ID: <bj7vch+kha0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79813

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Pen Robinson <pen at p...> wrote:

> What Harry did equates more nearly with a guest reading his host's 
> personal journal/diary.  If a guest *did* do so, would the guest 
(or  anyone?) think it unreasonable for the host to be mightily 
peeved?   Particularly if the diary was a truly *personal* document 
detailing the writer's feelings.  I don't think it matters if the 
diary was left on a  desk in the living room while the host went to 
answer the door, or whatever - the guest has *no right* to open it.
> 
> In the circumstances - a violation even worse than reading 
someone's  diary - Snape's emotional reaction is not surprising.  
Certainly as a  responsible adult he *should* have better self-
control, but Harry Potter has just done something well-nigh 
unforgiveable.  I can't bring  myself to classify it as mere 'bad 
manners'.
> 
> Pen



Reading a diary?  Oh, no, I'll go you one worse than that.  Given 
where that memory almost went to, I compare Harry's actions to 
snapping nude pictures of someone without their permission and then 
posting them all over the internet. Cause for all Snape knows, that 
is exactly what Harry is going to do- spread it all over school, or 
at least tell Ron and Hermione.  Now if you found out that someone 
had been taking nude photos of you in the shower without your 
knowledge or permission, and was going to post those photos all over 
the internet, and you had no way of stopping them or getting the 
pictures back-- wouldn't you scream and throw things also?  I think 
that Snape showed remarkable poise under the cicumstances.

Erin (an unapologetic Snape apologist- not in everything, mind you, 
but definitely in the pensieve privacy violation)




From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 07:56:39 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 07:56:39 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <000201c37336$363a1430$7d984cca@Monteith>
Message-ID: <bj6r7n+2r5i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79814

Melpomene wrote:
> No. But was it child abuse? I think not. I think had Severus 
> wanted to abuse Harry he could have done a HELL of a lot better 
> than that. He did not throw things "at" Harry, he threw ONE jar 
> OVER his head.

Sarah: 
Anything that leaves a mark on a minor is child abuse.  Intent to 
abuse someone is irrelavant in cases of child abuse; most physical 
abuse occurs because a parent just doesn't know how else to punish 
the child.  If that was a public school and someone found out about 
that, Snape would have been suspended from teaching until an 
investigation was complete, at the very least.  Very possibly 
fired.  The teacher would not be allowed near that child again.  And 
here's what Snape did (quoting from OoP US edition, pgs 649-650):

Snape was "gripping Harry's arm so tightly Harry's hand was starting 
to feel numb."  Snape was "shaking Harry so hard that his glasses 
slipped down his nose."  "Snape threw Harry from him with all his 
might.  Harry fell hard onto the dungeon floor."  If a public school 
teacher here in the US did that and was caught, the Department of 
Social Services would be on him in a second, and ensure that Snape 
did not go anywhere near Harry.  If a parent did that to a teen once 
and got reported on, the parent would probably be required to go 
through anger management classes.  If a parent did that consistently 
to a teen, there would be a good chance that child would be removed 
from the home until the parent proved that said parent wouldn't 
touch the child again.  

Harry's age doesn't matter.

Don't get me started on what Umbridge did!  She'd get a restraining 
order slapped onto her.  No way she'd be allowed to come in contact 
with the children in the school.  Even teens.  Here in the US, Harry 
would have grounds to get a restraining order out on Snape.  

Sorry about the rant; can you tell I work in the field of child 
abuse?  

Anyway, even if one disagrees that what Snape did to Harry doesn't 
constitute child abuse, his reaction, in his capacity as a teacher, 
was completely inappropriate.  What Harry did was wrong.  But Harry 
is not an adult, he's still a minor. Snape stopped the occlumency 
lessons, despite knowing how important they were.  Harry isn't 
blameless, but he's not the adult.  Snape is.  Harry effectively 
read someone's diary.  An invasion of privacy, yes.  Terrible, yes.  
But to that extent?  Risking that Voldemort could penetrate into 
Harry's mind jeapordized the Order; Snape knew this.  Harry did not.

Sarah





From marysophia888 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 12:04:08 2003
From: marysophia888 at yahoo.com (Sophia Runyan)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 12:04:08 -0000
Subject: LV in Slytherin (was: Re: Lucius Malfoy and LV)
In-Reply-To: <bhcdcl+69td@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj79no+buoq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79815

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bibphile" <bibphile at y...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "S Handel" <fc26det at a...> 
> wrote:
> > Ok, first, How did LV get into Slytherine?  I thought you had to 
> be a 
> > pure blood to get into that house.  Only one of LV's parents was 
> > magical.  
> >
> 
> I think the standards have been relaxed since Salazar's time.  
After 
> all, Godric only wanted to take "those with brade deeds to their 
> name."  I seriously doubt every 11 year-old ever sorted into 
> Gryffindor had brave deeds to his or her name.
> 
> I was also told that JKR notebook said Millicent was half-blood 
(but 
> I haven't seen the pictures so I don't know).
> 
> bibphile

And keep in mind that the Sorting Hat wanted to put Harry in 
Slytherin, too, and he's a half-blood.

Sonia
First-time Poster





From eberte at vaeye.com  Thu Sep  4 18:20:14 2003
From: eberte at vaeye.com (ellejir)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 18:20:14 -0000
Subject: Sirius reservations
In-Reply-To: <23C7FC38-DEFB-11D7-BE0B-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bj7vou+qo2s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79816

Kneasy wrote (spoiling for a fight, I think):
> <snip>  I'm really not impressed by Sirius. 
> I couldn't understand the cries of anguish, the desperate grasping
> at straws, the sense of loss that flowed from keyboards across the
> globe.  No, I don't hate him, I found him a distraction;
> un-necessary padding between books 2 and 4 and an intrusion
> thereafter. <snip>

Elle (Me):
You didn't like PoA as a book? (gapes in amazement) I *loved* the 
whole Sirius Black plot and I'm not even that much of a Sirius 
enthusiast.  I thought that PoA was one of the best of the series 
(definitely *not* "unnecessary padding", IMO.)  The plot was really 
clever (ahem, although I don't like to think too hard about that time-
turner thing--but that's another thread) and tons of the back-story 
was introduced.

Kneasy again (*really* being provocative now)
> The overwhelming  majority (close to 100%, but some list names
> defied analysis) of the mourners were female. Presumably adult
> female. They obviously find him sympathetic; but they are not the
> market the book is aimed at. Could it be that they have allowed
> sympathy to out-weigh JKR's plot requirements? <snip>
> 

Elle (Me again):
Hmmmm, let's see.  Why would the female readers find 
Sirius "sympathetic"?  Could it be because he is a devilishly 
handsome, tragically misunderstood adult male with a Peter-Pan 
complex. JKR obviously *intends* for us to view him as a sympathetic 
character.  It is interesting if she is really missing the mark with 
the adult male readers.  My scientific survey (of my two children) 
tells me that children *do* view Sirius in a positive light (he is 
one of the "good guys"); the kids were surprised but not devastated 
by his death.

Elle (who acknowledges Kneasy's assessment of the plot holes 
associated with Sirius but notes that these are not the *only* plot 
holes in the series--<then irons own hands>)




From manawydan at ntlworld.com  Thu Sep  4 18:23:39 2003
From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan)
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 19:23:39 +0100
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape's goatee?  NOOooooooooo!
References: <1062616313.17075.48485.m11@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <000f01c37311$aa38e700$e87c0550@f3b7j4>

No: HPFGUIDX 79817

Erin wrote:
>A few months ago, when I first joined this group, my attention was
>drawn to a picture of Professor Snape, drawn by J.K. Rowling, which
>is in the photos section of HP for Grownups.  In it, he has a
>goatee.  This startled me, as never in my wildest dreams had I ever
>pictured a bearded Snape.  He's never described as having one in the
>books, right?

I'm amazed! I'm boggled! And here's why...

For a little while I've been wondering whether Snape can be compared to
another oily-haired, sallow-skinned, black-haired, hook-nosed villain/hero
in fiction, namely Lord Gro in "The Worm Ouroboros". I've searched the
archives but no one seems to have made this connection before. But one of
the things that made me lean away from the comparison was the fact that Gro
is described as having a curly black beard while I'd always thought, like
you, of Snape being clean shaven.

Now we see a bearded Snape, I start to wonder again.

In "Ouroboros", Gro is introduced as a character who has deserted his native
allegiance to join up with the villains of the piece. But, when our heroes
are at their lowest gasp, he turns to their side. And, at the end, when our
heroes are about to win the final battle, he turns back again and is killed.

Snape "turns" from the WW to join up with the DEs. At some point during the
Voldemort war, he turns back to the good side. Does that mean, I wonder,
that the twist in book 7 will be that Snape will turn back to Voldemort and
be killed by the Order?

A quote or two: "...I judge him to be one who is not false save only in
policy. Subtle of mind he is, and dealy loveth plotting and scheming, and,
as I think, perversely affecteth ever the losing side if he be brought into
any quarrel; and this hath dragged him oft-times to misfortune"

"And who dares call me turncoat, who do but follow now as I have followed
this rare wisdom all my days: to love the sunrise and the sundown and the
morning and the evening star? since there only abideth the soul of nobility,
true love, and wonder, and the glory of hope and fear."

"Pale he is as the moon in daylight hours, slender, with fine-cut features
and great dark eyes, and his nose hooked like a reaping-hook; gentle-looking
and melancholy looking, yet noble"

The only difference that remains is that Gro is drawn as a bit of a dandy,
whereas Snape is drawn as a bit of a scruff.

Does anyone feel this idea is a starter?

Cheers

Ffred

O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon
Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion
Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 18:25:17 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 18:25:17 -0000
Subject: Why the time turner stinks/Hermione's homework
In-Reply-To: <bj7ihi+cd5v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj802d+ldrg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79818

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003"
<carolynwhite2 at a...> wrote:

> 
> CW comments:
> ... What irritates me about Hermione's use of the timeturner is why 
> she didn't/wasn't allowed (?) to use it to do her homework as well. 
> ... No wonder she was exhausted.


bboy_mn:

You have to understand that Hermione, when she is time-turning, is
experiencing linear time. That is, if she time turns 6 hours a day,
then her days (linear time) are 30 hours long even though the day
itself (timeline) is only 24 hourse long.

I give some good examples of how time turning really puts a strain on
the time tuner (the person) in this post -

Hermione Aging via Time turner
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/53555

And you are right... No wonder she was exhausted.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn





From wildfire_517 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 14:29:24 2003
From: wildfire_517 at yahoo.com (wildfire_517)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 14:29:24 -0000
Subject: Where is Ludo?
In-Reply-To: <bj73sb+n462@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj7i84+u09r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79819

>Donna:
> In GoF, LV says about 3 missing Death Eaters that one has fled.  
Has 
> anyone noticed that aside from Karkarof going missing, Ludo has 
also 
> disappeared.  Rita Skeeter herself stated she knew things about 
> Ludo.  Wonder if he will turn out to be a very powerful Death Eater?
> 
> Given his popularity from Quidditch and the fact that ordinary 
> wizards believe he's seen one bludger too many, does anyone think 
> that he is much more clever than he appears?  Perhaps he played on 
> that and is a much better actor than Karkarof.  
> 
> I did distrust Ludo the moment he was introduced and have a 
sneeking 
> suspicion that he will play a greater role in the future.  Even if 
> Snape is a spy and could find out this information, Karkarof did 
say 
> that the only person who knew all the identities of the DE was LV.  
> And as devious as LV is, that is one card that LV is keeping up his 
> sleeve.

Me:

While it is possible that Ludo is one of the missing DEs (it seems 
like there were quite a few more who didn't show to the graveyard 
than the ones LV mentioned), I find it unlikely.  He fled because of 
his gambling debts to the goblins.  I mean, it could be that JKR is 
trying to trick us into believing that he is a character of less than 
normal intelligence, only to have him pop up later on as a crafty 
genius, but I don't see that happening.  Would be a good plot twist 
if it did, though...

Besides, I always assumed that what Rita Skeeter was referring to 
about Ludo was simply the fact that he was on trial as a MoM employee 
who supposedly passed information, unwittingly(!), to the enemy.  
While there may have been more to the Ludo Bagman story than what we 
saw in DDs pensieve, I find it unlikely.  Ludo, to me, appears to be 
a bumbling throwaway character, much like Lockhart, who may make a 
cameo later on but will always remain a throwaway character.

   Wyld





From wildfire_517 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 14:40:33 2003
From: wildfire_517 at yahoo.com (wildfire_517)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 14:40:33 -0000
Subject: Why the time turner stinks/Hermione's homework
In-Reply-To: <bj7ihi+cd5v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj7it1+be3m@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79820

> CW comments:
> 
> (hoping I attributed correctly above). What irritates me about 
> Hermione's use of the timeturner is why she didn't/wasn't allowed 
(?) 
> to use it to do her homework as well. Why could she not add extra 
> hours to her evenings, so she could catch up with all the work from 
> the extra lessons ? No wonder she was exhausted.

My turn:

  I have to think that she was allowed to, which probably didn't help 
her exhausted state.  Everytime she turned it back, that's another 
hour she would be awake.  Between all the classes and all the 
homework, I'd guess that she would (with turnings) be up for 
somewhere around sixteen to eighteen hours a day.  Even assuming she 
was getting the recommended eight hours of sleep a night, that is 
still an extremely long day for a 13 year old.

  And, on second thought, if she was sitting in the Gryffindor common 
room doing her homework, every time she turned it back there would be 
another Hermione sitting there beside her.  I have to think someone 
would notice that.

    Wyld





From erinellii at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 18:23:05 2003
From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 18:23:05 -0000
Subject: Where is Ludo?
In-Reply-To: <bj7d6e+fnjc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj7vu9+fkpq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79821

Fran: 
> I have posted this theory before about Ludo....remember in GOF that 
> he was always dressed in his Wibourne Wasp uniform...... 2 
instances 
> where a WASP was flying around, 1 in GOF when Harry is praticing 
> stunning spells and he stuns a wasp.  Then in OOP, when the 
students 
> are taking OWLS, there is a WASP buzzing around a window.....
> IMO Ludo is evil. In the first instance he was checking on Harry's 
> prgoress as he had a bet on him to win the Triwizards Tourney. Now 
in 
> the 2nd instance of the wasp, I think Ludo is checking on Harry to 
> report back to LV. Harry is his most vulnerable when very tired and 
> under stress.  After Harry noticed the wasp he fell asleep and saw 
> Sirius being tortured through LV's mind control.  Also I think 
Windky 
> called Ludo a bad wizard as well.
> Fran
> > D


I'll jump on that ship.  Do you have an acronym?

Erin




From przepla at ipartner.com.pl  Thu Sep  4 18:27:27 2003
From: przepla at ipartner.com.pl (Przemyslaw Plaskowicki)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 20:27:27 +0200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] SHIP cliches (Was: Re: H/H SHIP)
In-Reply-To: <bj7u3h+2pbl@eGroups.com>
References: <bj7u3h+2pbl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F57840F.1040401@ipartner.com.pl>

No: HPFGUIDX 79822

I wrote:

>>I mean cliches are called cliches just because they happen so 
>>    
>>
>often. 
>  
>
>>They happen often, because they are based on real life peoples 
>>    
>>
>emotions 
>  
>
>>and experiences: hero gets the girl, because heroics is very 
>>    
>>
>attractive 
>  
>
>>to women; 
>>
>>[...]
>>
>>So, if JKR is going to give us realistic description of teen 
>>    
>>
>romance 
>  
>
>>(and from what she wrote so far we can deduce that she is), this 
>>    
>>
>must 
>  
>
>>inadvertly lead to cliche ending.
>>    
>>
Cressida replies:

>I think that you are forgetting here that the cliche of the hero 
>getting the girl is HOLLYWOOD which is about as far from real life as 
>it is possible to get. This scenario was created as a sop because 
>things like that really	 do not happen in real life. If JK Rowling is 
>trying to portray realistic teen romance in her sub-plot then the 
>ending of the book will be as unlikely as real life itself. I am sure 
>that she will show more spark of imagination than most of 
>the 'shipping' arguments I have recently seen on this board.
>
Now me again (Pshemekan):

I believe that hero doesn't get the girl in real life not because girls 
don't like heroes, but because lack of heroes in real life, and 
abundance of them in Hollywood movies.

I'm sure that it is not the idea that counts, but transforming this idea 
into a story. Frankly, all HP books are plagued with not so new ideas 
and yet we find them interesting enough to discuss them here. And as JKR 
is being praised for excellent storytelling and not for  superb 
imagination, I'm sure that she would make even that cliche plot interesting.

Regards,
Pshemekan, wondering how he could end up defending H/Hr ship...





From jones.r.h.j at worldnet.att.net  Thu Sep  4 17:18:07 2003
From: jones.r.h.j at worldnet.att.net (Robert Jones)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 17:18:07 -0000
Subject: How do muggles get admitted to Hogwarts?
Message-ID: <bj7s4f+c3fg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79823

"Anna" writes that JKR said somewhere that when a magical child is 
born his or her name is written down in a book by an enchanted quill 
and when the child turns 11 he or she gets a letter from Hogwarts.  
I think I have read that too.  But this raises the question of how 
does the quill know what muggle is going to be a witch or wizard?  
How did the quill know the day Hermione was born that she could be a 
witch?  Can muggles learn to be a wizard or witch, or must they be 
born that way?  Are some muggles born with a magic gene?  Does this 
mean Lilly and Hermione were really witches from birth, although 
they had muggle parents?
Boris (bewildered as always)





From erinellii at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 18:38:21 2003
From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 18:38:21 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj7feu+c2oa@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj80qt+akkv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79824

 "melclaros" wrote:
 
. Sirius, as much as he 
> hates Snape, is an adult <snort>. He should NEVER, EVER have used 
> that name in front of Harry. If you argue that point I'm going to 
go tell my son what I called his 2nd grade teacher while he wasn't 
> around.



I agree with all of your points except that one.  Not the Sirius 
shouldn't have used that name one, but the Sirius is an adult.  I'm 
not surprised you snorted.  I really don't count Sirius as an adult 
myself.  He was put in Azkaban when he was 20 or 21, and I don't 
think he really grew or developed at all mentally while he was there. 
I think people are way too hard on Sirius when they say he should 
have acted as an adult.  Why should he have?  He never got a chance 
to live as one.

Erin




From rredordead at aol.com  Thu Sep  4 18:46:50 2003
From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 18:46:50 -0000
Subject: How do muggles get admitted to Hogwarts?
In-Reply-To: <bj7s4f+c3fg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj81aq+9cjc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79825

Boris said:
But this raises the question of how 
does the quill know what muggle is going to be a witch or wizard?  
How did the quill know the day Hermione was born that she could be a 
witch?  Can muggles learn to be a wizard or witch, or must they be 
born that way?  Are some muggles born with a magic gene?  Does this 
mean Lilly and Hermione were really witches from birth, although 
they had muggle parents?

Now me:
All witches and wizards in the Harry Potter universe are born that 
way.  Sometimes to muggle parents, sometimes to magical parents, 
sometimes to mixed parents and sometimes magical parents give birth 
to a squib.  Whether it's by pure chance or genes or divine 
intervention...who knows.  But you cannot learn to be a witch or 
wizard. 
Mandy





From wsherratt3338 at rogers.com  Thu Sep  4 18:51:23 2003
From: wsherratt3338 at rogers.com (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 18:51:23 -0000
Subject: Sirius reservations
In-Reply-To: <23C7FC38-DEFB-11D7-BE0B-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bj81jb+4jol@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79826

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
 Why didn't he try 
> and find the Weasleys? They are an apparently well known family 
and 
> that's where Scabbers was. If he was going to be heading anywhere 
> before Hogwarts it was the Piggery.
> 
I agree with your evaluation of Sirius - he's one of those 
characters I feel uncomfortable about, because it's as if Rowling is 
*telling* me that I should love and admire him, and I keep wondering 
what's wrong with me because I just can't.  But I have to ask...did 
you really mean to write "the Piggery" instead of "the Burrow" when 
describing the Weasleys' house?  I think Draco would agree with that 
name, but i've always liked the idea of their house.

Wanda





From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 18:54:06 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 18:54:06 -0000
Subject: Mucking about in Time.
Message-ID: <bj81oe+l472@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79827

I believe you can alter time or perhaps I should say, that you can
alter past, present, and future history, but the consequences of doing
so can have catastophic consequences.

If we need a good model for mucking about in time, all we have to do
is look at the series of movies 'Back to the Future' starring Micheal
J. Fox. 

Marty McFly (MJ Fox) and the Professor move forward and backward
through time making changes, changes that severely alter the timeline.
Marty travels to the future, picks up a book of sport trivia and then
loses the book in the distant past. That book falls into the wrong
hands and creates a disasterous new timeline. So Marty and the
Professor have to go back in time and fix that change. 

But everytime they try to fix one thing, they screw up something else.
The interactions of time and events are so complex, that their
original timeline is lost forever. So all they can do is keep mucking
about in time until they spawn a timeline that they like, and try and
live with that one.

But what happens if there are several people with several time
machines, and they all go mucking about in time, trying to create a
timeline that suites them. Prof. Dumbledore points out, with regard to
the Philosopher's Stone, and it equally applies to time modification,
 that humans have a knack for choosing percisely that which is worst
for them. 

So, wizards can go back into the past and change history, but in doing
so, they invalidate all the history between that change and their
present time. That creates an irresolvable conflict in time; temporal
chaos. To make one small change in the past creates a temporal
upheaval that forces a whole new timeline; a whole new version of
history to be spawned. 

If you go into the past and kill your past self, then the time and
space continuum experience a cataclysmic upheavel, that forces a new
timeline into existance. If the timeline is alter too drastically, the
results can truly create disasterously cataclysmic results;
apocalyptic results. Perhaps even plunging the future world back into
the equivalent of the stoneage. And once again, I remind you of how
massively the problem is compounded when multiple wizards start
mucking about in time.

Yes, you can change time, but the consequences of doing so are of
apocalyptic proportions. Remember, it's not nice to fool with Mother
Nature.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn





From wsherratt3338 at rogers.com  Thu Sep  4 19:09:23 2003
From: wsherratt3338 at rogers.com (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 19:09:23 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj6r7n+2r5i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj82l3+e6gh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79828

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mochajava13" 
<mochajava13 at y...> wrote:
> Sarah: 
> Anything that leaves a mark on a minor is child abuse.  Intent to 
> abuse someone is irrelavant in cases of child abuse; most physical 
> abuse occurs because a parent just doesn't know how else to punish 
> the child.  If that was a public school and someone found out 
about 
> that, Snape would have been suspended from teaching until an 
> investigation was complete, at the very least.  Very possibly 
> fired.  The teacher would not be allowed near that child again.  

I honestly can't get too exercised about Snape roughing up Harry in 
the Pensieve scene, because I see the entire HP canon drawing on the 
old traditional English boarding school format, where corporal 
punishment was just taken for granted. I'm surprised Rowling has 
managed to keep physical punishment out of her stories up until now; 
even the bullying has been mostly verbal, instead of students 
beating each other up behind the Quidditch field, as it probably 
would be in real life.  A more believable satire on this sort of 
school and teaching method is in M.R. James's ghost stories (he was 
a teacher himself, so knew what he was talking about); in "Wailing 
Well" he writes about a bad student:  'It was to him that the Lower 
Master said, with no cheerful smile, "What, again, Judkins?  A very 
little persistence in this course of conduct, my boy, and you will 
have cause to regret that you ever entered this academy.  There, 
take that, and that, and think yourself very lucky you don't get 
that and that!"'  

Wanda





From prof_uloth at hotmail.com  Thu Sep  4 19:37:48 2003
From: prof_uloth at hotmail.com (Fred Uloth)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 11:37:48 -0800
Subject: Long Live the Queen (was Inside Dumbledore's Head)
In-Reply-To: <bj564q+a4t6@eGroups.com>
References: <bj4c5l+3l8o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20030904112951.00a697a0@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 79829


>Geoff:
>If Harry is a king, he can't win the game. A king cannot check a king.
>
>The king has to be protected. The next most valuable piece which is
>obviously the centre of any strategy is the queen......

Oh no...Harry is queen?!? I guess I'll have to apologize to the /Harry 
crowd...as this symbolism would seem to support the gay!Harry theory. Not 
that I buy this theory, but I can accept that this argument can be added to 
the list of supporting evidence to those who support said theory...

With the amount of wizards chess that is played in the books I have to 
wonder who would win a game of Wizards Chess should DD and LV play...I 
guess we'll find out in the last book...

...Fred 




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 19:38:23 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 19:38:23 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj7fl9+a20q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj84bf+3ums@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79830

> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, <silverdragon at e...> wrote:
> > Harry hurtled towards the door, a jar of dead cockroaches 
exploded 
> over his
> > head." Harry has used unintentional magic in the past, especially 
> when under
> > exteme stress. Perhaps the jar simply exploded.
> > 
> > Melpomene, who would have really liked to have watched what 
happened 
> in that office *after* Harry ran out, wrote:

> You are absolutely correct. Wouldn't that be something if Harry had 
> burst the roaches himself? I think I assumed the jar was thrown 
> because *I* would have been angry enough to throw whatever came to 
> hand first.
> 
Laura (who would also like to have watched that scene):

Oh, please.  Get real here.  You know perfectly well that Snape threw 
the jar.  Apologetics can get silly after a while.  Even I, Sirius-
lover that I am, will readily agree that his behavior at Grimmauld 
Place left a lot to be desired.  And yes, Harry was way, way, way out 
of line for looking in the pensieve.  And, yes, you can't help but 
feel sorry for teenage!Snape after seeing the treatment he received 
from James and Sirius.  Still...Snape threw the jar.  Any other 
reading is tortured. 
 No matter what my kid did to a teacher short of imposing physical 
harm, I'd expect the teacher to refrain from touching or otherwise 
physically threatening my kid.  And believe me, I let my kids get 
what's coming to them when they do something wrong.  But there is a 
bright line.  




From draco382 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 20:09:03 2003
From: draco382 at yahoo.com (draco382)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 20:09:03 -0000
Subject: Why the time turner stinks/Hermione's homework
In-Reply-To: <75E75D16.52AA437F.00170183@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bj864v+rrue@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79831

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, EnsTren at a... wrote:

> I can understand WHY she couldn't use it for her homework though.  
She'd be in her dorm doing it.  And you aren't allowed to see your 
past self, right?  So it's a no go.
> 

me:

I thought the only reason they created the rule "can't see your past 
self" was because your old self would not be ready to see a second 
copy of him/her self running around (wasn't there something to the 
effect of Hermione asking Harry what would he do if he saw himself 
walking by and he answered by saying he'd think he'd gone mad?)  In 
Hermione's case though, she is constantly aware that she's got the 
time turner...that she can use it...so if she suddenly saw herself 
running by to go to class, it would be no big deal.  Maybe she'd 
say "Oh, there I am...running a little late to Arithmancy too...what 
a shame."  So maybe that rule is subjective.  

My thoughts on why she couldn't use the time turner to do homework 
was, if she could sleep in, spend all the time she wanted on 
homework, and use the time turner as and when she pleased, it 
wouldn't make her very different from any other student.  What i mean 
is, she wouldn't really be any MORE challenged than any ordinary 
student at Hogwarts since she'll basically have all the time in the 
world to do her assignments.  Since she's been singled out as 
a "exemplary student" i suppose she's got to have some challenge 
beyond the mad 9-10 class schedule.  Otherwise, it would probably be 
too easy for Hermione i would imagine.


my two cents,
draco382




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 18:30:48 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 18:30:48 -0000
Subject: Snape, Harry and the Pensieve WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity 
In-Reply-To: <E19F8245-DEB8-11D7-A1C6-0030654DED6A@pensnest.co.uk>
Message-ID: <bj80co+6o2r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79833

msbeadsley:  No excuse needed.  Just human nature.  (OT note:  
statistics show that a large percentage of guests peruse hosts' 
medicine cabinets out of curiosity; kids are even snoopier <snip>

Pen Robinson:  Just to nitpick a bit, I'd say that equating between 
snooping in the Pensieve and nosing through someone's medicine 
cabinet is a bit generous.

I did say "kids are even snoopier" (than just looking in someone 
else's medicine cabinet).  However, I'll admit my tone was somewhat 
cavalier.

Pen Robinson:  What Harry did equates more nearly with a guest 
reading his host's personal journal/diary.  If a guest *did* do so, 
would the guest (or anyone?) think it unreasonable for the host to be 
mightily peeved?

Does it?  Harry's one previous experience of the Pensieve made it 
appear almost like a file cabinet for historical documents.  Do we 
have canon that Snape used the Pensieve as a journal?  (I thought it 
was more like a therapeutic tool here, a thing Harry could not have 
known.)

And I never said Snape was unreasonable for how he felt; it's how he 
expressed it:  violence and a refusal to go on with something 
supposedly vital to the cause?  If Harry had made magical Xeroxes of 
what he found in the Pensieve and posted them all over school (my 
boggart doppelganger is delighted at this notion), *then* I could 
understand Snape's reaction.  (Anyway, isn't "mightily peeved" the 
state Snape exists in whenever Harry is in the vicinity? <g>)

Pen Robinson:  Particularly if the diary was a truly *personal* 
document detailing the writer's feelings.  I don't think it matters 
if the diary was left on a desk in the living room while the host 
went to answer the door, or whatever - the guest has *no right* to 
open it.

That's a big IF.  Another one:  if my host was someone I couldn't 
escape who seemed to delight in tormenting me, you bet I'd be on ANY 
clues about that, the split-second opportunity presented itself.  I'd 
consider it a matter of self-preservation.

Pen Robinson:  In the circumstances - a violation even worse than 
reading someone's diary - Snape's emotional reaction is not 
surprising.  Certainly as a responsible adult he *should* have better 
self-control, but Harry Potter has just done something well-nigh 
unforgiveable.  I can't bring myself to classify it as mere 'bad 
manners'.

I don't see how we got from "(p)articularly if the diary was a truly 
*personal* document detailing the writer's feelings" to "a violation 
even worse than reading someone's diary."  Anyway, it *is* closer to 
merely bad manners; "well-nigh unforgiveable" according to canon 
would amount to barely short of Imperius, Cruciatus, or AK. <bg>

OT but germane:  People do read other people's diaries.  (It's 
happened at least once to everyone I know who keeps a journal.)  No 
one has a *right* to do it; many years ago when it happened to me 
with a boyfriend I had specifically warned off this behavior I 
was "mightily peeved" for months; BUT, having said that, I also have 
to say that I had expressed a willingness to that boyfriend to tell 
him whatever it was he thought he might be able to find out behind my 
back.  And he was much, much older than fifteen (but not much 
additionally older when I dumped him).

BTW, to anyone who might say that Snape's reaction was based on what 
he projected Harry doing with what he'd found, I applaud your 
perspicuity:  that is entirely valid.  Since Harry showed up Snape 
has been reacting to who he thinks Harry is and what he thinks Harry 
would do; Snape has never bothered to check his assumptions.

Harry was starved for information at the time; I understand what he 
did.  (As a matter of fact, the appropriateness of the behavior aside 
for a moment, if Snape hadn't caught him and gone so very out of 
control, what Harry found in the Pensieve might have gone a ways 
toward enlightening him and making him more understanding of Snape.)

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley"





From pokeypokey at comcast.net  Thu Sep  4 20:22:11 2003
From: pokeypokey at comcast.net (angelberri56)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 20:22:11 -0000
Subject: Sirius reservations
In-Reply-To: <23C7FC38-DEFB-11D7-BE0B-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bj86tj+cde9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79834

Kneasy wrote:

> 
> I'm really not impressed by Sirius.
> 
> I couldn't understand the cries of anguish, the desperate 
grasping at 
> straws, the sense of loss that flowed from keyboards across 
the globe. 
> No, I don't hate him, I found him a distraction; un-necessary 
padding 
> between books 2 and 4 and an intrusion thereafter. <snip>



Me (angelberri56)

This is funny, because in my last post, I analyzed Hermione's 
purpose in the plot, and now I'm going to do the same for Sirius!

As far as his basic role in PoA, if we hadn't met Sirius, then we 
wouldn't know alot about what went on in the time of the 
Marauders. This is the first book in which we get into the whole 
James and his friend's schooldays. If Sirius did not exist, then I 
believe that another character would have just been there 
instead, saying and doing basically the same things. JKR 
needed this information to be divulged, and she chose to do it 
through Sirius. And we all know that JKR doesn't put things in 
there for no reason. Basically, what I'm saying, is that we 
wouldn't know half of what we know now if Sirius hadn't been 
there. Also, Sirius is neccessary for moral support and advice for 
Harry, somewhat in GoF, because of the Triwizard Tournament, 
and even more in OOtP. 

You might also say, if you still think him unneccessary, that why 
would JKR bring him into the story, have him do a little dance, 
and then just throw him right back out? 

Well, let me make an analogy: Why are we born, when we are 
just going to die? Sirius is important because within his life, he 
helped people, found his identity, and also helped us, the 
readers, to understand things a little better! Plus, (this has been 
discussed before) his death, I believe, will prove to be important 
later in the series. 

So, as much as you are fully and absolutely entitled to your 
opinion, I don't think that Sirius was just "extra padding". (And 
this is coming from someone who does not worship Sirius, 
though I did really like him as a character.)

-angelberri56-
 








From gbannister10 at aol.com  Thu Sep  4 20:40:28 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 20:40:28 -0000
Subject: Sirius reservations
In-Reply-To: <23C7FC38-DEFB-11D7-BE0B-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bj87vs+r04u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79835

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:

Kneasy:
> Things have been quiet, my life insurance is fully paid up and no-
one 
> has rubbished me for, oh, at least a week. I tried checking past 
posts 
> for previous thoughts on these lines, but there's thousands of 
entries 
> for Sirius. No matter. Time to stir up a hornets nest.
> 
> I'm really not impressed by Sirius.
> 

<snipped>

> 
> Since when have Animagi been able to communicate with other animals 
as 
> Sirius said he did with Crookshanks? Even as a dog, can he talk 
cat? 
> Hermione is the closest to Crookshanks and she doesn't have this 
level 
> of understanding or communication. How come Sirius does?
>


Geoff:
I've always had a sneaking suspicion there is something odd about 
Crookshanks - why did he always know to go for Scabbers? I don't 
reckon it's just cat v. rat.

<more snips>

Kneasy:
> After the Shrieking Shack fracas the Dementors mass and close in. 
There 
> is Harry, Sirius and Hermione. Sirius passes out, so does Hermione. 
The 
> Dementors ignore them and go for Harry. Why not Sirius? Isn't he 
the 
> one they are implacably hunting? Why Harry? It's almost a repeat  
of 
> the  Quidditch match incident. Ignore everyone  else, we like the 
smell 
> of Potter!
> 


Geoff:
Come, come, read your POA! 

"Then, out of the darkness, they heard a yelping, a whining, a dog in 
pain....."

The Dementors approached Sirius first. He fainted. It was only then 
that they closed in and "formed a solid wall around *HArry and 
Hermione*". Twasn't just Harry though they seemed to concentrate on 
him after this - because he was the only one conscious?

I think you are being a bit hard on Mr.Black.

PS I am an adult male in case you have your sharpened Post Office 
pencil and grubby paper to hand. Obviously no cost spared! :-)

Geoff




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 20:35:04 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 20:35:04 -0000
Subject: Why did Sirius change? was Re: Sirius and Dumbledore
In-Reply-To: <bj7g5t+20ec@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj87lo+8il3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79836

pippin_999: I've been mulling over the puzzle of Sirius's 
inconsistent behavior and it dawned on my that I know someone exactly 
like Sirius. He's one of my dearest friends, in fact. Since we've 
become friends, he's always been calm and gentle with me, but he  
flies into a frenzy if he detects an enemy. He is utterly reckless in 
a fight. He doesn't give a fig for his appearance. He'd rather live 
rough than be cooped up in a house all day. He mopes around like a 
drama queen if he knows I'm going out of town. You won't find his 
name on a pedigree chart, and of course, his mother was a real bitch. 
<g> Yeah, I'm talking about my dog.

Oh, oh, oh!  I am in awe here, and thinking like mad:

It even goes a way to explaining Sirius's "I'm bored" lament to James 
in the Pensieve:  Pant, pant:  throw something for me to chase, man!  
(Making Snape a human Frisbee!  Well, he did get _levitated_.)  And 
so being cooped up in Grimmauld place is being "in the dog house."  
There's more:  don't oodles of "rite of passage" stories show the 
young protagonist having to bury his dog?

Sirius wasn't rabid, he was just kenneled too long.

Sandy aka "msbeadsley"





From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 20:36:45 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 20:36:45 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj7feu+c2oa@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj87ot+gfl0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79837

> Melpomene
> Silly me insisting that my own children address their own 
> teachers by their titles starting on the very 1st day of school. 
> Silly me for Never, ever (are you listening, Sirius?) using the 
name 
> I used for my son's 2nd grade teacher in private or among other 
> parents of children in that witch's class to pass my lips in a 
> child's presence.

Sarah:
Well, it's not so much that Harry has to address Snape 
as "Professor" or "Sir".  All the adults excpet Sirius remind Harry 
to call Snape "Professor Snape" whenever Harry calls him Snape.  
(Lupin, Molly, Dumbledore all do this at least once.)  It's that 
Snape makes Harry call him Professor/Sir all the time, like he's at 
boot camp or something.  Harry didn't call him "Snape" to his face; 
Harry asked a question without addressing him at all.  Snape seems 
like a drill sergeant at boot camp, or a teacher at a military 
academy.  It's inappropriate at Hogwarts.  And I don't understand 
why so many adults intist on calling other adults by a name a child 
would use in front of children.  When the adults know each other on 
a personal basis, that is.  Like a mother refering to her husband 
as "Daddy."  My grandfather calls my grandmother "Mom" all the time 
in front of us grown-up kids.  Bugs me no end.  My parents call 
their sibilings by their first names, and I still call them 
aunt/uncle.  


> Melpomene
> No, no NO! You know what? If my son (13) had come home whining 
that a 
> teacher had tossed him (physically) out of his office, I'd ask 
> him "What did YOU do to deserve that?"
> But this is likely generational. When I was in school if we got in 
> trouble we got in trouble again, worse, at home. 

Sarah:
Hmm, it must be generationsal.  I'm a young adult, no children.  
(The idea of having kids frightens me right now.  I'm engaged, and I 
still have cold feet over the whole marriage thing.)  However, my 
parents would have been at the principal's office, demanding that 
the teacher explain his actions.  (OK, at least my mother would 
have.)  


> 
> A medicine cabinet is not a diary--and a pensieve is in my mind a 
> diary squared.
> Inexcusable. Absolutely inescusable. I blame Dumbledore, quite 
> honestly. Harry'd never seen a Pensieve before he snooped in DDs. 
It 
> should have been explained then (to the little idiot) that SOME 
> people MIGHT consider them PRIVATE.

Sarah:
Hm, I've always equated a pensieve with a diary.  Some people could 
care less if someone reads their diary, others flip out.  But, in 
this instance, Snape made a point of taking out the pensieve, 
removing some thoughts from his head, and transferring them to the 
penseive, in front of Harry.  That's like taking out a diary in 
front of another person, writing something in front of them, and 
then putting it away.  I would definitely wonder what that person 
wrote, and be peeved that said person wrote something in front of 
me.  I would assume that it was about me.  And I would feel that 
said person was taunting me in a sort of I-know-something-you-don't-
know.  I wouldn't have looked in the diary now, but...  And hey, 
lots of parents snoop around their children's rooms and diaries.  
Yes, Harry should not have looked into the penseive, but Harry knew 
that when he did it.  However, that doesn't excuse Snape's behavior 
afterwards.  Also, Snape hasn't always behaved appropriately in 
front of Harry.  He almost dueled with Sirius in front of Harry; 
Harry had to stand between the two.  Sirius didn't jump up and 
threaten Snape; Snape responded.  Neither Sirius nor Snape have 
exactly been appropriate in front of Harry.  And Snape talks about 
James in front of Harry; always bad-mouthing James in front of 
Harry.  Completely inappropriate.  

In my opinion, the only one of that generation that has always been 
appropriate in front of Harry is Lupin.  Lupin knew Harry's parents 
extremely well, but is the only one of that generation that seems to 
understand that Harry is not a duplicate of his father.  And Lupin 
is the only one of that generation that seems to understand that 
just because he knew Harry's parents, that doesn't mean that he 
knows Harry.  Lupin, on several occassions in PoA, makes an attempt 
to act like more than a professor and more like a family friend, but 
restrains himself.  He's even civil to Snape.  He also waits for 
Harry to come to him, not the other way around.  Lupin obviously 
cares for Harry, but he keeps the relationship between the two 
appropriate.  Not like Sirius' brotherly relationship, or Snape's 
rivalry.  Much more like a father-figure.  I really, really hope 
Harry and Lupin have a closer relationship in future books.  (Lupin 
does show Harry slightly more affection than he shows the other 
students; he claps Harry on the shoulder when he just shakes 
everyone else's hand.)  Sorry about the little side track on Lupin.  
He is, by far, my favorite adult character.  

 
> Melpomene
>He should NEVER, EVER have used 
> that name in front of Harry. If you argue that point I'm going to 
go 
> tell my son what I called his 2nd grade teacher while he wasn't 
> around.


Sarah: I think that's givig Harry too little credit.  Harry knows 
that they knew each other at school, and knows that Sirius doesn't 
call Snape "Professor" or "Sir."  Plus, Snape was in Sirius' home, 
in a non-teacher capacity.  Slightly different dynamic.  And Snape 
had just insulted James.  In front of Harry.  Neither of the two 
showed much maturity; they almost dueled.  Harry acted much, much 
more mature than the other two and had to physically come between 
the two.  If I had to restrain my teacher and my parental figure, I 
would think that we've crossed the normal teacher/student boundary.  

None of the adults refer to Dumbledore as "Professor" either, even 
though they all probably had Dumbledore as a professor/head master.  
Molly and Arthur call each other by their first names in front of 
the children.  

Also, in the Occulmency lessons, Harry seems to try to get to know 
Snape on a more friendly basis, but Snape squashes that straight 
away.  Harry tries to ask Snape questions; Snape is so, well, Snape-
ish about answering them.  Harry tried to apologize after the 
penseive incident, or at least answer Snape's accusations.  Snape 
wouldn't let him get a word in edgewise.  And Snape has Harry tell 
people that Harry's taking remedial potions.  How petty.  Could have 
just said that Harry was coming in to ask questions for the OWLs or 
something like that.  Or even given Harry detentions in front of a 
load of people as a pretext for the Occlumency lessons.  Harry, like 
Hermione, didn't appreciate that Snape had to keep treating him, and 
Neville, like slime in front of everyone else to keep up 
appearances.  Harry seemed to expect a more neutral environment in a 
one-on-one basis, but alas, not really.  Although the two were 
making headway before the penseive incident.  Oh, well.  

Sarah, who also likes Snape's deliciously nasty character





From wildfire_517 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 20:41:07 2003
From: wildfire_517 at yahoo.com (wildfire_517)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 20:41:07 -0000
Subject: How do muggles get admitted to Hogwarts?
In-Reply-To: <bj81aq+9cjc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj8813+eu03@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79838

> Mandy:
> Now me:
> All witches and wizards in the Harry Potter universe are born that 
> way.  Sometimes to muggle parents, sometimes to magical parents, 
> sometimes to mixed parents and sometimes magical parents give birth 
> to a squib.  Whether it's by pure chance or genes or divine 
> intervention...who knows.  But you cannot learn to be a witch or 
> wizard. 

My turn:

  If that's the case, poor Filchy is out of luck.  No chance of 
learning to do magic if you were born a squib.  Poor guy... *sigh*

  Furthermore, that would mean that JKRs comment on someone realizing 
their potential later in life would have to be one of the witches or 
wizards we have already seen becoming stronger by leaps and bounds.  
Neville is the first person that comes to mind for me, but I doubt 
that she would refer to 15 as "late in life."  Any other candidates?

   Wyld





From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 20:46:35 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 20:46:35 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj7jj7+e7bh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj88bb+cevr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79839

melclaros: <snip> As to "But he never even told Ron and Hermione what 
he saw, now did he?" No, he didn't. But I'm absolutely SURE he would 
have done if Snape hadn't caught him in the act and thrown his 
tantrum. That scared him into silence.

Nope, not buyin' it.  Harry has told Ron and Hermione so many things 
he trusts them not to discuss with anyone else that I really doubt he 
would hesitate to pass on the scene in the Pensieve just for fear 
that Snape would find out he did.

IMO, Harry will tell them, but only after he's adjusted his image of 
his dad to include one where James could be an arrogant little berk 
at fifteen and a still be a hero of a dad.  We actually see some of 
that when Harry notices Ron has "Quidditch hair."

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley"





From melclaros at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 21:02:29 2003
From: melclaros at yahoo.com (melclaros)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 21:02:29 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj84bf+3ums@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj8995+cfco@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79840

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
>
> > > Melpomene, who would have really liked to have watched what 
> happened 
> > in that office *after* Harry ran out, wrote:
> 
> > You are absolutely correct. Wouldn't that be something if Harry 
had 
> > burst the roaches himself? > 


Oh, please.  Get real here.  You know perfectly well that Snape threw 
> the jar.  Apologetics can get silly after a while.
<snip>
>Still...Snape threw the jar.  Any other 
> reading is tortured. 


  
Mel rolls her eyes and replies:
For what it's worth I abslutely believe Snape threw the jar. *Hurled* 
the jar. (I don't however think he aimed *at* Harry) This belief is 
*precisely* why I would have liked to stay in that office and see 
what he did next. More smashing? A total breakdown? A self-satisfied 
smirk? Fist-pump in the air? A phone call do Dr. Phil? The 
possibilities are endlessly fascinating.

Considering the possibility that the jar exploded on its own, or as a 
result of roach overcrowding, or an unconcious magical outburst by 
Harry is interesting as well. Unlikely, Improbable even, but an 
interesting concept.



Melpomene




From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 20:53:18 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 20:53:18 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <20030904135218.98256.qmail@web21110.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bj88nu+fk05@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79841

>A Goldfeesh:
>I believe Melpomne is being misunderstood here: I
>believe she means that *Snape* thinks that "Oh no,
>Potter wasn't looking for Potters, he was looking for
>more "Fun with Snivellus" and we all know it." Not
>that Harry was looking for a way to get at Snape.

***

Sarah: 
I always took it as curiosity on Harry's part.  Harry saw the 
pensivve, and was reminded of the Department of Mysteries.  I think 
Harry went over to the pensieve thinking he was going to finally 
discover why the Department of Mysteries was so important, something 
the adults were keeping from him.  But then he sees the great hall, 
but looking quite different from normal.  Harry's thinking "huh?", 
and decided to check it out.  I think Harry was looking to an answer 
for the mystery of the Department of Mysteries, but saw his father 
instead.  And come on, Harry has precious little information about 
his parents.  If he saw his parents in the pensieve, he would have 
dived into the pensieve.  An invasion of someone's privacy, yes.  
But a very, very sad moment that all Harry can learn about his 
parents, the only way he can ever see his parents, is by invading 
someone else's memory.  That's one of the reasons that I felt 
Snape's reaction was too extreme; he was equating Harry with James, 
looking for a way to humiliate Snape.  Snape didn't realize that 
Harry wasn't paying attention to Snape at all, other than to ensure 
he could still watch his father while Snape was there.  Snape, 
understandably, felt that Harry was amused by what happened to Snape 
in the pensieve scene.  He doesn't give Harry the chance to explain 
that Harry wasn't amused by it, nor does Snape realize that Harry 
know very, very little about his parents.  Harry realized that he 
and Snape were similar in that they both were victims of bullies.  
The possibility that Harry was bullied and unloved as a child 
doesn't seem to enter Snape's mind.  I don't think that Snape sees 
Harry as anything but a more famous version of his father.  And 
Harry being an orphan doesn't seem to matter much to Snape.  
(Neither does the whole concept of not speaking ill of the dead.)

Don't get me wrong, I like Snape's character.  He's so slimy and 
nasty.  He's a character I love to be wary about, especially since 
he was a death eater, and was evil/support evil at one point in his 
life.  Harry's suspicion of Snape is valid, I think, since Harry 
doesn't know why Dumbledore trusts Snape so much.  All he knows is 
that Snape was a death eater and is now purportedly a spy for the 
good guys.  Snape is such a multi-faceted character, it's 
wonderful.  Such as, he did buy into the whole pure-blood nonsense; 
he was a death eater.  He's pretty nasty now, even in the presence 
of the Order.  He is such an ambiguity and a mystery.  Fascinating.

Sarah





From gbannister10 at aol.com  Thu Sep  4 21:04:59 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 21:04:59 -0000
Subject: Snape, Harry and the Pensieve WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity
In-Reply-To: <bj80co+6o2r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj89dr+pbn3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79842

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> msbeadsley:  No excuse needed.  Just human nature.  (OT note:  
> statistics show that a large percentage of guests peruse hosts' 
> medicine cabinets out of curiosity; kids are even snoopier <snip>
> 
> Pen Robinson:  Just to nitpick a bit, I'd say that equating between 
> snooping in the Pensieve and nosing through someone's medicine 
> cabinet is a bit generous.
> 
> I did say "kids are even snoopier" (than just looking in someone 
> else's medicine cabinet).  However, I'll admit my tone was somewhat 
> cavalier.
> 
> Pen Robinson:  What Harry did equates more nearly with a guest 
> reading his host's personal journal/diary.  If a guest *did* do so, 
> would the guest (or anyone?) think it unreasonable for the host to 
be 
> mightily peeved?
> 
> Does it?  Harry's one previous experience of the Pensieve made it 
> appear almost like a file cabinet for historical documents.  Do we 
> have canon that Snape used the Pensieve as a journal?  (I thought 
it 
> was more like a therapeutic tool here, a thing Harry could not have 
> known.)
> 


Geoff:
Can we actually consider fromn canon /why/ Harry looked in the 
Pensieve?

"He turned around. The light was coming from the Pensieve sitting on 
Snape's desk. The silver-white contents were ebbing and swirling 
within. Snape's thoughts.... things he did not want Harry to see if 
he broke through Sanpe's defences accidentally....

Harry gazed at the Pensieve, curiosity welling within him.... what 
was it that Snape was so keen to hide form Harry?

The silvery lights shivered on the wall.... Harry tok two steps 
towards the desk, thinking hard. Could it possibly be information 
about the Department of Mysteries that Snape was determined o keep 
from him?" (POA p.563 UK edition)

Harry was not expecting to see the scene involving his father; he 
wasn't prying to find out personal stuff to blab about Snape. He was 
trying to find out more about the DoM. OK, he should not have looked 
but Snape had effectively told him to mind his own business about the 
Department during his previous visit and, obviously, HP feels that 
there is something there which involves him. Since nobody seemd to 
want to tell him, the guy was trying to find out for himself. The 
wrong way, yes, but how else was he to go?

Geoff




From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Thu Sep  4 21:14:54 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 21:14:54 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <E19F8245-DEB8-11D7-A1C6-0030654DED6A@pensnest.co.uk>
Message-ID: <bj8a0e+lqna@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79843

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Pen Robinson <pen at p...> wrote:
> What Harry did equates more nearly with a guest reading his host's 
> personal journal/diary.  If a guest *did* do so, would the guest 
(or 
> anyone?) think it unreasonable for the host to be mightily peeved?  
> Particularly if the diary was a truly *personal* document detailing 
the 
> writer's feelings.... Certainly as a 
> responsible adult he *should* have better self-control, but Harry 
> Potter has just done something well-nigh unforgiveable.  I can't 
bring 
> myself to classify it as mere 'bad manners'.

Am I the only one here who thinks that Harry's snooping was
completely understandable (though maybe not laudable)?
We are not talking here of a guest visiting some random host.

Re-read the complete record of the various occlumency lessons and
their effects. For many months Harry has his entire mind and
memories, especially the most painfull and humiliating of them
out there exposed to a person who has never lost an opportunity
to treat him with derision and scorn - and sometimes use those
memories to get back at him. During these months he feels that
the lessons, far from helping him, make him more susceptible.
In the back of his mind he has the suspicion that perhaps the
teacher's ultimate goal is to weaken his resistance rather than
strengthen it (and let us not forget that just the year before
he had exactly such a teacher - Crouch Jr.). These suspicions
are also voiced by his best friend (Ron). In addition, Harry
is burning with curiosity to know what these DoM dreams mean,
and he knows that Snape can tell him that, but refuses.

So feeling violated and vulnerable, curious, suspicious of Snape's
intentions, Harry gets left with the pensieve alone. He wonders
(paraphrased - I don't remember the exact wording) "What was
it that Snape wanted to keep from him so much? was it perhaps
information about the Department of Mysteries?". And with that
he delves into the pensieve where he sees no other than his dead
father and Sirius. Who would not stay and witness the entire
scene under the curcumstances? Especially at 15?

I am not saying that it's a polite or well mannered behaviour,
only that it is completely to be expected, and I don't fault
Harry for it. Heck, I'd probably have done the same in his place.

I also don't fault Snape for his outburst. He is clearly very
insecure and the occlumency sessions must have been a stressfull
experience for him as well. Then have himself exposed in this
fashion to the son of the tormentor whom he loaths. No wonder he
snaps. But I think that to keep this grudge and refuse to teach
Harry even after he has had time to calm down and see that Harry
has indeed kept the event secret, is very irresponsible of him.

So neither is blameless there.

Salit





From dudemom_2000 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 21:15:10 2003
From: dudemom_2000 at yahoo.com (dudemom_2000)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 21:15:10 -0000
Subject: Of Pensieves and Memory Diaries
In-Reply-To: <bj388p+qrh8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj8a0u+crt0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79844

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bohcoo" <sydenmill at m...> 
wrote:
> 
> 
> 1.  What would happen if Snape or Dumbledore accidently dropped 
the Pensieve when transferring it from the cabinet/table and broke 
it, like the prophecies that got broken in the Department of 
Mysteries? All the memories that had been placed there would cease 
to exist, wouldn't they? (I am assuming that when Snape put his 
memory of The Lake Incident into the Pensieve, he no longer could 
remember it himself. He had transferred it for safekeeping.) <<Snip>>
> 
> 
> Bohcoo

*****\(@@)/*****

Interesting ideas you have posed. Possibly the answers will come up 
later in future books. IMO I think once the Pensive is broken the 
memories will dissipate like the prophecies did. I could see it 
leading to some big consequences if a LV follower got access to a 
Pensive that had memories in it (makes me wonder why everyone seems 
to be so careless with them, especially around Harry -  and he isn't 
the only curious one at Hogwarts). Anyway, as Mr Weasley once 
said: "Never trust anything that can think for itself, if you can't 
see where it keeps its brain." (US PoA P 194) Truer words ever 
spoken!

*****\(@@)/*****

Dudemom_2000




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 20:18:07 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 20:18:07 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj7feu+c2oa@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj86lv+h29o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79845

msbeadsley: The *words* can be demanded (and that will result in 
tremendous success, I'm sure), but the respect the words imply must 
be *earned*; something Snape seems oblivious to or bent on ignoring.

melclaros:  Mea Culpa. Silly me insisting that my own children 
address their own teachers by their titles starting on the very 1st 
day of school.  Silly me for Never, ever (are you listening, Sirius?) 
using the name I used for my son's 2nd grade teacher in private or 
among other parents of children in that witch's class to pass my lips 
in a child's presence. Silly, silly me.

The "tremendous success" I was referring to was the result I expected 
Snape to get; I thought that would be clear, but I failed.  It is 
one, very appropriate, thing, for a parent or guardian or even the 
headmaster to insist that youngsters use respectful titles to 
teachers/elders; Snape's insistence was (IMHO) ineffectual, petty in 
motive, and pathetic.

You sound like Molly here:  "If *I* was Harry's Mum--"  And if you 
were, a LOT of things would be different.  Among other things, he'd 
have grown up with a fierce mother's love; it would have illuminated 
his life for many years instead of merely saving it once.  And yes, 
he likely would have internalized a lot of more appropriate behavior, 
although I think he's done amazingly well, considering.

melclaros:  Those kindergarten teachers damned well should have 
EARNED the right to be called MISS Espey and Miss (damn i can't even 
remember her name!) Stupid of me to insist that he addrewss the 2nd 
grade nazi as MRS (name witheld--only because if i type it i'll start 
screaming).

Maybe I can clarify further.  What has happened is actually not 
(just) that Snape has failed to earn Harry's respect; Harry showed up 
prepared to respect all his teachers ("Wow, somebody who *teaches* 
magic").  Snape actively trashed not only the generic respect Harry 
had but any potential for more.  And your children used respectful 
titles to their elders because they respected *you* (and feared your 
wrath); how can anyone who insists on the trappings with no reference 
to an underlying structure expect what the trapping represent?

I have no issue with your indictment of Sirius here; he was behaving 
toward Snape as Snape behaves toward Harry:  stabbing at chimeras 
from the past.

melclaros:  But it doesn't surprise me, I took flack for years for 
being the only "Mommy" in the playgroup who insisted her children 
address EVERY adult with a courtesy title until instructed otherwise 
by THAT adult.

Well, I was one of the kids who got laughed at for having manners, so 
there!  And I'm glad that titles for elders and please and thank you 
et al were drummed into my head; if nothing else, it gave me more to 
rebel against later.  <kidding!>

melclaros:  Nope, Snape's a b*st*rd all on his own <snip> despite 
what I've said <snip> it never ceases to amaze me why people are 
always so surprised <snip> 

It doesn't exactly surprise me; but it's (he's) broken and needs 
fixing or replacing or some dam* thing.

melclaros:  "He'd never forgive Snape." <snip Harry has a LOT of 
reasons to hate Snape. But he has very, very few (I'm being generous) 
to mistrust him. <snip>

As has been said before:  seems a sophisticated bit of sophistry for 
a fifteen year old boy grieving the closest thing he remembers to a 
parental/fraternal role model.

melclaros:  But there's a LOT of work to be done on Both Sides.

No argument there, as long as we agree on who poisoned the well in 
the first place (and it wasn't James).

msbeadsley: No excuse needed.  Just human nature.  

melclaros:  No, no NO! You know what? If my son (13) had come home 
whining that a teacher had tossed him (physically) out of his office, 
I'd ask <snip>

Yes, Molly.  <g>

melclaros:  But this is likely generational. When I was in school if 
we got in trouble we got in trouble again, worse, at home. Now (and I 
work in a school, I see this every day) if a student so much as looks 
at a student cross-eyed (in the student's opinion) we have parent's 
marching into the office with lawyers.

Trying working on a high school campus for blind and deaf youngsters 
(I did); talk about entitlement!  So yes, I know what you mean there.

A bit OT but relevant I think:  On the other hand, in ninth grade as 
a friend and I entered Math class, I whispered (I thought) a comment 
(I didn't wake up a smart*ss yesterday), which the teacher overheard; 
her response was to swing me around by my arm and slap me across the 
face so hard that my glasses flew off and were broken.  My parents 
didn't threaten to sue, but they did make their displeasure clearly 
known (discipline is fine; a teacher violently out of control 
isn't).  And back in second grade a teacher threatened someone (don't 
honestly remember if it was me) with a whipping; my response:  "If 
you have to resort to violence, you're in the wrong profession."  I 
was simply making an observation then, and I still think so.

<big snip here with stuff others have also said and I addressed in 
another post>

msbeadsley:  <snip> Harry didn't even know the name "Snivellus" <snip>

melclaros:  Oh yes he did. Sirius used that name at Grimmaud when the 
Occlumency topic was 1st brought up. <snip>

I am chastised.  Even chastened.  Momentarily.

melclaros:  Even as snarky as he got, [Snape] never descended to that 
level IN FRONT OF A STUDENT. <snip> Sirius <snip> is an adult 
<snort>. He should NEVER, EVER have used that name in front of Harry. 
If you argue that point I'm going to go tell my son what I called his 
2nd grade teacher while he wasn't around.

(Wait a few years, then let me watch <g>.)  Sirius was a loose cannon 
(not biting) throughout OoP; I think there's general agreement on 
that (and even some general confusion on the dramatic shift from 
GoF).  He made a lot of mistakes.  If you want to compare Snape and 
*Sirius*, then another point:  nothing implies that Snape has been 
anything like as misused by the authorities as Sirius has.  It would 
make me a little crazy, too.

Sandy aka "msbeadsley"





From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 21:02:10 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 21:02:10 -0000
Subject: Why did Sirius change? was Re: Sirius and Dumbledore
In-Reply-To: <bj7g5t+20ec@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj898i+fk90@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79846

>>>Pippin:
> If I'm right, then it wouldn't have mattered where Sirius was 
> hidden. Once Voldemort registered as an intruder in his territory 
> and a threat to the pack, Sirius's doglike instincts  would have 
> made him want to get out there and fight.
<<<<

Sarah: 
Hmm, if Sirius is dog-like in his human state (very good analogy), 
what does that make Minerva McGonagall?  Is she cat-like in her 
behavior as a human?  Glaring at anything that dares to bother her.  
Ignoring annoying things until the annoyance is too bothersome and 
swatting them away.  Looks all prim and proper at times, but gets 
frisky at times and leers/swats at perceived annoyances.  Yowls and 
hisses when irritated or frightened.  Walks around as if she owns 
the place.  Hm, this seems to explain her behavior with Umbridge: 
she ignores, then "swats at", the helps Peeves in his mischief.  (I 
loved the muttering "it turns the other way" to Peeves while he was 
trying to unscrew a light fixture.)  Amused at the twins pranks that 
makes Umbridge's life miserable as head mistress.   Hmm, this 
analogy might work.  I wonder if Minerva sleeps in odd places in 
contorted positions during all hours of the day.  

Sarah, who is only half-way joking about this.





From jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 21:21:49 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 21:21:49 -0000
Subject: Finale:  Harry Potter and the Declaration of Independence (a filk)
Message-ID: <bj8add+a65b@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79847

This is a filk of the finale of the musical 1776, where John Hancock,
President of the Second Continental Congress, has its members called
to come forth and sign the Declaration of Independence.  Rather than
copy a scene from canon, I have chosen to have the Sorting Hat call
those witches and wizards who have performed in this filk musical
forward to take their bows.


I dedicate this filk to Caius Marcius Coriolanus.
                                      
                            Finale

SCENE:  The Great Hall, at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry,
after a performance of the smash hit filk musical, "Harry Potter and
the Declaration of Independence."

(A snare drum magically beats out a staccato drumroll.)

SORTING HAT:
After I call out your name and House, you will come forward and
receive whatever appreciation is due you.  I applaud the efforts of
every witch and wizard involved.  I, for one certainly know how
difficult it is to get up and sing before the entire School!

Sirius Black:  Gryffindor!

Lavender Brown:  Gryffindor!

Hermione Granger:  Gryffindor!

Angelina Johnson:  Gryffindor!

Parvati Patil:  Gryffindor!

Harry Potter:  Gryffindor!

Fred Weasley:  Gryffindor!

George Weasley:  Gryffindor!

Ron Weasley:   Gryffindor!

Bartemius Crouch, Sr.:  Head, Department of International Magical
Cooperation, Ministry of Magic

Gilderoy Lockhart:  Defense Against the Dark Arts Professor

Sybill Trelawney:  Divinations Professor

Rolanda Xiomara Hooch:  Flying Instructor and Quidditch Coach

Rubeus Hagrid:  Keeper of the Keys; Care of Magical Creature
Professor; Gryffindor!

Professor Sprout:  Herbology Professor, Head of House, Hufflepuff!

Filius Flitwick:  Charms Professor, Head of House, Ravenclaw!

Severus Snape:  Potions Master, Head of House, Slytherin!

Minerva McGonagall:  Transfiguration Professor, Head of House, Gryffindor!

Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore:   Order of Merlin, First
Class; Chief Mugwump, International Confederation of Wizards; Chief
Warlock, Wizenagamot; Headmaster of Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and 
Wizardry; Gryffindor!
             
                         

(The slow tattoo of the snare drum fades away.  Curtain.)

-Haggridd





From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 21:45:28 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 21:45:28 -0000
Subject: Sirius reservations
In-Reply-To: <23C7FC38-DEFB-11D7-BE0B-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bj8bpp+fn0q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79848

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
<snip> I'm really not impressed by Sirius.
> 
> I couldn't understand the cries of anguish, the desperate grasping 
at 
> straws, the sense of loss that flowed from keyboards across the 
globe. <snip>
> The results of a highly scientific survey (incorporating two pieces 
of 
> grubby paper, a Post Office pencil and a trawl through back posts) 
> showed a definite, but hardly surprising bias. The overwhelming 
> majority (close to 100%, but some list names defied analysis) of 
the mourners were female. Presumably adult female. They obviously 
find him sympathetic; but they are  not the market the book is aimed 
at. Could it be that they have allowed sympathy to out-weigh JKR's 
plot requirements?
> 

Laura:

Okay, Kneasy, my friend, the gloves are coming off. <grins, while 
flexing fingers menacingly>

I can't tell you how all adult females feel about Sirius, nor can I 
theorize with any validity about how adult males feel about him.  
(Although why on earth any adult male would rather identify with 
Snape than Sirius is beyond me.)  But I can tell you why I, as an 
adult female, love him.  I love Sirius for his passion and his 
ability to give himself completely and without reservation to what- 
or whoever earns his allegiance (and his judgement is pretty sound on 
what or who that should be).  I love him for his unstinting love of 
Harry.  Sirius, alone of all the characters in the books, always gave 
Harry everything he had, without reservation.  I agree that in OoP he 
didn't have as much to give as he did in GoF, but he gave what he had-
including his life.  

I hesitate to make any grand pronouncements about women identifying 
with suffering or with people who are trapped, but I can tell you 
that I found Sirius's situation terribly sad.  It's one thing to come 
from an unhappy home, as Snape seems to have done.  It's another to 
come from a home where the hostility is directed at you, personally, 
even as a child.  If you have that kind of experience in childhood 
you never really get rid of it.  Sirius was in prison long before 
Wormtail set him up.  Despite that, he was bright, funny, charismatic 
and well-liked (by anyone who wasn't into the dark arts).  That's why 
I think the real Sirius is the one we saw in GoF.  That's the person 
he could have-should have had a chance to-become.  

I wouldn't assume that JKR is writing only for children, or ever was.
And just because I'm sad about Sirius's death doesn't mean I don't 
understand why JKR felt it was necessary. 

Kneasy: 
> To most male fans Sirius is not a sympathetic or credible 
character, 
> not in the same way that Snape or DD or Arthur Weasley is. If they 
try 
> to put themselves in his position it doesn't work. His behaviour  
> doesn't tie in with male expectations or projections. Not only 
that, as 
> soon as he appears, so do holes all over the plot.
> 
> His account of his escape from Azkaban is more than a bit 
threadbare. <snipped quotation from text>
> Points to ponder:
> 
> Is there any evidence, apart from this passage, that Dementors are 
> confused by animal emotions?  Other evidence indicates that they 
ignore animal emotions and concentrate on the human.  The Dementor on 
the Hogwarts Express does not seem in the least confused despite the 
> presence of a highly agitated Crookshanks (Neville tries to sit on 
him in the dark). No, the first thing the Azkaban Dementors would 
sense was a lack of Sirius. Or would they? I was under the impression 
that Animagi retain their human intelligence and presumably emotions; 
isn't that the whole point of Animagi? Otherwise transfiguration 
suffices. So why didn't they notice Sirius sliding out the door?

Laura:

I think the implication is that the Dementors were confused by 
sensing something other than a human being in Sirius's cell.  Since 
they feed off humans, they would have no interest in animals in 
general.  

Although people retain their personalities and feelings when they are 
in animagus form (or so we think), the simple fact of the switch in 
form may be enough to confuse the Dementors, which no one ever 
claimed were intelligent.  I would also think that being an animagus 
would allow you to experience the emotions and perspectives of the 
animal you become, while retaining your own awareness of self.
> 
Kneasy:
> Swim back to the mainland? In that physical condition? The Lexicon 
> places Azkaban  in the middle of the North Sea, not Hogwarts lake. 
It's 
> at least 100 miles from shore.
> 
> "I journeyed north" (to Hogwarts). OK He might have landed on the 
> Scottish coast south of Hogwarts. Note there  is no mention of his 
side trip to Privet Drive (another 500+ miles, there and back). 
Sirius as the 'Grim" is described as 'hulking'. Not thin, skeletal, 
worn or starved. And no, not enough time has elapsed for him to feed 
himself up again.

> Laura
 Harry never got a clear look at Padfoot until the Shack.  So what he 
saw combined with his imagination (especially after he learned about 
Grims) could account for what he thought he saw.

Kneasy:
> It is just possible that before the confrontation with Pettigrew or 
> while awaiting trial, Sirius heard that Harry had been placed with 
the Dursleys. But why go there? First, foremost and apparently 
exclusively he wanted revenge. It wasn't Harry he moaned about in his 
sleep at nights, it was Pettigrew. Scabbers was the obsession. Why 
didn't he try and find the Weasleys? They are an apparently well 
known family and that's where Scabbers was. If he was going to be 
heading anywhere before Hogwarts it was the Piggery.

Laura:

No, I don't agree that revenge was foremost in Sirius's mind.  
Protecting Harry was always his first priority.  While Harry was at 
the Dursleys and Wormtail was at the Weasley's, there was no threat 
to Harry.  So Sirius could indulge his wish to see his godchild for 
himself, after so many years had passed.  Sirius is a man of great 
passion, as I suggested above.  This seems perfectly in character to 
me.  Then once he knows that both Wormtail and Harry are headed to 
Hogwarts, he turns his attention to eliminating the immediate threat 
to Harry, which is from the presence of a servant of LV in rat form.  
Even if he hadn't had personal reasons for wanting to expose 
Wormtail, he would have acted the same way in response to any threat 
to Harry's safety.

> Kneasy:
> Godfather - Godson relationships vary. But Sirius' actions in going 
to 
> Privet Drive are more those of a parent than those of a close, even 
> intimate friend of the family. More believable would be an all-out 
> effort to knock off Scabbers and then contact Harry to try and 
explain  himself, if he had time before recapture.
> 
Laura:

It's my understanding that one of the resposibilities of a godparent 
is to take over parenting if the original parents are unable to care 
for the child.  But I don't know very much about that-we don't have 
this tradition in my religious practice.  (I wish we did, though-I 
think it's very lovely.)

Kneasy:
> As an ex-pupil of Hogwarts, why did Sirius think the Fat Lady would 
> admit him without the password?
> Since when have Animagi been able to communicate with other animals 
as Sirius said he did with Crookshanks? Even as a dog, can he talk 
cat? Hermione is the closest to Crookshanks and she doesn't have this 
level of understanding or communication. How come Sirius does?
>"I've been living in the forest ever since.." Nearly an entire 
school year. With no problems from Acromantula, Centaurs, Werewolves 
or other friendly forest folk. Hagrid never noticed either, despite 
being the forest expert. Still, it explains his gaunt and hairy look.
>
Laura:

This stuff is all trivial, it seems to me, and can be explained in a 
variety of ways that don't affect their believability.  (I.e., he was 
frantic, how do we know they can't, and how big is the Forest anyhow?)

Kneasy:
> After the Shrieking Shack fracas the Dementors mass and close in. 
There is Harry, Sirius and Hermione. Sirius passes out, so does 
Hermione. The Dementors ignore them and go for Harry. Why not Sirius? 
Isn't he the one they are implacably hunting? Why Harry? It's almost 
a repeat  of the  Quidditch match incident. Ignore everyone  else, we 
like the smell of Potter!

Laura:

I got the idea that the Dementors weren't looking for anyone in 
particular at Hogwarts, just for the fear they fed on.  If Sirius and 
Hermione are both unconscious and Harry is awake and terrified, 
wouldn't they go for, shall we say, the full banquet rather than a 
snack?

> Kneasy:
> Needless to say -  I have a theory. Well, a partial theory. What if 
> Sirius is not just an Animagus but also an unwitting catspaw. Maybe 
he 
> was sprung from Azkaban - 'accidentally'  let loose by the 
influence of 
> friends of You-know-who in the Ministry and hotly pursued by 
Dementors. 
> The Ministry instructs Dementors after all. And what  a 
coincidence! We 
> think Black will be around Hogwarts, just where Harry is!   But the 
> Dementors have modified orders. Don't worry about Black - Get 
Potter!
> Umbridge must have got her idea from somewhere, she's nasty but 
hardly 
> an original thinker.
> 
Laura:

As to that, well, I wouldn't put it past JKR.  We'll see if your 
theory pans out in the end.  And I guess we'll just have to agree to 
disagree about Sirius.  

Gee, I've just written a love letter to a dead fictional character.  
Does this mean I'm having a mid-life crisis?  :-)






From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 21:49:39 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 21:49:39 -0000
Subject: unforgiveable charms?
Message-ID: <bj8c1j+46j5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79849

We know that there are Unforgiveable curses.  But I've been 
wondering, what with the strong feelings about Harry looking into 
Snape's pensieve thoughts, if there should be Unforgiveable charms as 
well.  For instance, shouldn't it be highly improper (if not worth a 
life term in Azkaban) to use Legilimency on someone without their 
permission?  Or to access their private thoughts in any other manner?

Laura, who's just now remembering that she was the fool who first 
proposed punishing Umbridge, which led to the whole gang-bang thread, 
and is hoping that she's not set off another land mine




From sylviablundell at aol.com  Thu Sep  4 22:18:30 2003
From: sylviablundell at aol.com (sylviablundell2001)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 22:18:30 -0000
Subject: Snape,Harry and the Pensieves
Message-ID: <bj8dnm+jlnt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79850

Sarah wrote:
Snape made a point of taking out the pensieve, removing some thoughts 
from his head and transferring them to the pensieve in front of 
Harry. That's like taking out a diary in front of another person, 
writing something in front of them, and putting it away.

Surely Snape is unaware that Harry has any previous knowledge of 
pensieves or their function. To him, itwould be like leaving his 
diary in the same room as an illiterate person who would have no idea 
of how to use it. If he had known that Harry knew exactly what a 
pensieve was, I doubt if he would have left him alone with it.
Sylvia (who keeps a rather uninteresting diary, but would hate anyone 
nosing into it).




From ratalman at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 22:19:26 2003
From: ratalman at yahoo.com (ratalman)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 22:19:26 -0000
Subject: Ginny:  green eyes or brown eyes?
Message-ID: <bj8dpe+8r3s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79851

In CoS, p. 40 (US, paperback), as Harry passes Ginny's room in 
the Burrow:

"On the third landing, a door stood ajar.  Harry just caught sight 
of a pair of bright brown eyes staring at him before it closed with 
a snap.  'Ginny'......"

While listening to CoS on audio tape (Jim Dale's reading), he 
clearly states "bright green eyes" in this same passage.  If this is 
a mistake, I'm surprised that it would not have been caught and 
corrected.

Which is it, brown or green?

Robyn




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 22:30:24 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 22:30:24 -0000
Subject: Nice vs. Good
In-Reply-To: <20030904201905.80092.qmail@web11406.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bj8ee0+5qsc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79852

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Nora Renka <nrenka at y...> wrote:
<snip> I keep seeing this Nice/Good dichotomy all over the
> place.  (Why, yes, there *is* an active Snapethread
> going, now that you mention it...).  I think there are
> some valid points to it, that those who do good,
> morally correct things are not always nice people.  
> 
> Fine.  I'll buy that.
> 
> But there are some moral theories, particularly the
> ones that are more stative (Kantian and virtue ethics
> come to mind here) that aren't so forgiving.  'Being
> nice' can be used as description of behavior which
> places the moral orientation and importance onto an
> actor rather than an act.  Kantian ethics tells us to
> act as though each person is an end in and of
> themself, and not to treat people as means.  
<snip>> 
> It's an ethical requirement to treat each person with
> respect for their innate humanity and human dignity. 
> And in this formulation, cruelty is a serious offense,
> and not something that can or should be ignored
> because the subject makes some correct actions.
> 
> Pensieve!James is cruel.  I myself found that scene
> rather disturbing, and felt some real empathy with
> Snape.  But on reflection, I actually find myself
> *less* sympathetic for Snape now than I used to be,
> because he should know better.  He's been the
> tormented, and now he's the tormentor, and the mental
> gymnastics must be amazing.  But he'd be a better
> person if he'd realize being 'nice' isn't a trivial
> thing.
><snip> 

Laura:

What you're saying makes a great deal of sense to me.  It also makes 
me wonder what you (and anyone else who cares to respond) would say 
about DD in this context.  There seems to be general agreement that, 
due to his position in the Order, he has to consider the overall 
situation rather than the good of any particular individual in it. Is 
it possible to do that and still meet the moral guidelines you set 
forth?  How?  And would you agree that he fails to do so with Sirius 
and with Harry?  It's not like he has hundreds or thousands of people 
at his command-it's a dozen or so if that.  So theoretically DD could 
have weighed the capabilities of each Order member and givne them 
appropriate assignments. 
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
> http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com




From wsherratt3338 at rogers.com  Thu Sep  4 22:54:03 2003
From: wsherratt3338 at rogers.com (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 22:54:03 -0000
Subject: Snape,Harry and the Pensieves
In-Reply-To: <bj8dnm+jlnt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj8fqb+lang@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79853

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sylviablundell2001" 
<sylviablundell at a...> wrote:
> Sarah wrote:
> Snape made a point of taking out the pensieve, removing some 
thoughts 
> from his head and transferring them to the pensieve in front of 
> Harry. That's like taking out a diary in front of another person, 
> writing something in front of them, and putting it away.
> 
> Surely Snape is unaware that Harry has any previous knowledge of 
> pensieves or their function. To him, itwould be like leaving his 
> diary in the same room as an illiterate person who would have no 
idea 
> of how to use it. If he had known that Harry knew exactly what a 
> pensieve was, I doubt if he would have left him alone with it.
> Sylvia (who keeps a rather uninteresting diary, but would hate 
anyone 
> nosing into it).

As I recall, though, this was the SECOND time Harry had been left 
alone with Snape's Pensieve-thoughts.  The first time was when they 
heard Prof. Trelawney screaming in the hall upstairs, and Snape left 
suddenly to deal with the emergency.  Harry waited for a moment, and 
then followed him.  I was filling in the backstory for myself, of 
course, but I thought that Snape must have realized after returning 
to his office that he'd left the Pensieve unattended, and yet Harry 
had not snooped in it.  So when the second occasion came about, he 
left and assumed that Harry would behave the same way.  So he would 
have been DOUBLY angry when he returned and found Harry looking in 
the Pensieve; the invasion of privacy was bad enough, but he must 
have felt like he'd been made a fool of because he'd actually 
trusted Harry to behave properly.  Someone like Snape would be 
really infuriated to think that he'd been tricked into letting his 
guard down; it would just reinforce his bad opinion of Harry.

Wanda





From marysophia888 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 21:01:31 2003
From: marysophia888 at yahoo.com (Sophia Runyan)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 21:01:31 -0000
Subject: Voldemort vs. Riddle
In-Reply-To: <bhe4f4+i465@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj897b+ectc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79855

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "acciosirius" 
<jendiangelo at c...> wrote:
> Ravenclaw Bookworm:
> 
> > I was skimming SS last night and noticed in the first chapter 
that 
> > Dumbledore tells McGonagall that he has been trying for years to 
> get 
> > people to call LV by his "proper name: Voldemort."  Contrast that 
> > with the battle in OoP when Dumbledore keeps calling him "Tom."
> > 
> > Is that because it would be confusing to introduce too many facts 
> at 
> > the beginning of the first book?  Or is there a more subtle 
reason 
> > for Dumbledore's (and JKR's) wording?
> 
> Me (AccioSirius Jen):
> 
> My guess is that Dumbledore knew Lord Thingy personally as "Tom 
> Riddle", so that's what he calls him when they meet in the MoM. But 
> Dumbledore also realizes that no one else in the WW recognizes Lord 
> Voldemort as Tom Riddle, so he refers to him as Lord Voldemort when 
> around other wizards (they would think that was his "proper" name). 
> (Boy, I really need a nap, because I'm confusing myself again!)
> 
> Just my babbling thoughts... AccioSirius Jen

Concerning the use of Voldemort's name, Dumbledore says (in PS/SS or 
CoS; sorry, can't think of exactly where) that "fear of the name 
increases fear of the thing itself".  
Hope that answers your question.

Sonia
Lurker Extraordinaire





From Zarleycat at aol.com  Thu Sep  4 23:30:30 2003
From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 23:30:30 -0000
Subject: Sirius reservations
In-Reply-To: <23C7FC38-DEFB-11D7-BE0B-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bj8hum+5ttb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79856

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:> 

snip
> To most male fans Sirius is not a sympathetic or credible 
character, 
> not in the same way that Snape or DD or Arthur Weasley is. 

Well, not being male, I can't comment on how men see any of the 
above.  Arthur is an interesting choice - a perfectly nice man who 
loves his wife and kids and who's often befuddled by at least some of 
his children, somehwat confused by the world of muggle artifacts, 
(which is his line of work, to some extent), and is often henpecked 
by his wife.  I guess guys could find that sympathetic and credible,
but mostly in the "there but for the grace of God..."

And Snape...I'll give you credible, but sympathetic?  <shudders>

If they try 
> to put themselves in his position it doesn't work. His behaviour  
> doesn't tie in with male expectations or projections. Not only 
that, as 
> soon as he appears, so do holes all over the plot.

<massive snip of things others have addressed>

I'm not going to try to talk you into liking Sirius, because it's 
your right to not like him or not think his character had a purpose.  
It strikes me that if Sirius and his actions are riddled with so many 
plot holes for you, then JKR didn't do a particularly good job in 
creating this character...<looks over her shoulder for the Heresy 
Police>

Marianne




From wildfire_517 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 22:07:33 2003
From: wildfire_517 at yahoo.com (wildfire_517)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 22:07:33 -0000
Subject: unforgiveable charms?
In-Reply-To: <bj8c1j+46j5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj8d35+5q5r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79857

>Laura:
(snips)
> shouldn't it be highly improper (if not worth a 
> life term in Azkaban) to use Legilimency on someone without their 
> permission?  Or to access their private thoughts in any other 
manner?

Wyld:

(Ignoring the rest of the potentially controversial post)

   Legilimency is a grey area I wouldn't try to touch, but I will 
take a stab at it anyway.  Here goes...

   It seems to me that Legilimency wouldn't be Unforgivable.  Take, 
for instance, a mother using it on her son (or daughter..must be PC) 
to find out if they are telling the truth about who really turned the 
family dog into a giant clown statue.  I wouldn't look at that as 
Unforgivable.  That would seem to me to be a perfectly legit use of 
such a talent.  Ditto to using it to discover exactly who committed 
this crime or that crime, though that is even more of a grey area as 
how is anyone supposed to know that the person performing Legilimency 
actually saw what they said they saw!  Regardless, I would also look 
on that as being an acceptable use of said talent.

   If we're talking about simply invading one's mind for the sole 
purpose of doing harm, committing a crime, or so on, then that would 
be Unforgivable in my view.  It's still such a grey area, though.  
How is anyone supposed to believe what one person *says* they saw in 
another person's mind, unless there is some sort of joint Legilimency 
that we have yet to see.  It's all quite confusing.

Wyld - walks away mumbling to himself, thinking that unforgivable 
charms just might be called curses, since there is no "curse" class





From silverdragon at ezweb.com.au  Fri Sep  5 22:33:08 2003
From: silverdragon at ezweb.com.au (silverdragon at ezweb.com.au)
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 08:33:08 +1000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
References: <bj84bf+3ums@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <008101c373fd$d203f260$79984cca@Monteith>

No: HPFGUIDX 79858


From: "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 5:38 AM

>
> Oh, please.  Get real here.  You know perfectly well that Snape threw
> the jar.  Apologetics can get silly after a while.  Even I, Sirius-
> lover that I am, will readily agree that his behavior at Grimmauld
> Place left a lot to be desired.  And yes, Harry was way, way, way out
> of line for looking in the pensieve.  And, yes, you can't help but
> feel sorry for teenage!Snape after seeing the treatment he received
> from James and Sirius.  Still...Snape threw the jar.  Any other
> reading is tortured.
>  No matter what my kid did to a teacher short of imposing physical
> harm, I'd expect the teacher to refrain from touching or otherwise
> physically threatening my kid.  And believe me, I let my kids get
> what's coming to them when they do something wrong.  But there is a
> bright line.


Well I'm certainly not apologising for the behaviour. This *is* a book
character and hence needs no apology, simply for serving the writer's
purpose.
But I agree, the man-handling of a stundent is inexcusable. I was merely
offering the suggestion that we do not, in fact *know* that the jar was
thrown. Would I have been angry enough to throw it? You bet! But it does not
say, for example, in the text that "Snape hurled a jar of cockroaches at
Harry as he fled."  It says a jar exploded. I agree that it's likely that it
was thrown, but I'm offering a suggested, textually derived alternative.

I admit that Snape is my absolute favourite character, but I still agree
that he is petty, mean and small-minded. I *like* the character petty, mean
and small-minded. It leaves a lot of room for development, as well as the
possibility of leaving the character to flounder developmentally when
everyone else is moving on - a contrast suggesting that some people just
*can't* move on. A real-life Snape I'd be itching to slap.

Nox (Snapefan but not a Snape apologist)





From journalisto at hotmail.com  Thu Sep  4 23:28:57 2003
From: journalisto at hotmail.com (Dan Youngren)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 16:28:57 -0700
Subject: [HPforGrownups] GetTheGalleons!?
Message-ID: <BAY9-F5O3C9vBGtWva70000237d@hotmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79859

PhoenixCharms wrote:

>They have muggle money... and Hermione doesn't have a job, so how does she
>get the wizard money?
>
>Is there a place to trade muggle money for wizard money?? But why would 
>there
>be when a wizard in need of muggle money can simply magic some up?

Dan:

Well, obviously so, eh? She has galleons so there must be a place to 
exchange--I'm quite sure Gringotts would do it. It's just like me going from 
America to Mexico--I need to convert my currency. It would only be 
reasonable for Gringotts to get the business (banks charge for that service, 
I believe...).

Further, JKR says so:
"Those goblins are sneaky people. They manage to put the Muggle money back 
into circulation. They are like "fences" --British slang, do you understand 
it?"

Arthur uses muggle money when he and Harry head off to the Ministry in OoP, 
and I suppose he could've transfigured some parchment, but would he? The 
Weasleys seem very honest; while it's probably impossible to counterfeit 
gold (the money-loving goblins would be fools not to have come up with a way 
to protect the reliability and safety of the gold they produce), I'm sure 
many wizards wouldn't think twice about conning a couple unsuspecting 
muggles.

Dan

_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive larger attachments with Hotmail Extra Storage.   
http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es




From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 22:51:24 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 22:51:24 -0000
Subject: Sirius reservations
In-Reply-To: <23C7FC38-DEFB-11D7-BE0B-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bj8flc+10m5o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79860

>>>> Kneasy:
The overwhelming 
majority (close to 100%, but some list names defied analysis) of the 
mourners were female. Presumably adult female. They obviously find 
him 
sympathetic; but they are not the market the book is aimed at. Could 
it be that they have allowed sympathy to out-weigh JKR's plot 
requirements?

To most male fans Sirius is not a sympathetic or credible character, 
not in the same way that Snape or DD or Arthur Weasley is. If they 
try 
to put themselves in his position it doesn't work. His behaviour 
doesn't tie in with male expectations or projections. Not only that, 
as 
soon as he appears, so do holes all over the plot.>>>>


Sarah:
Sirius reminds me of my uncle, which is possibly his role in the 
story.  When my uncle turned 50, he decided he was finally old 
enough to admit that he snuck out during his teens to go and pull 
pranks throughout the neighborhood.  Including coning-off a cul-de-
sac with orange traffic cones taken from somewhere else.  He was 
known to take his sons and their friends out to tee-pee some trees 
while my cousins were in their teens.  Sirius also reminds me of the 
uncle of a friend of mine.  The person who initiates a teen male 
into the rites of mischief, mayham, and later, women.  The bachelor 
uncle who never quite grows up and teaches a boy the ways of being a 
naughty male, to the amusement of the more serious father (here, 
seems to be Lupin or Dumbledore) and the exasperation of the mother 
(Molly Weasley).


>>>> Kneasy:
> Swim back to the mainland? In that physical condition? The Lexicon 
 places Azkaban  in the middle of the North Sea, not Hogwarts lake. 
It's at least 100 miles from shore.  "I journeyed north" (to 
Hogwarts). OK He might have landed on the 
 Scottish coast south of Hogwarts. Note there  is no mention of his 
side trip to Privet Drive (another 500+ miles, there and back). 
Sirius as the 'Grim" is described as 'hulking'. Not thin, skeletal, 
worn or starved. And no, not enough time has elapsed for him to feed 
himself up again.>>>>
 
Sarah:
As to some of the plot holes, I don't remember Harry describing the 
Grim as particulary chubby.  Just hulking and menacing.  Which a 
skinny dog with very long hair can look.  (Look at cats: some that 
seem quite chubby are really just furballs that look like skinny 
sticks when wet.)  The Grim never seemed to be a plot hole to me.  


Plus, we don't have any real textual evidence as to where Azkaban 
is.  Even if it's in the North Sea, it could be off of England, not 
Scotland.  Really, anywhere along the eastern coastline.  The North 
Sea is quite large, after all.  I always assumed that since he had 
to journey north to get to Hogwarts in Scotland, that Azkaban was in 
the southern part of the North Sea.  And I envisioned it to be 
something like Alcatraz for wizards, which is actually only a few 
miles from the coast of San Francisco.  Maybe a few miles more from 
the coast than Alcatraz is, but no more than 10 to 20 miles off the 
shore.  I assume that Sirius could see the coast from Azkaban, or 
else how would he know which way to swim to the mainland?  I always 
assumed that Azkaban was in between the eastern coast of England and 
the western coast of the Netherland (around where The Hague is).  
Closer to the Channel than to the Artic Ocean.  Or alternatively, 
the tide could have sent Sirius south while he was swimming to 
shore, causing Sirius to land on the southern shore of England, 
below Surrey.  

>>>> Kneasy:
> His account of his escape from Azkaban is more than a bit 
threadbare. "So one night when they opened my door to bring food, I 
slipped past them as a dog....it's so much harder for them to sense 
animal emotions that they were confused...."   Is there any 
evidence, apart from this passage, that Dementors are 
confused by animal emotions?  >>>>>

Sarah:
I thought they were just confused by dog-Sirius escaping, and their 
inability to find dog-Sirius.  The dementors weren't confused by 
Crookshanks becaue they weren't searching for Crookshanks.  Come on, 
the Dementors were probably confused that they couldn't sense a 
human in the process of escaping, and tried to latch onto a dog 
emotion.  They sensed Sirius in his dog form before, and thought he 
was going insane.  They weren't concentrating on trying to find him, 
just checking that he was still there.  They noticed his emotions 
were less human, and chalked it up to insanity.  The confusion came 
in when Sirius' emotions were less human, presumably from insanity, 
but he was sane enough to leave.  And confusion as to how to follow 
a being whose emotions they couldn't quite latch onto.   They might 
have noticed something slipping past them, but unable to really 
sense it.





>>>> Kneasy:
It is just possible that before the confrontation with Pettigrew or 
> while awaiting trial, Sirius heard that Harry had been placed with 
the  Dursleys. But why go there? First, foremost and apparently 
exclusively he wanted revenge. It wasn't Harry he moaned about in 
his sleep at nights, it was Pettigrew. Scabbers was the obsession. 
Why didn't he try and find the Weasleys? They are an apparently well 
known family and that's where Scabbers was. If he was going to be 
heading anywhere before Hogwarts it was the Piggery.>>>
> 


Sarah:
Go to the Burrow?  Why would he do that, when the newspaper article 
said that the Weasley's were in Egypt?  We don't know when the 
Weasley's got back from Egypt, aside from knowing that they got  
back in time to go to Diagon Alley for school supplies.  And we know 
from Hagrid that he told Sirius that he was taking baby Harry to the 
Dursley's.  Hagrid told Sirius this at the Potters destroyed home, 
when Sirius tried to take baby-Harry.  Plus, Sirius only went after 
Scabbers/Pettigrew because Scabbers/Pettigrew was in a position to 
harm Harry.  He wasn't obsessed with revenge; he only became 
obsessed with Scabbers/Pettigrew after he found out that 
Scabbers/Pettigrew was the pet of a young wizard at Hogwarts.
 
>>>> Kneasy: 
> As an ex-pupil of Hogwarts, why did Sirius think the Fat Lady 
would admit him without the password?
>>>

Sarah:
Harry tries to get in without a password at the beginning of OoP 
until Neville shows up.  He knew he wouldn't be able to, but he 
tried anyways.

>>>> Kneasy: 
>Since when have Animagi been able to communicate with other animals 
as  Sirius said he did with Crookshanks? Even as a dog, can he talk 
cat? Hermione is the closest to Crookshanks and she doesn't have 
this level of understanding or communication. How come Sirius does?

Sarah:
Ah, the mystery of cats, especially Crookshanks.  Cats seem to have 
an uncanny ability to "read" people.  One of my ex-roommates cats 
always knew when I was upset, and would come over with this look, 
rub against my leg, and try to get petted.  Like what Crookshanks 
does with Harry quite a bit in OoP: Crookshanks seems to go to Harry 
a lot for a petting in OoP.  Plus, Sirius himself says that 
Crookshanks is extremely intelligent and doesn't think that 
Crookshanks is a normal cat.  Neither do I, especially since 
Mundungus Fletcher's description is EXACTLY like Crookshanks.  
(Alas, Crookshanks and Mundungus are in the same room at the same 
time.)  They're both ginger haired and bandy-legged.  Something's up 
with Crookshanks; very bizzare.  (My pet theory about Crookshanks is 
that he's either an animagus related to Mundungus or some kind of 
half-human offspring.  Can a human that's been transfigured into an 
animal reproduce with that animal?  Like ferret-Malfoy, could he 
have mated with a female ferret while a ferret?  Kind of gross, but 
they would be an animal at the time.)



>>>> Kneasy:> 
"I've been living in the forest ever since.." Nearly an entire 
school year. With no problems from Acromantula, Centaurs, Werewolves 
or other friendly forest folk. Hagrid never noticed either, despite 
being the forest expert. >>>

Sarah: 
Yes, but all the creatures in the forest seem to leave other 
creatures alone.  (Except the centaurs with Grawp.)  We don't know 
if acromantulas or centaurs would bother a dog; they don't seem to 
bother the unicorns or thestrals that live in the forest.  And 
Hagrid might have noticed dog-Sirius, but why would he care?  
Crookshanks apparently roamed around the forest then, and Hagrid 
never commented/noticed either.  And werewolves are only dangerous 
to humans, not dogs, and only show up once a month.  Plus, who knows 
what Sirius ate in the forest then.  What does Grawp eat?  



>>>> Kneasy:
> After the Shrieking Shack fracas the Dementors mass and close in. 
There is Harry, Sirius and Hermione. Sirius passes out, so does 
Hermione. The  Dementors ignore them and go for Harry. Why not 
Sirius? Isn't he the one they are implacably hunting? Why Harry? 
It's almost a repeat  of the  Quidditch match incident. Ignore 
everyone  else, we like the smell of Potter!
>>>>


Sarah:
Harry was physically in the way of the other two, and full of 
emotion at the time.  Why not take Harry out?  He was in the way, 
and Dementors don't exactly attempt to kiss only the person they 
were sent after.  The Dementors in Little Whinging try to kiss 
Dudley, too, but were only sent after Harry.  Since they are blind, 
they might not know who is who, and just try to kiss whoever is 
there.  How exactly do they determine who is who?  They seem to 
sense people based on emotions; maybe Harry and Sirius seem very 
similar to them.  


Sarah





From sdpinoy2003 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 22:22:32 2003
From: sdpinoy2003 at yahoo.com (Ephrem B)
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 15:22:32 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] How do muggles get admitted to Hogwarts?
In-Reply-To: <bj7s4f+c3fg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030904222232.40062.qmail@web40011.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79861

Robert Jones <jones.r.h.j at worldnet.att.net> wrote:"Anna" writes that JKR said somewhere that when a magical child is 
born his or her name is written down in a book by an enchanted quill 
and when the child turns 11 he or she gets a letter from Hogwarts.  
I think I have read that too.  But this raises the question of how 
does the quill know what muggle is going to be a witch or wizard?  
How did the quill know the day Hermione was born that she could be a 
witch?  Can muggles learn to be a wizard or witch, or must they be 
born that way?  Are some muggles born with a magic gene?  Does this 
mean Lilly and Hermione were really witches from birth, although 
they had muggle parents?



In the interview with JKR, JKR said that the quill writes down the names of children that are born with magical abilities, not just magical children or children born to wizards.  But it brings up the question, do squibs get to go to magic school if they don't have magical abilities?

"Ephrem"




From azevedan at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 23:39:15 2003
From: azevedan at yahoo.com (azevedan)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 23:39:15 -0000
Subject: Why did Sirius change? was Re: Sirius and Dumbledore
In-Reply-To: <bj7g5t+20ec@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj8if3+q9ih@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79863

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" <foxmoth at q...> 
wrote:
> I've been mulling over the puzzle of Sirius's inconsistent 
behavior 

This was brought up before, and I think it bears repeating, 
since this thread has been going for a while with no reference 
to it:

Pay attention to Harry's falling asleep over his homework in 
Chapter 18 (OotP).  JKR calls out (twice!) "These plantes are 
moste efficacious in the inflaming of the braine, and are 
therefore much used...where the wizard is desirous of producing 
hot-headedness and recklessness..."

and then, right after that, no less, "Sirius was beoming reckless
cooped up in Grimmauld Place".

Combine that with 1) Kreacher serving Sirius (and preparing his
meals, as Sirius implies when he calls to Kreacher (who isn't 
around) to make breakfast), 2) the only time Sirius seems his 
old self is at Christmas, when Kreacher has left, and 3) Sirius
becomes sullen and withdrawn again when Kreacher returns just 
before Harry returns to Hogwarts.   Sounds like house elves may 
be desirous of producing hot-headedness and recklessness - 
really, only drawing out those aspects of Sirius' personality.

Ann




From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Thu Sep  4 21:44:19 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 21:44:19 -0000
Subject: SHIP Harry's Sexual preference- Sue
In-Reply-To: <3F5648CC.000001.65585@monica>
Message-ID: <bj8bnj+fca0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79864

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" <kcawte at b...> 
wrote:

> Besides it is an irresistible urge (especially for fanfic writers, I know I
> catch myself doing it) to have everyone happily paired off. So we have
> Harry/Hermione, Ron/Luna, Neville/Ginny; OR Ron/Hermione, Harry/Ginny,
> Neville/Luna; OR Harry/Draco, Ron/Hermione, Neville/Ginny; or Harry/Ron,
> Hermione/Ginny, Neville/Severus etc etc - whatever your personal arrangement
> is and then Dean and Seamus who we don't know much about (Dean is artistic?
> or is that fanon, and a Hammers fan and Seamus is Irish and possibly a
> quidditch fan) just sort of sitting there on the edge of the group and
> people want to pair them off so - pair them off together since they seem to
> be friends anyway - two birds; one handy stone.
>  
> It's similar to the way your happily married friends always want to pair you
> off with someone, once your 'star' Harry, Hermione, Ron, whoever it is you
> re writing about, is happily discovering the joys of love, romance and hot
> sex ;) you suddenly get the urge to have everyone else discover them too.
> 


    Yes, the pairing idea is *very* true. That's what was bothering 
me about poor Neville. He's so painfully shy, that I can't even 
really see if he'd be able to find a playmate, straight or gay.  I 
guess its a good thing that the Creevy brothers came along, at least 
that gives him a chance. ;)

    You're correct about Dean and Seamus. They both like what you 
stated. I *like* them as a pair, and have nothing against it, I was 
only concerned about where the Slut!Seamus came from. :)
 
   As for discovering the pleasures of their bodies and sharing with 
a friend, I'm all for it. As long as its consentual, its all good. ;) 
Besides, they spend 24/7 with each other for 9 months or so, and I 
think something will have to happen.


   Jeff







From hulahulagirl205 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  4 21:11:54 2003
From: hulahulagirl205 at yahoo.com (Nadia Kennedy)
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 14:11:54 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Sirius reservations
In-Reply-To: <23C7FC38-DEFB-11D7-BE0B-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <20030904211155.74056.qmail@web60105.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79865

B Arrowsmith <arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com> wrote:

Things have been quiet, my life insurance is fully paid up and no-one 
has rubbished me for, oh, at least a week. I tried checking past posts 
for previous thoughts on these lines, but there's thousands of entries 
for Sirius. No matter. Time to stir up a hornets nest.

(A good cut)

Hmm. More holes than the local golf course.

Needless to say -  I have a theory. Well, a partial theory. What if 
Sirius is not just an Animagus but also an unwitting catspaw. Maybe he 
was sprung from Azkaban - 'accidentally'  let loose by the influence of 
friends of You-know-who in the Ministry and hotly pursued by Dementors. 
The Ministry instructs Dementors after all. And what  a coincidence! We 
think Black will be around Hogwarts, just where Harry is!   But the 
Dementors have modified orders. Don't worry about Black - Get Potter!
Umbridge must have got her idea from somewhere, she's nasty but hardly 
an original thinker.



Another thought provoking post, Kneasy.
 
After I read your argument, I paged through PoA and looked up the relevant scenes, and realized that you are on to something here. There are more holes in Sirius's story than holes in Lupin's robes. I think you're going to need an acronym! ;)

But what really ticked me off about the whole Life and Death of Sirius was how JKR made him act so different than he had in the other books. The first time I read about Sirius' mood swings and anti-social behavior , a tiny voice inside my head said "She's going to off Sirius!" When it finally happened, I was disappointed in how crappy a death it was. I mean with Sirius, I expected something somewhat spectacular, not just a glad-he's-dead-now sort of thing. I know that JKR liked Sirius, so maybe she was just "distancing" herself from his death, but still, I feel more than a little betrayed by how she did it.

Nadia




From shirley2allie at hotmail.com  Thu Sep  4 23:45:35 2003
From: shirley2allie at hotmail.com (Shirley)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 23:45:35 -0000
Subject: Nice vs. Good
In-Reply-To: <20030904201905.80092.qmail@web11406.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bj8iqv+s8eg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79866

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Nora Renka <nrenka at y...> wrote:
--<rather hefty snip>--
> Nora:
> Pensieve!James is cruel.  I myself found that scene
> rather disturbing, and felt some real empathy with
> Snape.  But on reflection, I actually find myself
> *less* sympathetic for Snape now than I used to be,
> because he should know better.  He's been the
> tormented, and now he's the tormentor, and the mental
> gymnastics must be amazing.  But he'd be a better
> person if he'd realize being 'nice' isn't a trivial
> thing.
> 
> As always, I welcome comments/flames/whatever via
> email, and please point out any holes in logic.  It's
> been a long day. :)
> 
> -Nora

now Shirley, noting how she always seems to reply to posts just as 
she's walking out the door for the day....

I agree; I found that I didn't like Pensieve!James much, either.  
Perhaps it's because I hated watching pointless cruelty like that in 
grade school and still do.  However, I must point out that one of the 
traits of human nature that never fails to mystify me is that oft-
times, the 'bullied' eventually becomes the 'bully'.  I saw it 
countless times in college when the fraternity pledges (first years) 
were hazed by the upperclassmen and hated it; only to dish out the 
very same horrible treatment to the next group of pledges when they 
(the original first years) became the upperclassmen - their logic 
being that *they* had to put up with it, so now it's *their* turn - 
an awful, neverending cycle.  I've also seen it with some of the kids 
at my daughter's school (so they are now working on "bully-proofing" 
the school).

At any rate, I just figured that Snape was doing the same thing.

Shirley, who rather likes Snape a bit more after seeing some of his 
memories, but wishes he would grow up ;-)




From jmmears at comcast.net  Fri Sep  5 00:00:06 2003
From: jmmears at comcast.net (serenadust)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 00:00:06 -0000
Subject: Ginny:  green eyes or brown eyes?
In-Reply-To: <bj8dpe+8r3s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj8jm6+nhuh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79867

Robyn wrote:
> In CoS, p. 40 (US, paperback), as Harry passes Ginny's room in 
> the Burrow:
 
> "On the third landing, a door stood ajar.  Harry just caught sight 
> of a pair of bright brown eyes staring at him before it closed 
with 
> a snap.  'Ginny'......"
> 
> While listening to CoS on audio tape (Jim Dale's reading), he 
> clearly states "bright green eyes" in this same passage.  If this 
is 
> a mistake, I'm surprised that it would not have been caught and 
> corrected.
> 
> Which is it, brown or green?


I think that Dale goofed and the producers didn't catch it.  Both 
the US and UK versions of CoS say "brown" and in the British cds 
(read by Stephen Fry) it is also "brown". 

I remember when I was new to this list (nearly TWO years ago!), I 
was really thrilled to have caught this and thought I was the first 
one to notice the discrepancy.  Alas, one of the Mods referred me to 
the HPfGU archives where, sure enough she had brought it up way back 
in 2000 *sigh*.  

Jo Serenadust, failed LOON




From siskiou at earthlink.net  Fri Sep  5 00:02:38 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 17:02:38 -0700
Subject: SHIP Neville, was Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: SHIP Harry's Sexual preference- Sue
In-Reply-To: <bj8bnj+fca0@eGroups.com>
References: <bj8bnj+fca0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <1841527866.20030904170238@earthlink.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 79868



Hi,

Thursday, September 04, 2003, 2:44:19 PM, jeffl1965 wrote:

> Yes, the pairing idea is *very* true. That's what was bothering 
> me about poor Neville. He's so painfully shy, that I can't even 
> really see if he'd be able to find a playmate, straight or gay.  I 
> guess its a good thing that the Creevy brothers came along, at least 
> that gives him a chance. ;)

Well, he may be shy, but he asked Hermione to the ball long
before Harry and Ron ever attempted it.

Neville has always been able to stand up for himself, and if
he likes someone, he seems to be able to stand a possible
rejection and at least give it a try :)

I think Neville will do just fine, and not necessarily with
the Creevy brothers ;)

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net

Visit our two pet bunnies: http://home.earthlink.net/~siskiou/





From greatraven at hotmail.com  Fri Sep  5 00:56:14 2003
From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 00:56:14 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj8995+cfco@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj8mve+m643@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79869

-y I would have liked to stay in that office and see 
> what he did next. More smashing? A total breakdown? A
self-satisfied 
> smirk? Fist-pump in the air? A phone call do Dr. Phil? The 
> possibilities are endlessly fascinating.
> 
>
> 
> Melpomene

Or sank down into his chair, white-faced."Ohmighod, he's *seen* what 
his dad did to me, he's seen me vulnerable and now the little creep
is 
going to go and have a good laugh about it with all his friends! The 
whole school is going to know!"? Hurt, grief, humiliation? Have you 
noticed that he gives Harry the cold shoulder afterwards, can't even 
come up with a sarcastic comment or two? Don't get me wrong, I 
wouldn't want Snape for a teacher, or for a colleague (I work in the 
school system). He'd be the chemistry teacher who stayed in the 
science staffroom and rarely mixed with anyone, and yelled at the lab 
technician. But my heart went out to him in this scene and in case
you 
hadn't noticed, so did Harry's, for however little time it lasted.
Sue B





From fc26det at aol.com  Fri Sep  5 01:04:16 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 01:04:16 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj8mve+m643@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj8neg+orj4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79870

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sbursztynski" > 
 But my heart went out to him in this scene and in case
> you 
> hadn't noticed, so did Harry's, for however little time it lasted.
> Sue B

Now Susan:
I think Harry's heart is still with him.  I think that is why he is 
so very angry with him now.  Sirius and Remus admitted that what 
Harry saw was true.  It is easier for Harry to be angry at Snape than 
his hero father who just fell off his white horse.  I hope that Harry 
figures out that his anger is misdirected in the future books.
Susan




From greatraven at hotmail.com  Fri Sep  5 01:02:21 2003
From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 01:02:21 -0000
Subject: unforgiveable charms?
In-Reply-To: <bj8c1j+46j5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj8nat+ksak@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79871

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
> We know that there are Unforgiveable curses.  But I've been 
> wondering, what with the strong feelings about Harry looking into 
> Snape's pensieve thoughts, if there should be Unforgiveable charms 
as 
> well.  For instance, shouldn't it be highly improper (if not worth
a 
> life term in Azkaban) to use Legilimency on someone without their 
> permission?  Or to access their private thoughts in any other 
manner?
> 
> Laura, 

But you can do that with veritaserum and this seems to be legal, 
though maybe it shouldn't be. Snape has it in his supply cabinet and 
even threatens to use it on Harry at one point. If it was illegal, he 
wouldn't admit to having it, would he? :-) 

Sue B




From fc26det at aol.com  Fri Sep  5 01:11:22 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 01:11:22 -0000
Subject: To Squib or Not To Squib
Message-ID: <bj8nrq+96qv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79872

We are told that magical babies names are written in a book when they 
are born.  I am wondering if squibs are considered to be magical 
babies until they go to school or if they are not put in the book or 
what?  Neville said that his uncle and grandmother were afraid he 
didn't have enough magic to go to Hogwarts but I wonder if that was a 
misconception on Neville's part.  Filch is a squib and he is at 
Hogwarts.  The room of requirement works for him like it does for the 
kids.  I wonder also if there are degrees of squibness. (is that a 
word?)
Susan




From severusbook4 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 01:44:19 2003
From: severusbook4 at yahoo.com (severusbook4)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 01:44:19 -0000
Subject: Hogwart's Express (not to do with the book)
Message-ID: <bj8ppj+p4rm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79873

I just read that the Hogwart's Express used in the films was vandalized.  I know this 
has nothing to do with the books, but in a round about way it has some interest to 
the fans of Harry Potter.  I found in at Reuters.com, oddly enough news.

Thought you should know.

Sevvie  




From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Fri Sep  5 00:09:26 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 01:09:26 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: SHIP Harry's Sexual preference- Sue
References: <bj8bnj+fca0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F57D436.000001.89167@monica>

No: HPFGUIDX 79874

 
Jeff
 
You're correct about Dean and Seamus. They both like what you 
stated. I *like* them as a pair, and have nothing against it, I was 
only concerned about where the Slut!Seamus came from. :)
  

 
 K -

Well we know Seamus seems to be fairly outgoing and sociable, also he's
Irish so people assume that an older Seamus is going to enjoy alcohol (not
that I'm implying all Irishmen are drunks but they do have a bit of a
reputation for lively partying and partaking of alcoholic beverages). So we
ve got party-animal!Seamus without straying too much from canon - it's only
a small step from there to slut!Seamus. It's similar to the reasoning that
gives us slut!Sirius - Marauder-era Sirius is young, sexy, long haired, and
owns a flying motorbike ergo he must be the school slut ....

And it's a nice dynamic to write about from a fairly cliched romance pov -
one partner is the outgoing slut, beloved by all the girls and most of the
boys (Seamus or Sirius) and the other is shyer, more reserved aritstic
and/or intellectual and quite possibly overlooked by the female population
(Dean or Remus). So then you can have both of them wondering whether the
other would ever be interested in them and you get a nice dose of angst
leading up to your happy romantic ending (and hot sex possibly) - can you
tell I like first-time fics? :) 

But no there is no real evidence for slut!Seamus at all - for all we know
the outgoing exterior could hide a terribly insecure interior while Dean
could be shagging anything with a pulse :)

What I want to know is what is it about Seamus that leads people to make the
oler version of him a mediwizard? Because I've seen it done several times
and am even doing it myself - the idea does have appeal but I don't know
*why*!

K 



From editor at texas.net  Fri Sep  5 02:00:36 2003
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 21:00:36 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape's goatee?  NOOooooooooo!
References: <bj584i+jk1p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <007001c37351$80a5ca80$3605a6d8@texas.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 79875

Erin wailed:

> A few months ago, when I first joined this group, my attention was
> drawn to a picture of Professor Snape, drawn by J.K. Rowling, which
> is in the photos section of HP for Grownups.  In it, he has a
> goatee.  This startled me, as never in my wildest dreams had I ever
> pictured a bearded Snape.  He's never described as having one in the
> books, right?

If you have the American editions, look in Book 1 as well. The chapter
illustration for The Potions Master shows him just like this; balding, and
bearded. (I think it's The Potions Master; I don't have my books and it's
been a while.)

Point is, while this *is* a Grandpre thing--because the Brit versions don't
have the chapter illustrations--it goes way back. There was lively debate
before the first, um, large-screen visual interpretation, as to whether
Snape would have a beard or not.

I'd tend to let the "visual interpretation" carry the day. Besides JKR's
involvement in it, there's the canon fact that it is never mentioned. While
the argument *can* be made that other things that are not mentioned surely
exist there (bras; athlete's foot; toe gnur; head lice; etc.), most of what
can be mustered as evidence for this argument falls into the realm of things
that never cross Harry's mind or path. The fact is that a beard is a
prominent facial feature, one often used to define a shading of mood, and
the lack of any mention of one on the face of someone whom Harry sees often
and judges shades of mood in, argues strongly (to me at least) that it is
not there. No stroking of beard, no smile hidden in beard, nothing, nada,
zip.

Sorry. Long day at work, unwinding.

~Amanda




From severusbook4 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 02:22:39 2003
From: severusbook4 at yahoo.com (severusbook4)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 02:22:39 -0000
Subject: GetTheGalleons!?
In-Reply-To: <BAY9-F5O3C9vBGtWva70000237d@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <bj8s1f+qi02@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79876

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Dan Youngren" <journalisto at h...> wrote:
> PhoenixCharms wrote:
> 
> >They have muggle money... and Hermione doesn't have a job, so how does she
> >get the wizard money?
> >
> >Is there a place to trade muggle money for wizard money?? But why would 
> >there
> >be when a wizard in need of muggle money can simply magic some up?
> 
> Dan:
> 
> Well, obviously so, eh? She has galleons so there must be a place to 
> exchange--I'm quite sure Gringotts would do it. It's just like me going from 
> America to Mexico--I need to convert my currency. It would only be 
> reasonable for Gringotts to get the business (banks charge for that service, 
> I believe...).
> 
> Further, JKR says so:
> "Those goblins are sneaky people. They manage to put the Muggle money back 
> into circulation. They are like "fences" --British slang, do you understand 
> it?"
> 
> Arthur uses muggle money when he and Harry head off to the Ministry in OoP, 
> and I suppose he could've transfigured some parchment, but would he? The 
> Weasleys seem very honest; while it's probably impossible to counterfeit 
> gold (the money-loving goblins would be fools not to have come up with a way 
> to protect the reliability and safety of the gold they produce), I'm sure 
> many wizards wouldn't think twice about conning a couple unsuspecting 
> muggles.
> 
> Dan


Severus here:

In CoS pg. 57 US hardback. "But your Muggles! said Mr. Weasley delightedly. "We must 
have a drink! What's that you've got there? Oh, you're changing Muggle money. Molly, 
look!" He pointed excitedly at the ten-pound notes in Mr. Granger's hand.

This took place at Gringotts.

Sevvie
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Send and receive larger attachments with Hotmail Extra Storage.   
> http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Fri Sep  5 04:22:12 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 04:22:12 -0000
Subject: Clues in COS (was Re: Dumbledore's integrity)
In-Reply-To: <bj7ljc+6hog@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj931k+h6ms@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79877

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> 
> I agree whole-heartedly re Dumbledore, in fact my obsessions 
> regarding his plot status has caused some sad shaking of heads.
> 
> But, you may be pleased to know, that's not the reason for this 
post.
> 
> The slow revelations of his calculations start right in book 1 and
> can then be traced throughout the series.
> I have doubts that this is one of the big clues that apparently 
lurk in CoS.
> IIRC, JKR said that in CoS she nearly "gave the whole thing away".
> (I know I can rely on a rapid correction if I'm wrong.) CoS has
> something(s) apparently much more important buried in it. But
> we consistently ignore the biggest clue JKR has given and chase off
> down side alleys. We should be ashamed of ourselves.


Jen Reese: Kneasy, I was disappointed you didn't post a theory on 
this information--are you formulating one now? 

Well, your post had me thinking about COS all day and wondering what 
part would "give it all away."  I remembered the interview with JKR 
and Steve Kloves on the COS DVD, where JKR mentions that purity of 
blood is a very big deal in the book, and is the topic she thinks is 
of great importance in COS (paraphrasing here--the interview is at 
the Leaky Cauldron in the archives). Does that give anything away, 
except that we find out Voldemort isn't pure blood? This issue does 
come up again in OOTP in the battle scene, and you do have to wonder 
if the DE's know about Voldemort's parents (DE's besides Wormtail).

The part I've always wondered about, and I know this isn't original, 
but it's the part where Riddle says Voldemort is his "past, present 
and future." I never could wrap my mind around Voldemort being 
Riddle's past, unless we're talking about time/space continuum 
theories.  And no way am I venturing there; for me, those theories 
are the equivalent of trying to understand economic theory--my mind 
blanks out. But there is something *important* in his comment. Any 
ideas? 




From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Thu Sep  4 23:54:02 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 23:54:02 -0000
Subject: Book 6 Predictions (was: Predictions at Madison Square Garden)
In-Reply-To: <binsfa+lnd5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj8jar+kjtr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79878

>>> Remnant said in #79117: In book 6, the marauding DE's will drive 
Harry from his new home at Hogwarts, so he must now spend all his time 
with the completely frightening, gut-wrenching duo of
Snape and 
Mad-Eye Moody! Yes, watch Harry as he twists in the wind, separated 
from his friends and mentors.

Kirstini said in #79173:
> (snip snip snip) I want existing themes and trends identified for: 
(snip snip snip)
> Isolation I can identify, yes. All over OoP. Explain why Severus is 
taking time off from his valuable teaching duties, please. And Moody 
isn't such a bad candidate for mentorhood (sort of like a Dementor's 
hood, but not quite. Ha. Ha.), surely? (snip snip snip)

My most humble apologies, Kirstini. I completely missed your reply to 
my earlier post! Not only would I love to discuss this dangerously 
out-on-a-limb theory/prediction with you, but I hope others may join 
in improving/refuting it. Predictions are my favorite threads!

On to the discussion! and apologies for the length.

First, for the plot to move forward, JKR can't just leave all the DEs 
in Azkaban, because their evil deeds are one of the few ways she can 
demonstrate LV's power and horror without putting him on the stage 
directly. Plus, the Dementors seem to be at best an unstable work 
force at present.

So what do these DEs do now that they're on the loose and out in the 
open? Consider Lucious as an individual. He's now a known DE (canon); 
he hates Harry and DD (canon); he hates those who are not pure 
(canon). He's angry about the recent turn of events (seems obvious), 
and he blames Harry/DD (seems obvious).

Now consider that many or all DEs feel the same. Though we know 
few, Bellatrix certainly exhibits the same values as those 
outlined above for Lucious. So....

They want to attack/kill Harry/DD (conjecture). Probably also wreak 
some havoc in the WW against their other enemies (conjecture). But 
with DD so strong, they would likely go after others in the WW first, 
such as any MoM enemies and some mudbloods.

In the meantime, they could plan attack(s) on Harry and/or his 
friends. That takes us to winter break! Ok, no canon there, but it 
would be convenient. :)

Due to the attacks, Harry might leave Hogwarts. If he did, DD would 
surely send two or three trusted OoP'ers to keep him safe and continue 
his preparation for the LV showdown. Moody is obvious (trusted, 
powerful, careful to the point of paranoia as in the ride to 
Grimmauld). Snape, meanwhile is apparently also trusted (by DD), 
powerful (a stud in potions, maybe DADA, too, since he keeps applying 
for it), and an Occlumens. Plus, it's winter break, so he's got a few 
weeks off.

Then the hilarity ensues as Harry is out there with an extremely 
eclectic/paranoid/creepy Moody and 
scary/hated/still-not-trusted-by-Harry Snape. Both might be wonderful 
teachers of Occlumency, DADA, and a host of other skills JKR will make 
us aware of in Book 6. But Harry doesn't bond with either *at all*. 
Moody's eye creeps him out, and he's very imposing. Snape is Snape. 
Why does DD do this? Because he always forgets about the people stuff. 
He's logical to a fault.

In OOP, he leaves Sirius alone in a place that makes him feel 
terrible, trapped and powerless. And DD naively assigns Snape to teach 
Harry Occlumency despite their personal dislike of each other. And he 
never noticed Moody!Crouch, and I can go on. The trend seems to be 
that DD is very, very smart. Brilliant, to quote Ron. But not always 
with people. He's like the genius scientist who completely misreads 
people. Means well, but not perfect. Nobody is in JKR's books.

Anyway, there's maybe another Auror/OoPer with them (this is where I 
guess Tonks), but you get the idea. More to come....

-Remnant





From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 00:54:29 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 00:54:29 -0000
Subject: SHIP cliches (Was: Re: H/H SHIP)
In-Reply-To: <3F57840F.1040401@ipartner.com.pl>
Message-ID: <bj8ms5+g9qr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79879

Well, every  possible SHIP in Harry Poter could be seen as a cliche 
done in Hollywood:
H/Hr: Hero gets the girl; best friends fall in love.  Best noted in 
When Harry Met Sally...; Clueless (based on Emma); tons of classic 
movies; Robin Hood

R/Hr: Bickering sidekicks hook up ala Star Wars Leia and Han Solo.   
A couple bickering equates sexual attraction: Indiana Jones and the 
Temple of Doom; a ton of Doris Day/Rock Hudson - or was it Carey 
Grant? - movies; The Philadelphia Story; Romancing the Stone; Gone 
with the Wind, need I go on?

H/Luna: hero sees a "diamond in the rough" girl that no one likes, 
but falls for her anyway: the Breakfast Club (Emelio Estevez's 
character falls for Alley Sheedy's); She's All That; 10 Things I 
Hate About You (Taming of the Shrew)

H/G: guy falls for girl next door/best friends little sister/girl 
he'd over looked: Sabrina; Breakfast at Tiffany's (that's more the 
girl falls for the guy she overlooked); Northanger Abbey; The 
Princess Bride (girl falls for the farmboy that's been right under 
her nose and in love with her practically forever)

Draco/Ginny: enemies/opposites attracted to each other against their 
will and fall in love/: most notably Romeo and Juliet and every 
knock-off of it, The Breakfast Club (Molly Ringwald/Judd Nelson); 
evil boy falls for good girl and attempts to reedem himselfDangerous 
Liasons

There's also girl goes off with someone besides the hero, even 
though the hero loves her (R/Hr, if Harry ever liked Hermione), such 
as Casablanca.

R/Luna: like Harry/Luna, guy falls for weird, unpopular girl that's 
right under his nose

Neville/Hermione: smart girl falls for not-so-suave guy/tutor and 
tutee fall for each other: Kind of like Say Anything or Dirty 
Dancing.


Every romance has been done before.  So what?  And why is the idea 
of friends who fall for each other so bizzare?  It happens.  Not all 
romance, yes even teen romance, is about ackwardness, shyness, etc.  
If the couple starts off as friends, there's not much ackwardness 
(speaking from experience!) aside from the first hand holding, first 
kiss, etc.  No ackwardness in each other's company, just a sort 
of "what do we do now?" thing.  The ackwardness comes from dating 
someone one doesn't know very well.  (Like Cho and Harry's date.)  
Just from my experience with dating and relationships, anyway!
Sarah





From wildfire_517 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 00:45:29 2003
From: wildfire_517 at yahoo.com (wildfire_517)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 00:45:29 -0000
Subject: GetTheGalleons!? - An aside on Slang
In-Reply-To: <BAY9-F5O3C9vBGtWva70000237d@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <bj8mb9+olah@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79880

Dan: (err...JKR)
> Further, JKR says so:
> "Those goblins are sneaky people. They manage to put the Muggle 
money back 
> into circulation. They are like "fences" --British slang, do you 
understand 
> it?"

Me:
   Just an aside, but fences isn't just British slang.  We use it 
here in the U.S. as well, and I would assume it means the same thing.

  Wyld





From foad at bway.net  Fri Sep  5 00:55:32 2003
From: foad at bway.net (ab35ppw)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 00:55:32 -0000
Subject: Things that will come into play later
In-Reply-To: <bitp0k+ff2e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj8mu4+7fac@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79881

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "erinellii" <erinellii at y...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mom31" <mom31 at r...> wrote:
> > 
> > Some things from OOP I think will come into play later.
> > 
> > 1.  Hermione's otter patronus and/or Cho's swan patronus.  ....  
Was it to show us that Cho is a powerful witch or was 
> it just a personality match? (Swans are beautiful from afar, but not 
> very friendly and even a little dangerous up close> .......>

Historically swans are a symbol of hypocrisy, as they have white 
feathers, so they appear "pure", but they have black flesh. Cho's 
swan patronus may very well be an indication that her pretty exterior 
masks a darker interior.  

The fact that she felt the betrayal of the DA by her friend was 
insignificant certainly indicates a lack of a true appreciation of 
the seriousness of fighting Voldemort. She wants to appear to be 
doing the right thing (fighting Voldemort), but is not truly devoted 
to it. Future traitor to the Order?

ab35ppw





From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 00:59:04 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 00:59:04 -0000
Subject: How do muggles get admitted to Hogwarts?
In-Reply-To: <bj8813+eu03@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj8n4o+ollu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79882

>    Wyld:
> 
>   Furthermore, that would mean that JKRs comment on someone realizing 
> their potential later in life would have to be one of the witches or 
> wizards we have already seen becoming stronger by leaps and bounds.  
> Neville is the first person that comes to mind for me, but I doubt 
> that she would refer to 15 as "late in life."  Any other candidates?
> 


My pet theory is Petunia.  I have a theory that Petunia got a letter 
from Hogwarts, too, and hid it.  She's a little TOO obsessed with 
being normal, in my opinion.  But, like Umbridge said in OoP, if 
magical potential isn't realized/practiced, then it withers (I think 
that's the gist of part of her opening speeck).  But then that 
raises the question of Dudley not having any magical abilities.  Hm, 
I need to think this one through a bit.

Sarah





From dbonett at adelphia.net  Fri Sep  5 01:57:55 2003
From: dbonett at adelphia.net (dtbonett)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 01:57:55 -0000
Subject: Harry Potter is a CHILDREN'S BOOK re: rape sexual preference
In-Reply-To: <bj4iea+9s6e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj8qj3+h00d@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79883

Jim Ferer wrote:
> 
> JKR can, does, and will write about love.  Great literature has long
> dealt with love without getting sexual, or at least with sex in the
> background.  In canon, we have many kinds of love already: Lily's love
> for her son; Dumbledore's for Harry; Harry's for Sirius; the Trio's
> for each other; and the beginning of attraction as the characters get
> older. It's love we don't spend enough time considering these days ?
> the kinds of love, who we love, and how we express it. Getting into
> sexuality might even overshadow some of the excellent points about
> love we're seeing.  It's an example of JKR's genius that we're seeing
> so much about love.

I was glad to see these points brought up, in this thoughtful post. 
Has anyone ever considered that JKR might have chosen to write a
children's book because in 'adult' literature nowadays, writers are
forced to deal with sex, whether it actually adds anything to their
plot or not? I for one am sick of the mandatory sex scenes which
assault the reader (and viewer of tv, movies and even just plain old
commercials) everywhere and one reason that I like Harry Potter is
that one deals with characterization, motivation and other things in a
rich way without over-concentration on just one one aspect of human
life, which can be interesting when dealt with in a thoughtful way but
all too often has nothing to do with the plot of the book and just
appears to have been shoveled in there for the purpose of titillation.

C.S. Lewis, who JKR admits had a great influence on her, once said (I
don't remember what the exact quote is) that if people began to fill
their writing with detailed descriptions of people eating food,
describing exactly how they masticated, how the food went down their
throats and its passage into the large and small intestines etc. and
you were forced to read this constantly, as well as descriptions of
people staring longingly at unattainable food, put in for no reason,
it would be no more strange than the over-concentration on sex that we
have.  Since he died in 1963 (!) one wonder what he would think of
literature in 2003!

I appreciate the reader who brought up the point that these are 15
year olds we are talking about here, underage people.  JKR has an
audience of kids way younger than that still too--Iread the books to
my nine-year and appreciate being able to do so.  I would hope that
most people would agree that sex is an act for a man and a woman who
are emotionally mature, not anyone who is physically capable of
managing it.  Which would mean a couple a lot older than fifteen,
although our culture does encourage kids to jump in over their heads
and do something they don't really understand in terms of the
emotional (and other) repercussions of what happens when you don't
understand that its not just pleasure, there are responsibilities that
go along with it. The books would really change if JKR began
describing the characters having sex and it was REALISTIC (i.e., a
pregnant Hermione or people faced with various STDs, as well as just
the emotional ramifications,) Harry is staying just where his age
level should be, he has enough trouble trying to figure out how to
talk to Cho properly.  The emotions that went with his first kiss were
beautifully described, to me this is all we need to deal with for the
moment.  In learning about girls slowly, he is optimizing his chance
of (if he survives) one day ending up in a marriage that is like what
his parent's marriage is described as being like, or one like the
Weasleys, where the couple care about each other and care for the
children, and make the home a safe haven.  The Weasleys obviously
enjoy sex with each other, or else they wouldn't have so many kids,
and they obviously have a lot else in their relationship, too, and
this kind of thing is all too rare as a role model for kids nowadays
either in books or in real life. It's great to have this kind of thing
as a backdrop, while JKR lets the kids get on with being kids (which
15 year olds still are) and goes on with the adventure and the battle
between good and evil that I personally enjoy. 

> The word "love" does not sound like a zipper opening.

No, it doesn't, does it?
D. Bonett
 






From kaisenji at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 04:37:08 2003
From: kaisenji at yahoo.com (Kaisenji)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 04:37:08 -0000
Subject: How do muggles get admitted to Hogwarts?
In-Reply-To: <bj8813+eu03@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj93tk+cfnl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79884

Another thing this brings to mind is the muggles who "practice"
magick (i.e. wiccans) in the HP universe.  Correct me if I'm wrong but
wasn't that mentioned in a one of the books? I seem to remember
hearing about it..hm.

Anyway, makes one wonder what would the people of the wizarding world
think of muggles around practing magic. *snorts*  'spect they'd have a
real chuckle at that ar!

Kai
ps-no offense to real wiccans just bring a "what if" in the conversation





From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Fri Sep  5 05:03:18 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 05:03:18 -0000
Subject: SHIP Neville, was Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: SHIP Harry's Sexual preference- Sue
In-Reply-To: <1841527866.20030904170238@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <bj95em+tnek@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79885

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Susanne <siskiou at e...> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Thursday, September 04, 2003, 2:44:19 PM, jeffl1965 wrote:
> 
> > Yes, the pairing idea is *very* true. That's what was bothering 
> > me about poor Neville. He's so painfully shy, that I can't even 
> > really see if he'd be able to find a playmate, straight or gay.  
> >I guess its a good thing that the Creevy brothers came along, at
 > >least that gives him a chance. ;)
> 
> Well, he may be shy, but he asked Hermione to the ball long
> before Harry and Ron ever attempted it.
> 
  Jeff:
   
     That's quite true. I suppose he'd been secretly eyeing her 
during his fainting spells? :) The quiet ones are the ones to watch 
out for, or so I'm told.



> Neville has always been able to stand up for himself, and if
> he likes someone, he seems to be able to stand a possible
> rejection and at least give it a try :)
> 
  Jeff:

     That's true. He does seem to have some nerve when it comes to 
some things. He's not all that wishy-washy as some might think. I can 
say that I'm quite pleased with how he came into his own, more or 
less in the current novel. To speculate how important he'll be from 
now own is something I don't want to try right now. There might be 
more to him that we can guess.


> I think Neville will do just fine, and not necessarily with
> the Creevy brothers ;)
> 

    I can agree with that, but again, I don't want to speculate too 
much. I've seen him paired with Percy and even Sirius, iirc. Don't 
always make sense, but intresting anyway.

  Jeff







From hannahwonder at aol.com  Fri Sep  5 04:49:03 2003
From: hannahwonder at aol.com (hannahwonder at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 00:49:03 EDT
Subject: SHIP cliches (was Re: H/H Ship)
Message-ID: <12b.30e91f1d.2c896fbf@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79886

Pshemekan said: "I'm sure that it is not the idea that counts, but 
transforming this idea into a story. Frankly, all HP books are plagued with not so new ideas and yet we find them interesting enough to discuss them here. And as JKR 
is being praised for excellent storytelling and not for superb imagination, I'm sure that she would make even that cliche plot interesting."

As someone without any SHIP preference, I agree -- I don't think cliche ideas 
are that horrible; they can be done well, in which case the cliche-ness of 
them deserves to be forgiven. It's comparable I think to love/angst poetry, 
which can be the most cliche type poetry written. But that doesn't mean it's all 
bad. I trust JKR's ability as a writer to create a situation which, though 
perhaps one similar to situations in other stories, is interesting and important 
enough to the plot for any similarity to not matter. 

Hannah (this is my first post :) )




From tkj_etal at bellsouth.net  Fri Sep  5 06:36:56 2003
From: tkj_etal at bellsouth.net (trishel2003)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 06:36:56 -0000
Subject: "The Animagus Black!"
Message-ID: <bj9au8+7bru@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79887

"Master, I am sorry, I knew not, I was fighting the Animagus Black!" 
sobbed Bellatrix.--P. 812

What a weird thing to call Sirius. When Bella could have called him 
Sirius, or Sirius Black, or Black, or Mr. Black, or her cousin, or 
her cousin Sirius, or her cousin Black, or basically anything, she 
brings up the fact that he is an Animagus.

So, what's the deal? My personal theory is that the pureblood 
fanatics think of Animagi as half-breeds, and therefore lesser 
beings. That would also explain why Voldemort continually harps on 
poor Peter, calling him "Wormtail." He, Voldemort, is angry because 
his life depends on a lesser being.--RTJ





From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Fri Sep  5 05:41:30 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 05:41:30 -0000
Subject: SHIP Harry's Sexual preference- Sue
In-Reply-To: <3F57D436.000001.89167@monica>
Message-ID: <bj97ma+onep@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79888

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" <kcawte at b...> 
wrote:
> 
> Well we know Seamus seems to be fairly outgoing and sociable, also 
>he's Irish so people assume that an older Seamus is going to enjoy 
>alcohol (not that I'm implying all Irishmen are drunks but they do 
>have a bit of a reputation for lively partying and partaking of 
>alcoholic beverages). So we've got party-animal!Seamus without 
>straying too much from canon - it's only a small step from there to 
>slut!Seamus. It's similar to the reasoning that gives us slut!
>Sirius - Marauder-era Sirius is young, sexy, long haired, and
> owns a flying motorbike ergo he must be the school slut ....
> 

    Yeah, I can see Party-Animal!Seamus fairly easily. :) In a way, I 
think the way that JRK wrote him, is almost insulting with her having 
him wanting to make rum at age 11. To me, that implies that he's 
already a drinker, which might be true, but not something that she 
should point out early on as part of his make-up.

   The same can be said about how she presents the Weasley family. 
Their poor, red-haired, and have a large family. Sounds like a stab 
at the Irish to me. Perhaps not totally intentional, but still.

    I can understand about Sirius. He seems like he was the cock of 
the walk when he was younger. His talks with Harry in OOtP shows that 
perhaps he and James might've have lots of adventures making mayhem 
and chasing the girls. :)



> And it's a nice dynamic to write about from a fairly cliched 
>romance pov - one partner is the outgoing slut, beloved by all the 
>girls and most of the boys (Seamus or Sirius) and the other is 
>shyer, more reserved aritstic and/or intellectual and quite possibly 
>overlooked by the female population (Dean or Remus). So then you can 
>have both of them wondering whether the other would ever be 
>interested in them and you get a nice dose of angst leading up to 
>your happy romantic ending (and hot sex possibly) - can you
> tell I like first-time fics? :) 
> 
  LOL!! Yeah, I can see the first-time preferences very well. That's 
*not* a bad thing, btw. :) I guess being male, that's why the cliche' 
of one being the warrior, the other being the brain, regardless as to 
the sex of the couple, bothers me a bit. I don't really like to see 
too many stereotypes as I think it gives the youth a wrong idea about 
how things work and how they should act. Just like not all gay males 
are all limp-wristed and fem, and not all lesbians are masculine. 
Some yes, but not all.


> But no there is no real evidence for slut!Seamus at all - for all 
>we know the outgoing exterior could hide a terribly insecure 
>interior while Dean could be shagging anything with a pulse :)
> 

    I agree with that and wonder where it really came from. Seamus 
could be a lot of talk, and no action. That's fairly common amongst 
males. :) Besides, he doesn't really have anything to prove to 
anybody, so unless its just that dipping his wick all the time really 
means something to him, and if so, I would think he could spend more 
time in the loo taking care of things, and not have to worry about 
it. ;) Hmmm.... Slut!Dean? Maybe he would be asking for peeps to come 
to one of the empty classrooms to pose for him, and end up doing 
nudes and going from there? :)


> What I want to know is what is it about Seamus that leads people to 
>make the older version of him a mediwizard? Because I've seen it 
>done several times and am even doing it myself - the idea does have 
>appeal but I don't know *why*!


   Hmmm....this is just a guess on my part, but maybe with his 
clumsiness, he decided it would be a good skill to have? That's all I 
can think of, unless he wants to be the team Doctor for the Irish 
Quidditch team? I'd forgotten about that.


  Jeff
 





From dicentra at xmission.com  Fri Sep  5 07:30:40 2003
From: dicentra at xmission.com (Dicentra spectabilis)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 07:30:40 -0000
Subject: "The Animagus Black!"
In-Reply-To: <bj9au8+7bru@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj9e30+l6u9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79889

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "trishel2003" <tkj_etal at b...> wrote:
> "Master, I am sorry, I knew not, I was fighting the Animagus Black!" 
> sobbed Bellatrix.--P. 812
> 
> What a weird thing to call Sirius. When Bella could have called him 
> Sirius, or Sirius Black, or Black, or Mr. Black, or her cousin, or 
> her cousin Sirius, or her cousin Black, or basically anything, she 
> brings up the fact that he is an Animagus.
> 
> So, what's the deal? My personal theory is that the pureblood 
> fanatics think of Animagi as half-breeds, and therefore lesser 
> beings. 

I think you can add that by calling him "the Animagus Black," she's
demonstrating the degree to which she's separated herself emotionally
from him.  She's his cousin--his own blood--but she has nothing but
contempt for him because he's a "blood traitor."

It's much easier to off someone when you first dehumanize him.

--Dicentra, who will have her revenge on Bella if it's the last thing
she ever does




From prof_uloth at hotmail.com  Fri Sep  5 07:33:09 2003
From: prof_uloth at hotmail.com (Fred Uloth)
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 23:33:09 -0800
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's
  integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj61im+eb2e@eGroups.com>
References: <5.2.1.1.2.20030903152215.00a8f7c0@localhost>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20030904231839.00a69ae8@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 79890

At 12:38 AM 9/4/2003 +0000, jwcpgh wrote:
>But that's like saying that Harry couldn't have learned Patronus from
>Lupin, when he clearly did.  He knew perfectly well that
>the "dementors" weren't real, so by your argument there shouldn't
>have been enough challenge for him to learn the spell.  But he did,
>and very effectively too.

Lupin was an excellent teach for Harry, but Harry practiced on a Boggart 
not Lupin. The dementors weren't real, but the boggart had the same effect 
on Harry as a real dementor. If you go over that part of PoA, you will 
notice that Harry faints/blacks out several times. So in essence he was 
facing a "real" dementor, so what if it changed into a moon when Lupin gets 
in front of it. This was a perfect situation for him to practice as he had 
the a "safe" version of the real thing (i.e. the boggart would never have 
the chance to kiss Harry).

Lupin could probably teach Harry Occumency, but as they have personable 
relationship, the hostility would not be there. Snape on the other hand 
provides the hostile environment needed for Harry to truly master 
Occumency..the enmity is real, but Snape is not trying to take control of 
Harry....thus he is a "safe" version of the real thing. 




From liliana at worldonline.nl  Fri Sep  5 07:36:51 2003
From: liliana at worldonline.nl (laylalast)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 07:36:51 -0000
Subject: Clues in COS 
In-Reply-To: <bj931k+h6ms@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj9eej+g9jc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79891

<snip>

Kneasy said:
> > I have doubts that this is one of the big clues that apparently 
> lurk in CoS.
> > IIRC, JKR said that in CoS she nearly "gave the whole thing away".
> > (I know I can rely on a rapid correction if I'm wrong.) CoS has
> > something(s) apparently much more important buried in it. But
> > we consistently ignore the biggest clue JKR has given and chase 
off
> > down side alleys. We should be ashamed of ourselves.

Then Jen Reese said: 

<snip>

> Well, your post had me thinking about COS all day and wondering 
what 
> part would "give it all away."  I remembered the interview with JKR 
> and Steve Kloves on the COS DVD, where JKR mentions that purity of 
> blood is a very big deal in the book, and is the topic she thinks 
is 
> of great importance in COS (paraphrasing here--the interview is at 
> the Leaky Cauldron in the archives). Does that give anything away, 
> except that we find out Voldemort isn't pure blood? 

Lilian:

In some of the latest posts more listees have mentioned that COS is 
supposed to be important to the whole series, because JKR said or 
hinted so. And now I can add Kneasy's comment to that. But is there 
someone who knows when or where JKR has said such things (apart from 
the COS DVD) that suggest that COS is so important or even gives 
something away?
I'm currently working my way through COS again (just gotten it back) 
and all the interviews at quick-quill but my oh my, that's quite a 
lot. So if someone knows the exact interview and could tell me, I'd 
really appreciate it. To avoid burdening the forum with replies, 
please send it to my email adress.

Thx




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Fri Sep  5 08:06:37 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 08:06:37 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj8neg+orj4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj9g6d+pans@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79892

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Potterfanme" <fc26det at a...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sbursztynski" > 
>  But my heart went out to him in this scene and in case
> > you 
> > hadn't noticed, so did Harry's, for however little time it lasted.
> > Sue B
> 
> Now Susan:
> I think Harry's heart is still with him.  I think that is why he is 
> so very angry with him now.  Sirius and Remus admitted that what 
> Harry saw was true.  It is easier for Harry to be angry at Snape 
than 
> his hero father who just fell off his white horse.  I hope that 
Harry 
> figures out that his anger is misdirected in the future books.


Geoff:
Yes, but can you see Harry going to Snape and saying, "Professor, I 
realise now that my father was awful with you (or something similar!) 
and I want to apologise on his behalf."

Can you see him after the way Snape has reacted in earlier books? 
>From the word go, in PS, he set out to humiliate Harry - look at the 
very first Potions lesson HP ever attended. He has specialised in 
making snide comments or comments with a sting in the tail.

Would Harry attempt a reconcilation when he is conditioned to expect 
rebuffs, rudeness and put downs?




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Fri Sep  5 09:13:14 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 09:13:14 -0000
Subject: Sirius reservations
In-Reply-To: <bj87vs+r04u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj9k3b+jjad@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79893

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" <gbannister10 at a...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith 
> <arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> Geoff:
> Come, come, read your POA! 
> 
> "Then, out of the darkness, they heard a yelping, a whining, a dog in 
> pain....."
> 
> The Dementors approached Sirius first. He fainted. It was only then 
> that they closed in and "formed a solid wall around *HArry and 
> Hermione*". Twasn't just Harry though they seemed to concentrate on 
> him after this - because he was the only one conscious?
> 
> I think you are being a bit hard on Mr.Black.
> 
> PS I am an adult male in case you have your sharpened Post Office 
> pencil and grubby paper to hand. Obviously no cost spared! :-)


Tut, tut!
Of course I've read PoA (and probably missed some important 
clues too!).
The yelping, whining dog I ascribe to the proximity of the 
Dementors; they have an affecct on everyone near them. As
Sirius has spent so many years unnder their  influence, I'd be
surprised if he wasn't sensitised.
BTW, the fact that *as a dog*  he was so affected by them adds
a bit more muscle to my query regarding Sirius' escape - as a dog.

Kneasy




From sydpad at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 09:18:25 2003
From: sydpad at yahoo.com (Sydney)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 09:18:25 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj9g6d+pans@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj9kd1+ldmb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79894


> 
> Geoff:
> Yes, but can you see Harry going to Snape and saying, "Professor, I 
> realise now that my father was awful with you (or something similar!) 
> and I want to apologise on his behalf."
> 
> Can you see him after the way Snape has reacted in earlier books? 
> From the word go, in PS, he set out to humiliate Harry - look at the 
> very first Potions lesson HP ever attended. He has specialised in 
> making snide comments or comments with a sting in the tail.
> 
> Would Harry attempt a reconcilation when he is conditioned to expect 
> rebuffs, rudeness and put downs?

Me:

Well, I for one certainly hope so.  It's more than we would expect
from the avarage boy-on-the-street.  But I think the progress of the
books is to show Harry growing into an exceptional human being, not a
normal one.  I don't know if an apology is in order, necessarily, just
the same sort of compassionate tolerance (with a touch of amusement!)
that Dumbledore accords Snape.  

That's why I think it's unlikely Snape's manner will change much in
the coming books.  This is a test for Harry, really-- can he return
gentleness for aggression, without expectation of reward?  

Sydney-- (who, just to clarify, does NOT think this is the best
strategy for dealing with people like Voldemort!)




From IAmLordCassandra at aol.com  Fri Sep  5 09:38:20 2003
From: IAmLordCassandra at aol.com (IAmLordCassandra at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 05:38:20 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumble...
Message-ID: <7b.18734351.2c89b38c@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79895

In a message dated 9/5/2003 5:22:49 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
sydpad at yahoo.com writes:


> > 
> > Geoff:
> > Yes, but can you see Harry going to Snape and saying, "Professor, I 
> > realise now that my father was awful with you (or something similar!) 
> > and I want to apologise on his behalf."
> > 
> > Can you see him after the way Snape has reacted in earlier books? 
> > From the word go, in PS, he set out to humiliate Harry - look at the 
> > very first Potions lesson HP ever attended. He has specialised in 
> > making snide comments or comments with a sting in the tail.
> > 
> > Would Harry attempt a reconcilation when he is conditioned to expect 
> > rebuffs, rudeness and put downs?
Sydney: 

I don't know if an apology is in order, necessarily, just
the same sort of compassionate tolerance (with a touch of amusement!)
that Dumbledore accords Snape.  

Cassie (me):  

I agree with Sydney, however in my mind I can picture a scene with Harry 
apologizing to Snape (about the Pensieve).  I can't picture Harry going to Snape, 
though.   I just have this image of them stuck somewhere together or 
something...or maybe in a situation where Harry knows he may never seen the man again 
and having him blurt it out.  Or them getting into another row and Harry saying 
"Look, I'm sorry about what my father did to you! But I'm. not. my. father!"  


Whatever the situation, I'd imagine it to be an akward one no matter how much 
Harry has grown. 

~Cassie~ 





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From pen at pensnest.co.uk  Fri Sep  5 10:05:21 2003
From: pen at pensnest.co.uk (Pen Robinson)
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 11:05:21 +0100
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape, Harry and the Pensieve WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity
In-Reply-To: <bj80co+6o2r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <75C38EAB-DF88-11D7-9AEA-0030654DED6A@pensnest.co.uk>

No: HPFGUIDX 79898


On Thursday, Sep 4, 2003, at 19:30 Europe/London, msbeadsley wrote:

<quite a lot of snippages, hope nothing crucial has been cut>

>   Harry's one previous experience of the Pensieve made it
> appear almost like a file cabinet for historical documents.  Do we
> have canon that Snape used the Pensieve as a journal?  (I thought it
> was more like a therapeutic tool here, a thing Harry could not have
> known.)

It's an interesting image, a filing cabinet.  But... well, Harry was 
somewhat embarrassed, wasn't he, when present-day Dumbledore appeared 
beside him within the memory in GOF.  He was, plainly, perfectly aware 
that he was doing something he ought not to have been doing.  Even 
rifling through someone else's filing cabinet without permission is 
errant behaviour.   Dumbledore is, as usual, lenient with his 
transgression - possibly, it just occurs to me, this is a precursor of 
Dumbledore's downright stupidity throughout most of OOtP!  But 
Dumbledore did, as far as I recall, make it plain enough that these 
were his own thoughts in the Pensieve.
>
> Pen Robinson:  Particularly if the diary was a truly *personal*
> document detailing the writer's feelings.  I don't think it matters
> if the diary was left on a desk in the living room while the host
> went to answer the door, or whatever - the guest has *no right* to
> open it.
>
> msbeadsley: That's a big IF.

Is it?  A person's *thoughts* are going to be personal, aren't they?   
Even though Pensieve memories are presented as something more like 3D 
cinema than a view from a single camera*, there must, surely, be an 
element of the thinker inherent in the selection of those thoughts, if 
nothing else.

[* I think this is a pity!  What JKR has done makes it easier to tell 
the story, but I think it's somewhat illogical to present a memory from 
outside the perception of the rememberer.  Besides, wouldn't it have 
been interesting if Harry had been inhabiting Dumbledore's body during 
the GOF scenes, and Snape's during this one!  How much more intense the 
humiliation would have been!  Ah well.]

> Another one:  if my host was someone I couldn't
> escape who seemed to delight in tormenting me, you bet I'd be on ANY
> clues about that, the split-second opportunity presented itself.  I'd
> consider it a matter of self-preservation.

Ah.

We don't have a meeting of minds here.
>
> I don't see how we got from "(p)articularly if the diary was a truly
> *personal* document detailing the writer's feelings" to "a violation
> even worse than reading someone's diary."

It seems to me that the diary analogy is as close as I can get to the 
idea of prying into someone else's thoughts.   There is, however, a 
difference between something written-down-and-read, and something 
experienced-and-seen.   I'm not sure how to quantify it - perhaps 
someone else can do so?  At any rate, what I mean by "a violation even 
worse than reading someone's diary" was that sneaking into the Pensieve 
to see directly what was in Snape's mind was considerably more 
intrusive than reading his written notes could possibly have been.

> Anyway, it *is* closer to
> merely bad manners; "well-nigh unforgiveable" according to canon
> would amount to barely short of Imperius, Cruciatus, or AK. <bg>

Pushing it a bit there!  <g>  Not, incidentally, that I think of bad 
manners as 'merely' anything - manners are important - but I've never 
forgiven the persons who collaborated to read my diary...
>
> OT but germane:  People do read other people's diaries.  (It's
> happened at least once to everyone I know who keeps a journal.)

People do all sorts of things.  Don't make it right.  Doesn't even make 
it acceptable.

> many years ago when it happened to me
> with a boyfriend I had specifically warned off this behavior I
> was "mightily peeved" for months; BUT, having said that, I also have
> to say that I had expressed a willingness to that boyfriend to tell
> him whatever it was he thought he might be able to find out behind my
> back.  And he was much, much older than fifteen (but not much
> additionally older when I dumped him).

Did his reading your diary not put an instant end to your relationship? 
  If not, you are more tolerant than I am!
>
> BTW, to anyone who might say that Snape's reaction was based on what
> he projected Harry doing with what he'd found, I applaud your
> perspicuity:  that is entirely valid.  Since Harry showed up Snape
> has been reacting to who he thinks Harry is and what he thinks Harry
> would do; Snape has never bothered to check his assumptions.

Yes, this is an interesting point.  As I read it, at first, the memory 
in question was so deeply humiliating to Snape that he could not bear 
to think of someone else - particularly Harry - witnessing his 
humiliation.  Especially as he assumes Harry is so like James that 
Harry would be as amused as his father was by James' behaviour.

[I spose that's why Snape is so insistent on being addressed formally - 
he needs the reassurance that he's a person of consequence now.]

However, the idea of Snape expecting the whole of Gryffindor House to 
be sniggering at him... just amplifies the horror of the situation from 
his point of view, doesn't it?  It still isn't an excuse for his 
physical maltreatment of Harry, but emotionally it's easy to understand 
why he reacts so extremely.
>
> Harry was starved for information at the time; I understand what he
> did.

Hmm... yes, he went into the Pensieve looking for something specific, 
but that wasn't what he found.  Which to my mind makes the 'personal 
journal' analogy more valid than the 'filing cabinet' one.  Snape was 
not (at least, not in this instance) hiding information, he was hiding 
self-revelation.  Perhaps he knew that this was such a very tender spot 
that if Harry touched it during the lesson, Snape would find it very 
hard to maintain the necessary control - and hence put it somewhere 
'safely' out of the way.

> (As a matter of fact, the appropriateness of the behavior aside
> for a moment, if Snape hadn't caught him and gone so very out of
> control, what Harry found in the Pensieve might have gone a ways
> toward enlightening him and making him more understanding of Snape.)
>
I think it will yet do so.  I think - I certainly hope! - Harry will 
come to a more mature understanding of both James and Snape, following 
the things he saw in the Pensieve and the things he learned during his 
Occlumency lessons.  I think, and hope, Snape has also begun to learn 
the same kind of lesson about Harry - though this invasion of privacy 
has undoubtedly set it back a long way.  It's a pity Snape didn't 
realise how horrified Harry was by his father's behaviour...  ah well, 
more luvverly angst to come.  <g>

Pen




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Fri Sep  5 11:08:14 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 11:08:14 -0000
Subject: SHIP Harry's Sexual preference- Sue
In-Reply-To: <bj97ma+onep@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj9qqu+2mp2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79899

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jeffl1965" <jeffl1965 at h...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" <kcawte at b...> 
> wrote:
> > 
> > Well we know Seamus seems to be fairly outgoing and sociable, 
also 
> >he's Irish so people assume that an older Seamus is going to enjoy 
> >alcohol (not that I'm implying all Irishmen are drunks but they do 
> >have a bit of a reputation for lively partying and partaking of 
> >alcoholic beverages). So we've got party-animal!Seamus without 
> >straying too much from canon - it's only a small step from there 
to 
> >slut!Seamus. It's similar to the reasoning that gives us slut!
> >Sirius - Marauder-era Sirius is young, sexy, long haired, and
> > owns a flying motorbike ergo he must be the school slut ....
> > 
> 


Jeff:
>     Yeah, I can see Party-Animal!Seamus fairly easily. :) In a way, 
I 
> think the way that JRK wrote him, is almost insulting with her 
having 
> him wanting to make rum at age 11. To me, that implies that he's 
> already a drinker, which might be true, but not something that she 
> should point out early on as part of his make-up.
> 

Geoff (a different one just to be confusing!)
Not necessarily so. There is a side of us which likes to experiment 
with "grown-up" things when we're younger. I can remember having a 
pull at a cigarette when I was about 8 and not liking it one bit! I 
didn't smoke then until I was about 18 and gave it up for good at 21. 
I think it's the same with drink. Experimenting - and possibly being 
dared by others.



Jeff:
>    The same can be said about how she presents the Weasley family. 
> Their poor, red-haired, and have a large family. Sounds like a stab 
> at the Irish to me. Perhaps not totally intentional, but still.
> 


Geoff:
I see the Weasleys as a great family. Dad is conscientious and works 
hard and also wants to work at something which rewarding to him in 
other ways; hence he has perhaps a lower paid job. I taught for 32 
years. I could have gone into other careers when I left school but 
felt that teaching was a vocation. We were never as poor as the 
Weasleys but we never had the sort of money to throw around as Lucius 
in the book. I never regretted it though. And often large families 
pull together and the siblings are close to each other.




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Fri Sep  5 11:20:37 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 11:20:37 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumble...
In-Reply-To: <7b.18734351.2c89b38c@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bj9ri5+3j73@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79900

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, IAmLordCassandra at a... wrote:
> In a message dated 9/5/2003 5:22:49 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
> sydpad at y... writes:
> 
> 
> > > 
> > > Geoff:
> > > Yes, but can you see Harry going to Snape and 
saying, "Professor, I 
> > > realise now that my father was awful with you (or something 
similar!) 
> > > and I want to apologise on his behalf."
> > > 
> > > Can you see him after the way Snape has reacted in earlier 
books? 
> > > From the word go, in PS, he set out to humiliate Harry - look 
at the 
> > > very first Potions lesson HP ever attended. He has specialised 
in 
> > > making snide comments or comments with a sting in the tail.
> > > 
> > > Would Harry attempt a reconcilation when he is conditioned to 
expect 
> > > rebuffs, rudeness and put downs?
> Sydney: 
> 
> I don't know if an apology is in order, necessarily, just
> the same sort of compassionate tolerance (with a touch of 
amusement!)
> that Dumbledore accords Snape.  
> 
> Cassie (me):  
> 
> I agree with Sydney, however in my mind I can picture a scene with 
Harry 
> apologizing to Snape (about the Pensieve).  I can't picture Harry 
going to Snape, 
> though.   I just have this image of them stuck somewhere together 
or 
> something...or maybe in a situation where Harry knows he may never 
seen the man again 
> and having him blurt it out.  Or them getting into another row and 
Harry saying 
> "Look, I'm sorry about what my father did to you! But I'm. not. my. 
father!"  
> 
> 
> Whatever the situation, I'd imagine it to be an akward one no 
matter how much 
> Harry has grown. 
> 

Geoff:
Yes, I think I could subscribe to Cassie's view. The pouint I made 
was that I could not se Harry "going to" Snape - perhaps knocking on 
his door and saying "Excuse me, Professor Snape but could I speak to 
you privately?" I think Harry took a huge knock over this and it's 
taking time to think it through. I can recall events as an adult 
where something similar has happened in a professional situation and 
it can be damned difficult to get normal relations up and running 
again. 




From xmezumiiru at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 11:24:35 2003
From: xmezumiiru at yahoo.com (An'nai Jiriki)
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 04:24:35 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Clues in COS (was Re: Dumbledore's integrity)
In-Reply-To: <bj931k+h6ms@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030905112435.13189.qmail@web12201.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79901

> Jen Reese: > The part I've always wondered about,
and I know this
> isn't original, 
> but it's the part where Riddle says Voldemort is his
> "past, present 
> and future." I never could wrap my mind around
> Voldemort being 
> Riddle's past, unless we're talking about time/space
> continuum 
> theories.  And no way am I venturing there; for me,
> those theories 
> are the equivalent of trying to understand economic
> theory--my mind 
> blanks out. But there is something *important* in
> his comment. Any 
> ideas? 
> 

Chris (IMO)
I think the "past" is the fact the book's memories of
Harry are in the present, therefore the Dairy Riddle
that is in CoS is Voldie's future, therefore Voldie is
Diary Riddle's past.

Watch some Star Treks, they are pretty close when
explaining time paradoxs accurately. But it does get
the mind going.

=====
"You irritate me. Kill me now." ~Javert, Les Miserables

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 12:35:44 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 12:35:44 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumble...
In-Reply-To: <bj9ri5+3j73@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj9vv0+8hkb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79902

> > > > Geoff:
> > > > Yes, but can you see Harry going to Snape and 
> saying, "Professor, I realise now that my father was awful with you 
(or something similar!) and I want to apologise on his behalf."
 Can you see him after the way Snape has reacted in earlier 
> books? From the word go, in PS, he set out to humiliate Harry - 
look at the very first Potions lesson HP ever attended. He has 
specialised in  making snide comments or comments with a sting in the 
tail. Would Harry attempt a reconcilation when he is conditioned to 
expect rebuffs, rudeness and put downs?


> > Sydney: 
> > 
> > I don't know if an apology is in order, necessarily, just
> > the same sort of compassionate tolerance (with a touch of 
amusement!) that Dumbledore accords Snape.  
> > 
> > Cassie:  
> > 
> > I agree with Sydney, however in my mind I can picture a scene 
with  Harry apologizing to Snape (about the Pensieve).  I can't 
picture Harry going to Snape, though.   I just have this image of 
them stuck somewhere together or something...or maybe in a situation 
where Harry knows he may never seen the man again  and having him 
blurt it out.  Or them getting into another row and  Harry saying 
 "Look, I'm sorry about what my father did to you! But I'm. not. my. 
> father!"  
 
 Whatever the situation, I'd imagine it to be an akward one no 
> matter how much Harry has grown. 
> > 
Laura:

A couple of comments:
1) IMO, an apology can only be validly rendered by the person who 
committed the wrong.  (I'm thinking about this a lot at the moment 
because I'm Jewish and we are now in a period of reflection and 
repentance preceding the High Holy Days.) That's because the process 
by which you arrive at the words is as important as the words.  It's 
the internal understanding of why the behavior was wrong that makes 
the apology meaningful.  So expressing contrition on someone else's 
behalf makes no sense, since you can't know that that process has 
taken place.  Moreover, it's the actual experience of looking in the 
eyes someone *you* have injured, and accepting their anger and hurt, 
that brings you to a full understanding of the harm you've done.  
Harry can't do that for James-and it wouldn't be satisfying to Snape 
if he tried.  The victim has to have an opportunity to express 
his/her feelings directly to the wrongdoer.  (Of course, that's not 
possible in this case.  Some hurts are never resolved, sadly.) And 
the verbal apology is only the first step in real repentance (we call 
it teshuvah; it means turning/returning).  Without a commitment not 
to repeat the behavior, the words are meaningless.  Again, if it's 
not your behavior you can't make that commitment.  

2.  Harry does, however, owe Snape an apology for invading his 
privacy.  But whether Snape will be able to accept it is another 
question.  Old Severus isn't great in the communication department-I 
can't recall a single instance where he has a truly honest, personal 
conversation with anyone in the books.  He does everything he can to 
rebuff people (i.e., Lily in pensieve 2).  So Harry should make the 
effort (at some point, when he doesn't feel in danger of imminent 
bodily harm from Snape).  But that's no guarantee that it will work.  

3.  I don't think Harry will ever feel the same way about Snape 
again.  No matter how much he hates SS, he'll never forget what he 
saw and how it made him feel.  

4.  If Snape was afraid that Harry would spread the pensieve 2 story 
all over the school, he must then have been afraid of losing his 
power and position.  He likes being scary and intimidating.  If the 
students are laughing at him, either to his face or behind his back, 
his authority will be completely undermined.  So it wouldn't be just 
temporary embarrassment he'd fear, it would be permanent destruction 
of the image he's worked so long and hard to create.  It would be as 
though he was 15 again, and that would be catastrophic for him.




From jujupoet29 at hotmail.com  Fri Sep  5 08:07:03 2003
From: jujupoet29 at hotmail.com (sienna291973)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 08:07:03 -0000
Subject: Book 6 Predictions (was: Predictions at Madison Square Garden)
In-Reply-To: <bj8jar+kjtr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj9g77+j668@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79903

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "boyd_smythe" 
<boyd.t.smythe at f...> wrote:
Consider Lucious as an individual. He's now a known DE (canon); 
> he hates Harry and DD (canon); he hates those who are not pure 
> (canon). He's angry about the recent turn of events (seems 
obvious), 
> and he blames Harry/DD (seems obvious).

Sienna:

Something occured to me as I was reading your post here and that is 
how Lucius' position has changed in OoTP.  It occurs to me that 
Lucius no longer has anything to lose and could possibly present a 
far more dangerous opponent for Harry in the final two books .  He is 
sure to be not just angry but furious at the way things have turned 
out for him.  Up until now, he enjoyed all the prestige his wealth 
could buy him and while not necessarily trusted by many, his money 
got him anything he wanted.  In a sense, he was able to play both 
sides of the field - doing his work for Voldemort while continuing to 
maintain his position in the civilised Wizarding world.  Now it would 
seem to me that Harry and DD have cut off his safety net by exposing 
him.  If Voldemort loses, Lucius loses and it will be interesting to 
see how  Lucius will react now that the stakes have been raised so 
high.

Sienna





From jujupoet29 at hotmail.com  Fri Sep  5 08:26:34 2003
From: jujupoet29 at hotmail.com (sienna291973)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 08:26:34 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj9g6d+pans@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj9hbq+6om3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79904

> > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sbursztynski" > 
Susan:
> I think Harry's heart is still with him. I think that is why he is 
> so very angry with him now. Sirius and Remus admitted that what 
> Harry saw was true. It is easier for Harry to be angry at Snape 
than 
> his hero father who just fell off his white horse. I hope that 
Harry 
> figures out that his anger is misdirected in the future books.


Then Geoff:
>Yes, but can you see Harry going to Snape and saying, "Professor, I 
>realise now that my father was awful with you (or something 
similar!) 
>and I want to apologise on his behalf."

>Can you see him after the way Snape has reacted in earlier books? 
>From the word go, in PS, he set out to humiliate Harry - look at the 
>very first Potions lesson HP ever attended. He has specialised in 
>making snide comments or comments with a sting in the tail.

>Would Harry attempt a reconcilation when he is conditioned to expect 
>rebuffs, rudeness and put downs?

Now me (Sienna):
I personally have to agree that Snape has made it awfully hard for 
Harry to truly feel any lasting sympathy for him.  It is testament to 
Harry's good heart that he was able to feel compassion for Snape at 
any point in time given their history.  And he is still only 15, 
while Snape, at his mature age, still wears the emotional scars of 
his childhood and, what's more, takes them out on an innocent boy who 
already has more than enough to deal with in his life. I can't say 
that I feel an awful lot of sympathy for Snape.  I can certainly 
empathise with awful childhood experiences (who among us doesn't have 
at least one of those) but to let them rule your behaviour years 
later is something I find hard to understand.  I would sooner see 
Snape attempt a reconciliation with Harry (given that he should now 
at least suspect that Harry is NOT like his father) than expect Harry 
to bury his feelings about all of the rudeness and nastiness Snape 
has directed at both himself and Sirius.

Sienna
Who feels much better now she's vented.






From c.john at imperial.ac.uk  Fri Sep  5 08:52:01 2003
From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 08:52:01 -0000
Subject: Neville's parents/What makes a muggle?
Message-ID: <bj9irh+7b4e@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79905

I just wanted to discuss something my wife noticed from the PS. This 
concerns Neville and his 'Wizard discovery' speech. Neville refers to 
the fact that his family thought he was all muggle up until this 
point.
POINT 1 - Neville's parents are supposedly Alice and Frank 
Longbottom. Therefore, if Neville was non-magical, surely he would be 
described as a squib (ie non magic person with two magical parents)
POINT 2 - In OOTP, Alice is described as looking incredibly like 
Neville. (Which brings me round to my second point. What is a muggle? 
If you have one magic parent and one non magic parent and you are non-
magic, are you a muggle?) 

Therefore, IS FRANK LONGBOTTOM NEVILLE'S DAD?? (otherwise why would 
his family think he was a muggle?)

This could be a FLINT, but it is a lengthy piece of dialogue, and it 
seems that JKR could simply have said Neville's family thought he was 
non-magical rather than muggle!!





From jujupoet29 at hotmail.com  Fri Sep  5 09:36:14 2003
From: jujupoet29 at hotmail.com (sienna291973)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 09:36:14 -0000
Subject: Sirius reservations
In-Reply-To: <bj9k3b+jjad@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj9lee+bbp9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79906

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
the fact that *as a dog*  he was so affected by them adds
> a bit more muscle to my query regarding Sirius' escape - as a dog.

Sienna:
I think this is a stretch as I've always assumed that there were not 
100 or more dementors gathered around Sirius' cell in Azkaban but 
rather stationed throughout the prison.  In the Forbidden Forest in 
POA the point was that there were so many of them in the one area. I 
don't think its a fair comparison.





From helen.young at pgen.com  Fri Sep  5 10:03:22 2003
From: helen.young at pgen.com (Young, Helen ( ET ))
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 11:03:22 +0100
Subject: Snape Vampire
Message-ID: <03D1565B532E3C48805D3ABA4CE81EC20DB65D@CORWWPKSEXV03.corp.pg.eon.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 79907

To continue an old theory...

I haven't got my book with me but in OotP when Harry is watching James
taunt Snape, James justifies it by saying ...

"it's more because he exists"

I read this not just as a comment that Snape exists therefore he is
worth torturing but that vampires exist and are therefore worth
torturing.
There are plenty of previous posts on this list about prejudice and
discrimination against different species and took this episode to be
another example.

Has anyone seen new examples in OotP of discrimination against other
species or new evidence to back up the darling Snape as Vampire theory?

Hels.





From twelve_grimmauld_place at hotmail.com  Fri Sep  5 09:35:25 2003
From: twelve_grimmauld_place at hotmail.com (Linda)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 09:35:25 -0000
Subject: Clues in COS (was Re: Dumbledore's integrity)
In-Reply-To: <bj931k+h6ms@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bj9lct+pbk1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79908

> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" 
> <arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> > 
> > IIRC, JKR said that in CoS she nearly "gave the whole thing away".
> > (I know I can rely on a rapid correction if I'm wrong.) CoS has
> > something(s) apparently much more important buried in it. But
> > we consistently ignore the biggest clue JKR has given and chase 
off
> > down side alleys. We should be ashamed of ourselves.
> 
I think that purity of blood is the big thing we learn in CoS, but to 
hedge my bets, I'll put forward another theory too :o)  

We find out in CoS that some of Voldemort's powers were transferred 
to Harry when the curse rebounded.  Is that because the 
curse 'malfunctioned', so to speak, when it hit baby Harry? Or does 
the killing curse normally transfer the powers of the victim to the 
culprit?  

For example:  when Dumbledore defeated Grindlewald, did he gain 
Grindlewald's powers?  Wizards are long-lived, but Dumbledore is 150 
or so.  Has his extra life-span come from taking the life of another 
wizard?

Voldemort said in GoF that his goal is to conquer death.  Does he 
prolong/strengthen his life force by 'feeding off' others?  Why would 
that be important for the septology?  

Theory One
As the prophecy says it is only Harry who can 'vanquish' the Dark 
Lord, does poor Harry stand to inherit a whole lot of dark magic one 
day if he finally kills Voldemort and survives?

Theory Two
This might belong in Theory Bay, and I might need to get a lilo for 
it, but what if Voldemort and Dumbledore have the same goal - 
avoiding death?  They would have very different approaches to 
achieving it, of course, but however he's doing it, Dumbledore has 
reached a good age.  And he worked on creating a Philosopher's Stone. 
Was it just an interest in Alchemy that made him do that?  That's the 
only canon I can think of to back it up, so I might need to downgrade 
to a set of arm bands..

Transfer of powers in general, though - what do people think?

Lumos







From wsherratt3338 at rogers.com  Fri Sep  5 13:19:02 2003
From: wsherratt3338 at rogers.com (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 13:19:02 -0000
Subject: Clues in COS (was Re: Dumbledore's integrity)
In-Reply-To: <bj9lct+pbk1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bja2g6+rmkk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79909

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Linda" 
<twelve_grimmauld_place at h...> wrote:
> We find out in CoS that some of Voldemort's powers were 
transferred 
> to Harry when the curse rebounded.  Is that because the 
> curse 'malfunctioned', so to speak, when it hit baby Harry? Or 
does 
> the killing curse normally transfer the powers of the victim to 
the 
> culprit?  
> 
> For example:  when Dumbledore defeated Grindlewald, did he gain 
> Grindlewald's powers?  Wizards are long-lived, but Dumbledore is 
150 
> or so.  Has his extra life-span come from taking the life of 
another 
> wizard?
> 
> Voldemort said in GoF that his goal is to conquer death.  Does he 
> prolong/strengthen his life force by 'feeding off' others?  Why 
would 
> that be important for the septology?  
> 
I was thinking that that might be the reason why Voldemort wanted 
nobody else to kill Harry but himself; he waved them off in GoF, and 
I thought that was why Lucius was careful not to AK Harry in the 
shootout at the end - I presumed he was acting on orders from LV.  
But Voldemort was willing for Dumbledore to kill Harry when he 
possessed him, so it looks as if he wasn't worried that Harry's 
powers would be transferred to his enemy, making him even more 
powerful.  Now I don't know if that theory is valid anymore.

Wanda




From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Sep  5 13:21:54 2003
From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Ivan=20Vablatsky?=)
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 14:21:54 +0100 (BST)
Subject: The final solution
Message-ID: <20030905132154.76031.qmail@web21508.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79910

Ive just had a wonderful spiritual realisation about the final
confrontation and Id like to share this with you all. Id like to hear your
reactions to this new theory even if theyre negative.

It all began when I was discussing with a wise old friend the similarity
between verse 56 of The Voice of the Silence by HP Blavatsky and the HP
prophecy.

The Prophecy: and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can
live while the other survives . . .

The Voice of the Silence: The Self of matter and the SELF of Spirit can
never meet. One of the twain must disappear; there is no place for both.

My friend pointed out the word, meet. He reminded me that Good and evil
can never meet. Notice that Good here has a capital letter, which means we
are not talking about good as the opposite of evil, as the opposite pole of
the good-evil continuum. Were talking about the Absolute Good of the
Original Spirit, which is the object and destination of the Path of
Liberation from the time-spatial universe/prison of relative good and evil.
Thats the journey Harry is on. Well, thats my theory and Im sticking to
it.

Good and evil can never meet because evil would be destroyed in the presence
of Good. Thats a spiritual law. But Good will not destroy because it is
love. What actually happens when Good and evil are confronted with each
other is that Good withdraws, leaving evil to destroy ITSELF! When Good
withdraws its replaced by the Love it radiates. Good radiates Love
impartially to the good and the evil. As we learned in OoP evil cannot bear
to be in the presence of love.

What does that mean for Harry? It means that, despite the prophecy, Harry
does not have to kill Voldemort. When Harry and Voldemort enter the final
confrontation, Harry will withdraw and fill the void with love, leaving
Voldemort to destroy himself! 

At the end of book 7 Harry will have gone through the Gate of Saturn (the
portal with the veil in the ministry) and he will be liberated. He will have
left the good-evil continuum.

This is my prediction for Book 7. How exactly this will happen, I dont
know. But it makes perfect sense to me. Its just one of those things you
feel in your heart to be true even though you cant prove it or explain it. 

Harry doesnt want to be a murderer. In my new theory he wont have to be.
The prophecy will be wrong in this particular detail. Voldemort will not die
at Harrys hands but at his own. The beauty of this final solution I find
dazzling. 

Hans in Holland


________________________________________________________________________
Want to chat instantly with your online friends?  Get the FREE Yahoo!
Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk



From jferer at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 13:34:49 2003
From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 13:34:49 -0000
Subject: SHIP cliches (Was: Re: H/H SHIP)
In-Reply-To: <3F5778D0.6080904@ipartner.com.pl>
Message-ID: <bja3dp+opr8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79911

-Cressida:"Whatever your views on the [shipping among the characters]
matter you have to admit that JKR would try very hard to avoid falling
in to that most obvious of traps hero gets main female character. I
sincerely hope that she has something a little more surprising up her
sleeve than that old chestnut."

Pshemekan:"This seems to be most repeated in the SHIPping discussions.
H/Hr Ship -- no it's hero gets the girl cliche, FITD situation -- no,
that is the love triangle cliche, R/Hr Ship -- bickering friends
cliche... So it seems all mainstream trio solutions are cliche ? JKR
should pair Ron/Hagrid, Snape/Hermione and Harry/Angelina so to avoid
clicheism."

Pshemekan's right, IMO. Everything's been done before.  It takes more
than that to make a clich?; in a true clich?, a plot element is
handled in an unoriginal, uninteresting way that shows a lack of
thought or originality.

But take a plot or subplot with rich, fascinating characters, have
them act in believable ways, and tell the story well, and you have
something fresh and new.  JKR is not the first to do this.  400+ years
ago, an author took old stories that had been circulating for many
years, gave them a twist, populated the stories with fascinating
characters and brilliant storytelling, and gave us the works of
William Shakespeare.

I think clich?-ism doesn't apply here. If Hermione and Harry work as a
team and simpatico as a man and woman, that's what I hope happens,
hero-gets-the-girl be damned.  I happen to think H/Hr does work, and
the case for them is strong. That's good enough.

Jim Ferer




From erinellii at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 13:52:06 2003
From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 13:52:06 -0000
Subject: "The Animagus Black!"
In-Reply-To: <bj9au8+7bru@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bja4e6+j0k1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79912

 "trishel2003"  wrote:
> "Master, I am sorry, I knew not, I was fighting the Animagus 
Black!" sobbed Bellatrix.--P. 812
> 
> What a weird thing to call Sirius. When Bella could have called him 
> Sirius, or Sirius Black, or Black, or Mr. Black, or her cousin, or 
> her cousin Sirius, or her cousin Black, or basically anything, she 
> brings up the fact that he is an Animagus.
> 
> So, what's the deal? My personal theory is that the pureblood 
> fanatics think of Animagi as half-breeds, and therefore lesser 
> beings. That would also explain why Voldemort continually harps on 
> poor Peter, calling him "Wormtail." He, Voldemort, is angry because 
> his life depends on a lesser being.--RTJ



Do you think?  My take was that the WW saw the Animagi transformation 
as powerful magic; only 11 people (that we know of) have accomplished 
it this century.  So Bellatrix would be trying to remind Voldemort 
that her attention was taken by dealing with this really powerful 
wizard, and futhermore, that she'd managed to serve Voldemort well by 
defeating him.
  Why on earth would she want to call him her cousin?  "Cousin" 
doesn't sound menacing, or like a good excuse for messing up Voldy's 
plans.  "I was fighting my cousin Sirius"?  That sounds like 
something a seven-year-old would say. Why would she want to remind 
Voldemort that she was related to the enemy?  And of course the idea 
of being related to Sirius is probably as unappealing to her as it 
was to him.

 
As for the Wormtail thing, well, Peter is a lesser being without his 
being an Animagi coming into it at all.  If you ask me, Voldemort is 
trying to terrify him by reminding him that he is a rat, and 
Voldemort can posess and destroy rats any time he wants to.  Or 
possibly Voldy is angry because Peter's disguise as a rat is useless 
to them, since the good guys know what he looks like, so he calls him 
Wormtail all the time to remind him of that. 

Erin




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Fri Sep  5 14:14:15 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (B Arrowsmith)
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 15:14:15 +0100
Subject: Sirius reservations
Message-ID: <3B5199AC-DFAB-11D7-9D7B-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79913

Ah! In her hedonistic retreat Laura stirs from her sybaritic repose, 
surrounded by Sirius look-a-likes who peel grapes, cater to her every 
need and prostrate themselves before her imperious caprices.


Laura:

Okay, Kneasy, my friend, the gloves are coming off. <grins, while
flexing fingers menacingly>

I can't tell you how all adult females feel about Sirius, nor can I
theorize with any validity about how adult males feel about him.

Kneasy:
Me either. I  gave up trying to fathom how the female grading system 
for male desirability works when I found out Frank Sinatra used to 
cause mayhem back in the Forties.

Laura:

(Although why on earth any adult male would rather identify with
Snape than Sirius is beyond me.)

Kneasy:
Most males quite like the idea of being thought, not evil, but a 
masterful villain (think some of the old James Mason films). Add 
mysterious and it definitely attracts. Sure, edit out the physical 
(greasy hair and yellow teeth) by all means, but the *character* has 
potential for serious fantasies. Sirius on the other hand has nothing 
going for him, so far as most  males are  concerned. He's rash, bad 
tempered, petulant and gives an impression of weakness. He *might* dote 
on Harry, but no-one male would want to be labeled with that lot. I'm 
told females like him because  of his vulnerability. Tell me, how long 
would it take before that became predictable and irritating?

Laura:

I think the implication is that the Dementors were confused by
sensing something other than a human being in Sirius's cell. Since
they feed off humans, they would have no interest in animals in
general.

Although people retain their personalities and feelings when they are
in animagus form (or so we think), the simple fact of the switch in
form may be enough to confuse the Dementors, which no one ever
claimed were intelligent. I would also think that being an animagus
would allow you to experience the emotions and perspectives of the
animal you become, while retaining your own awareness of self.


Kneasy:
I made a post (79893) responding to Geoff regarding animal/Dementor 
reactions. Oddly enough it strengthened my case (surprise!). After 
Shrieking Shack, Sirius, (as a dog) is yelping and whining at the 
approach of the Dementors. It was so traumatic it apparently caused him 
to revert to human shape. Why wasn't he so strongly affected when 
escaping his cell?

 > Laura
Harry never got a clear look at Padfoot until the Shack. So what he
saw combined with his imagination (especially after he learned about 
Grims) could account for what he thought he saw.

Kneasy:
Now, now! Play the game! Harry thinks 'hulking' before learning about 
Grims. JKR tends to be punctilious about vocabulary. Hulk implies bulk 
- strongly. Can you believe a TV show called 'The Incredible Thin'?


Laura:

No, I don't agree that revenge was foremost in Sirius's mind.
Protecting Harry was always his first priority.

Kneasy:
Sorry, but it was. When he finally got into the dorm, did he go to  
Harry? He did not, he went to Ron's bed for Scabbers. At the S.S. all 
his actions, words, demeanour are primarily about revenge and 
self-justification. Explaining things to Harry would have been an 
after-thought if distractions hadn't intruded. He even has his hands 
around Harry's throat at one point. Sirius is obsessed, verging on 
demented perhaps, but he is fixed in his priorities. And Harry isn't at 
the top of the list.


Laura:
It's my understanding that one of the resposibilities of a godparent
is to take over parenting if the original parents are unable to care
for the child. But I don't know very much about that-we don't have
this tradition in my religious practice. (I wish we did, though-I
think it's very lovely.)

Kneasy:
Unfortunately  it's  not. That's a bit of wishful thinking (or is JKR 
trying to pull a fast one?) Oh, it has happened on occasion, usually in 
Victorian romances, but the usual resolution is for a child to go to a 
relative if possible. The original and true function of a Godparent is 
to take responsibility for ensuring that a child receives a proper 
*religious* grounding; hence the title. These days it's more of a 
social recognition to the parents friends.


Laura:

This stuff is all trivial, it seems to me, and can be explained in a 
variety of ways that don't affect their believability.

Kneasy:
Hmm. Trivial. Perhaps. But even circumstantial evidence can be 
compelling, finding a trout in the milk, for example.


Laura:

I got the idea that the Dementors weren't looking for anyone in
particular at Hogwarts, just for the fear they fed on.


Kneasy:
I got the opposite idea - that the Dementors were guarding Hogwarts and 
environs solely because they suspected Sirius would be trying to break 
in. Fudge: "I have never seen them so angry." (at Sirius' escape), and 
"..they rarely fail." Arthur tells Molly (Chap. 4, "They didn't report 
it  in the press but Fudge went out to Azkaban the night Black escaped 
[now there's a co-incidence! You can see why I see conspiracy theories 
all over, can't you?]. The guards told Fudge Black's been talking in 
his sleep. Always the same words "He's at Hogwarts ... he's at 
Hogwarts...We had to ask him [DD] if he minds the Azkaban guards 
stationing themselves at the entrances to the school grounds."

Laura:

If Sirius and Hermione are both unconscious and Harry is awake and 
terrified, wouldn't they go for, shall we say, the full banquet rather 
than a snack?

Kneasy:
I admit that this isn't a particularly telling point, but their 
instructions are, supposedly, to get Black. Harry isn't going anywhere; 
he can be enjoyed at leisure, later (to continue your  banquet 
metaphor). Black is  supposedly the meat and veg.

angelberri56:
We wouldn't know half of what we know now if not for Sirius...why would 
JKR bring him into the story, have him do a little dance, then just  
throw him right back out?

Kneasy:
Isn't that exactly what she has done? Unless there is more to it than 
meets  the eye. In every  book except PoA Harry  has battled Voldy 
and/or his minions. Why  should this one be the singular exception? 
Unless he has foiled yet another  dastardly Voldy plan, but it hasn't 
yet been revealed to us.
As to what Sirius has told us, well, only Scabbers is critical and that 
could have been conveyed as hearsay by Lupin.

Wanda:
Did you mean to write 'The Piggery' instead of the 'Burrow'.

Kneasy:
Sort of. The Burrow is described as looking like a converted pigsty and 
a friend of mine lives in an actual conversion (much more salubrious 
than it sounds) that is jokingly referred to as such, so the term 
'Piggery' is how I think of it.

Sarah - I think you're reaching - hard. Can you get there?

Kneasy







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From annemehr at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 14:47:48 2003
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 14:47:48 -0000
Subject: Sirius reservations
In-Reply-To: <bj9k3b+jjad@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bja7mk+puq9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79914

Geoff wrote:
> > Come, come, read your POA! 
> > 
> > "Then, out of the darkness, they heard a yelping, a whining, a 
dog in 
> > pain....."
> > 
> > The Dementors approached Sirius first. He fainted. It was only 
then 
> > that they closed in and "formed a solid wall around *HArry and 
> > Hermione*". Twasn't just Harry though they seemed to concentrate 
on 
> > him after this - because he was the only one conscious?
<snip> 

Kneasy wrote: 
> Tut, tut!
> Of course I've read PoA (and probably missed some important 
> clues too!).
> The yelping, whining dog I ascribe to the proximity of the 
> Dementors; they have an affecct on everyone near them. As
> Sirius has spent so many years unnder their  influence, I'd be
> surprised if he wasn't sensitised.
> BTW, the fact that *as a dog*  he was so affected by them adds
> a bit more muscle to my query regarding Sirius' escape - as a dog.

Annemehr:
Actually, I ascribe Sirius' yelping in pain to having just been 
injured by Lupin the werewolf as he finally succeeds in driving him 
off; after all, this must be the first time he'd ever tried to 
control him without Prongs and Harry's already seen that Lupin had 
gashed him.  I just wonder if the dementors were close enough to him 
at the time he yelped to be the cause of it, because of this passage:

"But then, from beyond the range of their vision, they heard a 
yelping, a whining: a dog in pain....
"Sirius," Harry muttered, staring into the darkness.
He had a moment's indecision, but there was nothing thy could do for 
Ron at the moment, and by the sound of it, Black was in trouble --
Harry set off at a run, Hermione right behind him.  The yelping 
seemed to be coming from the ground near the edge of the lake.  They 
pelted toward it, and Harry, running flat out, felt the cold without 
realizing what it must mean --
The yelping stopped abruptly.  As they reached the lakeshore, they 
saw why -- Sirius had turned back into a man.  He was crouched on 
all fours, his hands over his head."

>From Sirius' yelp of pain until Harry sees him crouched by the lake 
seems to take a fair amount of time.  Harry even feels the cold 
before he even sees Sirius.  To me, this means that the dementors 
were still fairly far off when Sirius began yelping; otherwise, they 
would have been surrounding Sirius already by the time Harry reached 
him.  Add to that the fact that he was emotionally best able to deal 
with dementors in dog form, and I think that would counterbalance 
the fact that there were so many dementors (which would also have 
been the case at Azkaban).

Of course, as to why Harry was going to be the first one kissed, 
I've already posted my theory -- it was that dementor from the 
Hogwarts Express that had gotten a taste for Harry and wanted 
more. :P

Does anybody know whether it says anywhere how close the Whomping 
Willow is to the lake?

Annemehr




From zanelupin at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 15:06:43 2003
From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 15:06:43 -0000
Subject: Cho (was: Re: Things that will come into play later)
In-Reply-To: <bj8mu4+7fac@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bja8q3+i5j1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79915

Joj, aka mom31, wrote:
>>1.  Hermione's otter patronus and/or Cho's swan patronus.  ....  
Was it to show us that Cho is a powerful witch or was 
it just a personality match? (Swans are beautiful from afar, but not 
very friendly and even a little dangerous up close> .......>>
 
ab35ppw then wrote:
>Historically swans are a symbol of hypocrisy, as they have white 
feathers, so they appear "pure", but they have black flesh. Cho's 
swan patronus may very well be an indication that her pretty 
exterior masks a darker interior.  

The fact that she felt the betrayal of the DA by her friend was 
insignificant certainly indicates a lack of a true appreciation of 
the seriousness of fighting Voldemort. She wants to appear to be 
doing the right thing (fighting Voldemort), but is not truly devoted 
to it. Future traitor to the Order?>

KathyK:
 
As far as I can tell, Cho has not had to deal with the reality or 
seriousness of fighting Voldemort on a level anywhere near that of 
Harry, the Weasleys, or Hermione (among other DA members who have 
lost family and friends).  Losing Cedric was certainly a blow and a 
wake up call for her.  In OoP she was fueled by the loss of Cedric 
into wanting to do *something* to take down Voldemort.  She just 
doesn't know, really what she's getting into.

I don't think she feels that Marietta's betrayal of the DA was 
insignificant.  She doesn't just brush it off.  She tries to 
apologize and to explain to Harry why Marietta did what she did.  
The way I look at it is that Cho remains loyal to her friend over a 
group of people she doesn't know very well.  

And yes, she does try to downplay what Marietta did by rationalizing 
that none of the students got into trouble (although she 
conveniently left out the DA being the reason Dumbledore is no 
longer headmaster).  But she's trying to make amends with Harry, who 
understandably doesn't want to hear any excuses at all.  

I don't think Cho is a possible future traitor because I don't think 
Harry or anyone else will trust her or her friend again.

KathyK (who is not a fan of Cho)




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Fri Sep  5 15:19:25 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 15:19:25 -0000
Subject: "The Animagus Black!"
In-Reply-To: <bj9au8+7bru@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bja9ht+4r1j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79916

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "trishel2003" <tkj_etal at b...> 
wrote:
> "Master, I am sorry, I knew not, I was fighting the Animagus 
Black!" 
> sobbed Bellatrix.--P. 812
> 
> What a weird thing to call Sirius. When Bella could have called him 
> Sirius, or Sirius Black, or Black, or Mr. Black, or her cousin, or 
> her cousin Sirius, or her cousin Black, or basically anything, she 
> brings up the fact that he is an Animagus.
> 


Jen Reese: 

That wording seemed strange to me, too. After reading Dumbledore's 
explanation to Harry about Kreacher's involvement, I decided Bella 
worded it that way because Voldemort had ordered them to off "that 
animagus, Black" if he showed up at the MOM and tried to help Harry. 

So Bellatrix was trying to offer this to Voldemort in lieu of the 
broken prophecy, hoping to stave off punishment. But, then it doesn't 
explain why she didn't just tell him Sirius was dead instead of that 
they fought. She'd want credit for that.

OK, Second theory: During the three times the Potters defied 
Voldemort, Sirius assumed his animagus form to help them, and that's 
the only way Voldemort really knows him. Perhaps he doesn't even know 
his real name, so Bellatrix has to refer to him that way so LV will 
know who she's talking about.




From annemehr at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 15:25:13 2003
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 15:25:13 -0000
Subject: "The Animagus Black!"
In-Reply-To: <bja4e6+j0k1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bja9sp+gi0n@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79917

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "erinellii" <erinellii at y...> 
wrote:
>  "trishel2003"  wrote:
> > "Master, I am sorry, I knew not, I was fighting the Animagus 
> Black!" sobbed Bellatrix.--P. 812
> > 
> > What a weird thing to call Sirius.<snip>
> > So, what's the deal? My personal theory is that the pureblood 
> > fanatics think of Animagi as half-breeds, and therefore lesser 
> > beings. That would also explain why Voldemort continually harps 
on 
> > poor Peter, calling him "Wormtail." He, Voldemort, is angry 
because 
> > his life depends on a lesser being.--RTJ
> 
> 
Erin wrote: 
> Do you think?  My take was that the WW saw the Animagi 
transformation 
> as powerful magic; only 11 people (that we know of) have 
accomplished 
> it this century.  So Bellatrix would be trying to remind Voldemort 
> that her attention was taken by dealing with this really powerful 
> wizard, and futhermore, that she'd managed to serve Voldemort well 
by 
> defeating him.
<snip> 
>  
> As for the Wormtail thing, well, Peter is a lesser being without 
his 
> being an Animagi coming into it at all.  If you ask me, Voldemort 
is 
> trying to terrify him by reminding him that he is a rat, and 
> Voldemort can posess and destroy rats any time he wants to.  Or 
> possibly Voldy is angry because Peter's disguise as a rat is 
useless 
> to them, since the good guys know what he looks like, so he calls 
him 
> Wormtail all the time to remind him of that. 


Annemehr:
I agree with Erin on Bellatrix calling Sirius "the Animagus Black" 
as the animagus transformation is certainly a magical *power* and 
has nothing to do with breeding -- they all know Sirius is a 
pureblood.

As for Wormtail, I think Voldemort calls him that out of cruelty 
(not that Peter hasn't earned it).  He calls Peter by the name given 
to him by the friends he *betrayed*.  Voldemort apparently reads 
people well, at least as far as negative feelings go.  He can 
probably sense some shame in Peter over his betrayal and enjoys 
twisting the knife a bit.  Time will tell if this is shortsighted of 
him; maltreatment and a life-debt to Harry is something that makes 
many of us think he will change sides before the end.

I suppose Peter as Wormtail should be quite easy to recognize with a 
silvery paw.  Still, a small animal animagus must be pretty useful, 
especially in the dark, even if his disguise is known.  He's still 
harder to spot than a full-sized DE and can squeeze into narrower 
places.

Annemehr




From rredordead at aol.com  Fri Sep  5 16:09:50 2003
From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 16:09:50 -0000
Subject: Latent Witch Petunia (was:How do muggles get admitted to Hogwarts?)
In-Reply-To: <bj8n4o+ollu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjacge+qnar@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79918

Sarah said:
My pet theory is Petunia.  I have a theory that Petunia got a letter 
from Hogwarts, too, and hid it.  She's a little TOO obsessed with 
being normal, in my opinion.  (snip)

Now Me:
I agree about Petunia.  I believe she is a witch but is absolutely 
terrified of it.  Which makes sense as she lives in this very 
correct, 'puritan' world in which witch and wizard craft is most 
definitely considered evil and bad.  Why she turned against it as a 
child (or young adult) is still a mystery though, as her parents were 
obviously supportive of Lily getting her Hogwarts acceptance letter, 
I imagine they would have been of Petunia too but for some reason 
Petunia rejected it.

Pertunia is over obsessed with being 'normal' but her birthright is 
catching up to her quickly.  You can deny what you are and live a 
happy life.  
Mandy





From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Fri Sep  5 16:22:32 2003
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 16:22:32 -0000
Subject: Why the time turner stinks/Hermione's homework
In-Reply-To: <bj7qn0+g1ma@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjad88+knrr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79919

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003" 
> <carolynwhite2 at a...> wrote:
 What irritates me about 
> > Hermione's use of the timeturner is why she didn't/wasn't allowed 
> (?) 
> > to use it to do her homework as well. Why could she not add extra 
> > hours to her evenings, so she could catch up with all the work 
> from 
> > the extra lessons ? No wonder she was exhausted.
> 
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "severusbook4" 
<severusbook4 at y...> wrote:
> Hermione did use it for homework, that is why she was so exhausted 
> all the time, it wasn't just the fact of adding 2 hours to her day, 
> it was also the 2 - 3 hours she was adding for homework.  

CW replies:

Sevvie, can you give me a quote to back this up ? I didn't see any 
indication she was using it to do her homework, only her classes. 
Thanks.




From zanelupin at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 16:45:39 2003
From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 16:45:39 -0000
Subject: unforgiveable charms?
In-Reply-To: <bj8c1j+46j5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjaejj+7nn5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79920

Laura, hoping not to set off another land mind, said:

>>>We know that there are Unforgiveable curses.  But I've been 
wondering, what with the strong feelings about Harry looking into 
Snape's pensieve thoughts, if there should be Unforgiveable charms 
as well.  For instance, shouldn't it be highly improper (if not 
worth a life term in Azkaban) to use Legilimency on someone without 
their permission?  Or to access their private thoughts in any other 
manner?<<<

Wyld said of Legilimency (post 79857):

<snip parents using it on children>
>>That would seem to me to be a perfectly legit use of 
such a talent. Ditto to using it to discover exactly who committed 
this crime or that crime, though that is even more of a grey area as 
how is anyone supposed to know that the person performing 
Legilimency actually saw what they said they saw! Regardless, I 
would also look on that as being an acceptable use of said talent.

If we're talking about simply invading one's mind for the sole 
purpose of doing harm, committing a crime, or so on, then that would 
be Unforgivable in my view. It's still such a grey area, though. 
How is anyone supposed to believe what one person *says* they saw in 
another person's mind, unless there is some sort of joint 
Legilimency that we have yet to see. It's all quite confusing.<<

 
Sue B said in post 79871:

>But you can do that with veritaserum and this seems to be legal, 
though maybe it shouldn't be. Snape has it in his supply cabinet and 
even threatens to use it on Harry at one point. If it was illegal, 
he 
wouldn't admit to having it, would he? :-)<

KathyK:

There are many gray areas when it comes to spells and potions in the 
WW.  My personal favorite has always been memory charms.  In my 
opinion, there are few thing worse than having the power to steal 
someone's memory.  Yet the Ministry has Obliviators ready to come 
and wipe a muggle's memory should one witness or learn of magic.  
This type of use is clearly necessary to the WW as they don't wish 
their hidden world exposed to the muggle world.  

But there are instances in the books of memory charms being used by 
non ministry officials and there is not any indication this is 
regulated or considered illegal.  First we have Gilderoy Lockhart 
memory-charming the pants off of everyone he steals glory from.  Is 
it not also true that he must have placed memory charms on any 
witnesses to the great feats for which he takes credit?  

Granted, once the people are unable to remember they did any of the 
things in Lockhart's books, they'd have no reason to report it to 
the MoM if it was considered a crime.  

Another example is Crouch Sr. erasing Bertha Jorkins memory of 
learning that his son was alive and not in Azkaban where he should 
have been.  In that instance, a memory charm was not only used, but 
caused damage to the victim's mind.  Bertha Jorkins became very 
forgetful after Crouch put the charm on her.  Now, Crouch was dead 
by the time anyone discovered the memory charm he'd used, but there 
was no indication at all by anyone that what Crouch did was illegal.

And finally we have Dumbledore thanking Kingsley Shacklebolt for 
modifying Marietta Edgecombe's memory in order to save the students 
in the DA from punishment by the ministry.  Once again, this act is 
necessary to protect Harry and the other students, but no regret or 
doubt about what has been done is expressed.  

So memory charming, IMO, is a huge gray area when it comes to 
morality.  But there is no evidence that there's any problem with 
it, legally speaking.  Along the lines of what Wyld says of the 
difficulties in monitoring Legilimency, determining whether the use 
of a memory charm was correct is very difficult.  Unless there was a 
strict law that *only* Ministry officials could use them, there is 
no way to determine if a memory charm is "unforgiveable" enough to 
throw someone in Azkaban for.  

As far as Veritaserum is concerned, according to Snape in GoF, the 
Ministry has very strict guidelines regarding its use (US paperback, 
517, ch 27).  Snape is the only one we see in possession of the 
stuff and he's the potions master at a school.  Because of his 
position perhaps it's permissible for him to have it.  I mean, 
someone has to make the stuff, right?  And he could teach his upper 
level students how to make it.  Plus, he doesn't say it's illegal to 
have it, just that it's use is restricted.  

Potions seem to me much easier to control than spells because 
potions need ingredients and a place to be stored.  It's easier to 
regulate ingredients or inspect someone's potions store than to make 
sure people aren't going around reading other people's minds and 
erasing their memories.

And actually, going back to memory charms for a moment, should 
someone be accused of using one on someone else if they are indeed 
illegal, someone investigating could use *prior incantato* to 
discover the last spell the accused did.  (Can that spell be used to 
look at previous spells?  I know that Harry's wand made Voldemort's 
do that, but it was a special case.)  So it could be easier to 
determine if someone's used a memory charm illegally than to 
determine if someone has used Legilimency illegally.  Then again, I 
recall Snape using his wand for Legilimency during Harry's lessons, 
so who knows?

KathyK (going on for too long)




From rredordead at aol.com  Fri Sep  5 16:44:56 2003
From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 16:44:56 -0000
Subject: Final battle as a chess game (was: Inside Dumbledore's Head) 
In-Reply-To: <bj564q+a4t6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjaei8+j31e@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79921

Geoff said:
If Harry is a king, he can't win the game. A king cannot check a king.
The king has to be protected. The next most valuable piece which is 
obviously the centre of any strategy is the queen......

Now me:
A King cannot check a King.  Which is why Harry - The White King and 
LV - The Black King will not fight alone in the final battle.  They 
will both be joined by other pieces, one of which will be able to 
check and kill a king.

Harry will be joined by his White Knight - Neville and his White 
Bishop - Hermione (The keeper of knowledge).

LV will be joined by one other:  Bellatrix as the Black Queen. (Fits 
nicely doesn't it?)

The White Queen? - Lily Potter. Was lost.
The question is can the White Queen be reclaimed and give the White 
side a fighting chance? If so who will play her? Ginny, Luna perhaps 
even McGonagall?

Any thoughts on who some of the other players are?





From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Sep  5 16:47:27 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 16:47:27 -0000
Subject: Snape Vampire
In-Reply-To: <03D1565B532E3C48805D3ABA4CE81EC20DB65D@CORWWPKSEXV03.corp.pg.eon.net>
Message-ID: <bjaemv+eevj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79922

Hels:
>>James justifies [bullying Snape] by saying ..."it's more because he 
exists"
I read this not just as a comment that Snape exists therefore he is
worth torturing but that vampires exist and are therefore worth 
torturing.
There are plenty of previous posts on this list about prejudice and
discrimination against different species and took this episode to be
another example.>> 

I think that this theory actually offers up anti-Snape-Vamp canon. 
It's *James* who says this. He might be a nasty little wanker, but he 
also says in the same scene "I would never call you a you-know-what" 
(mudblood). His best friend is a werewolf. While I'm not arguing that 
Snape's being part of a discriminated-against minority would in 
itself be enough to stop James from bullying Snape, I certainly don't 
think you could possibly claim that his attack on Snape was racially 
motivated. I think that comment exposes the random, horrific nature 
of bullying very well on its own.

Kirstini (tipping back on her chair and addressing the ceiling, 
loudly: "That scene took place on a summer afternoon. They were 
*outside*. In *daylight*")  






From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Fri Sep  5 16:56:25 2003
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 16:56:25 -0000
Subject: SHIP cliches (Was: Re: H/H SHIP)
In-Reply-To: <bj7u3h+2pbl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjaf7p+9nbv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79923

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cressida_tt" 
<cressida_tt at h...> wrote:

the cliche of the hero getting the girl is HOLLYWOOD which is about 
as far from real life as it is possible to get. This scenario was 
created as a sop because things like that really do not happen in 
real life. If JK Rowling is trying to portray realistic teen romance 
in her sub-plot then the ending of the book will be as unlikely as 
real life itself. I am sure that she will show more spark of 
imagination than most of the 'shipping' arguments I have recently 
seen on this board.

CW comments:

The problem I have with all the SHIPPING is that in my experience, 
teenage crushes and romances rarely lead to long-term relationships, 
and if they do, they end in tears, because the partners grow up and 
grow apart. I am in my mid 40s, and can't think of anyone I knew at 
school who either married their school sweetheart, or if they had a 
serious relationship then, is still in it. 

Similarly, even those who met their partners at college, or in their 
early 20s, had trouble sticking together. Maybe its our real world, 
but the strong couples I know are often on their second or third 
relationship, having trudged through a lot of grief and revised 
expectations on the way. 

On the other hand, plenty of people I know of both sexes keep in 
touch with school friends, and remain curious and interested in how 
their life stories pan out. (See the success of that website which 
puts school friends in touch with each other).

It seems to me to be incredibly boring and limiting to suggest that 
any of the main school characters should marry their classmates. Ok, 
so Lily and James married just out of school, but they died so young, 
we have no idea if it would have been a long term happy relationship. 
Molly and Arthur apparently did the same; but personally I wouldn't 
class their marriage as an interesting relationship from the way it 
is depicted in the book, in fact it seems to me it is incredibly 
stereotypical from the 50s era (I am thinking of my own parents here).

With JKR's personal history, I would be really surprised if she 
disposes of all the kids in neat pairs. Some of them might embark on 
a more serious romance, and we can endlessly speculate on the outcome 
of that post-book 7, but will she give us permanent, marriage-type 
relationships by the end of the series ? No, I hope not. Its totally 
the wrong message for 21st century kids; they need to grow 
individually and find out who they are before taking on the 
compromises and difficulties of a permanent partnership.




From kkearney at students.miami.edu  Fri Sep  5 17:13:58 2003
From: kkearney at students.miami.edu (corinthum)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 17:13:58 -0000
Subject: Time, Repetition and the Uber-Dimension (was: Narrative Function
In-Reply-To: <bj6o22+d65v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjag8m+fckm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79924

Talisman wrote:
 
> >You cannot exist as a savior-self that is even one metabolic-
second 
> >older than you were when you would have perished without it.
> <snip>
> >Therefore, older Harry could not initially save younger Harry--
even 
> >though Time insists that he was "always" present in both
> >roles.

And Laurasia replied:

> Why is that? Are you saying:
> 
> Harry2 and Harry1 are both at the lake. Harry2 can't save Harry1 
> because Harry1 needs Harry 2 to survive?
> 
> That is: X and Y are simultaneous. 
> X can't save Y because Y needs X? 
> 
> That makes no sense. 
> 
> It should be: 
> X *must save* Y because X needs Y.
> And this is where the problems start. 
> 
> Am I right in assuming that what you really are having an issue 
with 
> is the idea that Harry *must* save his former self? It's not that 
you 
> disagree with the fact that Harry and Harry-plus-3-hours are 
standing 
> right next to each other, it is just that that now means that Harry 
> had no choice in going back in time? 

First off, I'm jumping into the middle of this without having read 
some of the recent time-travel posts, so if I'm repeating, just 
ignore me.

Talisman is saying (if I understand her correctly), and I agree, that 
the Harry-*must*-save-himself scenario is implausible.  Time can't 
motivate a person; if Harry had wanted to change something while time-
traveling, he could.  He did.  But time doesn't record it that way.

In this case, Harry1 and Harry2 exist simultaneously.  But Harry2 can 
only exist in this time frame if Harry1 successfully made it to the 
time-travel point once before.  Therefore, Harry1 must have escaped 
the Dementors without the help of Harry2 the first time around.  
However, the second time, Harry2 steps in takes action.

Who knows what was going through Harry1's and Harry2's heads during 
the original course of events.  Hypthetically, let's say Harry1 
originally just barely managed to fend off the Dementors for a while 
until help came (Snape? It's not important though).  Then Sirius was 
arrested, Harry1 and Hermione1 went to the hospital wing, etc. 
(everything proceeding as in the final recording, for sanity's 
sake).  In order to save Sirius, Harry1 and Hermione1 go back in 
time, becoming Harry2 and Hermione2.  While there, Harry2 sees Harry1 
trying to fend off the Dementors, gets worried that maybe things will 
happen differently this time,  and decides just to be safe to cast a 
Patronus to save himself.  As soon as this happens, Harry1's memories 
change to that which is recorded in the book.  Because Harry2 is in 
reality Harry1 plus three hours, his memories also change.  The 
result: the one and only Harry has only one memory, one which 
includes both present him and future him.  He interprets his actions 
as being directly motivated by his memories, when in reality the 
opposite is true.  The must-go-back-in-time situation presents itself 
only after the time travel has already ocurred.

Did that make any sense?  

-Corinth






From johnheaton at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 13:22:19 2003
From: johnheaton at yahoo.com (John Heaton)
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 06:22:19 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: GetTheGalleons!? - An aside on Slang
In-Reply-To: <1062746441.24999.54871.m13@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030905132219.99134.qmail@web11304.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79925

On Fri, 05 Sep 2003 00:45:29 -0000, Wyld quoted Dan as saying: 

> > Further, JKR says so:
> > "Those goblins are sneaky people. They manage to put the 
> > Muggle money back into circulation. They are like "fences" 
> > --British slang, do you understand it?"

And then him- or herself said:
>    Just an aside, but fences isn't just British slang.  We use 
> it here in the U.S. as well, and I would assume it means the 
> same thing.

In the US, a "fence" is someone who purchases and redistributes
stolen merchandise.  What the Gringotts goblins do seems more
akin to money laundering, though without the illegal overtones
that phrase carries.

=====
John Heaton
AIM: JohnHeaton
http://bluearmadillo.net

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com




From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Fri Sep  5 13:53:46 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 13:53:46 -0000
Subject: Book 6 Predictions (was: Predictions at Madison Square Garden)
In-Reply-To: <bj9g77+j668@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bja4ha+i3jp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79926

Sienna:
> Something occured to me as I was reading your post here and that is 
> how Lucius' position has changed in OoTP.  It occurs to me that 
> Lucius no longer has anything to lose and could possibly present a 
> far more dangerous opponent for Harry in the final two books .  He 
is 
> sure to be not just angry but furious at the way things have turned 
> out for him.  Up until now, he enjoyed all the prestige his wealth 
> could buy him and while not necessarily trusted by many, his money 
> got him anything he wanted.  In a sense, he was able to play both 
> sides of the field - doing his work for Voldemort while continuing 
to 
> maintain his position in the civilised Wizarding world.  Now it 
would 
> seem to me that Harry and DD have cut off his safety net by exposing 
> him.  If Voldemort loses, Lucius loses and it will be interesting to 
> see how  Lucius will react now that the stakes have been raised so 
> high.

I'm with you, Sienna. OoP was clearly a catastrophe for Lucius, so it 
seems likely that his character will be on stage at least a couple of 
times in Book 6. Plus, JKR needs the DEs to turn up the heat on their 
terrorism to more clearly paint the threat posed by a future where LV 
wins.

So the question is, what will Lucius do? Well, given his wealth he 
would certainly have been in touch with the goblins at Gringott's 
quite a bit. And we know that the goblins have not always been 
peaceful members of the WW. Plus he likely still has a few MoM'ers in 
his pocket through bribery/blackmail.

So...my vote is for him inciting a goblin revolt with the aid of a few 
MoM insiders. Even if the WW ends up quelling this uprising, imagine 
the chaos! It would be like a bank collapse--except that the goblins 
have *all* of the money that we know of, and they may also have some 
magical treasures/weapons, as well. Remember the SS/PS? And if the 
goblins can build a subterranean world like Gringott's, could they 
tunnel into anything else? The MoM? Hogwarts? Newspaper HQs? Less 
likely, yes, but a possibility.

If you'd like to entertain other possible connections for Lucius (and 
ways to breed chaos), look into the various Drooble/Wrapper posts 
(regarding St. Mungo's) or many Fudge posts (MoM and heliopaths 
post#78730). And add any other connections through other DEs and LV!

Now I don't expect JKR to pen a complete breakdown of wizarding 
society--that might be too much for her younger readers. But I do 
think she'll make it more dangerous and certainly more chaotic in Book 
6.

-Remnant
"And I would have gotten away with it, too, if it weren't for 
you kids!"





From prof_uloth at hotmail.com  Fri Sep  5 17:54:14 2003
From: prof_uloth at hotmail.com (Fred Uloth)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 09:54:14 -0800
Subject: Minority Report (Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why the time turner
  stinks)
In-Reply-To: <bj6d2d+gbrt@eGroups.com>
References: <001201c37293$3aa114e0$79092244@parkvl01.md.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20030905094021.00aa4ad8@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 79927

At 03:54 AM 9/4/2003 +0000,
"Deirdre F Woodward" wrote:
> > Or better yet, why hasn't Dumbledore or someone else gone back and
> > killed pre-powerful Voldemort?

msbeadsley wrote:
><snip>  And regarding the pre-emptive strike on Voldemort:
>if you go back and kill the arch villain before he *becomes* the arch
>villain, haven't you murdered an innocent man?  At that point, he
>hasn't yet *made* the choices which will later warrant executing him.

Fred Uloth (that's me) wrote:
Sounds like the topic of Minority Report (movie with Tom Cuise that came 
out about a year ago...I understand it was based on a popular Sci Fi book) 
where they used people who can see the future to arrest people before they 
had the chance to murder someone. I agree with msbeadsley that this is 
*very* dangerous ground.

Not to mention that it would alter history something fierce...If Voldy 
hadn't killed the Potters would Harry have turned out as well as he did or 
would he have been a carbon copy of James "strutting around Hogwarts." How 
different would Neville be if he hadn't been deprived of his parents...one 
can assume that his confidence level would be higher. Crouch Sr. would have 
been minister of magic....

Who is to say that a different "Dark Lord" wouldn't have come about. Maybe 
poor DD would spend his life assassinating dark wizards...no this would not 
be a good thing. Adversity forces us to grow (look at Harry), if you 
eliminate all the Dark Wizards there will be no opposition to require 
people to choose right or wrong...no growth in character.

I'm sure I've done an absolutely lousy job of stating my argument and will 
have this blasted to shreds...I'm just not feeling clear headed enough to 
state things well.




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Fri Sep  5 17:53:41 2003
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 17:53:41 -0000
Subject: Sirius reservations
In-Reply-To: <23C7FC38-DEFB-11D7-BE0B-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bjaij5+9tjo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79928

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
 
> Swim back to the mainland? In that physical condition? The 
Lexicon  places Azkaban  in the middle of the North Sea, not 
Hogwarts lake. It's at least 100 miles from shore.

One must go to the source, in this case the Scholastic Interview 
of February 2000. Rowling is asked "Where is Azkaban" and 
replies, "In the north of the North Sea. A very cold sea" Nothing 
about a hundred mile swim there. 

Wizards are pretty tough. We know they can endure an hour long 
immersion in a Scottish loch in the middle of February.  The 
water in Loch Ness, for example, averages 42 degrees 
Fahrenheit. And a big black dog has probably got some Newfie 
in him. They were bred to rescue fishermen from icy waters, 
IRRC. Add that to Rowling's usual vagueness about geography 
(is Myrtle's bathroom on the first floor or the second?) and I think 
the logistics of the escape are about as well explained as 
anything else.


> Since when have Animagi been able to communicate with 
other animals as  Sirius said he did with Crookshanks? Even as 
a dog, can he talk cat? <

Sirius does say he had trouble making Crookshanks 
understand him. But as for Animagi communicating with other 
animals, I refer you to GoF ch. 33.

Voldemort: "He sought me in the country where it had long been 
rumoured I was hiding... helped, of course, by the rats he met 
along the way. Wormtail has a curious affinity with rats, do you 
not, Wormtail? His filthy little friends told him there was place, 
deep in an Albanian forest, that they avoided.."

> Hermione is the closest to Crookshanks and she doesn't have 
this level of understanding or communication. How come Sirius 
does?<

Perhaps she's never tried. Maybe she feels it's unfair, like giving 
orders to House Elves. Ron's pretty sharp with her about her 
inability to control her pet. Obviously he expects her to do better. 
Neither is he skeptical about Sirius's account . Hedwig is 
certainly capable of carrying out quite involved commands for 
Harry.



> 
> "I've been living in the forest ever since.."
> Nearly an entire school year. With no problems from 
Acromantula,  Centaurs, Werewolves or other friendly forest folk. 
Hagrid never  noticed either, despite being the forest expert. Still, 
it explains his  gaunt and hairy look.<

As Sirius says, "I doubt any students ever found out more about 
the Hogwarts grounds...than we did." Sirius was familiar with the 
Forest from his Marauder days, and had plenty of experience at 
avoiding Hagrid.

> Needless to say -  I have a theory. Well, a partial theory. What if 
> Sirius is not just an Animagus but also an unwitting catspaw. 
Maybe he  was sprung from Azkaban - 'accidentally'  let loose by 
the influence of  friends of You-know-who in the Ministry and hotly 
pursued by Dementors.  The Ministry instructs Dementors after 
all. And what  a coincidence! We think Black will be around 
Hogwarts, just where Harry is!   But the  Dementors have 
modified orders. Don't worry about Black - Get Potter!<

Umbridge hasn't got the imagination to be a Death Eater. 
ESE!Lupin, on the other hand...<g>

Pippin
who thinks the reader is supposed to like Sirius, but not quite as 
much as Harry does





From jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 18:06:47 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 18:06:47 -0000
Subject: Shuffle Off To Hufflepuff (a filk)
Message-ID: <bjajbn+psru@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79929

This is a filk of the song "Shuffle off to Buffalo" from the 
musical "Forty-Second Street."


I dedicate this filk to His Royal Filkness Caius Marcius, 
Rex Filkorum.

                   Shuffle Off To Hufflepuff

SCENE:  Dobby has warned Harry that Dolores Umbridge and her 
Inquisitorial Squad are racing to the Room of Requirement to trap 
Dumbledore's Army.  Harry tells everybody to scatter.  For some 
reason Ernie Macmillan, Justin Finch-Fletchley, Hannah Abbot, 
Zacharias Smith and Susan Bones find themselves running away 
together.  There appears to be a disagreement about which course to 
pursue.

ERNIE MACMILLAN: 
Now that the Dragon dung's hit the fan,
The die is cast.

JUSTIN FINCH-FLETCHLEY:
We must run and hide as best we can
Pretty darn fast.
Now that Umbridge has come,
We have to keep mum
Until all the danger has passed.

ZACHARIAS SMITH:
If we don't begin this journey
We'll be needing an attorney
Let's leave all our stuff.

HANNAH ABBOT, JUSTIN FINCH-FLETCHLEY and SUSAN BONES:
Mm mm mm...
Off we better shuffle,
Shuffle off to Hufflepuff.

ZACHARIAS SMITH:
Let's go run to the Library,
Madam Pince can't be that scary
We've all had enough.

HANNAH ABBOT, JUSTIN FINCH-FLETCHLEY and SUSAN BONES:
Ooh ooh ooh!
Off, we'd better shuffle,
Shuffle off to Hufflepuff.

ZACHARIAS SMITH:
The High Inquisitor will catch us 
I hope that I have made that clear.
Her black quill is gonna scratch us 
If we don't hurry out of here.

To the Owlery we must bail,
Even though we have no mail,
We'll just have to bluff.

HANNAH ABBOT, JUSTIN FINCH-FLETCHLEY and SUSAN BONES:
Ooh!
No, we gotta shuffle,
Shuffle off to Hufflepuff.

ZACHARIAS SMITH:
At the kitchen they won't mind us,
And I'll bet she'll never find us
If we just hang tough.

HANNAH ABBOT, JUSTIN FINCH-FLETCHLEY and SUSAN BONES:
Mm mm mm...
No, we gotta shuffle,
Shuffle off to Hufflepuff.

ZACHARIAS SMITH:
If we travel at our top speed
We'd get all the way to Hogsmeade;
It won't be that rough.

HANNAH ABBOT, JUSTIN FINCH-FLETCHLEY and SUSAN BONES:
Ooh ooh ooh!
No, we gotta shuffle,
Shuffle off to Hufflepuff.

ZACHARIAS SMITH:
Guys, I don't quite understand you.
I will not tell you twice.
She is sure to apprehend you
Unless you all take my advice.

You must follow me to a man.
I've a well thought-out escape plan,
It's not off the cuff.

HANNAH ABBOT, JUSTIN FINCH-FLETCHLEY and SUSAN BONES:
Ooh!
No, we better shuffle,
Shuffle off to Hufflepuff.

ERNIE MACMILLAN:
Zacharias, how you try us, 
Now we really gotta fly, as 
You're just talking guff. 
So, come on and shuffle
Shuffle off to Hufflepuff

When she knows as much as we know
She'll take ev'ry step to see no
Student lacks of woe. 
Let's escape the scuffle,
Shuffle off to Hufflepuff!

(For all their bickering, the Hufflepuffs seem to have made it back 
to their common room without incident.  Unfortunately, Harry wasn't 
quite so lucky.)

-Haggridd




From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Fri Sep  5 15:22:12 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 15:22:12 -0000
Subject: Book 6 Predictions (was: Predictions at Madison Square Garden)
In-Reply-To: <binsfa+lnd5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bja9n4+4r39@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79930

In post #79117, Remnant wrote:
>> (snip snip snip) First, LV and the DE's must eliminate two or three 
key OoP members ambush-style. Sorry, Lupin lovers, but it's a fire 
sale and all powerful parent-types close to Harry must go! You, too, 
Arthur & Molly Weasley! >>

Then Kirstini wrote in #79173:
> You aren't just happy with Harry losing both natural parents, 
primary parent-guardian, and elderly mentor figure? I need more 
argument for why, please. I know loads of people think that Lupin and 
the Weasleys 
are going to be next for the chop, but I'm not entirely sure that any 
of those deaths will have a big enough effect on Harry apr? Sirius. 
Especially if you are killing off Ever So Fallible Dumbledore in the 
next book.<



In this, the second installment of the canonical debate of a 
prediction (to the extent that that's possible), let's discuss the, 
ahem, elimination of those close to Harry. Again, apologies for the 
length.

OK, Kirstini, we apparently agree on the growing isolation of poor 
Harry as a theme. But you may be right that not all of these must be 
killed. That could be a bit much for the younger readers. And frankly, 
this is where I have the least canon to go on. So pelt me with yellow 
flags if you must, but I'll give it my best.

JKR needs to tip the scales in LV's favor in Book 6 to create some 
sense of impending doom for the whole WW. That would establish Harry's 
duty to vanquish LV as a wholly necessary/good action.

So how to tip those scales? Well, there's the DE-inflamed chaos I 
referred to earlier in this thread (post #79878). And the readers have 
to feel that Harry is in more dire jeopardy, physically and/or 
spiritually, than ever before. Perhaps I'm reading too closely to 
Biblical scriptures here, but Harry might even question why it has to 
be him; perhaps he'll have an epiphany where he resolves what he must 
do. Either way, with Lupin, DD, Arthur/Molly, Hermione and Ron 
hovering about, he would not be exposed enough.

So she needs to eliminate some of them from Harry's life. Maybe they 
won't be killed, but they'll be equally inaccessible.

Now here I'm just putting two and two together, and saying maybe the 
DEs kill one of these during their upcoming marauding. I can't put my 
finger on it, but that really feels like Arthur or Lupin to me. 
They're both involved in things dangerous/important to the DEs 
(Arthur: OoP/MoM, Lupin: OoP/Grimmauld), and both have put themselves 
in harm's way before for a cause. If you don't want them killed, then 
maybe they're trapped in Azkaban with Dementors or sent to the 
past/future or memory-charmed or just plain captured. But one way or 
another, eliminated.

Then I say to myself, how to eliminate Hermione/Ron? Since I don't 
expect JKR to kill them, the easiest is to take Harry away from 
Hogwarts. Then he'll be stuck with whoever goes with him to protect 
him (post #79878).

Alternatively, Arthur could take over Fudge's job (too many posts from 
others to list here) or simply ride off to some important task away 
from Harry during the summer (problems at Azkaban or Gringott's?). And 
I suppose Lupin could be off on some important role, too. But they'll 
be out of the picture for Harry. And I just think something 
catastrophic will happen to *someone* close to Harry in Book 6. Again, 
it gets back to JKR making the evil more apparent prior to the final 
showdown.

As for Molly, losing Arthur would eliminate her in some ways from 
supporting Harry emotionally. In fact, Harry might even feel somehow 
responsible (he always thinks everything is his responsibility) and 
distance himself some more. Or maybe she's killed, captured or the 
like. JKR could go anywhere on this one.

We'll save DD's elimination for another post. 

Poor Harry, he looks to be on his way through more bad stuff before he 
can be rewarded with (pick your poison from the following) death, 
peace, a SHIPmate, a foster family, or an office at Hogwarts/MoM. But 
it sure makes for good reading!

-Remnant





From prof_uloth at hotmail.com  Fri Sep  5 18:20:17 2003
From: prof_uloth at hotmail.com (Fred Uloth)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 10:20:17 -0800
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves
  objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj7jj7+e7bh@eGroups.com>
References: <20030904135218.98256.qmail@web21110.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20030905101225.00a89be8@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 79931

At 02:52 PM 9/4/2003 +0000, melclaros wrote:
>As to "But he never even told Ron and Hermione what he saw, now did
>he?"
>No, he didn't. But I'm absolutely SURE he would have done if Snape
>hadn't caught him in the act and thrown his tantrum. That scared him
>into silence.

I, Fred Uloth, would like to politely disagree with Mel. Harry kept his 
word about not telling the others about Neville because he respected 
Neville's privacy and his promise to DD. Harry will keep his promise to 
Snape out of embarrassment for what his father and godfather did, not 
respect for Snape. Notice that he has told some people about it, but they 
were people that already knew of the incident. He will not tell, but it is 
not for fear of Severus...I think Harry loathes Snape...he does not fear 
him. I don't think Harry fears anyone...he only fears that they will take 
the lives of loved ones (there was another thread that discussed the 
boggart that brought out this point rather well...as I delete email 
messages after I read them I cannot attribute the theory...my apologies). 




From prof_uloth at hotmail.com  Fri Sep  5 18:33:31 2003
From: prof_uloth at hotmail.com (Fred Uloth)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 10:33:31 -0800
Subject: Manners (was Re: Snape and Harry)
In-Reply-To: <bj7feu+c2oa@eGroups.com>
References: <bj5o3q+lkqi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20030905102243.00af47b0@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 79932

At 01:41 PM 9/4/2003 +0000, melclaros wrote:
>Silly, silly me. Those kindergarten teachers damned well should have
>EARNED the right to be called MISS Espey and Miss (damn i can't even
>remember her name!) Stupid of me to insist that he addrewss the 2nd
>grade nazi as MRS (name witheld--only because if i type it i'll start
>screaming).

Fred Uloth:
Hmm...maybe you should consider home schooling ;) I know it's not for 
everyone and only mention it in jest...

I agree with you hear. I'm currently trying to break a four year old of the 
habit her mother has allowed of addressing me by my first name. Ack! I 
can't believe that we have let things slip to the point where children are 
on a first name basis with adults. But I won't dwell on societal problems....

I believe that the reason JKR has Harry addressing Snape without title is 
to show what lack of respect Harry has for the man. It's probably lost on a 
lot of the kids reading the books and they only look on it as a lesson on 
manners, but I see it as a reinforcement of how much bad blood there is 
between Hp and SS. Look how heated Mel and others of us get on the subject. 
I say good for you JK, you've done it again.

I wish I were more like Mel, but I'm afraid that his children have heard me 
bad mouthing other adults...not directly in front of them, but rather when 
I thought they were asleep in their bedrooms but they weren't.

Regards,
Fred 




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Fri Sep  5 18:42:02 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 18:42:02 -0000
Subject: Sirius reservations
In-Reply-To: <bjaij5+9tjo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjaldq+thef@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79933

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" <foxmoth at q...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith 
> <arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
>  
> > Swim back to the mainland? In that physical condition? The 
> Lexicon  places Azkaban  in the middle of the North Sea, not 
> Hogwarts lake. It's at least 100 miles from shore.

Pippin> 
> One must go to the source, in this case the Scholastic Interview 
> of February 2000. Rowling is asked "Where is Azkaban" and 
> replies, "In the north of the North Sea. A very cold sea" Nothing 
> about a hundred mile swim there. 
>
 Kneasy:
Further than I thought, then. The north of the North Sea is where
it becomes the Artic Sea. More like 400 miles. With  an average 
Feb temp. of 30 -35 Fahrenheit. Survival time about 10 mins.

I rest my case.


Kneasy: 
> > Since when have Animagi been able to communicate with 
> other animals as  Sirius said he did with Crookshanks? Even as 
> a dog, can he talk cat? <
> 
Pippin
> Sirius does say he had trouble making Crookshanks 
> understand him. But as for Animagi communicating with other 
> animals, I refer you to GoF ch. 33.
> 
> Voldemort: "He sought me in the country where it had long been 
> rumoured I was hiding... helped, of course, by the rats he met 
> along the way. Wormtail has a curious affinity with rats, do you 
> not, Wormtail? His filthy little friends told him there was place, 
> deep in an Albanian forest, that they avoided.."
> 
Kneasy:
Accepted. But that does not mean that different species can
communicate. Can dog talk to cat? I have doubts. 

Kneasy
> > Hermione is the closest to Crookshanks and she doesn't have 
> this level of understanding or communication. How come Sirius 
> does?<

Pippin:
> Perhaps she's never tried.
 
Kneasy
Hermione buys an atypical looking cat from a magical animal
shop and doesn't try to communicate? Hermione?

Kneasy:
> > "I've been living in the forest ever since.."
> > Nearly an entire school year. With no problems from 
> Acromantula,  Centaurs, Werewolves or other friendly forest folk. 
> Hagrid never  noticed either, despite being the forest expert. Still, 
> it explains his  gaunt and hairy look.<
>
Pippin: 
> As Sirius says, "I doubt any students ever found out more about 
> the Hogwarts grounds...than we did." Sirius was familiar with the 
> Forest from his Marauder days, and had plenty of experience at 
> avoiding Hagrid.
>
Kneasy
Maybe so, for an afternoon. But  a year?  When beings like the
Centaurs talked to him and would certainly mention an intruder?
 
Pippin:
> Umbridge hasn't got the imagination to be a Death Eater. 
> ESE!Lupin, on the other hand...<g>
>

Kneasy:
Ah! Welcome to the Conspiracy Club! All suggestions carefully 
considered!
 





From jesmck at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 19:15:20 2003
From: jesmck at yahoo.com (jesmck)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 19:15:20 -0000
Subject: Neville's parents/What makes a muggle?
In-Reply-To: <bj9irh+7b4e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjanc8+btc7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79934

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "esmith222002" <c.john at i...> 
wrote:
> I just wanted to discuss something my wife noticed from the PS. 
This 
> concerns Neville and his 'Wizard discovery' speech. Neville refers 
to 
> the fact that his family thought he was all muggle up until this 
> point.
> POINT 1 - Neville's parents are supposedly Alice and Frank 
> Longbottom. Therefore, if Neville was non-magical, surely he would 
be 
> described as a squib (ie non magic person with two magical parents)


I think that when Neville is saying "all muggle" it's kind of like 
slang.  Or maybe it's a kind of dig toward squibs that's commonly 
used. I can't picture Neville trying to offend someone, so it's 
probably one of those things that's offensive, but said so often a 
kid might not pick up on it being offensive. He also says it when he 
knows that he's not a squib and he would probably assume that 
everyone at Hogwarts is a wizard, so he may think there aren't any 
squibs around to offend.

Jessica




From jesmck at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 19:36:35 2003
From: jesmck at yahoo.com (jesmck)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 19:36:35 -0000
Subject: The final solution
In-Reply-To: <20030905132154.76031.qmail@web21508.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjaok3+f40n@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79935

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Ivan Vablatsky 
<ibotsjfvxfst at y...> wrote:
> I've just had a wonderful spiritual realisation about the final
> confrontation and I'd like to share this with you all. I'd like to 
hear your
> reactions to this new theory even if they're negative.
> 
> It all began when I was discussing with a wise old friend the 
similarity
> between verse 56 of "The Voice of the Silence" by HP Blavatsky and 
the HP
> prophecy.
> 
> The Prophecy: "and either must die at the hand of the other for 
neither can
> live while the other survives . . ."
> 
> The Voice of the Silence: "The Self of matter and the SELF of 
Spirit can
> never meet. One of the twain must disappear; there is no place for 
both."
> 
> My friend pointed out the word, "meet". He reminded me that Good 
and evil
> can never meet. Notice that Good here has a capital letter, which 
means we
> are not talking about good as the opposite of evil, as the opposite 
pole of
> the good-evil continuum. We're talking about the Absolute Good of 
the
> Original Spirit, which is the object and destination of the Path of
> Liberation from the time-spatial universe/prison of relative good 
and evil.
> That's the journey Harry is on. Well, that's my theory and I'm 
sticking to
> it.
> 
> Good and evil can never meet because evil would be destroyed in the 
presence
> of Good. That's a spiritual law. But Good will not destroy because 
it is
> love. What actually happens when Good and evil are confronted with 
each
> other is that Good withdraws, leaving evil to destroy ITSELF! When 
Good
> withdraws it's replaced by the Love it radiates. Good radiates Love
> impartially to the good and the evil. As we learned in OoP evil 
cannot bear
> to be in the presence of love.
> 
> What does that mean for Harry? It means that, despite the prophecy, 
Harry
> does not have to kill Voldemort. When Harry and Voldemort enter the 
final
> confrontation, Harry will withdraw and fill the void with love, 
leaving
> Voldemort to destroy himself! 
> 
> At the end of book 7 Harry will have gone through the Gate of 
Saturn (the
> portal with the veil in the ministry) and he will be liberated. He 
will have
> left the good-evil continuum.
> 
> This is my prediction for Book 7. How exactly this will happen, I 
don't
> know. But it makes perfect sense to me. It's just one of those 
things you
> feel in your heart to be true even though you can't prove it or 
explain it. 
> 
> Harry doesn't want to be a murderer. In my new theory he won't have 
to be.
> The prophecy will be wrong in this particular detail. Voldemort 
will not die
> at Harry's hands but at his own. The beauty of this final solution 
I find
> dazzling. 
> 
> Hans in Holland
> 
> 
> 


I really like this theory.  I don't want (and can't picture) Harry to 
kill LV himself because it will take away whatever innocense the poor 
boy will have left.  Having to go through everything he has will 
definitely have an effect on him, but killing will leave that much 
more of a scar.  Plus, I think that if Harry causes LV to kill 
himself, then technically the prophesy remains accurate because Harry 
is then responsible for LV's death even if he uses a figurative hand 
instead of a physical one.

I also like the idea of love conquering LV and the Death Eaters.  I'm 
not sure if the veil will play into the resolution of the story in 
the way you mentioned, I think it will be the room that contains the 
powerful force (which many on this list believe to be love), but I 
agree that we'll see the veil again in one of the 2 final books.

Jessica





From melclaros at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 19:49:19 2003
From: melclaros at yahoo.com (melclaros)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 19:49:19 -0000
Subject: Manners (was Re: Snape and Harry)
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20030905102243.00af47b0@localhost>
Message-ID: <bjapbv+s531@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79936

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Fred Uloth <prof_uloth at h...> > 
> Hmm...maybe you should consider home schooling ;) I know it's not 
for 
> everyone and only mention it in jest...


LOL, I have...but also considered that I'd kill the little brats 
before they "graduated" unless they killed me first. Which isn't as 
far fetched as it sounds. And there was just that ONE Nazi teacher.


> 
> I agree with you hear. I'm currently trying to break a four year 
old of the 
> habit her mother has allowed of addressing me by my first name. 
Ack! I 
> can't believe that we have let things slip to the point where 
children are 
> on a first name basis with adults. But I won't dwell on societal 
problems....

Indeed. Drives me NUTS to have a 3year old wander up to me and call 
me by my 1st name. Or a 5 yo, or a 10 year old. Anything over that, 
in a social setting I would allow but sure would apppreciate the 
oppty to say, "Please call me..."



> 
> I believe that the reason JKR has Harry addressing Snape without 
title is 
> to show what lack of respect Harry has for the man. It's probably 
lost on a > lot of the kids reading the books and they only look on 
it as a lesson on > manners,> 


Absolutely! The sad part is that as far as the lesson goes 
is "Professor Snape, Harry". You know, I might be able to manage 
Harry never apologising--or never thanking Snape for the various and 
sundry services he has rendered. But I would just ONCE like DD or McG 
or SOMEONE (besides that Hermione who rattles on so endlessly no one 
even listens anymore) to say, "Look, next time *think* before you go 
suspecting--or worse accusing--*anyone* of anything. You've been 
wrong every time so far. What does that tell you?"
This is an adult issue. Harry has had a lousy upbringing but I'll bet 
dollars to donuts if he was taught NOTHING else he was taught to SHOW 
respect. (Notice the word is SHOW, not FEEL.) Harry is certainly not 
carrying this burden alone. But unless we're supposed to believe he's 
completely stupid he should have at LEAST figured out that he should 
ALWAYS call Snape "Sir".
Actually I think he has--I adored that last little exchange between 
them just as Minerva gets back from St.M.'s.  It showed growth on 
both sides.




> I wish I were more like Mel, but I'm afraid that his children have 
heard me 
> bad mouthing other adults...


Oh don't feel bad, I'm sure they've heard *plenty*. I made an exta 
effort with this particular case (well teachers in general) knowing 
the poor kid was stuck in her torture chamber for 181 days. Trust me 
on this one, Snape would have a breeze compared to this one. Think 
Umbridge. Teaching 7 year olds.


Melpomene, going to put head in bucket---said child is now in 8th 
grade, get OVER it, Mom.




From cewald at niu.edu  Fri Sep  5 20:36:00 2003
From: cewald at niu.edu (evershade1)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 20:36:00 -0000
Subject: No subject
Message-ID: <bjas3g+js3g@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79937

Hello 
I apologize for using this list for my personal need, but I hope you 
will understand once you have read my message.  On July 1st, my 
husband, left home to get some cigars on his motorcycle, and he 
never returned.  He is 52, a successful and respected business man, 
father to our 11 year old son, a solid Christian from a small 
Midwest town, loved by many, and loved deeply by me for the past 14 
years.  To read the full story, please go to 
http://www.angelfire.com/art2/art-ewald/   If you want to help, 
please pray for my husband and our family, download the poster and 
post it where ever you feel appropriate, and pass this information 
on to your email list friends.  Thank you from my heart, Chris Ewald





From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 20:39:36 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 20:39:36 -0000
Subject: Sirius reservations
In-Reply-To: <3B5199AC-DFAB-11D7-9D7B-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bjasa8+rg5e@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79938

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> Ah! In her hedonistic retreat Laura stirs from her sybaritic 
repose, surrounded by Sirius look-a-likes who peel grapes, cater to 
her every need and prostrate themselves before her imperious caprices.
> 
>*Laura smiles wistfully and extends an invitation for Dicentra to 
drop by anytime*

> Laura:
> 
> (Although why on earth any adult male would rather identify with
> Snape than Sirius is beyond me.)
> 
> Kneasy:
> Most males quite like the idea of being thought, not evil, but a 
> masterful villain (think some of the old James Mason films). Add 
> mysterious and it definitely attracts. Sure, edit out the physical 
> (greasy hair and yellow teeth) by all means, but the *character* 
has 
> potential for serious fantasies. Sirius on the other hand has 
nothing 
> going for him, so far as most  males are  concerned. He's rash, bad 
> tempered, petulant and gives an impression of weakness. He *might* 
dote 
> on Harry, but no-one male would want to be labeled with that lot. 
I'm 
> told females like him because  of his vulnerability. Tell me, how 
long 
> would it take before that became predictable and irritating?
> 
> Laura responds:

Vulnerability never loses its charm, believe me.  And I do believe 
that the Sirius we saw in GoF was the default version.  If he'd been 
able to have a normal life, he would have had time to resolve some of 
his emotional problems that tormented him in OoP.  And it would have 
been very emotionally satisfying to be able to care for Harry, which 
would havd done wonders for his feelings of guilt and shame.

Kneasy:
 After 
> Shrieking Shack, Sirius, (as a dog) is yelping and whining at the 
> approach of the Dementors. It was so traumatic it apparently caused 
him 
> to revert to human shape. Why wasn't he so strongly affected when 
> escaping his cell?

Laura:

As Annemehr said, there were probably not 100 Dementors guarding 
Sirius's cell.  And I'd suggest that it was a matter of expectations 
and focus.  That is, when Sirius escaped from Azkaban, he had a well-
thought-out plan and a clear picture of what to expect.  He could 
concentrate all his energies on what he had to do in reasonably 
predictable surroundings.  Outside of the Shack, chaos reigned.  
Sirius had no control of the situation, people for whom he felt 
responsible were in imminent danger and there were tons of hungry 
Dementors all over the place.  It was a very different situation.
> 
Laura (from before)
> Harry never got a clear look at Padfoot until the Shack. So what he
> saw combined with his imagination (especially after he learned 
about Grims) could account for what he thought he saw.
> 
> Kneasy:
> Now, now! Play the game! Harry thinks 'hulking' before learning 
about Grims. JKR tends to be punctilious about vocabulary. Hulk 
implies bulk strongly. Can you believe a TV show called 'The 
Incredible Thin'?

Laura again:

Lord, don't give reality tv any ideas!  <bg>  I think my theory works 
even before Harry read about Grims.  He saw a "hulking outline".   We 
know that eyewitness evidence is notoriously unreliable, so if Harry 
saw Padfoot's shape in the dark for a second or two (and in a state 
of panic and shock), his mind would have been likely to fill in the 
missing information as "massive, heavy, scary dog" rather than "dog 
with big frame but skinny and weak-looking".
> 
> Laura (from before):
> 
> No, I don't agree that revenge was foremost in Sirius's mind.
> Protecting Harry was always his first priority.
> 
> Kneasy:
> Sorry, but it was. When he finally got into the dorm, did he go to  
> Harry? He did not, he went to Ron's bed for Scabbers. At the S.S. 
all his actions, words, demeanour are primarily about revenge and 
> self-justification. Explaining things to Harry would have been an 
> after-thought if distractions hadn't intruded. He even has his 
hands  around Harry's throat at one point. Sirius is obsessed, 
verging on demented perhaps, but he is fixed in his priorities. And 
Harry isn't at the top of the list.
> 
> Laura again:

We read the evidence differently, I guess.  The fact that Sirius was 
so focussed on Scabbers just proves my point, in my view.  Sirius 
felt that it was imperative to eliminate the threat to Harry.  There 
was no reason for him to go to Harry at all, and in fact, it's not 
clear when he would have done so.  Clearly he would have preferred to 
get rid of Peter without revealing himself to Harry-and Harry's 
reaction to him tells us a good bit of the reason why.  IIRC, Sirius 
had his hands around Harry's throat after Harry attacked him.  
Whatever plan Sirius had for communicating the truth about Wormtail 
to Harry got trashed the night of the Shack confrontation.
<snip> 
> 
> Laura (from before):
> 
> I got the idea that the Dementors weren't looking for anyone in
> particular at Hogwarts, just for the fear they fed on.
> 
> 
> Kneasy:
> I got the opposite idea - that the Dementors were guarding Hogwarts 
and environs solely because they suspected Sirius would be trying to 
break in. <snip> 

Laura responds:
> 
Yes, you're right that they were assigned to guard Hogwarts because 
of everyone's assumption that Sirius would show up there.  But once 
they were there, everyone was fair game.  They still had to eat, 
right?  The Dementors don't discriminate among their victims, as I 
understand it.  If they found Sirius, all well and good, but in the 
meantime, there were all those other people...

By the way, Pippin, don't *even* get started on ESE!Lupin.  Or I'll 
have to take you on next...;-)  It's a good thing I have an 
understanding husband...





From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 20:45:18 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 20:45:18 -0000
Subject: unforgiveable charms?
In-Reply-To: <bj8c1j+46j5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjasku+62pl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79939

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
> We know that there are Unforgiveable curses.  But I've been 
> wondering, what with the strong feelings about Harry looking into 
> Snape's pensieve thoughts, if there should be Unforgiveable charms
> as well.  For instance, shouldn't it be highly improper (if not 
> worth a life term in Azkaban) to use Legilimency on someone without 
> their permission?  Or to access their private thoughts in any other 
> manner?
> 
> Laura, 

bboy_mn:

Responding to this original poster and to the other respondants-

Let's remember that there is a big difference between that which is
legally/socially/morally unforgivable and that which is AN 'Unforgivable'.

unforgivable = done something wrong

Unforgivable (with a capital "U")= done something unforgivably wrong.

So you really think that a death sentence or life in prison is the
appropriate sentence for Harry looking at Snape's thoughts in the
Pensieve or someone using Legilimency? Seems a bit harsh to me.

Certainly these are a violation of some measure of right and wrong,
but do you really see them as capital crimes of the highest order;
capital crime demanding the most extreme sentence the law will allow? 

Let's look at what Legilimency really is in a practical sense. As far
as I can see, it is hardly more than a highly accurate form of
intuition. Voldemort or Dumbledore have a strong ituitive sense of
when someone is lying based on subtle interpretations of their
thoughts, emotions, and demeanor. 

Snape said it himself, that Legilimency is not 'mind reading' as the
mind is not something which can be read; and we can certainly
reasonably conclude that it is not 'thought stealing' as it does not
deprive the owner of his thoughts. It does invade the privacy of the
owner of those thoughts, but it doesn't actually steal any thoughts
from him.

To the person who responded with a comment that Veritaserum was legal,
that is a slight misstatement. The use of Veritaserum is (supposedly)
strictly controlled by the Minstry of Magic; strictly control, in all
likelihood, for both legal and human rights reasons. We see (or the
story implies) that it is not routinely used in for prisoner
interogations; just as truth serum is not routinely used for muggle
police interogations.

I guess my main point is that we can't go bandying about with the word
'Unforgivable' (with a capital 'U') because that means something very
very specific; it means a life sentence in Azkaban. Certainly, many
curses and charms can be used in generally unforgivable ways, but they
would still fall far far short of being Unforgivable (with a capital 'U').

Just a thought.

bboy_mn








From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Sep  5 20:53:27 2003
From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Ivan=20Vablatsky?=)
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 21:53:27 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The final solution
In-Reply-To: <bjaok3+f40n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030905205327.54790.qmail@web21510.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79940


jesmck wrote:
>>I don't want (and can't picture) Harry to kill LV himself because it will
take away whatever innocense the poor boy will have left. Having to go
through everything he has will definitely have an effect on him, but killing
will leave that much more of a scar.<<

Hans:
Thanks for that response. Don't we all love Harry? There's very few in the
group who don't, and I think it's because Harry is something inside of us.
We all want Harry to be innocent and good and kind. Harry is our deepest
spiritual self.

I just can't understand that so many people still see HP just as a
children's story. That obviously includes Warner Bros. It includes most
journalists and people like A.S. Byatt who says we've got a comic reading
mentality for liking HP. It includes the Chinese government who awarded a
prize to CoS as the best foreign film , while they're so antireligious!
Could somebody please tell me why the sublime and supernal spiritual beauty
of HP is not obvious to people?


________________________________________________________________________
Want to chat instantly with your online friends?  Get the FREE Yahoo!
Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk



From wsherratt3338 at rogers.com  Fri Sep  5 21:09:24 2003
From: wsherratt3338 at rogers.com (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 21:09:24 -0000
Subject: Manners (was Re: Snape and Harry)
In-Reply-To: <bjapbv+s531@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjau24+nid2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79941

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "melclaros" <melclaros at y...> 
wrote:
> Absolutely! The sad part is that as far as the lesson goes 
> is "Professor Snape, Harry". You know, I might be able to manage 
> Harry never apologising--or never thanking Snape for the various 
and 
> sundry services he has rendered. But I would just ONCE like DD or 
McG 
> or SOMEONE (besides that Hermione who rattles on so endlessly no 
one 
> even listens anymore) to say, "Look, next time *think* before you 
go 
> suspecting--or worse accusing--*anyone* of anything. You've been 
> wrong every time so far. What does that tell you?"
> This is an adult issue. Harry has had a lousy upbringing but I'll 
bet 
> dollars to donuts if he was taught NOTHING else he was taught to 
SHOW 
> respect. (Notice the word is SHOW, not FEEL.) Harry is certainly 
not 
> carrying this burden alone. But unless we're supposed to believe 
he's 
> completely stupid he should have at LEAST figured out that he 
should 
> ALWAYS call Snape "Sir".
> Actually I think he has--I adored that last little exchange 
between 
> them just as Minerva gets back from St.M.'s.  It showed growth on 
> both sides.
> 
> 
At least it was a break from his incessant lying.  I think even 
Snape was a bit impressed that Harry would just flat out "tell the 
truth and shame the Devil", as they say - I thought it was an 
improvement that he'd just tell Snape what he was about to do and 
then wait for the punishment instead of launching into another 
recitation of his wrongs.  As for the forms of address used in the 
book, there's a clear distinction between the way students talk 
among themselves and the way they have to talk to an authority 
figure.  When they're among equals, they speak of ALL the teachers 
in the less-respectful "last name only" style, whether they're good 
teachers or not.  McGonagall, Flitwick, Trelawney, Quirrell, etc.  
When they're with adults, they're expected to use the title, whether 
they're speaking directly to or indirectly about a teacher.  It gets 
a little hazier when we consider how adults address each other; for 
the most part, I think the formality is preserved in public.  
It's "Professor Snape" and "Professor McGonagall" when they meet at 
the end of OotP, with the students present.  Even when they don't 
like each other, they don't demean each other in front of the 
children: so Arthur speaks of 'Lucius Malfoy', and Lucius speaks 
of 'Arthur Weasley'.  Even face to face they use their given names, 
to at least preserve the appearance of politeness.  I think it's 
important, and it's a matter of maintaining standards of civility.  
There's no question of anyone "deserving" or "earning" their title; 
it's used because it would be barbaric not to.  Civilized people are 
obedient to the rules governing their society.  I think this is why 
Dumbledore keeps correcting Harry when he disses Snape; bringing up 
children properly involves civilizing them, and Harry has to learn 
that his opinion, about Snape or anyone else, is not the deciding 
factor in how he has to treat them.

Incidentally, I notice that Sirius refers to "Snape" and "Malfoy" 
throughout.  Does anyone else?  I think Lupin speaks of him 
as "Professor Snape", at least when he's counselling Harry to work 
hard at Occlumency.  This is one of the reasons why I never liked 
Sirius much; he seemed to me, with all his blokeyness and 
enthusiasm, to be reinforcing the part of Harry that needed to be 
disciplined.  He should have been reminding Harry of the proper way 
to address his teacher, not raising guffaws by demonstrating how he 
was such a pal and just one of the lads by talking the same way.

Wanda





From acoteucla at hotmail.com  Fri Sep  5 21:26:43 2003
From: acoteucla at hotmail.com (acoteucla)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 21:26:43 -0000
Subject: The final solution
In-Reply-To: <20030905132154.76031.qmail@web21508.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjav2j+jpp0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79942

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Ivan Vablatsky 
<ibotsjfvxfst at y...> wrote:

I like your theory - it matches fairly closely with my own 
predictions regarding how the series will end.  However, you wrote 
the following:

> Harry doesn't want to be a murderer. In my new theory he won't have 
to be.
> The prophecy will be wrong in this particular detail. Voldemort 
will not die
> at Harry's hands but at his own. The beauty of this final solution 
I find
> dazzling. 

I don't think the prophecy will be "wrong".  The prophecy states that 
either must die at the hand of "the other".  One of my favorite 
theories is that "the other" is actually a third person (Peter 
Pettigrew), and not Harry or Voldemort.  

However, your particular theory does not require this interpretation 
of the prophecy.  You said that Harry will go through the veil in 
book 7 - what if Voldemort is the one who pushes him through?  Then 
Harry dies at the hand of Voldemort!  The prophecy says nothing 
regarding what will happen afterwards.




From talisman22457 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 21:51:03 2003
From: talisman22457 at yahoo.com (Talisman)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 21:51:03 -0000
Subject: Time, Repetition and the Uber-Dimension (was: Narrative Function
In-Reply-To: <bjag8m+fckm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjb0g7+evib@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79943

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "corinthum" <kkearney at s...> 
wrote:
> Talisman wrote:> > >You cannot exist as a savior-self that is even 
one metabolic- second older than you were when you would have 
perished without it.  <snip> Therefore, older Harry could not 
initially save younger Harry--even though Time insists that he 
was "always" present in both roles.
> 
> And Laurasia replied:
> 
> > Why is that? <snip> 
> > > > That makes no sense. 
>  
> Corinth responded:
>> Talisman is saying (if I understand her correctly), and I agree, 
that the Harry-*must*-save-himself scenario is implausible.  <snip>  
> In this case, Harry1 and Harry2 exist simultaneously.  But Harry2 
can only exist in this time frame if Harry1 successfully made it to 
the time-travel point once before.  Therefore, Harry1 must have 
escaped the Dementors without the help of Harry2 the first time 
around.  
                *         *           * 
Talisman, staking out the secret chamber at Malfoy Manner, with her 
Hand of Glory at the ready, replies:

Yes, Corinth that IS it.  Thanks for your lucid feedback.

Whether the reader thinks Snape assisted Harry or not is quite a 
different question and does not affect the time-travel theory.

Let me also take this opportunity to clear up my #79635 "Kirstini" 
quip.  It has been pointed out that some readers may think I was 
making an unflattering comparison, one impugning Kirstini's talents.

No such comparison was being made.  I consider Kirstini my friend, 
and I think she is very bright.

Talisman, slipping quietly into the coal-shute . . .   





From leu02ram at rdg.ac.uk  Fri Sep  5 14:49:51 2003
From: leu02ram at rdg.ac.uk (leu02ram)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 14:49:51 -0000
Subject: Snape Vampire
In-Reply-To: <03D1565B532E3C48805D3ABA4CE81EC20DB65D@CORWWPKSEXV03.corp.pg.eon.net>
Message-ID: <bja7qf+7anu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79944

Hels <helen.young at p...> wrote:
> To continue an old theory...
> 
> I haven't got my book with me but in OotP when Harry is watching 
James taunt Snape, James justifies it by saying ...
> 
> "it's more because he exists"
> 
> I read this not just as a comment that Snape exists therefore he is
> worth torturing but that vampires exist and are therefore worth
> torturing.
> There are plenty of previous posts on this list about prejudice and
> discrimination against different species and took this episode to be
> another example.
> 
> Has anyone seen new examples in OotP of discrimination against other
> species or new evidence to back up the darling Snape as Vampire 
theory?


Now me (Rachel):

If James is so against different species, then why is he best friends 
with a werewolf, and why did he go through the (I think) painful 
process of becoming an animagus? 

The Snape Vampire theory is a bit of a mystery to me, but there is 
discrimination everywhere against other species. This seems to have 
been discussed a lot and it seems pointless to list the hundreds of 
remarks/looks/comments/violence that occured.

Sorry if I've been rude but I don't think that this could possibly 
be the reason for his bullying, I think he was just a bully.

Regards,

Rachel





From dtaylor at epfl.net  Fri Sep  5 18:50:20 2003
From: dtaylor at epfl.net (shacklebolt38)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 18:50:20 -0000
Subject: Sirius and Dumbledore (Was: Pensieves objectivity & Dumbledore's integrity)
In-Reply-To: <bj6cel+fk7n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjaltc+4lva@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79945




> > 
> > Now me (Lisa):
> > Thank you, Susan, for a nice post.  Personally, I think that there 
> > are actually two issues here, one being why Sirius rushed to the 
> > Ministry (and, in the end, to his death), and the other being 
> > Dumbledore's understanding (or lack thereof) of Sirius (and Harry) 
> > and his treatment of them in OOP.  I don't think that they're 
> > necessarily that closely related, and neither have I gotten the 
> > impression that there is a consensus on the list that they are 
> > clearly causally related.
> 
> Sirius loved Harry and wanted to 
> > protect him, and I find it hard to believe that he could be 
> > convinced to sit around and wait while Harry was in grave danger.  
> > 
> > Lisa
> 
> snip

snip

Let us not forget that Sirius feels great responsibility for the death 
of Harry's parents and says as much in POA.  This would motivate him 
to do all he could to keep Harry safe.  Even without the guilt, his 
love for James and any child of James would send him to the rescue 
whatever he was doing.
Shacklebolt





From vam0609 at aol.com  Fri Sep  5 15:35:41 2003
From: vam0609 at aol.com (kuligkutig)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 15:35:41 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore dislodged
In-Reply-To: <001601c370c7$d5179080$0d60bd3f@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <bjaagd+hmnl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79946

> Secondly, I jumped to the 'Ron as Seer' posts in my mind.  Could 
Dumbledore dislodge Fudge and make Arthur Weasley Minister of 
Magic?   Fun thought.

Me: You know I have a feeling also that Arthur will be Minister of 
Magic because Ron joked about it when he said that they have as much 
chance of winning the Quidditch Cup as his dad becoming Minister of 
Magic and we all know they won the Cup. I just noticed that everytime 
Ron joke about something it is always true. It is when he is serious 
that he is usually wrong. 

Vampire






From samwise_the_grey at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 16:07:56 2003
From: samwise_the_grey at yahoo.com (samwise_the_grey)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 16:07:56 -0000
Subject: Clues in COS (was Re: Dumbledore's integrity)
In-Reply-To: <bja2g6+rmkk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjaccs+d0il@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79947

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Wanda Sherratt" 
<wsherratt3338 at r...> wrote:
 
> I was thinking that that might be the reason why Voldemort wanted 
nobody else to kill Harry but himself; he waved them off in GoF, and 
thought that was why Lucius was careful not to AK Harry in the 
shootout at the end - I presumed he was acting on orders from LV.  
But Voldemort was willing for Dumbledore to kill Harry when he 
possessed him, so it looks as if he wasn't worried that Harry's 
powers would be transferred to his enemy, making him even more 
powerful.  Now I don't know if that theory is valid anymore.
 
> Wanda

Now, now, don't dismiss it too soon. The way I read that scene is LV 
was counting on DD not to kill Harry. 'You kill me you'll kill the 
boy too' as it were. He's taking a hostage now that he's been backed 
into a corner. 

Clearly DD's decisions are effected by his fondness of Harry. Do you 
destroy LV and save the WW at the cost of one life? It would be the 
practical, ultimately good thing (assuming DD really could kill LV 
while he possessed Harry). Did DD ever consider doing it? It doesn't 
appear so.

~Samwise





From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Fri Sep  5 15:52:45 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 15:52:45 -0000
Subject: Turncoat!Tonks (was: Aurors/Unforgiveable Curses)
In-Reply-To: <bj58l7+kii0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjabgd+sq58@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79948

> Sarah:
> Well, I can't see Tonks turning, given that she herself is a half-
> blood (her dad was muggle born), and I can't see her being accepted 
> into the death eater fold.  Tonks isn't even on the Black family 
> tapestry, and her dear Auntie Bella hates half-bloods like Harry 
> (and like Tonks).  My bet on Tonks is that she's there to teach 
> Harry how to be a metamorphmagus.  Remember in the first book how 
> Harry made his hair grow after a particularly bad haircut from 
> Petunia?  Sounds like Harry's parceltongue ability: he didn't 
> realize that everyone else couldn't do this, and so hasn't exactly 
> mentioned it to anyone.  Since we might be seeing human 
> transfigurations next year (according to Hermione in GoF), we might 
> see Harry develop some metamorphmagus ability.

Yes, yes, all true! But I think it's a set-up. Tonks will *use* all of 
those facts and possibly the shared metamorphmagus to gain Harry's 
complete trust. Then she'll betray Harry/DD. Why? OK, here goes some 
unabashed guessing.

First, what purpose does the metamorphmagus serve? IMO, it would be 
perfect for impersonating someone; that's deception. She could "be" 
Snape and do something rotten to get him in trouble. She could "be" DD 
and send Harry's protectors off in the wrong direction. Obviously, 
this all assumes she could use the power to do a good impersonation, 
an unknown at this time.

Second, what is her motivation (this suddenly feels like a criminal 
trial!)? No canon that I've come across yet. But what if she needed 
help to become an Auror (maybe due to her clumsiness) and Lucius 
greased the skids with a little donation, thus buying her loyalty? Or 
maybe she plays at being silly on purpose so that others will always 
underestimate her (kind of like the not-so-dumb dumb blonde stereotype 
in movies like Legally Blonde); in the meantime she's quite 
power-hungry? We really know very little about her as a character.

In closing, everything is not always what it seems in the Potterverse. 
Tonks' unusual character/characteristics make her jump out to me as 
something more than a minor Auror with little role to play in 6&7. So 
I give her my role, you give her yours. I admit that yours has more 
canon, but mine fits the plotline I think will happen in book 6 (post 
#79117).

-Remnant





From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Sep  5 22:33:10 2003
From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 22:33:10 -0000
Subject: Sirius reservations
In-Reply-To: <20030904211155.74056.qmail@web60105.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjb2v6+d9f7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79949

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Nadia Kennedy
<hulahulagirl205 at y...> wrote:

<snip>

> But what really ticked me off about the whole Life and Death of
Sirius was how JKR made him act so different than he had in the other
books. The first time I read about Sirius' mood swings and anti-social
behavior , a tiny voice inside my head said "She's going to off
Sirius!" When it finally happened, I was disappointed in how crappy a
death it was. I mean with Sirius, I expected something somewhat
spectacular, not just a glad-he's-dead-now sort of thing. I know that
JKR liked Sirius, so maybe she was just "distancing" herself from his
death, but still, I feel more than a little betrayed by how she did it.
> 
> Nadia

I wonder if I'm alone in thinking Sirius' behaviour, well, logical
given the circumstances. During his two years on the run he'd been
hiding in the Forbidden Forest, somewhere in the tropics, and in the
cave outside Hogsmeade. Living on rats might be no picnic, but he'd
been able to be outdoors, stretch his legs, enjoy life in comparative
safety (no one knew he was an Animagus) and so on. In hindsight, this
was probably the worst mental preparation for 12 Grimmauld Place you
could think of, letting the bloke get used to fresh air and sunlight
again and then shutting him inside a place he hates with a passion.

On the other hand, I do think Sirius is somewhat overdone in the
chapter "The Order of the Phoenix". Even if he is gradually sinking
lower into depression during the autumn it'd been more effective if it
hadn't been the first thing Harry noticed about him. But he doesn't
get really moody until it's clear that Harry won't be staying with
him, I think Hermione's got it right.  

My reaction to the death scene was something like "Damn, it wasn't
supposed to happen yet", but now I've grown into it any other way
would have felt affected, unrealistic, cheap even. 

Alshain the dumbstruck (10 000 new posts since I logged in last)   





From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Fri Sep  5 22:49:29 2003
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 22:49:29 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj9hbq+6om3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjb3tp+subc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79950

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sienna291973" 
<jujupoet29 at h...> wrote:
> > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sbursztynski" > 
> Susan:
> > I think Harry's heart is still with him. I think that is why he 
is 
> > so very angry with him now. Sirius and Remus admitted that what 
> > Harry saw was true. It is easier for Harry to be angry at Snape 
> than 
> > his hero father who just fell off his white horse. I hope that 
> Harry 
> > figures out that his anger is misdirected in the future books.
> 
> 
> Then Geoff:
> >Yes, but can you see Harry going to Snape and saying, "Professor, 
I 
> >realise now that my father was awful with you (or something 
> similar!) 
> >and I want to apologise on his behalf."
> 
> >Can you see him after the way Snape has reacted in earlier books? 
> >From the word go, in PS, he set out to humiliate Harry - look at 
the 
> >very first Potions lesson HP ever attended. He has specialised in 
> >making snide comments or comments with a sting in the tail.
> 
> >Would Harry attempt a reconcilation when he is conditioned to 
expect 
> >rebuffs, rudeness and put downs?
> 
> Now me (Sienna):
> I personally have to agree that Snape has made it awfully hard for 
> Harry to truly feel any lasting sympathy for him.  It is testament 
to 
> Harry's good heart that he was able to feel compassion for Snape at 
> any point in time given their history.  And he is still only 15, 
> while Snape, at his mature age, still wears the emotional scars of 
> his childhood and, what's more, takes them out on an innocent boy 
who 
> already has more than enough to deal with in his life. I can't say 
> that I feel an awful lot of sympathy for Snape.  I can certainly 
> empathise with awful childhood experiences (who among us doesn't 
have 
> at least one of those) but to let them rule your behaviour years 
> later is something I find hard to understand.  I would sooner see 
> Snape attempt a reconciliation with Harry (given that he should now 
> at least suspect that Harry is NOT like his father) than expect 
Harry 
> to bury his feelings about all of the rudeness and nastiness Snape 
> has directed at both himself and Sirius.
> 
> Sienna
> Who feels much better now she's vented.

And my two knuts:
I have been thinking about the state of Snape's and 
Harry's "relationship" since I finished OOP for the second time. The 
second time is when I really take in details. I am not reading to 
find out who dies, who gets kissed etc. So I can concentrate. At the 
end of the book, when Snape prevents a confrontation between Harry 
and Draco Malfoy, Harry's parting thought is that he'll never forgive 
Snape, presumably for his role in Sirius'death. That stood out to me. 
I do believe their relationship is going to get worse before it gets 
better. All this talk of them acting civilly to each other is a pipe 
dream as long as Harry is able to rationalize some blame Snape's way. 
That's a typical teenage thing to do, I realize. What ever resolution 
these two have, it may take the entirity of the next two books to 
occur. JKR can move through the details of an upsetting incident very 
quickly when she wants to, but one does not deal with the loss of the 
closest thing to a parent Harry's ever known in a summer holiday with 
despised relatives. On the contrary, I'd be much surprised if Harry 
doesn't spend way too much time dwelling on Sirius'death and unless 
he's extraordinarily mature, (which despite my undying affection for 
him, I can't see that being the case), he's going to want to continue 
to blame someone as convinient as Snape for a while. It isn't going 
to build good feeling between them. I am not seer, but it seems that 
something very unusual is going to have to occur to bring Harry and 
Snape above their irrational feelings for each other. Hope that comes 
sooner rather than later, the dramatic tension can wear thin.
Jennifer




From hardcoreukuk at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Sep  5 15:32:39 2003
From: hardcoreukuk at yahoo.co.uk (Tricia Hemans)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 15:32:39 -0000
Subject: Harry's Grandparents
In-Reply-To: <bj5870+ognt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjaaan+3ldm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79951

Sarah ("mochajava13") wrote:
> Petunia definitely seemed jealous of Lily, but she also seemed to 
> dislike her too much for the dislike to be mere sibling jealousy(snip)

Now me:
I think that it could be just jealousy. Look at Snape for example: he 
was jealous of James and he's taking it out on Harry. As an adult he 
should have been able to get over it, but he hasn't.

Sarah:
> If they were still alive, someone in the magical community would have 
> mentioned it to Harry by now.  To not tell him that his grandparents 
> were alive would be unnecessarily cruel. (snip)


Now me: Up until book 3 Harry never knew he had a godfather. Who's to 
say they ain't keeping it from him because they could have been into 
Dark Arts. Maybe that's why James dislikes it so much, because he grew 
up with it around him. (Just an idea.) 

"Tricia Hemans"




From wildfire_517 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 17:08:18 2003
From: wildfire_517 at yahoo.com (wildfire_517)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 17:08:18 -0000
Subject: How do muggles get admitted to Hogwarts?
In-Reply-To: <bj8n4o+ollu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjafu2+qqm2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79952

> >    Wyld:
> >    Furthermore, that would mean that JKRs comment on someone 
realizing their potential later in life would have to be one of 
the witches or wizards we have already seen becoming stronger by 
leaps and bounds.  
> > Neville is the first person that comes to mind for me, but I 
doubt that she would refer to 15 as "late in life."  Any other 
candidates?
> > 
 
>Sarah:
> My pet theory is Petunia.  I have a theory that Petunia got a 
letter from Hogwarts, too, and hid it.  She's a little TOO obsessed 
with being normal, in my opinion.  But, like Umbridge said in OoP, 
if magical potential isn't realized/practiced, then it withers (I 
think that's the gist of part of her opening speeck).  But then that 
> raises the question of Dudley not having any magical abilities.  
Hm, I need to think this one through a bit.

Me again:

   I definitely agree with Petunia.  That was, to be honest, my first 
thought all along, until reading that magical potential dies if it is 
not utilized.  However, as has been pointed out already, Petunia 
always struck me as an odd character.  For someone who's life has 
been touched by magic in so many ways, she sure seems like she is 
trying to hide something.  Maybe she did get her Hogwarts letter and 
denied her true calling for some reason.  I'm not really sure.  It 
just seems to me that, with the comments made earlier, Petunia 
*can't* be the one referred to by JKR.  The statements just don't add 
up.  That's why I was wondering if there were any other pet theories 
floating around besides the apparently popular Petunia one.

    Wyld





From wildfire_517 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 17:32:46 2003
From: wildfire_517 at yahoo.com (wildfire_517)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 17:32:46 -0000
Subject: "The Animagus Black!"
In-Reply-To: <bja9ht+4r1j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjahbu+dkqf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79953

>Jen Reese: 
>
>(snips) 
> So Bellatrix was trying to offer this to Voldemort in lieu of the 
> broken prophecy, hoping to stave off punishment. But, then it 
doesn't 
> explain why she didn't just tell him Sirius was dead instead of 
that 
> they fought. She'd want credit for that.
> 

My turn:

  Maybe the DEs know something we don't.  Maybe she really thought 
Sirius wasn't dead.  Maybe there is a way to come back from the other 
side of the veil.  Or maybe she was babbling because she was shocked 
her master was there and she really didn't know what she was saying.  
Personally, I hope it's the first option, but I have a hunch it's the 
second one.

>Jen Reese:
> OK, Second theory: During the three times the Potters defied 
> Voldemort, Sirius assumed his animagus form to help them, and 
that's 
> the only way Voldemort really knows him. Perhaps he doesn't even 
know 
> his real name, so Bellatrix has to refer to him that way so LV will 
> know who she's talking about.

Me again:

   While this one might possibly work, I would have to think that the 
information passed to LV by Wormtail would include the fact that 
certain members of the OotP were unregistered Animagi, including 
Black.  Plus, Sirius explains why he had the Potters switch 
secretkeepers by saying that he hoped LV would come after him and 
leave PP alone.  That, to me, implies that LV knew who he was, and LV 
doesn't seem like a person who would go into a potential battle 
without knowing as much as possible about his opponents, which would 
include knowing Sirius' Animagus abilities.

   Wyld





From sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 23:13:06 2003
From: sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com (sevenhundredandthirteen)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 23:13:06 -0000
Subject: Time, Repetition and the Uber-Dimension (was: Narrative Function
In-Reply-To: <bjag8m+fckm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjb5a2+esfh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79954

Corinth wrote:
 
> Talisman is saying (if I understand her correctly), and I agree, 
that 
> the Harry-*must*-save-himself scenario is implausible.  Time can't 
> motivate a person; if Harry had wanted to change something while 
time-
> traveling, he could.  He did.  But time doesn't record it that way.

<snip>

 While there, Harry2 sees Harry1 
> trying to fend off the Dementors, gets worried that maybe things 
will 
> happen differently this time,  and decides just to be safe to cast 
a 
> Patronus to save himself.  As soon as this happens, Harry1's 
memories 
> change to that which is recorded in the book.  Because Harry2 is in 
> reality Harry1 plus three hours, his memories also change.  The 
> result: the one and only Harry has only one memory, one which 
> includes both present him and future him.  He interprets his 
actions 
> as being directly motivated by his memories, when in reality the 
> opposite is true.  The must-go-back-in-time situation presents 
itself 
> only after the time travel has already ocurred.


Wonderful! Now it all makes sense here... The only problem I have 
with this is about Harry2's memories being suddenly wiped over. The 
reason that I'm having an issue with this is because I don't see how 
JKR is going to reintroduce us to the 'original saviour' (Snape, 
whoever) if Harry's memories are now actually legitimate. If Harry2's 
memory was wiped over the second he cast the Patronus, then surely 
Snape's memory was also wiped over. It follows that Snape now has no 
memory of attempting to save Harry at all. 

Who, then, *does* have memory of the inital incident? Dumbledore, 
perhaps? But how did *he* escape the memory modification that time 
caused? Perhaps *no-one* has any memory of the initial version. Is 
it, perhaps, only trapped in Harry's subconscious mind (hence why the 
Occlumency lessons were bringing it back)? (We've seen that an 
Obliviate charm can be broken into, perhaps Time's memory changing 
charm works the same way). But why would Harry believe this version 
of events when Snape will deny them (he, like Harry, had his memory 
changed when Time was changed) and he has his own explanation (Harry 
saved them all along) that makes perfect sense?

If no-one has memory of the initial incident I don't see how it's 
going to come back into play. In fact, I don't see how it even 
becomes relevant anymore because there is the completely internally-
consistent version of events that Harry now believes. Whilst Snape 
may have actually saved Harry, that version of reality no longer 
exists. We're now following the version of reality in which *Harry* 
saved Harry. That is, the inital version of events have become 
redundant.

What's more- how did Harry manage to cast the Patronus? We have seen 
that Harry wasn't able to cast a corporeal Patronus up until that 
point. In the book (the modified memory version, if we follow this 
theory) Harry states that he could only cast one because he knew he 
already had. *BUT* in the memory-changing version of events he cast 
the Patronus as a precaution even though he knew that someone else 
was going to save him. He knows that he's already saved, but does it 
as a precaution. That, to me, doesn't sound like a good enough reason 
to be suddenly instilled with enough confidence to cast his first 
ever corporeal Patronus strong enough to ward off a hundred Dementors.


Actually, I think I now understand why Talisman had such issues with 
the 'it-only-happened-once' theory. 
If we apply Corinth's line:

Time can't 
> motivate a person; if Harry had wanted to change something while 
time-
> traveling, he could.  He did.  But time doesn't record it that way.

to the self-consistent version of time then Harry *could* have 
changed something, but *didn't*, so his memories remain perfectly 
intact. That is, Harry has perfect *true* recall of the events 
because he never had to change anything. On the other hand, if he 
*didn't* cast the Patronus over the lake (that is, if he was forced 
to change something), then Time would have over-ridden his memories 
with *that* version of events- a.k.a. we're left with a soul-sucked 
Harry. 

Talisman followed this thought to reach the conclusion 'therefore, if 
Harry wasn't there, we are left with soul-sucked Harry. Harry wasn't 
always there. Therefore, someone else must have saved him.' Whereas 
I'm following this statement to the conclusion 'therefore, if Harry 
wasn't there, we are left with a soul-sucked Harry. But Harry *was* 
always there. Therefore whilst he was in real danger, so long as he 
cast the Patronus no-one else needed to have saved him.' That is- if 
Harry failed to cast the Patronus (as he might at any time) Time will 
rewrite itself to include soul-sucked Harry. BUT, so long as he *did* 
cast the Patronus (which he did) then Time will remain as the itial 
version of itself- non-soul-sucked Harry, Harry as saviour.

Corinth's line actually works pretty well with the self-consistent 
version of events. What Talisman and I now find differences in is 
just one tiny little point:

Talisman wrote (in #79635):

>Though Time stubbornly shows Hermiones 1,2 & 3 as 
>being "always" "simultaneously" there, we know that
>they arrived in 
>a serial fashion.

Whereas I'm looking at it from Time's point of view- I am saying they 
*didn't* arrive in a serial fashion at all. They were always 
simultaneously there (just the way Time sees it).

One tiny little issue. To think we spent all think time arguing and 
it all boils down to one tiny little point.

~<(Laurasia)>~




From dbonett at adelphia.net  Fri Sep  5 17:38:52 2003
From: dbonett at adelphia.net (dtbonett)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 17:38:52 -0000
Subject: SHIP cliches (Was: Re: H/H SHIP)
In-Reply-To: <bjaf7p+9nbv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjahnc+8hio@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79955

"a_reader2003" wrote:
> I am in my mid 40s, and can't think of anyone I knew at 
> school who either married their school sweetheart, or if they had a 
> serious relationship then, is still in it. 

I am in my mid-forties and still with my husband that I started dating
at age 18. I am very happy with him, although maybe some would
classify our relationship as 

>incredibly > stereotypical from the 50s era (I am thinking of my own
>parents here).

To each their own.  I would tend to think of us as stable, secure and
peaceful rather than stereotypical. Off-hand, I know many couples who
are similar. My brother is married to his high school girlfriend (met
at aged 15), my cousin just hit 27 years with her husband met at aged
20, I stopped counting when I got to ten couples that I know like
this, including friends as well as family. Maybe one tends to hang out
with people who are similar/have similar experiences, so that if you
have been a relationship a long time, your friends tend to have done
the same thing?  I know there are many divorces and troubled
relationships out there and I also do have close friends who have been
divorced, obviously, (some remarried and some not)  but long-term
couples like us are also part of the 'real world' still nowadays,
although we get no publicity. 

I think having been through what she has, JK Rowling
might especially value stability. It looks like she has got this now
herself and she looks very content. I agree that she probably won't

> dispose of all the kids in neat pairs

Nor should she, but I  do not understand why

>permanent, marriage-type  relationships <snip>
would be 
> totally  the wrong message for 21st century kids--


 I would think that that sort of relationship they would be a goal for
most people eventually no matter what the century, although of course
any marriage relationship, at whatever age you start it involves
> compromises and difficulties.

That said, I do not think the HP books are like Jane Austen, that is,
I don't think they are about finding the right marriage partner, so
the relationships in them will always be just a subtext to the primary
theme of the battle between good and evil.  

Note: I would have said the Dursleys, although a very stable couple,
are more stereotypical like the 50's, at least to outside appearances
(someone who didn't know them wouldn't know how mean they are).  Molly
Weasley is a very strong woman who knows whats what, stands up to her
husband when she thinks he is not on the right track, and is an equal
member of the Order, besides raising some very impressive kids
(except, at the moment, Percy).She has dealt with poverty well.  She
is not in la-la land, loses her temper when pressed (though she is
kind) and obviously has a lot of feeling for the people around her,
not just her kids.  She stands up to Sirius too and says some very
sensible things to him.  Mr. Weasley also has a lot of courage to stay
in the job that he likes, rather than doing what others (including
Percy) think he should.  Kids could have worse role models.

D. Bonett





From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Fri Sep  5 19:39:18 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 19:39:18 -0000
Subject: Seamus and the Weasleys (was: Re: SHIP Harry's Sexual preference- Sue)
In-Reply-To: <bj9qqu+2mp2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjaop6+il4q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79956

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" 
<gbannister10 at a...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jeffl1965" <jeffl1965 at h...> 
> wrote:
> 
> 
> Jeff:
> > Yeah, I can see Party-Animal!Seamus fairly easily. :) In a way, I 
> > think the way that JRK wrote him, is almost insulting with her having 
> > him wanting to make rum at age 11. To me, that implies that he's 
> > already a drinker, which might be true, but not something that she 
> > should point out early on as part of his make-up.
> > 
> Geoff (a different one just to be confusing!)
> Not necessarily so. There is a side of us which likes to experiment 
> with "grown-up" things when we're younger. I can remember having a 
> pull at a cigarette when I was about 8 and not liking it one bit! I 
> didn't smoke then until I was about 18 and gave it up for good at 21. 
> I think it's the same with drink. Experimenting - and possibly being 
> dared by others.
> 
>
   Jeff:
     Yeah, I can agree with that. I did a bit too. Still don't smoke 
nor do I drink. :) I'm sure Seamus and some of the other's 
test "adult" things while away from the watchful eye of Mum and Dad, 
but I just thought it was odd that she had him doing it so soon, and 
in an open place. IIRC, he tried before and made a weak tea. ;) I'm 
guessing he did that attempt elsewhere, maybe the common room? That 
would be a bit safer, I'd wager. 

> 
> Jeff:
> > The same can be said about how she presents the Weasley family. 
> > They're poor, red-haired, and have a large family. Sounds like a stab 
> > at the Irish to me. Perhaps not totally intentional, but still.
> > 

> Geoff:
> I see the Weasleys as a great family. Dad is conscientious and works 
> hard and also wants to work at something which rewarding to him in 
> other ways; hence he has perhaps a lower paid job. I taught for 32 
> years. I could have gone into other careers when I left school but 
> felt that teaching was a vocation. We were never as poor as the 
> Weasleys but we never had the sort of money to throw around as Lucius 
> in the book. I never regretted it though. And often large families 
> pull together and the siblings are close to each other.


   Jeff:

    That's how I see them. It's just that it's difficult to really 
guess what she really means. She hides clues in the books, and 
sometimes you can tell that she has other hidden meanings as well. As 
I've mentioned before, she tends to make most of the blonds, the 
males mainly, appear to be dolts or right wankers, Dudley, Malfoys, 
Neville, Seamus, et al. Makes one wonder. Was her first husband a 
blond?

    The large families association is true. Both my parents came from 
large, poor families, and their closeness is very obvious. Not all 
large families are that close, especially as adults, from what I've 
seen, but usually while growing up most certainly are.


  Jeff






From susannacedric at passagen.se  Fri Sep  5 20:58:50 2003
From: susannacedric at passagen.se (susannacedric)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 20:58:50 -0000
Subject: Neville's parents/What makes a muggle?
In-Reply-To: <bjanc8+btc7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjatea+s8e7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79958

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jesmck" <jesmck at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "esmith222002" <c.john at i...> 
> wrote:
> > I just wanted to discuss something my wife noticed from the PS.  This 
> > concerns Neville and his 'Wizard discovery' speech. Neville refers to 
> > the fact that his family thought he was all muggle up until this point.
> >
> > POINT 1 - Neville's parents are supposedly Alice and Frank 
> > Longbottom. Therefore, if Neville was non-magical, surely he would be 
> > described as a squib (ie non magic person with two magical parents)
> 

> Jessica:
> I think that when Neville is saying "all muggle" it's kind of like 
> slang.  Or maybe it's a kind of dig toward squibs that's commonly 
> used. I can't picture Neville trying to offend someone, so it's 
> probably one of those things that's offensive, but said so often a 
> kid might not pick up on it being offensive. He also says it when he 
> knows that he's not a squib and he would probably assume that 
> everyone at Hogwarts is a wizard, so he may think there aren't any 
> squibs around to offend.


It might also be the fact that the word 'squib' isn't really 
introduced until Filch is 'outed' by Harry and that doensn't  happen 
until book three (hope my memory serves me right on this fact). So 
maybe JKR didn't want the term to be revealed until then, similar to 
the Thestrals issue.

Susanna





From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Fri Sep  5 21:01:49 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 21:01:49 -0000
Subject: Book 6 Predictions (was:Predictions at Madison Square Garden)
In-Reply-To: <binsfa+lnd5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjatjt+2ccr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79959

>> In post #79117, Remnant said:
>> see Harry saved by Moody, Tonks or Shacklebolt and taken to a 
beautiful reunion with his SHIP-mate and two or three other close 
friends (all schoolmates, of course). Tears flow, Harry blames himself 
and then vows to never let someone so close be taken from him again. 
So he disappears. End of book 6. >>

> Then in post #79173, Kirstini said:
> Ooh, what for? This sounds exciting. And aren't the schoolmates 
rather obviously Ron and Hermione? Or did you kill Ron off? 
> Interesting. So you're identifying a breakdown in the formal 
conventions of the series (Boy at house has birthday, leaves house, 
goes to Diagon Alley, gets on train, fights with Draco, gets off 
train, eats a big stodgy meal, trains for Quidditch, celebrates 
Halloween, plays Quidditch, signs a list saying he's staying at 
Hogwarts for Christmas, goes to Hogsmeade, plays more Quidditch, 
fights Snape, studies for exams, gets involved in huge denoument, ends 
up in hospital ward, wins cup, gets on train, fights Draco, gets off 
train, leaves station)?
>I know that OoP went some way towards this, by removing the emphasis 
from Hogwarts (even by putting Luna in on the Hogwarts Express) and 
changing the real-time dates around slightly (book opens after Harry's 
birthday). Is this the sort of thing you were thinking of? I want 
proper canonically-backed thematic analysis of how each of these 
things you describe is going to come about. Show me the themes. Tease 
them out in lots of lovely detail. Wave them about under my nose until 
I. Get. The. Point, please. >


And this brings us to the last of our semi-canonical discussions of my 
current Book 6 predictions (post #79117), wherein much changes for the 
worse while Harry changes for the better. Off we go!

Since my initial Book 6 posting, I have decided that Tonks was the 
betrayer (post #79697), so she can't be the savior, too. And that 
leaves Snape, Moody and Shacklebolt to save Harry. Frankly, I don't 
have the foggiest which it will be. But they are the most likely to be 
with either Harry (to keep him safe) or DD (in the rescuing crew). It 
will be Snape if JKR doesn't decide now is the time for him to 
sacrifice himself for the cause/DD/Harry. Obviously, I read Snape to 
be genuine in his loyalty to one of those.

My belief is that with DD buying the farm (or at least being 
vanquished somehow) in this betrayal/trap, Snape will become Harry's 
new guardian/mentor. During the battle, Snape will have proven to 
Harry through his actions that he is on Harry's side. Now that their 
mutual misunderstanding has cost them DD, Snape will finally tell 
Harry why he is loyal, and Harry (who blames himself as always) will 
tell Snape he's sorry. Not only does this match up with the theme of 
not reading a book by its cover (a consistent JKR nugget), but it 
finally resolves the plot development needs of DD elimination and a 
Snape-Harry truce/understanding. Can we really believe in a Harry the 
Good who still hates Snape because he's a tough teacher? Despite 
Snape's work on behalf of the OoP? No, resolution must come for those 
two before Harry can vanquish LV.

Thus will start Harry's preparation for the final showdown. He'll have 
seen firsthand the evil of LV's ways, and will feel the added 
obligation of living up to DD's sacrifice to save Harry. Snape will be 
able to tell him more about LV and what happened to his parents and 
why Harry is the one. It is this series of events that will shape 
Harry's resolution to defeat LV. Something like this needs to happen 
so that Harry can take the next step in his development.

After the dust settles from his discussion with Snape, JKR will need 
to get Harry back to his friends. They're the most important things to 
him, and we won't have seen them in a few chapters, now. Thus the 
return to Hogwarts and a reunion with them. They'll include Hermione 
and Ron, of course, and probably Neville, Luna, Ginny and maybe one or 
two more of the recently developed characters.

OK, maybe I jumped the gun on his disappearing. Sounds neat, but on 
second thought, you're right that it ventures too far from the tree. 
He probably stays at Hogwarts after the events to finish his 
preparations.

So as for breaking down the structural conventions of the books that 
you have described so well, Kirstini, they may not be affected so 
much. He could start at Hogwarts, make it through to winter break 
before leaving Hogwarts and meeting the betrayal/trap, then return to 
Hogwarts in time to continue his studies under a new headmaster and a 
very dedicated Snape. Maybe Snape is finally DADA! Maybe the 
house-elves provide protection to Hogwarts! Maybe Grawp and the 
centaurs do, too! Maybe the MoM starts hunting DEs in earnest at last! 
Maybe no one wins the House Cup, because that's dividing the houses 
that need to work together to survive! Maybe some members of Slytherin 
will start to come around (OK, maybe they'll just leave Hogwarts 
instead).  Maybe there's more action in the second half of the school 
year outside of Hogwarts (Gringott's? Lucius' house? Other exotic 
locales?) Or maybe this took the whole spring? Maybe maybe maybe.

Kirstini, it's impossible to second guess everything that JKR's up to, 
but she has set some ground rules for what needs to happen in the next 
two books. I merely hope that my predictions keep you entertained 
until the real Book 6.

-Remnant
Maybe I'm Done!





From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 21:05:37 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 21:05:37 -0000
Subject: SHIP cliches (Was: Re: H/H SHIP)
In-Reply-To: <bjaf7p+9nbv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjatr1+bven@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79960

>>>>> CW comments:
> 
> The problem I have with all the SHIPPING is that in my experience, 
teenage crushes and romances rarely lead to long-term relationships, 
and if they do, they end in tears, because the partners grow up and  
grow apart. I am in my mid 40s, and can't think of anyone I knew at  
school who either married their school sweetheart, or if they had a  
serious relationship then, is still in it. 

Similarly, even those who met their partners at college, or in their 
early 20s, had trouble sticking together. Maybe its our real world,  
but the strong couples I know are often on their second or third  
relationship, having trudged through a lot of grief and revised 
expectations on the way. >>>>>

Sarah: 
Considering that over 50% of marriages of any kind end in divorce, 
with second and third marriages having an even higher divorce rate, 
I think saying that people who met in their teens/early twenties 
have more problems than others do at sticking together is unfair.  
My mother's cousin is almost 50, still with her high-school 
sweetheart, and they started dating at 15.  My mother and aunt, both 
in their 50s, divorced from people they met in college after 15+ 
years of marriage.  My uncle is still with his wife, and they met 
when he was in his early twenties.  My sister, still going strong 
with her now-husband, and they started dating when she was 18.  One 
of my friends married her high school sweetheart, and they've been 
together for over 6 years.  I know plenty of people who broke up 
with highschool sweethearts and college sweethearts (including those 
who had children in their late teens), but saying that people who 
met in their teens/early twenties have more trouble than others at 
staying together is not true in my experience.  In my experience, 
the strongest relationships I know of (including extended family and 
friends) are ones when they met in their teens/early twenties with a 
realistic expectation of what a relationship is all about.


>>>>> CW comments:
> With JKR's personal history, I would be really surprised if she 
disposes of all the kids in neat pairs. Some of them might embark on 
a more serious romance, and we can endlessly speculate on the 
outcome of that post-book 7, but will she give us permanent, 
marriage-type relationships by the end of the series ? No, I hope 
not. Its totally the wrong message for 21st century kids; they need 
to grow individually and find out who they are before taking on the 
compromises and difficulties of a permanent partnership.>>>>

Sarah: 
Speaking from experience here (I'm in my mid-twenties, so I might 
still count as a 21st century kid according to some), teens nowadays 
have had to shoulder a lot of adult responsibilities.  Quite a few 
of us were left to raise ourselves since our parents worked long 
hours.  Not to mention the fact that very young teens are already in 
sexual relationships. (I knew people who were experimenting with sex 
and drugs when I was 13, and that was in the early 1990s.  If 
anything, it's much, much more prevalent now.)  Not showing a 
serious relationship would be a mistake, because teens (and those of 
us in our 20s) would find it unrealistic, as we all know someone 
who's been in a very long relationship.  Also, not portraying a 
serious relationship when the trio is supposed to be 16-18 would be 
slightly condesending, in my opinion.  For one, teens that age 
aren't exactly children any longer.  They're not adults in the UK or 
the US, but 16 year olds are considered adults in other parts of the 
world.  Plus, what 16 year old doesn't think they're an adult, 
capable of a serious relationship?  A lot of us (more than half) are 
kids from "broken homes" who have no good example of how to have a 
successful relationship.  Our parents certainly aren't good 
examples.  Showing them a successful relationship would be very, 
very helpful.  I'd like it is JKR showed a serious relationship 
amoung the trio by the last book.  Hey, I met my fiance at 19, my 
sister met her husband at 18, my best friend met hers at about 16.  
In my circle of friends, there's the successful couples who met 
between the ages of 15-21, and those that are still looking whos 
longest relationship has been maybe one year.

Sarah


ADMIN: This thread is veering off-topic.  If your response to this post addresses the issue of young marriages without also addressing its relevance to canon, please post your response to OT-Chatter.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hpfgu-otchatter/






From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep  5 21:32:38 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 21:32:38 -0000
Subject: Book 6 Predictions (was: Predictions at Madison Square Garden)
In-Reply-To: <bja9n4+4r39@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjavdm+4un8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79961

Jumping on the predictions of who will be eliminated next (somehow I 
feel like this is some weird twist on Agatha Christie's And Then 
There Were None):

My guess is that Ginny's going to get the axe in the next book or 
two.  Did anyone else notice that the boggart at Grimmauld Place 
never appeared as Ginny, but did appear as all the male Weasleys and 
Harry?  Plus, we've got Mrs. Weasley's fear that not all the 
Weasleys are going to survive the next war.  And Ginny seems to be 
quite deceptive to her family, or at least able to lie and keep 
secrets from them.  (Neither the twins nor Ron knew that Ginny snuck 
off with their broomsticks; Ginny lies without flinching when 
telling Molly that Crookshanks was playing with dungbombs and again 
when lying to students while Harry and Hermione tried to contact 
Sirius at Grimmmauld Place.)  And Arthur talks about finding the 
Dark Mark hovering over a home, telling those that live there 
someone is dead.  My new crack-brained theory is that Ginny is going 
to sneak off somewhere, lie to her parents as to where, and get 
offed.  Or the Weasleys might leave Ginny behind at the Burrow in an 
attempt to protect her while the rest of the family goes to do work 
for the Order or something, and come home to find the Dark Mark 
hovering overhead.  I think a Weasley is almost guaranteed to go 
(not that I like it), and the most likely canidates are either Ginny 
or Ron.  Possibly Percy.  

All the muggle born students at Hogwarts, and in the wizarding world 
at large, are at risk; Draco and all the death eaters' kids at 
Hogwarts know who they are.  Some of the ones we know about are 
Hermione, Lavendar, Dean, Penelope Clearwater, Justin Flinch 
Fletchley, the Creevey brothers, and Ted Tonks.  (I'm sure I'm 
missing some.)  Then the half-bloods are at risk, too: Harry (but 
he's a target anyway), Tonks, and Seamus.  Anyone of them could get 
it just because of their heritage.

I think Lupin will survive the series, just one of those feelings.  
Pettigrew's going to get it.  (I hope so anyway; Harry saved 
Pettigrew's life.  Pettigrew then goes and restores Voldemort, which 
causes a series of events that lead to Sirius' death.  Pettigrew 
needs to get what's coming to him.  My mean spirited side hopes that 
Crookshanks eats him while Pettigrew is a rat.)  Dumbledore, maybe, 
but probably from old age.  Although Professor Marchbanks tested 
Dumbledore for his transfiguration NEWTS, and she's alive and 
kicking.  

Sarah





From tkj_etal at bellsouth.net  Fri Sep  5 21:16:50 2003
From: tkj_etal at bellsouth.net (trishel2003)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 21:16:50 -0000
Subject: Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
In-Reply-To: <bj4qu7+rsvq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjaug2+n92m@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79962

Pip!squeak wrote:
> > Snape is a nasty son-of-a-sorceror, and he and Harry don't like 
> > each other one little bit. But when the order comes through that Snape 
> > and Harry have to work together, it's Snape who makes-sarcastic-
> > comments-and-soldiers. Harry is the one who obstructs the lessons as 
> > much as he can by the passive method of I-haven't-done-my-homework-
> > Sir and the active method of breaking into the pensieve.
> > 
> > It is Snape who tries as much as he can to be adult about the 
> > Occlumency lessons. It is Harry who behaves like the 15 year old he 
> > is, shuffling his feet, doing as little as he can, and finally 
> > breaking the rules so badly that Snape chucks him out. But Harry's 
> > reaction to this is 'I don't care'. When he's asked to talk to Snape 
> > and ask to be taken back, he doesn't.
 
 Harry is actually responding to Snape's perception of him. Consider: 
 when Harry calls Legilimency "mind-reading," Snape says he has 
 no "subtlety" (incidently, I agree with Snape), and that his mind is 
 shallow and weak. Harry responds by conforming to Snape's perception 
 of him as a stubborn, arrogant dim-bulb: "Whatever Snape said, 
 Legilimency sounded like mind reading to Harry and he did not like 
 the sound of it at all."  Harry acts the same way at Potions. It's a 
 vicious cycle: Harry uneasy, Snape insults him, Harry becomes more 
 uncomfortable and begins to believe he's stupid, Snape becomes more 
 biligerent as Harry becomes more clumsy--keep this up, and Harry 
will be melting his cauldron in class.

I'm not saying Harry tried his best during his Occlumency lessons. 
 But Snape did nothing to try to put Harry at ease or encourage him, 
 or give him any instruction over than "Clear your mind of emotion," 
(which is not what enabled Harry to throw off the Imperius curse--
 quite the opposite).  Some interview comments Rowling has made about 
 Snape make me wonder about him--perhaps he's doing something evil 
 during these lessons? Like deliberately prying open Harry's mind?
 
 --RTJ







From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Fri Sep  5 23:32:32 2003
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 23:32:32 -0000
Subject: Neville's hair colour (was Seamus and the Weasleys)
In-Reply-To: <bjaop6+il4q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjb6eg+fsp9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79963

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jeffl1965" <jeffl1965 at h...> 
wrote:
 
> I've mentioned before, she tends to make most of the blonds, the 
> males mainly, appear to be dolts or right wankers, Dudley, Malfoys, 
> Neville, Seamus, et al. Makes one wonder. Was her first husband a 
> blond?
> 


Is Neville blond? Is it mentioned somewhere in the books. I only 
remember him being round faced and small. And even before the movies 
came out, I imagined him with brown hairs. That said, blond or not 
blond, the way this character was developped, with that much dignity, 
especially in the later books, I really disagree, that he is a dolt. 
Like Dumbledore said: "It are your choices, that define you" or 
something like this. And Neville's choices have nearly always been 
right. In fact, I can't remember a single scene where he didn't make 
the right choice.

Hickengruendler




From c.john at imperial.ac.uk  Fri Sep  5 20:21:38 2003
From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 20:21:38 -0000
Subject: Voldemort's attacks on Harry
Message-ID: <bjar8i+kb48@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79964

Why, oh why does Voldemort attempt to kill Harry in OOTP.

His first attempt to kill Harry resulted in his 'disappearance' for years. 

His second attempt (after he thought he'd overcome his previous problems with Harry) resulted in being on the wrong end of 'Priori Incantatem'.

He then spends the whole of OOTP trying to get hold of the prophecy, to allow him to understand his problems with Harry. Then after he fails, his response is to perform Avada Kedavra on Harry.

Is he stupid? How can he be sure the spell won't rebound again? And if he is sure he can kill Harry simply with Avada Kedavra, then why bother with the prophecy at all??

"c.john"




From jdr0918 at hotmail.com  Fri Sep  5 23:41:35 2003
From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 23:41:35 -0000
Subject: Seamus and the Weasleys (was: Re: SHIP Harry's Sexual preference- Sue)
In-Reply-To: <bjaop6+il4q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjb6vf+qf7e@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79965

<<<Geoff wrote:..I see the Weasleys as a great family. Dad is 
conscientious and works hard and also wants to work at something 
which rewarding to him in other ways; hence he has perhaps a lower 
paid job...We were never as poor as the Weasleys but we never had the 
sort of money to throw around as Lucius in the book...And often large 
families pull together and the siblings are close to each other..>>>

The Sergeant Majorette says

I suspect that the Weasleys are not as poor as they seem to be, just 
eccentrically frugal. I'll bet they're not living on Arthur's salary, 
either. Maybe they're not meant to be Irish, but Scots, and as 
disdainful of wastrels like those johnny-come-lately Norman Malfoys 
as the Malfoys are of them. Molly may have cleaned out the vault in 
GoF, but obviously there was something there for Ron's new broom in 
OotP.

--JDR




From wsherratt3338 at rogers.com  Fri Sep  5 23:53:48 2003
From: wsherratt3338 at rogers.com (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 23:53:48 -0000
Subject: Clues in COS (was Re: Dumbledore's integrity)
In-Reply-To: <bjaccs+d0il@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjb7mc+eueb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79966

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samwise_the_grey" 
<samwise_the_grey at y...> wrote:
> Now, now, don't dismiss it too soon. The way I read that scene is 
LV 
> was counting on DD not to kill Harry. 'You kill me you'll kill the 
> boy too' as it were. He's taking a hostage now that he's been 
backed 
> into a corner. 
> 
> Clearly DD's decisions are effected by his fondness of Harry. Do 
you 
> destroy LV and save the WW at the cost of one life? It would be 
the 
> practical, ultimately good thing (assuming DD really could kill LV 
> while he possessed Harry). Did DD ever consider doing it? It 
doesn't 
> appear so.
> 
I don't know if it's possible to be sure.  I took it the other way - 
that it was a trick.  Voldemort had some plan of escape, or knew the 
spell wouldn't hurt him, but he was trying to trick Dumbledore into 
finishing off Harry for him. Perhaps he just isn't sure if it's 
possible for him to kill Harry, he's tried and failed a number of 
times now and it's too risky, so he wanted to get Dumbledore to do 
it.  That way, any repercussions would hit HIM, not Voldemort.

Wanda





From kkearney at students.miami.edu  Sat Sep  6 00:35:54 2003
From: kkearney at students.miami.edu (corinthum)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 00:35:54 -0000
Subject: Time, Repetition and the Uber-Dimension (was: Narrative Function
In-Reply-To: <bjb5a2+esfh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjba5a+o9ec@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79967

I wrote:

> >As soon as this happens, Harry1's 
> memories 
> > change to that which is recorded in the book.  Because Harry2 is in 
> > reality Harry1 plus three hours, his memories also change.  The 
> > result: the one and only Harry has only one memory, one which 
> > includes both present him and future him.  He interprets his 
> actions 
> > as being directly motivated by his memories, when in reality the 
> > opposite is true.  The must-go-back-in-time situation presents 
> itself 
> > only after the time travel has already ocurred.

And Laurasia replied:
 
> Who, then, *does* have memory of the inital incident? Dumbledore, 
> perhaps? But how did *he* escape the memory modification that time 
> caused? Perhaps *no-one* has any memory of the initial version. Is 
> it, perhaps, only trapped in Harry's subconscious mind (hence why the 
> Occlumency lessons were bringing it back)?

Me:

No one has any memory of the original version.  Not in this dimension,
anyway.  It wasn't a memory modification in the sense of memory
charms.  A person is only capable of being in one time dimension.  In
the dimension that we're concerned with, Harry2 saved Harry1.  It's
not an illusion, it's a fact.  The fact that other now non-existant
events triggered this reality is irrelevant.  I missed the
Occlumency-is-bringing-back-memories-of-a-parallel-dimension theory,
but this is impossible if this theory of time travel is correct.  


Laurasia:

> If no-one has memory of the initial incident I don't see how it's 
> going to come back into play. In fact, I don't see how it even 
> becomes relevant anymore because there is the completely internally-
> consistent version of events that Harry now believes. 

Me:

Exactly.  It's not going to come into play because it doesn't exist,
and never did exist, in the dimension we are concerned with.  

Laurasia:

> What's more- how did Harry manage to cast the Patronus? We have seen 
> that Harry wasn't able to cast a corporeal Patronus up until that 
> point. In the book (the modified memory version, if we follow this 
> theory) Harry states that he could only cast one because he knew he 
> already had. *BUT* in the memory-changing version of events he cast 
> the Patronus as a precaution even though he knew that someone else 
> was going to save him. He knows that he's already saved, but does it 
> as a precaution. That, to me, doesn't sound like a good enough reason 
> to be suddenly instilled with enough confidence to cast his first 
> ever corporeal Patronus strong enough to ward off a hundred Dementors.

Me:

The Patronus-as-a-precaution idea was just the simplest thing I could
think of.  Feel free to come up with a scenario that gives Harry more
motivation...an elaborate thousand page novel if need be.  As long as
it begins with Harry escaping the dementors and ends with him casting
a patronus to ward off the same dementors, the results will be the same.


-Corinth




From furkin1712 at aol.com  Fri Sep  5 23:37:47 2003
From: furkin1712 at aol.com (furkin1712 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 19:37:47 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Latent Witch Petunia (was:How do muggles get admitted to ...
Message-ID: <f3.2f7f2b7f.2c8a784b@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79968

Mandy said:
 Why she turned against it as a 
child (or young adult) is still a mystery though, as her parents were 
obviously supportive of Lily getting her Hogwarts acceptance letter, 
I imagine they would have been of Petunia too but for some reason 
Petunia rejected it.


I think that Petunia went to HOgwarts and maybe got bullied by some pure 
bloods or got hexed around alittle and couldn't take it. Or maybe she just stayed 
for a day and said, "This isn't for me, I'm surrounded by freaks." 

That's my pet theory, I think she got her letter and was freaked out by the 
school.
*-Blue Eyes-*


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From furkin1712 at aol.com  Fri Sep  5 23:54:42 2003
From: furkin1712 at aol.com (furkin1712 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 19:54:42 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Marauders Theory(Remus, Sirius, Peter, James)
Message-ID: <140.18737b5b.2c8a7c42@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79969

Sarah:
I think Lupin will survive the series, just one of those feelings.? 
Pettigrew's going to get it.? (I hope so anyway; Harry saved 
Pettigrew's life.? Pettigrew then goes and restores Voldemort, which 
causes a series of events that lead to Sirius' death.? Pettigrew 
needs to get what's coming to him.? My mean spirited side hopes that 
Crookshanks eats him while Pettigrew is a rat.)? 
(snip)

Just a question: Does anyone else see some kind of mystery surrounding the 
members of the Marauders? Look: James is dead, Sirius is dead both Killed by 
Voldemort or his supporters. Wormtails is a Voldemort supporter and that leaves 
dear old Moony. Lupin was and is in the Order of the Pheonix and he's the only 
good Marauder left. Kind of sucks to be him, as we all know Pettigrew's gonna 
get the ax, where does Lupin come in in all of this? Personally, I'll wager 
the theory that James and Remus did a soul-switching spell or something was 
right because then there's more to Remus then jsut that werewolf in the Order. 

And something was funny about that part in OotP when Harry told Sirius and 
Remus that Snape stopped giving him Occulmency lessons and Sirius screamed 
something about having a word with Snape and Remus shouted If anyone's got a right 
to yell at Snape its me.....now why would Remus have suppremacy over the 
Godfather? 

Just something to Nibble on.

SOMEONE PLEASE COMMENT ON IT, I would LOVE the input~
*-Blue Eyes-*


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From furkin1712 at aol.com  Fri Sep  5 23:44:34 2003
From: furkin1712 at aol.com (furkin1712 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 19:44:34 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: How do muggles get admitted to Hogwarts?
Message-ID: <f.185f7c3c.2c8a79e2@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79970

>Sarah:
> My pet theory is Petunia.? I have a theory that Petunia got a 
letter from Hogwarts, too, and hid it.? She's a little TOO obsessed 
with being normal, in my opinion.? But, like Umbridge said in OoP, 
if magical potential isn't realized/practiced, then it withers (I 
think that's the gist of part of her opening speeck).? But then that 
> raises the question of Dudley not having any magical abilities.? 
Hm, I need to think this one through a bit.


Well, Vernon's not a wizard so that would be half of Dudley's blood, remember 
just because you have a magical parent doesn't mean your magical i.e. Squibs. 
Also, if magical power fades over time then it wouldn't be apparent in DUdley 
because its almost gone in Petunia. 

Here's a thought, maybe Petunia is somehow involved in the whole Voldemort 
conspiracy? Maybe she's got a major magical part to play and she was afraid of 
it so she left.

I think maybe.
*-Blue Eyes-*


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 00:10:27 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 00:10:27 -0000
Subject: Ron -- Seer when joking? (was Re: Dumbledore dislodged)
In-Reply-To: <bjaagd+hmnl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjb8lj+g27r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79971

>>>Vampire:

I just noticed that everytime 
Ron joke about something it is always true. It is when he is serious 
that he is usually wrong. >>>>

Sarah:
Well, I hope this isn't true, because Ron joked about his own death 
in OoP!  Remember his line "I don't care if the tea leave read Die, 
Ron, Die, I'm just going to chuck them in the trash" or something to 
that effect?  

Then again, I'm in denial about all the possible foreshadowing of 
Ron's death.  
Sarah






From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 00:23:00 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 00:23:00 -0000
Subject: Turncoat!Tonks (was: Aurors/Unforgiveable Curses)
In-Reply-To: <bjabgd+sq58@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjb9d4+jtcd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79972

I agree that there is something more going on with Tonks.  But I 
don't think she'll turn evil, if for the sole reason of sticking it 
to the family that rejected her and her mother.  Andromeda (Tonks' 
mother) got burned out of the family tree as Sirius had.  I really 
wonder if Lucius and Narcissa admit that they're related to Tonks in 
any way, shape, or form.  I wonder if Draco knows that one of his 
cousins is a half-blood, and an uncle is muggle-born.  I think one 
of her, and Sirius', functions in the books are to show another side 
to pure-blood families, and to show that choices, not blood, is what 
is important.  

Look at Sirius: here he is, belonging to a very old 
wizarding family (probably just as connected as the Malfoys are, 
since a Black married a Malfoy).  He could have had everything that 
money could buy in the wizarding world, his family is seeped in the 
dark arts, his only brother a death eater, but Sirius turned his 
back on all of it.  Same with Andromeda.  They show the flip side to 
Lucius Malfoy and Bellatrix Lestrange, and go along with JKR's theme 
of doing what is right versus doing what is easy.  The easy path for 
Sirius and Andromeda would have been to do what Draco Malfoy and the 
Andromeda's sisters did: go along with the message their parents 
gave them.  Look at Draco; he's taking the easy path.  Sirius and 
Andromeda took the right one: they stood up to their families and 
were shunned because of it.  Tonks comes into play because she's a 
living representation of Andromeda's choice to marry a muggle-born.  

OK, I admit Tonks being a living representation of Andromeda's 
choices is a little weak.   But, Tonks may be a way for Grimmauld 
Place to remain the Order's headquarters.  If Sirius didn't have a 
will, the house goes to his closest living relative.  Bellatrix, 
being an escaped convict and known death eater, might not be able to 
inherit.  (Could be wrong on this point.)  House then goes to 
Andromeda, then Tonks.

Sarah





From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 01:29:09 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 01:29:09 -0000
Subject: unforgiveable charms?
In-Reply-To: <bjasku+62pl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjbd95+eef1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79973


 "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
> >I've been wondering...if there should be Unforgiveable charms
> > as well.  For instance, shouldn't it be highly improper (if not 
> > worth a life term in Azkaban) to use Legilimency on someone 
without their permission?  Or to access their private thoughts in any 
other manner?
> > 
> > Laura, 
> 
> bboy_mn:
> 

> 
> Let's remember that there is a big difference between that which is
> legally/socially/morally unforgivable and that which is 
AN 'Unforgivable'.
> 
> unforgivable = done something wrong
> 
> Unforgivable (with a capital "U")= done something unforgivably 
wrong.
> 
> So you really think that a death sentence or life in prison is the
> appropriate sentence for Harry looking at Snape's thoughts in the
> Pensieve or someone using Legilimency? Seems a bit harsh to me.
> 
> Certainly these are a violation of some measure of right and wrong,
> but do you really see them as capital crimes of the highest order;
> capital crime demanding the most extreme sentence the law will 
allow? 
> 
> Let's look at what Legilimency really is in a practical sense. As 
far
> as I can see, it is hardly more than a highly accurate form of
> intuition. Voldemort or Dumbledore have a strong ituitive sense of
> when someone is lying based on subtle interpretations of their
> thoughts, emotions, and demeanor. 
> 
> Snape said it himself, that Legilimency is not 'mind reading' as the
> mind is not something which can be read; and we can certainly
> reasonably conclude that it is not 'thought stealing' as it does not
> deprive the owner of his thoughts. It does invade the privacy of the
> owner of those thoughts, but it doesn't actually steal any thoughts
> from him.
> 
> To the person who responded with a comment that Veritaserum was 
legal,
> that is a slight misstatement. The use of Veritaserum is 
(supposedly)
> strictly controlled by the Minstry of Magic; strictly control, in 
all
> likelihood, for both legal and human rights reasons. We see (or the
> story implies) that it is not routinely used in for prisoner
> interogations; just as truth serum is not routinely used for muggle
> police interogations.

Laura:

Of course, you're right-I was being a bit hyperbolic.  No one should 
be sent to Azkaban for life for invasions of privacy.  (Although  the 
Attorney General of the United States is geetting close...no, I won't 
go there). What I was trying to get at, though, was that there don't 
seem to be clear guidlines in the WW about what magic is socially 
unacceptable (as opposed to Unforgiveable).  Maybe it's because these 
situations don't come up very often-not many people own a pensieve or 
are able to use Legilimency or have access to veritaserum.  But, for 
instance, the post about the violation caused by the wide use of 
memory charms makes a valid point-taking away someone's memories is a 
pretty drastic thing to do.  And I think Legilimency is  more than 
intuition-that doesn't require magic to learn.  It's an invasion by 
one person into another person's private space.  

To me, and maybe this is just a personal thing, poking into someone's 
mind, however you do it, is a whole different issue than making 
tentacles grow on them or turning their legs to jelly or even hanging 
them upside down in midair.  But I don't get the sense that children 
in the WW are taught at an early age that "we don't do anything that 
involves another person's brain without their permission."  
(Refinements, such as Ministry use of veritaserum would, of course, 
be left to explain at a later age.)  And even if those spells or 
potions have legitimate uses, where are the legal safeguards?  
Shouldn't you have to have something like a search warrant before you 
use veritaserum on someone?  Shouldn't there be witnesses, a court 
reporter, the suspect's lawyer, present?  And how can you rely on the 
report of a legilimens?  It's just that person's report, after all.

Just wondering.




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 00:44:47 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 00:44:47 -0000
Subject: Albus Dumbledore and the Socks in the Mirror (of Erised)
Message-ID: <bjbalv+3oda@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79974

  ["What do you see when you look in the mirror?"
  "I?  I see myself holding a pair of thick, woolen socks."
  Harry stared.
  "One can never have enough socks," said Dumbledore.  "Another 
Christmas has come and gone and I didn't get a single pair.  People 
will insist on giving me books."
  It was only when he was back in bed that it struck Harry that 
Dumbledore might not have been quite truthful.  But then, he thought 
as he shoved Scabbers off his pillow, it had been quite a personal 
question.]

I have searched through the archives looking to see if this has been 
done to death and haven't seen more than a glimmer.

And the lexicon, although it covers socks, doesn't go where I want to.
http://www.hp-lexicon.org/socks.html

I think Professor Dumbledore told the truth, that Harry surprised it 
out of him, although it wasn't very clear.  Things that have been 
mentioned that socks represent include freedom (Dobby), love (Molly 
Weasley's hand-knitting) and obligation (Harry's hand-me-downs).  
What I thought of first, though, was something I haven't seen.  And I 
can't get it out of my head, so please bear with me.

Dumbledore does not just say he would like to be given socks; he 
mentions that "(p)eople will insist on giving" him books.  I don't 
think people are giving him recreational reading; I think (though 
there's no canon for this) he's being gifted with Uber-wizard tomes.

The gifts people give you reflect the image they have of you.  People 
see Dumbledore as a keeper of knowledge and leader/protector of the 
good guys.  He accepts the mantle, knowing he's the most appropriate 
person to wear it.  But he longs for simple pleasures (sherbet lemon 
drops), comfort, warmth (*thick, woolen* socks), and a comfortable, 
secure retirement.  (How often are we told he looks old or tired or 
both?  Didn't he save the world once already, something about a guy 
named Grindelwald?)

(There's also a line in the first chapter of the first book where 
Dumbledore says, "I haven't blushed so much since Madame Pomfrey told 
me she liked my new earmuffs."  Is that a hint, that an intensely  
personal response, blushing, is connected with those soft, warm, 
commonplace earmuffs?)

A world in which Dumbledore could expect to receive something as 
warm, fuzzy, and prosaic as socks for Christmas would be one which 
did not hang in the balance.  It would be a world in which he would 
not have to be wary of having his caring for others turned back on 
him.  It would be a world in which he would not have to sacrifice the 
happiness (or the very life) of "the boy who lived."

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley"





From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 01:17:54 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 01:17:54 -0000
Subject: "The Animagus Black!"
In-Reply-To: <bjahbu+dkqf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjbck2+lsbq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79975

Jen Reese: << So Bellatrix was trying to offer this to Voldemort in 
lieu of the broken prophecy, hoping to stave off punishment. But, 
then it doesn't explain why she didn't just tell him Sirius was dead 
instead of that they fought. She'd want credit for that. >>

wildfire_517: << Maybe the DEs know something we don't.  Maybe she 
really thought Sirius wasn't dead.  Maybe there is a way to come back 
from the other side of the veil.  Or maybe she was babbling because 
she was shocked her master was there and she really didn't know what 
she was saying. Personally, I hope it's the first option, but I have 
a hunch it's the second one. >>

Bellatrix seemed to me like a kid trying to avoid a swat, you know, a 
kid's voice goes up in pitch and volume and intensity and he talks 
*real* fast (not to mention canting buttocks forward or twisting to 
keep the backside out of range), trying to avert or get out of range 
of the blow.  <Ouch, too evocative...>

Jen Reese: << OK, Second theory: During the three times the Potters 
defied Voldemort, Sirius assumed his animagus form to help them, and 
that's the only way Voldemort really knows him. Perhaps he doesn't 
even know his real name, so Bellatrix has to refer to him that way so 
LV will know who she's talking about. >>
 
wildfire_517: << While this one might possibly work, I would have to 
think that the information passed to LV by Wormtail would include the 
fact that certain members of the OotP were unregistered Animagi, 
including Black.  Plus, Sirius explains why he had the Potters switch 
secretkeepers by saying that he hoped LV would come after him and 
leave PP alone.  That, to me, implies that LV knew who he was, and LV 
doesn't seem like a person who would go into a potential battle 
without knowing as much as possible about his opponents, which would 
include knowing Sirius' Animagus abilities. >>

IMO, Bellatrix, ever the obedient servant, parrots back whatever 
terms her master uses, and Voldemort has referred to Sirius as "the 
Animagus Black" since Wormtail finked as secret keeper.  Voldemort 
thinks of people in terms of their strengths and weaknesses and how 
he can counteract the first and exploit the second; it makes sense 
that his name for an enemy would have a built-in reminder of any 
unusual abilities.

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley"





From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Sat Sep  6 02:17:01 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 02:17:01 -0000
Subject: Book 6 Predictions (was: Predictions at Madison Square Garden)
In-Reply-To: <bjavdm+4un8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjbg2t+8va8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79976

Sarah:
>> My guess is that Ginny's going to get the axe in the next book or 
two.  Did anyone else notice that the boggart at Grimmauld Place 
never appeared as Ginny, but did appear as all the male Weasleys and 
Harry?  Plus, we've got Mrs. Weasley's fear that not all the Weasleys 
are going to survive the next war.  And Ginny seems to be quite 
deceptive to her family, or at least able to lie and keep 
secrets from them.  <snip>Ginny is going to sneak off somewhere, lie 
to her parents as to where, and get offed.>>

But Ginny (and Arthur, who either you or das Remnant offered up for 
sacrifice - sorry, I've got a bad history of deleting the wrong bits 
of posts, so can't confirm) has already had a potential death kinda 
situation. And, bearing in mind Talisman's recent comments aboutHarry 
saying "I must lie" in PS, is Ginny's ability to lie convincingly 
perhaps being flagged up for some major role, rather than just 
getting her into trouble? Lying (as long as you do it towards some 
noble end) has never been condemned as a punishable action in teh 
Pottersverse. It's not like Jurassic Park, where the cheat, the chain-
smoker, the sexist hunter, and the cowardly lawyer are all dino-food 
(but the capitalist beasty theme park developer gets away with trying 
to elect himself to grace [unlike the book], because he's got little 
grandchildren to worry about). Essentially, JKR creates a very 
plausible reconstruction of 21st C morality, where crimes which would 
formerly have been inscribed upon the sinner's person ("I must not 
tell lies") are tempered through a new morality which judges a person 
only where that person has actively attempted to cause hurt to 
another (yes, I know Harry Crucio'd BL, but he didn't understand the 
mindset "to hurt" properly). Perhaps we all respond so well to it 
because it's pleasurable to view the world as idealistic adolescents 
again?

Kirstini.




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 02:06:43 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 02:06:43 -0000
Subject: The Marauders Theory(Remus, Sirius, Peter, James)
In-Reply-To: <140.18737b5b.2c8a7c42@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bjbffj+oe0p@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79977

Blue Eyes wrote:
> Just a question: Does anyone else see some kind of mystery 
> surrounding the members of the Marauders? Look: James is dead, 
> Sirius is dead both Killed by Voldemort or his supporters. 
> Wormtails is a Voldemort supporter and that leaves dear old Moony. 
> Lupin was and is in the Order of the Pheonix and he's the only good 
> Marauder left.

Could be just:  Bullies Die!  Lupin was the passive one, maybe he 
gets to live; then again, maybe he just gets to die later.

> And something was funny about that part in OotP when Harry told 
> Sirius and Remus that Snape stopped giving him Occulmency lessons 
> and Sirius screamed something about having a word with Snape and 
> Remus shouted If anyone's got a right to yell at Snape its 
> me.....now why would Remus have suppremacy over the Godfather? 

  "I'm coming up there to have a word with Snape!" said Sirius 
forcefully and he actually made to stand up, but Lupin wrenched him 
back down again.
  "If anyone's going to tell Snape it will be me!" 

Lupin is keeping Sirius from leaving the house, going off half-cocked 
and getting himself killed or picked up by the MoM and then killed 
(too bad it was just a stopgap measure).  I don't read anything at 
all about who has the *right* to intercede into the scene.

> SOMEONE PLEASE COMMENT ON IT, I would LOVE the input~

Glad to be of service.

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley"





From mom31 at rochester.rr.com  Sat Sep  6 02:34:13 2003
From: mom31 at rochester.rr.com (mom31)
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 22:34:13 -0400
Subject: Feelings on OoP
Message-ID: <000901c3741f$5d627e50$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>

No: HPFGUIDX 79978

I've been wondering how everyone else is feeling about OoP now that we've had time to re-read it and let it sink in.  

For me, it didn't even feel like canon at first.  When I first finished it, I felt very emotionally drained, and had absolutely no idea how I felt about the book.  People kept asking me if it was good, and I kept replying, that I needed to read it again to figure it out.  I was so tense and anxious about the death, and so surprised about Harry's attitude!  It seemed such a downer.

I liked it much better the second time, and now that my daughters done with it, I'm going to start my third.  I'm going to pay particular attention to the cleaning scenes at Grimmauld Place.  There has to be something important in there.

The more I get used to OoP, the more I like it.  I love that Harry has more of a personality now!  

This is how I'd rank the books.

1. GoF
2. PoA
3. OoP
4. SS
5. CoS


Joj

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Sat Sep  6 03:08:06 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 03:08:06 -0000
Subject: Seamus and the Weasleys 
In-Reply-To: <bjb6vf+qf7e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjbj2m+m23q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79979

Jeff:
>>Yeah, I can see Party-Animal!Seamus fairly easily. :) In a way, I 
think the way that JRK wrote him, is almost insulting with her having 
him wanting to make rum at age 11. To me, that implies that he's 
already a drinker, which might be true, but not something that she 
should point out early on as part of his make-up.>>

Kirstini: UH? I wanted to drink at 11. I actually did drink 
(socially) at fourteen, as many kids at my school did (relaxed 
drinking laws over here mean that by the time kids are ready to start 
drinking leagally they're generally a lot more sensible about it).I 
love all the litte bits in OoP: "hey, I bet he'd sell us Firewhiskey" 
and Seamus/Dean trying to buy booze for a post-exam party, becuase 
they exhibit this wonderful, non-judgemental mentality which I really 
respect the atuhor for. 
I'm vaguely concerned about your idea of "insulting", as I want to 
point out something else:
 
Jeff:
>>The same can be said about how she presents the Weasley family. 
They're poor, red-haired, and have a large family. Sounds like a stab 
at the Irish to me.>> 

Kirstini:
Sounds like you implanting your own horrifically crude stereotyping 
upon an interpretation to me. Firstly, how a stab? At which point in 
the narrative are the Weasleys portrayed as anything other than a 
highly interesting, enjoyable experience for Harry, experiencing a 
world other to his own? Secondly: at the point at which she created 
Ron and the Weasleys, JKR herself was struggling to feed her own 
daughter, and had red hair (obviously, she acceeded to food and 
bleach as her fortunes took an upturn).
 
The Sergeant Majorette says:
>>Maybe they're not meant to be Irish, but Scots, and as disdainful 
of wastrels like those johnny-come-lately Norman Malfoys as the 
Malfoys are of them.>> 

Kirstini again (oar well and truly stuck): As the only "out" Scot on 
the list <awaits deafening response> I'd like to muss everything up 
again. I *love* the Seagent Majorette's reading. I'd love it to be 
true. But the Weasleys are English. We have an Irish person (Seamus) 
who conforms to a few nice wee stereotypes for us there, ah, so he 
does now. Beware of the banshee, begorrah, begorrah(1)! We have 
McGonagall and her tartan biscuit tin (and don't forget "fair 
Ravenclaw from glen"). Old Godric is going to turn out Welsh. All 
four countries covered. Everyone else conforms to a particular middle-
Englishness that we see preserved in their accent (Hagrid and Stan 
Shunpike are a bit thicker than the rest, so they get to keep those 
regional accents in all those variously patronising shades of 
hyphenation). We also have token black, South-Asian and North-Asian 
pupils (all five of them, six, if we add on Kingsley Shacklebolt) 
representing, rather smugly, each non-white skintone. 

English people can be ginger. JKR is herself (she may live in 
Edinburgh now, but I have a feeling she still said something 
like "the Scotch" recently, leaving us all sniffing about for the 
Jack Daniels.) The Weasleys are at least second generation English, 
because they are comfortable with the word "mate", enough so to 
suggest that its use in their dialogue doesn't sound like them 
auditioning for a Guy Ritchie film (although I dread to hear the 
audio aspect of the Phelps twins' "visual interpretation"  - ahem - 
of OoP). They live in the world's most English sounding place other 
than Little Whinging. Also, they are all named Arthurian-ly (has this 
ever been a word?). Scottish parents going for a theme would more 
likely go for Gaelic names. Not any sort of social commentry, just 
instinct.

Kirstini
1) I am well aware that Seamus has never said "begorrah, begorrah". I 
was merely illustrating a point, and to type "Ah, feck off ya Banshee 
hoor, there's a bomb under your ruin" would probably have caused much 
alarm on list from the folk who quite rightly can't be too sure about 
online sarcasm. 




From angellslin at yahoo.com.hk  Sat Sep  6 04:17:32 2003
From: angellslin at yahoo.com.hk (angellslin)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 04:17:32 -0000
Subject: Feelings on OoP
In-Reply-To: <000901c3741f$5d627e50$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
Message-ID: <bjbn4s+3128@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79980

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mom31" <mom31 at r...> wrote:
> I've been wondering how everyone else is feeling about OoP now that 
we've had time to re-read it and let it sink in.  
> 
> For me, it didn't even feel like canon at first.  When I first 
finished it, I felt very emotionally drained, and had absolutely no 
idea how I felt about the book.  People kept asking me if it was 
good, and I kept replying, that I needed to read it again to figure 
it out.  I was so tense and anxious about the death, and so surprised 
about Harry's attitude!  It seemed such a downer.
> 
> I liked it much better the second time, and now that my daughters 
done with it, I'm going to start my third.  I'm going to pay 
particular attention to the cleaning scenes at Grimmauld Place.  
There has to be something important in there.
> 
> The more I get used to OoP, the more I like it.  I love that Harry 
has more of a personality now!  
> 
> This is how I'd rank the books.
> 
> 1. GoF
> 2. PoA
> 3. OoP
> 4. SS
> 5. CoS
> 
> 
> Joj
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


I'm bitterly upset by OoP. It's a book about human weaknesses. Rather 
than restoring to different branches of magic, the OoP is 
so "realistic" that it tells us that wizards are just human, who 
commit all sort of human mistake, no matter you're as wise as 
Dumbledore, or as reckless and brave as Harry Potter. 

I'm also disappointed by Harry's behaviour in this book. Of course, 
you can argue that he's a teenager and feels angry and be 
misunderstood and stuff like that. But I wonder, if Harry continues 
his self-consciousness, self-isolation and self-pity as in OoP, can 
he be alive by the end of Book 7 or how many of his friends and 
mentors have to die in order to save him? 

Angel 
(whose favourite book is PoA)




From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com  Sat Sep  6 04:34:24 2003
From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 04:34:24 -0000
Subject: Lonely Doom (filk)
Message-ID: <bjbo4g+qeko@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79981

Lonely Doom (GoF, Chap. 31-33)

The ninth A!Kedrava filk to the tune of Lonely Room from Rodgers and 
Hammerstein's Oklahoma!

Dedicated to Haggridd

THE SCENE: The Little Hangleton cemetery. HARRY, tied to the tomb of 
Tom Riddle, recounts the events leading up to his capture, and 
witnesses the resurrection of Lord Voldemort. 

HARRY:
A knife rends
A life ends
There's ol' Wormtail a-fiddlin' an' a-brewin'
And I'm caught in this snare
All alone and solitaire,
This nightmare by a lonely tomb.

After the third task was commencin'
As I got past the Skrewt and the Sphinx 
Then a spider ten feet high starts attackin' me and Ced
And I fall through some unlucky jinx.
And Cedric could have been the winner
But he said that he owed it to me
I say, let's call it smarter just to join hands
And we both reached for the trophy.

In a whirl we land
In a place we don't know
Our wands we raise to keep out harm.
But a cold evil voice
Hurls a curse at us - 
Ced fell like rain in a storm!

A knife rends
A life ends
And Wormtail is a-sobbin' through the fumes.
>From the cauldron see him rise -
Now the Dark Lord has revived!
I await a lonely doom...

I ain't gonna see any friends no more!
I ain't gonna leave here alive!
Voldy decides
I should be untied

Gives me one last chance to duel
With him!

(With nothing beside his wand, HARRY is bought face to face with LORD 
VOLDEMORT)

     -	CMC

HARRY POTTER FILKS
http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm 





From princesspeaette at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 05:06:33 2003
From: princesspeaette at yahoo.com (princesspeaette)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 05:06:33 -0000
Subject: Snape, Harry and the Pensieve WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity
In-Reply-To: <75C38EAB-DF88-11D7-9AEA-0030654DED6A@pensnest.co.uk>
Message-ID: <bjbq0q+smcv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79982


Pen wrote:

It seems to me that the diary analogy is as close as I can get to the 
idea of prying into someone else's thoughts. There is, however, a 
difference between something written-down-and-read, and something 
experienced-and-seen. I'm not sure how to quantify it - perhaps 
someone else can do so? At any rate, what I mean by "a violation even 
worse than reading someone's diary" was that sneaking into the 
Pensieve to see directly what was in Snape's mind was considerably 
more intrusive than reading his written notes could possibly have 
been.



I agree that going into the Pensieve is a far greater violation than 
reading someone's diary.  Of course I never sucessfully kept a diary 
for more than a week, because I wasn't going to leave information 
like that lying around. (I lose things a lot) I remember Dumbledore 
said something about a pensieve allowing the person to examine 
thoughts and memories at their leisure, and helping to spot patterns 
(sorry, don't have the book for an exact quote, but I know that's 
close).   To me having someone go into your memories in such an in 
depth way would feel almost as if someone had broken into your 
psychatrist's office and read all their files, listened to all the 
tapes of sessions.  I cannot imagine anyone doing something like 
that, especially someone you dislike so intensely.  I think Harry got 
what was coming to him.  Yes, it would have been better, and more 
mature, of Professor Snape to keep his temper, but I completely 
understand why he didn't.


And just because I haven't posted to this thread before, and I've 
been looking for an opportunity to work this in, I don't think 
Professor Snape threw the jar.  I don't think Harry blew it up 
unintentionally.  I actually think Snape might have blown it up.  And 
that makes me feel even worse for him.


~Margaret





From hebrideanblack at earthlink.net  Sat Sep  6 05:10:01 2003
From: hebrideanblack at earthlink.net (Wendy St. John)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 05:10:01 -0000
Subject: unforgiveable charms?
In-Reply-To: <bjbd95+eef1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjbq79+5mpr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79983

Laura wrote:

"To me, and maybe this is just a personal thing, poking into 
someone's 
mind, however you do it, is a whole different issue than making 
tentacles grow on them or turning their legs to jelly or even 
hanging 
them upside down in midair. But I don't get the sense that children 
in the WW are taught at an early age that "we don't do anything that 
involves another person's brain without their permission." 
(Refinements, such as Ministry use of veritaserum would, of course, 
be left to explain at a later age.) And even if those spells or 
potions have legitimate uses, where are the legal safeguards? 
Shouldn't you have to have something like a search warrant before 
you 
use veritaserum on someone? Shouldn't there be witnesses, a court 
reporter, the suspect's lawyer, present? And how can you rely on the 
report of a legilimens? It's just that person's report, after all."

Now me (Wendy):

I think you've made a very good point here, and it's one of the 
things that most bothers me about the Wizarding World as we've seen 
it. I agree that poking around in someone's brain is something I'd 
definitely put towards the "unforgiveable" end of the spectrum. And, 
I'd also add that not only are children not taught not to do these 
things, there is actually lots of evidence that it's seen as 
acceptable in Wizarding society, judging by the use of Obliviate. It 
is certainly common practice to modify the memories of Muggles in 
order to protect the secrecy of the WW. It's less clear whether or 
not obliviating another witch or wizard would be as acceptable. 
Judging by Lockhart, I would guess that it is frowned upon. (Which 
then leads us to what appears a rather ugly biogtry against Muggles. 
Are they considered to be so far beneath witches and wizards, that 
they aren't entitled to the same human rights)? I am very 
uncomfortable with the idea of memory modification and the fact that 
we've not seen what safeguards are in place to assure that it is 
used ethically and responsibly.

Returning to your question about Legilimency, I did think of one 
thing which might justify its use without a warrant or such . . . it 
almost seems to me to be more of an art than a science. We learn in 
OoP that it is not mind reading, but that the skilled Legilimens 
can "delve into the minds of their victims and . . . interpret their 
findings correctly." (OoP, page 469, UK edition). So, maybe 
the "interpretation" part of this makes it somewhat unreliable in 
terms of the certainty that one has come to the correct conclusions. 
It almost reminds me of a form of divination - it's difficult to 
prove that the information given in, for example, a tarot reading is 
accurate, without some external corroboration. So, maybe Legilimancy 
is not viewed as being universally accurate - some people are better 
at it than others, so it would be considered "soft" rather 
than "hard" evidence.

I also have a theory that one of the uses of the Pensieve is as a 
tool for Legilmency I posted about it back in message #72732

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/72732

for anyone who might be interested in reading my thoughts about this.

:-)
Wendy




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sat Sep  6 06:51:53 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 06:51:53 -0000
Subject: Seamus' hair colour (was Neville's hair colour/Seamus and the Weasleys)
In-Reply-To: <bjb6eg+fsp9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjc069+gomg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79984

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hickengruendler" 
<hickengruendler at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jeffl1965" <jeffl1965 at h...> 
> wrote:
>  
> > I've mentioned before, she tends to make most of the blonds, the 
> > males mainly, appear to be dolts or right wankers, Dudley, 
Malfoys, 
> > Neville, Seamus, et al. Makes one wonder. Was her first husband a 
> > blond?
> > 
> 

Hickengruendler: 
> Is Neville blond? Is it mentioned somewhere in the books. I only 
> remember him being round faced and small. And even before the 
movies 
> came out, I imagined him with brown hairs. That said, blond or not 
> blond, the way this character was developped, with that much 
dignity, 
> especially in the later books, I really disagree, that he is a 
dolt. 
> Like Dumbledore said: "It are your choices, that define you" or 
> something like this. And Neville's choices have nearly always been 
> right. In fact, I can't remember a single scene where he didn't 
make 
> the right choice.
> 

Geoff:
I was going to follow this one up until I saw Hickengruendler's 
reply. On a further point of information, Seamus is described in PS 
(p.90 UK edition) as "sandy haired."




From wildfire_517 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 04:46:50 2003
From: wildfire_517 at yahoo.com (wildfire_517)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 04:46:50 -0000
Subject: Voldemort's attacks on Harry
In-Reply-To: <bjar8i+kb48@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjborq+fl2i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79985

"c.john" writes:

(snips)
> He then spends the whole of OOTP trying to get hold of the 
prophecy, to allow him to understand his problems with Harry. Then 
after he fails, his response is to perform Avada Kedavra on Harry.
> 
> Is he stupid? How can he be sure the spell won't rebound again? And 
if he is sure he can kill Harry simply with Avada Kedavra, then why 
bother with the prophecy at all??
> 

Me:

   Lemme see here...:

1) The spell wouldn't rebound again, as when LV was ressurrected, he 
used some of Harry's blood, removing the latent protection 
surrounding Harry left by his mother.  That protection caused the 
spell to rebound in the first place.  Without it, LV can be pretty 
sure that AK would kill him off this time, I believe.

2) LV wanted the prophecy because he only knew half of what it said.  
For all he knew, it could have gone something like, "Killing Harry 
Potter will bring about the ultimate doom for the one who calls 
himself Voldemort."  If it had, then LV would suddenly become Harry's 
new best friend.  With the prophecy broken, LV decides to finally 
remove the Harry problem once and for all since he continues to make 
a pest of himself year after year.  Again, this is all IMO.

    Wyld





From wildfire_517 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 04:58:48 2003
From: wildfire_517 at yahoo.com (wildfire_517)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 04:58:48 -0000
Subject: Clues in COS (was Re: Dumbledore's integrity)
In-Reply-To: <bj9lct+pbk1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjbpi8+5mta@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79986

Lumos:
(snip) 
> Theory One
> As the prophecy says it is only Harry who can 'vanquish' the Dark 
> Lord, does poor Harry stand to inherit a whole lot of dark magic 
one 
> day if he finally kills Voldemort and survives?
> (snips) 
> Transfer of powers in general, though - what do people think?

Me:

  Oh boy.  That's...interesting to think about.  If this is true, and 
it quite possibly could be (DD saves the WW from Grindewald, he's now 
the most powerful wizard alive..), does this mean Harry is destined 
to become the next LV if he kills him, provided he can't fight off 
the new evil urges?  That would add an interesting twist to the 
novels.

  However, I do see transfer of powers as being highly likely.  The 
two most powerful wizards we have seen (DD and LV) who are generally 
considered the two most powerful alive both have, at one point or 
another, "defeated" other wizards.  Since no other wizard seems to be 
remotely close to them in power (Incidently, how would one measure 
wizarding power?  Who can do what spells fastest?), it could be 
assumed that their leaps and bounds came from slaying other wizards 
and not just good old fashioned hard work.  I can definitely see this 
as being a delightful plot twist in books to come.

    Wyld





From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Sat Sep  6 05:47:53 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 05:47:53 -0000
Subject: Seamus and the Weasleys
In-Reply-To: <bjbj2m+m23q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjbse9+dvq8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79987

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kirstini" <kirst_inn at y...> 
wrote:
> Jeff:
> >>Yeah, I can see Party-Animal!Seamus fairly easily. :) In a way, I 
> think the way that JRK wrote him, is almost insulting with her 
having 
> him wanting to make rum at age 11. To me, that implies that he's 
> already a drinker, which might be true, but not something that she 
> should point out early on as part of his make-up.>>
> 
> Kirstini: UH? I wanted to drink at 11. I actually did drink 
> (socially) at fourteen, as many kids at my school did (relaxed 
> drinking laws over here mean that by the time kids are ready to 
start 
> drinking leagally they're generally a lot more sensible about it).I 
> love all the litte bits in OoP: "hey, I bet he'd sell us 
Firewhiskey" 
> and Seamus/Dean trying to buy booze for a post-exam party, becuase 
> they exhibit this wonderful, non-judgemental mentality which I 
really 
> respect the atuhor for. 
> I'm vaguely concerned about your idea of "insulting", as I want to 
> point out something else:
>

   Jeff: 

     Well, I don't know about all the general UK/Continental Laws, so 
didn't know what the drinking age is there. I know in many former 
Soviet Block contries kids drink vodka almost as soon as they're off 
the teat. I'd tried a bit of booze, and was allowed at 13 to have a 
small glass of wine during holidays, but I never wanted to do that 
much, and still don't. 
   Well, I'm not trying to make anybody take the piss, I was just 
concerned about how she presents certain people. I'm sure if JKR 
wrote Cho Chang with halting English, that many people would be 
insulted by it. I can hope that the actress they choose isn't asked 
to speak that way. :)




  
> Jeff:
> >>The same can be said about how she presents the Weasley family. 
> They're poor, red-haired, and have a large family. Sounds like a 
stab 
> at the Irish to me.>> 
> 
> Kirstini:
> Sounds like you implanting your own horrifically crude stereotyping 
> upon an interpretation to me. Firstly, how a stab? At which point 
in 
> the narrative are the Weasleys portrayed as anything other than a 
> highly interesting, enjoyable experience for Harry, experiencing a 
> world other to his own? Secondly: at the point at which she created 
> Ron and the Weasleys, JKR herself was struggling to feed her own 
> daughter, and had red hair (obviously, she acceeded to food and 
> bleach as her fortunes took an upturn).
> 

    Perhaps so, but it's just how she made Draco insult Ron by 
mentioning his being poor, red-haired and freckled and having more 
kids than they can afford. Sounds much like what I've read/seen many 
English say about some Irish folk. Sod'em I say. Erin Go Braugh! :) 
So she just seems, imho, to be making a bit of a mockery of them a 
bit. Even some other fans seem to think that judging from how they 
write the Weasley family in their ficcies. Personally, I love the 
Weasleys. Ron's my fave, but I think the rest are just as great. I do 
find it funny that Jo loves the Weasleys and yet she did color her 
hair. It's her right, but just funny.

 
> The Sergeant Majorette says:
> >>Maybe they're not meant to be Irish, but Scots, and as disdainful 
> of wastrels like those johnny-come-lately Norman Malfoys as the 
> Malfoys are of them.>> 
> 
> Kirstini again (oar well and truly stuck): As the only "out" Scot 
on 
> the list <awaits deafening response> I'd like to muss everything up 
> again. I *love* the Seagent Majorette's reading. I'd love it to be 
> true. But the Weasleys are English. We have an Irish person 
(Seamus) 
> who conforms to a few nice wee stereotypes for us there, ah, so he 
> does now. Beware of the banshee, begorrah, begorrah(1)! We have 
> McGonagall and her tartan biscuit tin (and don't forget "fair 
> Ravenclaw from glen"). Old Godric is going to turn out Welsh. All 
> four countries covered. Everyone else conforms to a particular 
middle-
> Englishness that we see preserved in their accent (Hagrid and Stan 
> Shunpike are a bit thicker than the rest, so they get to keep those 
> regional accents in all those variously patronising shades of 
> hyphenation). We also have token black, South-Asian and North-Asian 
> pupils (all five of them, six, if we add on Kingsley Shacklebolt) 
> representing, rather smugly, each non-white skintone. 
> 
 
   Jeff:
   I agree. I'm not saying that she's picking *only* on the Irish, 
its just that I got a bit irked that she seems to be making 2 strikes 
against the Irish. If I see some jokes about the Welsh and their 
sheep or have a Welsh character wearing his wellies or maybe 
something about Paddington Bear, I'd feel better.
   As for accents, well, the Weasley kids say "oy" a lot, and with 
Ron's constant swearing, I can almost picture him with a working 
class cockney accent, which the actor playing him *almost* has.


> English people can be ginger. JKR is herself (she may live in 
> Edinburgh now, but I have a feeling she still said something 
> like "the Scotch" recently, leaving us all sniffing about for the 
> Jack Daniels.) The Weasleys are at least second generation English, 
> because they are comfortable with the word "mate", enough so to 
> suggest that its use in their dialogue doesn't sound like them 
> auditioning for a Guy Ritchie film (although I dread to hear the 
> audio aspect of the Phelps twins' "visual interpretation"  - ahem - 
> of OoP). They live in the world's most English sounding place other 
> than Little Whinging. Also, they are all named Arthurian-ly (has 
this 
> ever been a word?). Scottish parents going for a theme would more 
> likely go for Gaelic names. Not any sort of social commentry, just 
> instinct.
> 
  Jeff:

   Oh, I agree that having ginger hair doesn't make a person full-
blood paddy, but people seem to expect it, don't they? I know I seem 
to run into that misconception myself, being redhaired and of Irish 
blood as well. :)
   I agree the Weasley family could be a few generations removed from 
Ireland. Maybe their original family name is O' Weasel? :) They would 
have more common Irish names, but living in England, they might want 
to sound more English. 



> Kirstini
> 1) I am well aware that Seamus has never said "begorrah, begorrah". 
I 
> was merely illustrating a point, and to type "Ah, feck off ya 
Banshee 
> hoor, there's a bomb under your ruin" would probably have caused 
much 
> alarm on list from the folk who quite rightly can't be too sure 
about 
> online sarcasm.

  Jeff:

     Yeah, it's true he's not talked about St. Paddy's day or the 
wearin' o' the green, or talked about mass or pipebombs. But only 
because Harry ain't seen him do that yet. ;) It is sad that being 
cheeky doesn't always work online, but its just one of those things. 
If this list ever goes live video chat or voice chat, then it would 
be much easier. :)


  Jeff






From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 05:46:50 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 05:46:50 -0000
Subject: Feelings on OoP
In-Reply-To: <bjbn4s+3128@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjbsca+cpfr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79988

"mom31" <mom31 at r...> wrote: <<I've been wondering how everyone else 
is feeling about OoP now that we've had time to re-read it and let it 
sink in.  For me, it didn't even feel like canon at first.  When I 
first finished it, I felt very emotionally drained, and had 
absolutely no idea how I felt about the book.  <snip> It seemed such 
a downer.>>

The first time I finished it I was sort of appalled; it was just so 
incredibly bleak (that I had that "this can't be real" (canon) 
reaction as well).  Harry and Sirius both seemed to have developed 
personality disorders, and Sirius didn't even live long enough to 
find his way out of his.

"mom31" <mom31 at r...> wrote: <<I liked it much better the second time, 
and now that my daughters done with it, I'm going to start my third.  
I'm going to pay particular attention to the cleaning scenes at 
Grimmauld Place. There has to be something important in there.>>
 
I am less moved by anything that happens in OoP each time I read it.  
I go through as if I'm an investigator at a crime scene, gathering 
clues.  Recently evidence points thusly:  I think Kreacher, for all 
intents and purposes, killed Sirius; let's plaque him!  But 
Dumbledore seems to think that choices *house elves* make don't count 
(and isn't that sort of species-ist itself?), saying that Kreacher is 
what wizards made him.  Does DD know more than he's told about how 
house elves are bound?  After all, Dobby at least made 
choices "outside the box," even if it did mean he had to iron his 
hands.

"mom31" <mom31 at r...> wrote: <<The more I get used to OoP, the more I 
like it.  I love that Harry has more of a personality now!>>  

I honestly cannot read it through again.  Not yet.  I made it twice, 
but now I just flip back and forth and look things up and read a 
chapter or two, but not in order.  It is incredibly claustrophobic 
(and I'm not, usually):  Sirius is closed up in the Black mansion, 
and Harry is trapped first at the Dursleys and then inside his own 
head.  He doesn't even have the occasional freedom of the skies; his 
broom has been arrested.
 
I don't rate the books with each other; I think I won't know where 
each book falls in the rankings for me until the saga is finished and 
I know how each installment fits in.

"angellslin" <angellslin at y...> wrote: <<I'm bitterly upset by OoP. 
It's a book about human weaknesses. Rather than restoring to 
different branches of magic, the OoP is so "realistic" that it tells 
us that wizards are just human, who commit all sort of human mistake, 
no matter you're as wise as Dumbledore, or as reckless and brave as 
Harry Potter.>>

I think the earlier books were about human weakness, too: only it was 
Quirrell, Peter Pettigrew, Barty Crouch--nobody we cared about.  In 
OoP we experience weakness as the viewpoint character's and other's 
who matter to us.  Without human weakness, there's no story.  At 
all.  Ever.  Comedy is about overcoming human weakness; tragedy is 
about succumbing to it.  IMO.

"angellslin" <angellslin at y...> wrote: <<I'm also disappointed by 
Harry's behaviour in this book. Of course, you can argue that he's a 
teenager and feels angry and be misunderstood and stuff like that.>>

I just reread the OoP scene in Dumbledore's office where Harry is 
screaming and throwing things and wanting out (more claustrophobia), 
and Dumbledore refuses to let him go.  He sort of goads Harry, saying 
it's okay to feel the way he feels, it shows he's human.  And Harry 
is utterly rejecting that, screaming that he'd rather not be human 
than feel as he does.  That got me to thinking; did Dumbledore have a 
similar encounter with Tom Riddle?  Did he let Tom Riddle go stew in 
his own juices instead of forcing him to let out some of his pain and 
rage?  Could he have prevented Lord Voldemort if he'd looked more 
closely at Tom Riddle?  I know he wasn't headmaster then, but he was, 
what, Transfiguration teacher?  How influential might he have been?  
How much does he blame himself, if he does?

"angellslin" <angellslin at y...> wrote: <<But I wonder, if Harry 
continues his self-consciousness, self-isolation and self-pity as in 
OoP, can he be alive by the end of Book 7 or how many of his friends 
and mentors have to die in order to save him?>>

If Harry is as unbearable throughout Book 6, I swear I will not even 
buy Book 7 (though I would probably borrow it eventually).  I calmed 
down and felt better when I heard (rumor, but I clung) that Book 5 is 
the longest in the series and that it served to set up the plot for 
Books 6 and 7; fine, one like that I can stand.  And I'm on board for 
any theory that says that some part of Harry's OoP negativity was 
actually Voldemort's serotonin shortage coloring Harry's perceptions 
through that link.  I wonder if there's a vessel in the Bay...

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley", now thoroughly "Black(ened)" again





From greatraven at hotmail.com  Sat Sep  6 07:16:57 2003
From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 07:16:57 -0000
Subject: Albus Dumbledore and the Socks in the Mirror (of Erised)
In-Reply-To: <bjbalv+3oda@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjc1l9+m1ka@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79989

--
> A world in which Dumbledore could expect to receive something as 
> warm, fuzzy, and prosaic as socks for Christmas would be one which 
> did not hang in the balance.  It would be a world in which he would 
> not have to be wary of having his caring for others turned back on 
> him.  It would be a world in which he would not have to sacrifice 
the 
> happiness (or the very life) of "the boy who lived."
> 
> Sandy, aka "msbeadsley"

What a wonderful post! Yes. Dumbledore is expected to save the world, 
so who is going to give the saviour of the world something as simple 
as socks? And yet, have you noticed how very like Gandalf he is? Like 
Gandalf, despite all his power, he really likes simple things - in 
Gandalf's case, a nice relaxed smoke of his favourite pipeweed and a 
joke with friends. You can certainly imagine either of them playing a 
game of darts with friends in the pub and probably cheating
gleefully. We can only hope DD survives to enjoy this world and be 
given socks for Christmas in the last scene.

Sue B




From greatraven at hotmail.com  Sat Sep  6 07:32:17 2003
From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 07:32:17 -0000
Subject: Voldemort's attacks on Harry
In-Reply-To: <bjborq+fl2i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjc2i1+ko34@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79991

> 
>    Lemme see here...:
> 
> 1) The spell wouldn't rebound again, as when LV was ressurrected,
he 
> used some of Harry's blood, removing the latent protection 
> surrounding Harry left by his mother.  That protection caused the 
> spell to rebound in the first place.  Without it, LV can be pretty 
> sure that AK would kill him off this time, I believe.
> 
> 2) LV wanted the prophecy because he only knew half of what it
said.  
> For all he knew, it could have gone something like, "Killing Harry 
> Potter will bring about the ultimate doom for the one who calls 
> himself Voldemort."  If it had, then LV would suddenly become 
Harry's 
> new best friend.  With the prophecy broken, LV decides to finally 
> remove the Harry problem once and for all since he continues to
make 
> a pest of himself year after year.  Again, this is all IMO.
> 
>     Wyld

Me now:

And why doesn't he just kill Aunt Petunia? He must know about the 
home-protection thing or he would have tried before to kill Harry at 
home, unless there's a secret-keeper somewhere we haven't been told 
about. If he kills Auntie P, he will then have broken the "bond of 
blood" and he can kill Harry at home. (Which, now I think of it,
makes 
Petunia a pretty brave lady and I think we're going to see a more 
sympathetic side of her in future books). Sue B.




From tkj_etal at bellsouth.net  Sat Sep  6 06:34:55 2003
From: tkj_etal at bellsouth.net (Tim Johnson Family)
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 01:34:55 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Feelings on OoP
References: <bjbn4s+3128@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <002901c37440$fd6835e0$1477d6d1@oldcomputer>

No: HPFGUIDX 79992

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mom31" <mom31 at r...> wrote:
(snips)
> This is how I'd rank the books.
>
> 1. GoF
> 2. PoA
> 3. OoP
> 4. SS
> 5. CoS
>
>
> Joj
>

Each of the books has its own personality; we ought to look at them like
children, actually: all different, all wonderful.
Check it out:
SS: Naive (Idea: both Harry and J.K. Rowling are full of awe, insecure, and
inexperienced)
CoS: Heroic (Harry is unstoppable, personally disconnected with the
action--Rowling had writer's block when she wrote it, so you might say she
was heroic for finishing it)
PoA: Masculine (The Mauraders and Snape were all men, Harry discovers his
father "inside him," though I have no idea how this is reflected in JKR's
life)
GoF: Fated (JKR said herself the theme was the "Cup of Faith"--it's Harry's
destiny--he can't escape it; probably that's how JKR felt about her book
series)
OoP: Angry (Duh; and from the nihilistic streak in the book, I'd say JKR has
begun deconstructing the world she created)

My personal favorite? PoA--I have a soft spot for the Mauraders.
--RTJ





From tkj_etal at bellsouth.net  Sat Sep  6 06:45:02 2003
From: tkj_etal at bellsouth.net (Tim Johnson Family)
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 01:45:02 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: "The Animagus Black!"
References: <bjbck2+lsbq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <002b01c37442$66e73d80$1477d6d1@oldcomputer>

No: HPFGUIDX 79993


Sandy, aka "msbeadsley" wrote:
>IMO, Bellatrix, ever the obedient servant, parrots back whatever
>terms her master uses, and Voldemort has referred to Sirius as "the
>Animagus Black" since Wormtail finked as secret keeper.  Voldemort
>thinks of people in terms of their strengths and weaknesses and how
>he can counteract the first and exploit the second; it makes sense
>that his name for an enemy would have a built-in reminder of any
>unusual abilities.

All right--it's possible that Bellatrix calls him the Animagus Black because
that's what LV calls him. The question is, why would he? Sirius's Animagus
abilities had nothing to do with the secret keeper thing. LV sees Sirius in
terms of strengths and weaknesses, OK, so what are they? Sirius is a member
of the Order, knows about Wormtail, is an Animagus, and Harry's godfather.
I'm sure Voldemort thinks of him in those terms. But the Prophecy scheme had
nothing to do with Sirius being an Animagus, it had everything to do with
Sirius being Harry's godfather. So the most logical thing for Bella to say
would be, "I was fighting his godfather!" But she doesn't, leaving me to
theorize that it's derogatory term. Further evidence is the very low number
of animagi. Yes, it's supposed to be difficult and dangerous to achieve, but
it can't be THAT hard if smart fifth-year students and people like Rita
Skeeter can do it. There's probably some other reason why people aren't keen
to achieve that additional power.
Anyway, Sirius is a very notorious wizard, and even Voldy, who hasn't been
reading the papers for thirteen years, would probably speak of him by his
name. When I talk about Britney Spears, I say Britney Spears, not The Young
Singer and Entertainer Britney Spears.
--RTJ





From tkj_etal at bellsouth.net  Sat Sep  6 06:53:10 2003
From: tkj_etal at bellsouth.net (Tim Johnson Family)
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 01:53:10 -0500
Subject: Albus Dumbledore and the Socks in the Mirror (of Erised)
References: <bjbalv+3oda@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <002e01c37443$8a032a80$1477d6d1@oldcomputer>

No: HPFGUIDX 79994


Sandy, aka "msbeadsely" wrote:
>  A world in which Dumbledore could expect to receive something as
warm, fuzzy, and prosaic as socks for Christmas would be one which
did not hang in the balance.  It would be a world in which he would
not have to be wary of having his caring for others turned back on
him.  It would be a world in which he would not have to sacrifice the
happiness (or the very life) of "the boy who lived." <<<


It's sounds a little altruistic, though. I doubt anyone, looking in the
Mirror, would see world peace, or the end of poverty--and at this point
Dumbledore hasn't developed his "crush" on Harry. If I had to guess, I'd say
Dumbledore would see family in the Mirror (assuming, of course, that he
doesn't have family).  But I'd imagine Dumbledore surrounded by hypothetical
family members (wife, children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren), not,
say, holding a tax form in which his dependents are clearly indicated. The
Mirror doesn't show someone a symbol of what they want, it shows them the
real thing--down to the difference between wanting gold and immortality and
wanting the Stone.
And while we're on the Mirror, has anyone noticed that the Mirror does show
"truth and knowledge," which Dumbledore said it couldn't? It shows what you
really want, which is a kind of truth, and it shows Harry his parent's
faces, which he had never seen before or could never remember.
--RTJ





From tkj_etal at bellsouth.net  Sat Sep  6 07:03:39 2003
From: tkj_etal at bellsouth.net (Tim Johnson Family)
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 02:03:39 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Marauders Theory(Remus, Sirius, Peter, James)
References: <140.18737b5b.2c8a7c42@aol.com>
Message-ID: <003401c37445$009906a0$1477d6d1@oldcomputer>

No: HPFGUIDX 79995

*-Blue Eyes-* said:
"And something was funny about that part in OotP when Harry told Sirius and
Remus that Snape stopped giving him Occulmency lessons and Sirius screamed
something about having a word with Snape and Remus shouted If anyone's got a
right
to yell at Snape its me.....now why would Remus have suppremacy over the
Godfather?"

Remus doesn't have supremacy over the Godfather. Quite the opposite--Remus,
though the most fair-minded and kindest of the Mauraders, has a courage
problem and often doesn't stand up to his friends when he knows they are
wrong. Lately that's changed. When Lupin restrains Sirius, he's showing a
new streak of courage, besides a determination to "fix" the wrongs he did as
a younger man.
--RTJ





From tkj_etal at bellsouth.net  Sat Sep  6 06:58:15 2003
From: tkj_etal at bellsouth.net (Tim Johnson Family)
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 01:58:15 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Turncoat!Tonks (was: Aurors/Unforgiveable Curses)
References: <bjb9d4+jtcd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003101c37444$3fc55140$1477d6d1@oldcomputer>

No: HPFGUIDX 79996

Sarah wrote:
"Tonks may be a way for Grimmauld
Place to remain the Order's headquarters.  If Sirius didn't have a
will, the house goes to his closest living relative.  Bellatrix,
being an escaped convict and known death eater, might not be able to
inherit.  (Could be wrong on this point.)  House then goes to
Andromeda, then Tonks."

No, let's think about it. When Mrs. Black, Sirius's dear old mum, kicked the
bucket, her only living son was in Azkaban for life--so if convicts can't
inherit, it would have gone to the Malfoys, wouldn't it? But Sirius
inherited it instead. As it stands, Sirius's nearest blood relatives are the
Malfoys, the Tonkses, and Bellatrix Lestrange (ugh!). I think that even if
he doesn't have a will, the house will go to Harry--after all, not only is
he Sirius's godson and wizard guardian, Harry once saved his life, which
indicates a deeper attachment.
--RTJ





From tkj_etal at bellsouth.net  Sat Sep  6 06:22:59 2003
From: tkj_etal at bellsouth.net (Tim Johnson Family)
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 01:22:59 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape, Harry and the Pensieve WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity
References: <bjbq0q+smcv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <002201c3743f$52895740$1477d6d1@oldcomputer>

No: HPFGUIDX 79997



Margaret wrote: "I agree that going into the Pensieve is a far greater
violation than
reading someone's diary."

Pleasant thought for today: the Occlumency lessons are a kind of
metaphorical rape. No wonder Harry didn't like them.--RTJ






From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Sat Sep  6 08:07:48 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 08:07:48 -0000
Subject: Feelings on OoP
In-Reply-To: <bjbsca+cpfr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjc4kk+rbhc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79998

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> "mom31" <mom31 at r...> wrote: <<I've been wondering how everyone else 
> is feeling about OoP now that we've had time to re-read it and let 
it 
> sink in.  For me, it didn't even feel like canon at first.  When I 
> first finished it, I felt very emotionally drained, and had 
> absolutely no idea how I felt about the book.  <snip> It seemed 
such 
> a downer.>>

I loved the book, although it lacked the tight plot lines that the
previous books had. I loved the way Harry developed - screams and
tantrums and all (it helps that I have a 15 year old with a late
July birthday, so I can relate :-)). It would seem unrealistic to
me to see Harry going through the traumatic experiences in his
life without a breakdown, and the book also let him make his
mistakes. I liked how he is being developed into a leader, whose
followers go with him even when he messes up. I also felt that
the bleak state the WW was in was to be expected - certainly
it was foreshadowed in the end of GoF with Fudge's behaviour. It
was so much more realistic than similar situations in other
fantasy books where the chief leader (e.g. Gandalf) talks and
everyone follows. Voldemort's chief talent was always described
as being able to operate behind the scenes and saw discord and
chaos. This is exactly what has been happening.

I really felt for Harry in this book. He felt so much more real
than the somewhat flat character in the earlier books.

Then there were the fabulous plot lines, especially F&G who
really shined in this book. Umbridge was brilliantly done
(as were, come to think of it, the DADA teachers in all the books
with the exception of Quirrell). Luna Lovegood and Hermione
were also great.

I thought Sirius' plot line to be very realistic. It was
rather expected that 12 years locked in a prison with dementors
24 hours per day would leave their mark. I thought he was very
convincing and such a tragic figure. It was so heartbreaking
to have him die, even though it was necessary for the plot.

Where I did not like the book: I was not as enchanted with
Ginny and Neville plotlines - I felt that their personality
change was a bit too abrupt and unconvincing. Until this
book Ginny had been this little wide eyed girl with a crash
on Harry, then without warning changes into this confident,
mischievous, social butterfly and fighter. Neville was this clumsy,
rather dumb but sweet, self effacing kid who out of the blue
becomes a leading character. I suppose JKR needed them to
change for the sake of the plot (Neville set to become Harry's
No. 2 and Ginny for the long expected romance w/Harry) but there was
hardly any buildup in previous books for their personality change.

Plotwise the book did not feel as focused and was hurried at the
end. I was not surprised by the prophecy as it was clear from
book 3 that there must have been something like that (when
DD mentioned that what Harry heard was Trelaney's second
prophecy), though the Neville part in it was unexpected.
But on the whole I really liked the book and am looking forward
to books 6 and 7.

Salit







From beneficii at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 07:11:21 2003
From: beneficii at yahoo.com (beneficii)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 07:11:21 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's power, Transfer of power (was Clues in COS )
In-Reply-To: <bjbpi8+5mta@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjc1ap+hc5s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 79999


 Wyld:
<snip>
> However, I do see transfer of powers as being highly likely.  The 
two most powerful wizards we have seen (DD and LV) who are generally 
considered the two most powerful alive both have, at one point or another, "defeated" other wizards.  Since no other wizard seems to 
be remotely close to them in power (Incidently, how would one measure 
wizarding power?  Who can do what spells fastest?), it could be 
assumed that their leaps and bounds came from slaying other wizards 
and not just good old fashioned hard work.  I can definitely see 
this as being a delightful plot twist in books to come. >>> 
   

But in OOTP, I recall the OWLs/NEWTs proctor saying that when 
Dumbledore took his NEWTs, he "did things with a wand I've never seen 
anyone do."  Perhaps he was just naturally powerful.  Of course, this 
doesn't explain Aberworth Dumbledore (the headmaster's brother) too 
well, who got in trouble for doing inappropriate charms on a goat.

Beneficii




From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Sat Sep  6 07:21:04 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (JeffL1965)
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 02:21:04 -0500
Subject: Fw: Neville's hair colour (was Seamus and the Weasleys)
Message-ID: <003c01c37447$6f69a380$9c72aa18@sport.rr.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80000

"hickengruendler" <hickengruendler at y...> wrote:

> Is Neville blond? Is it mentioned somewhere in the books. I only
> remember him being round faced and small. And even before the
> movies came out, I imagined him with brown hairs. That said, blond 
> or not blond, the way this character was developped, with that much
> dignity, especially in the later books, I really disagree, that he 
> is a dolt.


       Jeff:

     I can't find the quote, but I seem to recall that he was
 mentioned as having blond, or sandy colored hair. I wish I could
 find  the quote, but with my bad memory, I could be thinking of
 fanfiction.  I am sure that Dudley has blond hair, and Seamus is a blond or
 sandy  haired as well.

   Jeff










From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 08:25:14 2003
From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra Pan)
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 01:25:14 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: transfer of ?magicality? {was Clues in COS}
In-Reply-To: <bj9lct+pbk1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030906082514.90784.qmail@web21107.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80001

Argh!  Sorry about misfiring posts 
lately.  Will iron these trigger-happy 
fingers after typing this... <g>

Lumos, in part:
> We find out in CoS that some of
> Voldemort's powers were transferred
> to Harry when the curse rebounded. 
> Is that because the curse
> 'malfunctioned', so to speak, when it
> hit baby Harry? Or does the killing
> curse normally transfer the powers of
> the victim to the culprit?  

I suspect that if this aspect is true, 
then the categorization of AK as 
"unforgivable" makes a lot of sense: 
it's cannibalism but with magicality.

Still Lumos, still in parts:
> Voldemort said in GoF that his goal
> is to conquer death.  Does he
> prolong/strengthen his life force by
> 'feeding off' others?  Why would that
> be important for the septology?  

<snip 2 theories>

> Transfer of powers in general, though
> - what do people think?

I had posted my thoughts on this back in 
June as the third 'prediction' in post 
#59741.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/59741

Yours truly:
> (3) Avada Kedavra is a cannibalistic 
> curse. When used on Muggles, the 
> benefit to the one who performed the 
> curse is similar to the benefit of 
> drinking unicorn blood. This could 
> explain how Voldemort's main 
> objective, to conquer death, go so 
> well with the Death Eaters' creed, 
> perhaps manifested in Lucius Malfoy's 
> opposition to Arthur Weasley's 
> "Muggle PROTECTION Act."

<snipping myself>

> I suspect that AK'ing a wizard/witch 
> would not only yield a harvest of life 
> force <sorry this is getting kinda 
> ewww...> but also the powers which 
> makes a witch/wizard magical.

     *     *     *

Hmm...since I cannibalized my own posts, 
does that make *me* an Ourobouros? <g>

Petra, off to find her "Sweeney Todd" cd
a
n  :)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From nelliot at ozemail.com.au  Sat Sep  6 06:17:33 2003
From: nelliot at ozemail.com.au (njelliot2003)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 06:17:33 -0000
Subject: OoP - GUILTY Dumbledore (was Dumbledore's true sorrow motives)
In-Reply-To: <be0fvh+sjhe@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjbu5u+bsbh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80002

Replying to Talisman's post 66983:


Talisman,

Along with a number of other postees, I have to take issue with your 
post which concludes that DD is guilty of cold calculated murder. 
I'm prepared to accept that he is not entirely honest, but I believe 
that he is operating from the purest of motives. My position is 
pretty well summed up by "katrinawitch" who wrote in message 68690: 
 
Quote "Whew! Talisman, some great points you made there, and maybe 
I'm just being sentimental, but I just can't (or maybe don't want to) 
belive that Dumbledore could be that conniving and deliberately use 
Harry (and Sirius) in that fashion. You're making me too sad just 
reading your post!

Dumbledore finally admitted at the end of OOP that he has a weakness 
(e.g. he cared too much for Harry), and this just emphasizes more 
and more that, even though he's "the greatest wizard alive", he's 
human, and makes mistakes, and can be blinded by love.

Do I think DD killed Sirius, in order to verify the prophecy, make 
Harry more focused in his hatred for Voldemort, and put the rest of 
the plan in action? No, defintely not.

I really don't think it was he that stunned Sirius, thus pushing him 
into the veil.

My thoughts are that Dumbledore has finally realized that this is 
all really happening, and he's got a tremendous burden to carry, 
maybe even as much or more of a burden than Harry. He's the leader, 
the one that everyone looks to for protection and advice, the head 
of The Order, and the person Harry has always looked to. Now he's 
got the lives of the entire Wizarding World on his shoulders and 
conscience. He has no choice but to make these sacrifices, and the 
wizards who are in The Order have made the choice to be involved, 
and thus are willing to make those sacrifices too. Sirius included 
(even he said as much...he'd be willing to die for the cause).

In conclusion, I just won't believe that those "twinkling" blue eyes 
and half-moon spectacles are hiding anything but love for Harry and 
hope for the Wizarding World. Guilty, yes. Guilty of love and of 
wanting to do the right thing, but his guilt has finally made him 
realize what's at stake.

Kat" Unquote.

The replies I've read to your post thus far have expressed the 
writer's beliefs and/or feelings about the issues you raise, but I 
want to look a bit deeper. I have quoted your original post belowand 
added my own comments, interpretations, arguments etc. to support my 
contention that a lot of your case is built on speculation. I have 
tried to steer away from speculation myself in making my case for 
DD's innocence. Where I have speculated, I hope I have made this 
overt. Because the text is often open to interpretation and 
incomplete until book 7 is published, there are alternate 
interpretations which are just as valid ? I hope. 

I doubt the shrieking certainty to the conclusion of your post: 

"Oh, yes. Sirius had to die. The velvet curtain flies open and 
Talisman, eyes rolling, mouth drooling, clawed hands thrashing, 
shrieks: DUMBLEDORE IS GUILTY! GUILTY! GUILTY!" 

(A digression. It's interesting to speculate on the Talisman as 
demonic shrew quoted above with the Talisman as unrequited mother 
(lover?) who "will go to the grave with an unmet need to give Snape 
a nice warm bubble bath.")

And so to the riposte. 

Talisman:
> As to Dumbledore's specific Decoy!Harry/Chosen!Harry theories, 
> the entrails are not clear. What is clear is that Dumbledore is 
> willing to sacrifice Weapon!Harry in any way necessary to defeat 
> Voldemort.
> 
> What's more, I say, is that Book Five is the Wizengamot in which 
> Dumbledore, for all his noble intentions, is found Guilty!--not 
only of being a cold-hearted manipulator, and Guilty! of being a 
great and harmful liar, but yes--Guilty! of Murder! >>>

Me:
I am new to HPfGU and am not familiar with the Decoy!Harry/ Chosen!
Harry/ Weapon!Harry theories. They sound absolutely fascinating and 
I look forward to reading them. Even if any or all of them are true, 
I don't believe Sirius had to die to achieve the outcomes at the end 
of the book, so there's no reason for DD to kill him.  

Talisman:
> Evidence for the Prosecution:
> (All cites from OoP unless otherwise noted)
> 
> I. The Nature Of Lies is an important theme that informs OoP, 
> probably worthy of a separate post, but consider some examples:
> 
> 1.) Petunia lies about her bases for wizarding knowledge (31) her 
> knowledge of LV (37-8) and her reasons for keeping Harry (41). Are 
> these good or bad lies? Too early to tell.
> 
> 2.) Ginny lies "unblushingly" about chucking dung bombs, and it's 
> charming. (75) We're liking her more already.
> 
> 3.) Mrs. Figg lies--on the witness stand--about seeing the 
> dementors (144) and in so doing saves innocent Harry from the 
> corrupt Wizengamot.
> 
> 4.) Harry tells the truth about LV, and is punished as a liar.
> Umbridge's torturous method of etching "I must not lie" in Harry's 
> bloody skin points up the ironic and pivotal nature of this 
question 
> (267). 
> 
> 5.)Hermione lies to Umbridge about whom they are trying to contact 
> in the fire. (747) The lie saves Harry and the OoP, anything else 
> would have been traitorous.
> 
> 6.) Dumbledore is the biggest liar of all. 

Me: 
Truth/Lies are an important theme in the series. I agree, the nature 
of truth would make a good subject for a separate post. But the 
theme is only relevant here insofar as it can be shown that DD is a 
liar, so I'm not going to comment on the points 1 to 5 above. Except 
for point 3. You say that Mrs Figg lies on the witness stand. I 
couldn't find it. She is corrected during her statement by Madam 
Bones when Mrs Figg says that the Dementors were "running" (OoP pg. 
132 .au ed.) This flusters her, but she did see (and feel) the 
Dementors.
" 'Don't put that away idiot boy! She shrieked. 'What if there are 
more of them around? Oh, I'm going to kill that Mundungus 
Fletcher!'" (Ch 1, pg. 23, last sentence). And over the page in Ch 
2, Mrs Figg says " '
 and now look! Dementors!'" And this is before 
Harry has said a word to her about what just happened. 

Talisman
> Dumbledore has always been willing to lie, e.g. "It was only 
> when he was back in bed that it struck Harry that Dumbledore might 
> not have been quite truthful." (SS 214)

Me:
This is the bit where Harry asks DD what he saw in the Mirror of 
Erised. Sure, he probably did lie here. It was an extremely personal 
question and their relationship is hardly one of equals. So I don't 
think DD is obliged to tell the truth. (It seems to me that he might 
have given his answer in such a way as to indicate to Harry that he 
was lying, as Harry realises upon reflection.) All the same, he 
could avoid lying by telling Harry that he's not going to say what 
he sees. I see how this makes you suspicious of DD's honesty, but 
this one example is too trivial to lead me to believe that 
everything he says is untrue or that he can't be trusted on more 
important matters. 

Talisman:
> But in OoP, the frustration we suffer, along with Harry, at 
> Dumbledore's persistent noncommunication, drives home the 
magnitude of his lies by ommision. (Though Hedwig knows we've 
been aggravated with his silence since book one.) The only 
question is: how often does he lie overtly? >>>

Me:
I couldn't agree with you more on the question of how often DD lies 
overtly. As to the aggravation "of his lies by omission", I would 
argue that this is to do with plotting by the author. We readers are 
being kept in the dark just as Harry is, for purposes only JKR 
knows! If DD is deliberately lying by omission, you speculate his 
intent is evil. I, along with others such as katrinawitch, speculate 
his intent is good. 

Talisman:
> II. Let's agree that Dumbledore's lies are all in furtherance of 
> his "noble" plan. A plan, Dumbledore tells us, in which caring 
> about Harry is not permitted.(838) Protecting Harry's utility, 
yes. 
> Furthering Harry's personal happiness or dreams, no.

Me:
DD loves Harry! 
" 'I cared about you too much. I cared more for your happiness than 
your knowing the truth, more for your peace of mind than my plan, 
more for your life than the lives that might be lost if the plan 
failed. In other words, I acted exactly as Voldemort expects we 
fools who love to act. Is there a defence? I defy anyone who has 
watched you as I have ? and I have watched you more closely than you 
can have imagined ? not to want to save you more pain than you had 
already suffered.'" (pg. 739 .au ed.)  How can you believe DD would 
cause Harry more pain by killing Sirius after this honest 
declaration of love and affection? 

> Group members have long observed that Dumbledore facilitates 
Harry's confrontations with the Dark Lord. Harry recognised that 
> himself from the start:". . .instead of stopping us, he just 
> taught us enough to help." (SS 302) 
> 
> Dumbledore is always there to make sure his Weapon!Harry isn't 
> destroyed (is he testing whether Harry is "the one," or honing 
> Chosen!Harry's skills?).
> 
> Nonetheless, these machinations are undertaken without 
consideration for Harry's needs and preferences. Just part of a 
> cold-hearted, "noble," plan.

Me: 
Harry's needs and preferences are to play the hero, to go after Big 
V. I see nothing sinister or "cold-hearted" (and neither does Harry 
going by the same quote from SS pg. 302 you use above) with DD 
helping Harry to be Harry whether it's Weapon!Harry or Chosen!Harry. 
Up until OoP it doesn't matter whether Harry is aware he's part of a 
plan. During OoP it does matter because DD's failure to recognise 
how grown up Harry is, and therefore tell all, contributes to 
Sirius' death. Again I have to say that being kept in the dark about 
what DD has been doing to assist Harry as he's been "watching him 
more closely than he can have imagined" is not DD's machinations; 
it's JKR's.  "agnesbrauner" agrees, in Message 76512. 

> (Small rant here where I say that consigning Harry to 10 years of 
> child-abuse has more to do with Dumbledore's discomfort at being 
> around someone he is "using" than the fact LV might come back in 
> 10 years. (835) In 10 years Harry is at Hogwarts and the "Petunia 
> pact" only protects him a few months or weeks out of the year.) 

Me:
You attributing discomfort as DD's reason for banishing Harry to the 
Dursley wilderness is pure speculation. Nothing wrong with 
speculation ? where would HPfGU be without it? ? but I am drawing 
attention to it because so much of your case is built on suspicion, 
not facts! 

> So, to recap, Dumbledore lies and manipulates to further his cold-
> hearted plan, which always includes maneuvering Harry into/through 
> confrontations with LV. 

Me:
So to "recap", DD is watching over and helping Harry to go after 
whomever and whatever he wants, to fulfill his needs and desires as 
best he (Harry) knows how. DD is acting out of love for the boy, 
love which grew as he got to know Harry, whatever his feelings were 
before Harry arrived at Hogwarts. 

Talisman:
> No exception in OoP in which I believe Dumbledore orchestrates 
> Harry's conflict with LV, and effectuates Sirius's death.
> Why Sirius's death you say? Because killing Sirius achieves 4-5 of 
> Dumbledore's goals:
> 1.) It Activates "the power the Dark Lord
> knows not" (841), which in turn;
> 
> 2.) Allows Dumbledore to further Verify that
> Harry is the chosen one;
> 
> 3.) It prepares Harry to receive the Prophecy
> (sort of cocking Weapon!Harry);
> 
> 4.) Harry's lasting love-grief becomes Voldemort-
> Legilimency/Posession Repellent, thereby 
> ensuring Weapon!Harry's utility to "the
> noble plan," and incidently;
> 
> 5.) It gets rid of someone who does care
> about Harry the person, and who would disobey 
> Dumbledore to further Harry's happiness.

Me:
It's quite possible that Sirius' death achieves DD's 'goals' 1 to 4. 
The question is whether DD cold-bloodedly orchestrated the death in 
order to test his pre-meditated plan/goals, or whether they were 
outcomes of an accidental and tragic death. Looking at the same 
evidence, you point the finger of blame, I wring the hands of 
anguish. 

Point 5 needs further examination. I agree that Sirius can't be 
trusted to obey DD. We see evidence of this when Sirius goes in dog 
form to farewell Harry on platform 9?. We know he is a rebel and 
risk-taker: Sirius is disappointed that Harry turns out to be less 
like his father than he thought because Harry cautions him against 
turning up at Hogsmeade for a lark (OoP pg. 273 .au ed). Sirius is 
surprised that Harry hasn't asked what Voldemort is up to on his 
first night at Grimmauld Place (OoP pg. 83 .au ed ? the following 8 
pages of conversation are very instructive of Harry and Sirius' 
relationship and Sirius' relationships to and within the Order). 
Given his love of a good fight and his larrikinism, I believe Sirius 
would have directly disobeyed DD the same night when the 
conversation turned to the 'weapon' being sought by Big V. I think 
Sirius was on the point of telling Harry a lot more than he "needs 
to know" (pg. 84) when Molly came back. She bullied Sirius into 
keeping quiet and the other adults fell in behind her. But if Molly 
hadn't come back at just that moment, well ... one can only 
speculate what Sirius would have said. (I can imagine Sirius giving 
a full and complete explanation of the 'weapon' if Harry came out 
and asked him directly when they were alone together.)

I think Sirius would have helped Harry into the fight with Big V. 
Sirius' idea of happiness would have been to have Harry become a 
member of the OoP and Harry would have gone along with that. 

You imply that Sirius has Harry's best interests at heart more than 
DD and that having Sirius around would have resulted in a happier 
outcome for Harry. I think the outcomes would have been similar. 
Both DD and Sirius have similar ends in mind for Harry ? they would 
have disagreed on the means of achieving them. Sirius (correctly?) 
realised that Harry was old and mature enough to know things sooner 
than DD; and had Sirius been allowed to fully answer Harry's 
questions, Harry would have had his eyes opened sooner. Harry is 
Harry and he will go after Big V, *whatever he knows*, until one of 
them dies.

Talisman:
> The Evidence Continues:
> 
> III. Dumbledore admits Sirius's death is his fault. (825)
> 
> Dumbledore admits that by not warning Harry about the trick 
> that Dumbledore, himself, saw coming, he allowed Harry to fall for 
> it. (N.B. At the same time Dumbledore is busy warning experienced 
> adult wizards to beware LV's tricks so that they won't fall for 
them 
> (96).)

Me:
DD is warning the WW of the return of Big V in order to thwart his 
evil plans to amass his power base by stealth. Hence the speeches to 
the Wizengamot and the Confederation which got him ousted from one 
and demoted from the other. The irony is that if DD had been 
believed, then Sirius' name could have been cleared and he wouldn't 
have had to remain in hiding. How much more help could Sirius have 
been to Harry and interfering to DD's plans then? 

DD takes responsibility for Sirius' death ? he does share some of 
the blame for not being more open with Harry. It doesn't follow that 
he killed Sirius outright, or used a hex that appeared to come from 
someone else, or floated Sirius through the veil when he was only 
stunned. 

Talisman:
> IV. Dumbledore is aware that Sirius's nature--brave, clever, 
> energetic--makes him unlikely to stay home when other's (esp. 
Harry) are in danger. (825) Yet Dumbledore confines him to his 
> miserable-memory-laden childhood home.

Me:
Did DD "confine" Sirius to Grimmauld Place against his will? I doubt 
it. His participation in the OoP and his stay at his old house was 
voluntary because he believed in what DD was doing. I believe he 
sacrificed his needs to what he saw as those of the greater good. 

Talisman:
> Dumble dore does not contradict Harry when Harry points out how 
> Sirius hated being shut up, saying "that's why he wanted to get 
out last night." (834)
> 
> In fact, if he's not faking, Dumbledore's icy facade appears to 
> crack here: guilt, guilt, guilt. 

Me:
You read 'icy' fa?ade, I read 'cool, calm and collected'. DD has 
done remarkably well to retain his cool in the face of everything 
Harry has (literally) thrown at him in the office. In any case, the 
reason he 'cracks' here is not guilt; it's because he's come to the 
moment he's most dreading ? the time for telling all: "I have 
watched you struggling under *more burdens than any student who has 
ever passed through this school* and I could not bring myself to add 
another ? the greatest one of all." (pg. 740, my emphasis) If DD 
feels like that about it, it's no wonder he's getting emotional, 
especially as this follows Harry's blinding rage over a death for 
which DD feels responsible. 

Talisman:
> (Pan back to Sirius saying,"Personally I'd welcome. . .a deadly 
> struggle for my soul[, it] would have broken the monotony nicely." 
> (82)
> 
> Not only does Sirius hate confinement, and love Harry, but he does 
> suffer from Snapes taunts about uselessness and cowardice. 
> 
> Dumbledore says not, but Dumbledore lies. (833) We see for 
ourselves that Snape's taunting hurts Sirius deeply. Sirius and Snape 
> draw wands over it (518-20) and battle is only averted by Mr. 
> Weasley's arrival. 

Me:
Why wouldn't DD believe that "Sirius was much too old and clever to 
have allowed such feeble taunts to hurt him" (pg. 734). He makes the 
same mistake about Snape and Occlumency lessons. "I thought 
Professor Snape could overcome his feelings about your father ? I 
was wrong." (pg. 735) 

DD does not 'lie' to Harry here. He was not witness to the near duel 
between Snape and Sirius. I expect S. and S. behaved a lot more 
civilly in DD's company and in the company of other adults in the 
Order. As a man of impeccable morals and manners, DD is merely 
guilty of believing that his friends are capable of the same 
standards he sets himself. 

Talisman:
> Dumbledore knows that Snape stopped giving Occlumency lessons, 
that LV has been gaining more and more access to Harry's mind, and 
> that (just a lucky guess?) LV will bate Harry with Sirius. 
> 
> Dumbledore knows as well that if Sirius is told that Harry has 
> stepped into LV's trap, nothing will stop Sirius from going to 
> Harry's rescue. For extra insurance, let's just have Snape tell 
him to stay home, shall we? (830)

Me:
This is all just plotting to trigger the final showdown. The plot 
relies on implausibilities and coincidence like:
 
*Umbridge would go off into the Forbidden Forest alone 
*DD didn't write Harry a letter since they couldn't talk face to 
face. He could easily have explained about Occlumency and the 
possibility of Sirius being used as bait by Big V and why he was 
avoiding eye contact.Or someone else could have explained why 
Occlumency is important. All Harry is ever told is that it is 
important and to just do it! This approach is not guaranteed to get 
Harry's attention. 
*Sirius just happened to be upstairs, or out of earshot, when Harry 
called on the Floo network
*Harry forgot all about the 2 way mirror. (Digression to point out 
one of my gripes about JKR. Why did she introduce the mirror? Is it 
just another example of her many cruelties to Harry?)

*You even mention some plot elements that don't ring true below, 
though you don't see them that way. 
*Snape didn't search the forest.
*Snape doesn't assume the kids are in danger from creatures in the 
forest?
*It's convenient that DD can't be contacted with one of the 'special 
ways' known only to the Order.

There has to be some event that triggers the final showdown. Having 
the baddie set a trap with the person most loved by the hero as bait 
is a timeless device that has been used in countless stories. All 
the above function to bring on the climax, not show DD's evil 
subterfuge. 

That's not to say that Sirius has to be the one who dies just 
because the plot contrives to get him into the action. Snape telling 
Sirius to stay home is entirely in character for Snape, given his 
past taunts. 

Talisman:
> Indeed, let's look at Snape's behavior on the fatal night.
> 
> O.K. Snape understands from Harry's cryptic message that LV is 
> springing his trap.
> 
> Then Snape sees Harry go off into the forest. Snape doesn't see 
> Harry come out for awhile (how long??)
> 1) Contrary to what I've seen posted in the OoPFaq, Snape NEVER 
> searches the forest. Dumbledore merely "says" (if we can trust 
him) that Snape "intended" to search for Harry. (830) And, he 
> only "intends" that after sending the OoP to the M.O.M.
> 
> Why would Snape assume Harry was at M.O.M.? Umbridge went 
> into the forest. Umbridge remained in the forest until Dumbledore 
> fetched her. Why wouldn't it be MUCH more likely that Harry was 
> being assailed by Umbridge/centaurs/giants/werewolves/spiders/etc. 
> when he didn't come out soon enough to suit Snape? 
> 
> Snape has special ways of communicating with OoP members (830), 
> surely that includes Dumbledore? Why is Dumbledore just a little 
too late arriving at Grimmauld Place? Just after Sirius left. (831) 
> How long did it take to interrogate Kreacher (assuming that was 
even necessary)? Why is Dumbledore so tardy to the party? 
> 
> No matter, he behaves badly enough when he arrives.
> 
> V. Dumbledore's guilty behavior at the M.O.M.
> includes his late arrival (OoP been fighting for 5 pages). 
> 
> But, he dashes down the steps to the floor of the Death Chamber, 
and almost instantly neutralizes the Death Eaters. (805)
> Oddly, "[o]nly one couple were still battling." (805) Bellatrix 
and Sirius. Bellatrix misses (with what is apparently a stunning 
spell) 

Me:
DD does not neutralise the DE's almost instantly. The text is 
confused here. 

"... when the Death Eaters nearest realised he (DD) was there and 
yelled to the others. One of the DE's ran for it, scrabbling like a 
monkey up the stone steps opposite. DD's spell pulled him back as 
easily and effortlessly as though he had hooked him with an 
invisible line ? Only one pair were still battling ..." (pg. 710). 
The battling pair is Sirius and Bellatrix. Then we read about 
Sirius' death and Harry's reaction to the end of the chapter. 

In the next chapter, (pg. 712) after several more para.s of Harry's 
reaction we read 

"There was movement going on around them, pointless bustling, the 
flashes of more spells. To Harry it was meaningless noise, the 
deflected curses flying past them did not matter, ..." Over on page 
713 we read: "DD had most of the remaining DE's grouped in the 
middle of the room, seemingly immobilized by invisible ropes... 
behind the dais there were still flashes of light, grunts and cries ?
 Kingsley had run forward to continue Sirius' duel with Bellatrix." 

On page 710 it appears there is only one pair (Sirius & Bellatrix) 
still battling after DD hooks the escaping DE, so what were the 
others doing? Escaping? Yet there still seems to be battling on page 
712 after Sirius' death. On page 713 we learn that DD has *most* of 
the DE's immobilised and Kingsley is still battling Bellatrix. 

I think that far from ignoring Sirius, DD is preoccupied with 
rounding up the escaping DE's (there must be half a dozen of them in 
the room) to prevent them disapparating. He's left Bellatrix alone 
because she's caught up with first Sirius and then Kingsley. That's 
all. 

Talisman:
> and then . . . JK drops to a new, one sentence paragraph, for the 
> crucial shot.
> 
> "The second jet of light hit him . . ."
> 
> The jet is the subject of the sentence.
> The person who fired the shot, and the color of the jet, are 
> mysteriously missing from the sentence. 
> 
> Sure Bellatrix had just finished a "first," shot. So had 
Dumbledore.
> How about "the second jet aimed at him?" Maybe even magiked to 
look like it came from Bellatrix's direction?
> 
> Again:
> 
> 1. Dumbledore doesn't neutralize Bellatrix;
> 2. JK is coy about where jet came from.

Me:
Nor is there any instance elsewhere in the series of spells being 
made to appear to come from someone else? There is absolutely no 
evidence that the killing jet came from DD. It's not 100% clear it 
came from Bellatrix, but she seems to think she killed him and she 
ought to know: "Harry heard Bellatrix Lestrange's triumphant scream" 
(pg. 711). You're right. JKR is coy about where the jet came from, 
but to suggest DD magicked it from her direction is stretching a 
very thin wand. 

Talisman:
> You don't like it? Well try it another way.
> 
> VI. Let's say Dumbledore just takes advantage of what should have 
> been another stunning spell. Why does it take Sirius "an age" to 
> fall? (806) Is is just Harry's subjective view?

Me:
It is possible it is Harry's subjective point of view. The text 
reads "seemed" to take Sirius an age to fall. It is not uncommon for 
witnesses to catastrophic events to report that time appears to 
stretch. It could be this phenomenon that Harry experiences or it 
could be that DD does indeed float Sirius through the veil. 

My turn to speculate. I suggest that Sirius was not stunned by 
Bellatrix' jet of light of unspecified colour, but was in fact 
killed by it. DD knowing he was dead deliberately floated Sirius 
through the veil - as an act of kindness to Harry. Because Sirius is 
behind the veil, Harry will be able to contact him later. 

My suspicion of this comes from a hint dropped by Luna Lovegood when 
she and Harry discuss the death of her mother. "And anyway, it's not 
as though I'll never see Mum again, is it? When Harry expresses 
uncertainty, Luna continues: "Oh come on. You heard them, just 
behind the veil, didn't you? ... In that room with the archway. They 
were just lurking out of sight, that's all. You heard them." (pg. 
761)

Unfortunately I would not put it past JKR to drop this hint only to 
have it turn out to be one of Luna's loony ideas that comes to 
nothing. In which case Harry will be crushed yet again, having been 
twice thwarted in his quest to communicate with Sirius: via his 
ghost and via the 2 way mirror. JKR is cruel to Harry, but surely 
even she could not be that cruel. 

(Another digression: which of Luna's loony ideas has ever been 
proven to be crazy? We only have Hermione's snorts of derision and 
the scepticism of the rest of the school as "proof" that she has 
crazy ideas.)

Talisman:
> Harry sees Sirius hit and leaps down the steps (compare Neville 
> coming down 808) before Sirius, who is on the dais (804), falls 
> through he archway.(806) Remember how Dumbledore controlled 
Harry's fall to the Quidditch field in PoA? hmmmm. 
> 
> Moreover, Dumbledore is fast on the draw. (814) But he doesn't try 
> to shield/deflect Sirius from falling through the veil. 
> 
> Dumbledore is right by the dais. Dumbledore doesn't offer comfort 
> to Harry.
> 
> 
> 1. Dumbledore doesn't neutralize Bellatrix;
> 2. JK is coy about where crucial jet came from;
> 3. If Sirius just stunned, does Dumbledore "float" him
> through veil?;
> 4. Fast-draw Dumbledore doesn't try to save Sirius from 
> falling through veil;
> 5. Dumbledore doesn't comfort Harry.
> 
> VII Dumbledore is strangely inneffectual against Bellatrix, and 
> takes a long time to reveal himself in the M.O.M. lobby.
> 
> Harry has already been fighting Bellatrix for awhile, has 
clarified that the prophecy is broken, and Voldemort, having 
> Legilimened as much from Harry, has appeared, before Dumbledore 
> steps back in.  Another masterful manipulation.

Me:
Masterful manipulation or plotting? It doesn't matter that Harry is 
alone with Bellatrix and Big V for awhile; DD is there to save him 
in time from the AK curse. And it allows JKR to introduce a 
fascinating plot development: Harry's use of an unforgivable curse.

A comment on your use of the word nonchalantly (below). You put a 
negative spin on the term, but I wonder if DD appears that way 
because he is "a person who achieves the 'magic' of an actuated life 
(in a Mazlovian sense, and a journey that, happily, we can all take 
if we are brave & loving etc.)" (see your post 67142). I think DD 
models actuated behaviour all the time, but it is spectacularly 
evident in his duel with Big V and later in his office whilst Harry 
rages and storms about him. It is a trait that I think Luna shares 
and one that Harry might need to acquire in order to defeat Big V. 

Talisman:
> Now Dumbledore can test his theory. Dumbledore nonchalantly spars 
> with LV. Then, just when Harry thinks LV is gone, Dumbledore 
orders him to stay pinned under the statue guard, and 
> "[f]or the first time, Dumbledore sounded frightened." (815)

Me:
I think he's frightened for Harry because he cares about him and 
possibly because DD's powerless to help ? there was nothing DD could 
do to Big V once he's entered Harry's body without harming Harry. 

"that I would sacrifice you in the hope of killing him." (pg 730) 

Harry has faced a lot of pain and difficulty before, but what he is 
about to experience is the worst so far. "Harry's scar burst open 
and he knew he was dead: it was pain beyond imagining, pain past 
endurance - " (pg. 719 and it goes on if you want to read it.) No 
wonder DD was frightened. 

Talisman:
> Why? Somehow (Legilimens?)Dumbledore knows LV is about to possess 
> Harry. Now he'll find out: 1) whether Harry can be used as a tool 
> of LV's; 2) whether Sirius was killed in vain.
> 
> The possesion is thwarted when Harry considers joining Sirius in 
> death, and "his heart fill[s] with emotion." (816)
> 
> *Here is the power the Dark Lord does not know. Activated
> 
> *Harry is a match for LV. Verification.
> 
> *Harry no longer cares about the petty, childish things of his 
> universe beore Sirius's death. He has further impetus for ending 
> VL's evil career: Preparation to receive the prophecy.
> 
> *Grieving Harry will be feeling the aching loss/love of Sirius for 
> years to come: LV can't stand to share those feelings: 
> Legilimens/Possession Reppellent.
> 
> *Sirius can't interfere with Dumbledore's "noble," heartless plan. 
> 
> How does Dumbledore know what thwarted LV's possession of Harry? 
> (844) How does he know what was in Harry's heart when LV was 
> banished? How can he say: "It was your heart that saved you[?]"
> 
> Yet he knows immediately. (816) And thereafter, he looks at Harry, 
> speaks to Harry and allows Harry to remain in his company.

Me:
The question in my mind is whether loving thoughts of Sirius are all 
that Harry could have summoned to send Big V scurrying. Why not 
thoughts of never seeing Ron or Hermione alive again? Just such 
thoughts were sufficient for him to conjure his Patronus in Ch 1 to 
repel the Dementors. "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!'" (pg. 22).

Say Sirius hadn't died. Would thoughts of never seeing him alive 
again have produced sufficient feelings of love to do the trick on 
Big V. What if one of Harry's friends had come running into the 
lobby and Harry had seen the look on their face as they watched him 
writhing in agony? Would that have helped him feel more strongly? 
Well, what if Ron or Hermione, or one of the other kids, had died 
instead of Sirius, during the fight with the DE's - one of them 
could easily have been murdered during those 5 pages that DD was 
absent. Would loving thoughts of a *dead* Ron have produced enough 
love to repel Big V? 

This is getting ridiculous ? how much love is enough love to send 
Big V scurrying? What I am trying to show is that Harry could have 
felt the requisite emotion without anyone dying. What you assume is 
that DD assumed that only Sirius' death would do the trick and then 
killed him to test his assumption. 

 Talisman:
> 1. Dumbledore doesn't neutralize Bellatrix; (Me: he was 
preoccupied with rounding up escaping DE's)
> 2. JK is coy about where crucial jet came from; (Me: can't be sure 
what that vague text means, if anything.)
> 3. If Sirius just stunned, does Dumbledore "float" him
> through veil?; (Me: he wasn't stunned, he was dead so DD floated 
him through the veil so he would be around for Harry later)
> 4. Fast-draw Dumbledore doesn't try to save Sirius from 
> falling through veil; (Me: see 3. above)
> 5. Dumbledore doesn't comfort Harry. (Me: see 1. above)
> 6. Dumbledore manages the LV scene in lobby; (Me: all I read was 
that DD was trying to capture 'Tom' and not kill him, either because 
DD can't or won't. Why didn't DD try to kill Tom? Maybe because 
killing goes against his principles!)
> 7. Dumbledore knows LV going to possess Harry; (Me: He'd known for 
quite some time and had tried to prepare Harry with the Occlumency 
lessons. At the time of the actual possession, I don't believe there 
was anything DD could do to help Harry. 
> 8. Dumbledore knows Sirius love/grief thought repels LV; (Me: Yes 
he does, but were love/grief feelings of Sirius the only feelings 
that would have done the trick?)
> 9. Dumbledore gets: (Me: I prefer to see 9 a. to e. as *outcomes* 
of the fight rather than hypotheses that DD had worked out in 
advance and then subsequently managed the action ? for over a year! -
 to test.)
> a. special power activation; (Me: Sirius death is not proven to be 
crucial to achieving power activation)
> b. chosen one verification; (Me: not proven, see below)
> c. Prophecy preparation; (Me: Harry was ready long ago. Sirius 
knew it on Harry's first night in Grimmauld Place.  I love your idea 
of one of the themes of OoP being about maturation from youth to 
adulthood (see your post 67142). DD's failure to recognise Harry's 
maturity is just a tragic working out of this theme.)
> d. LV repellent; (Me: You seem to imply that Harry is now 
permanently possession proof. Where is the evidence that the 
experience has had a permanent effect on Harry or that it will work 
again?) 
> e. no sirius interference. (Me: I think Sirius would have 
interfered with DD's plans if he and DD had disagreed on method. For 
example, Sirius might tell Harry about the prophesy because he's fed 
up with DD's delays. The outcome would have been the same ? a Harry 
fit to fight Big V and withstand possession via Occlumency. I don't 
believe DD's plans ever included killing Sirius because DD is too 
moral for this. DD is supremely tolerant of differences and 
individuals. Hence the reason he puts up with Snape and Trelawny and 
employs an emancipated house elf and creatures that are scorned by 
many wizards: half-giants, werewolves, centaurs, vampires (Snape?). 

Me again: 
Regarding point 9b. above. There is no proof that Harry is the 
subject of the prophesy. "alexcukier" in message 66778 advanced the 
idea that Neville is the true subject of the prophesy. We don't know 
that he isn't, because as far as we know, Big V hasn't tried to kill 
him. What if Harry survived the AK curse with only a scar on his 
forehead, not because of the prophesy, but because of his mother's 
blood or love or sacrifice or whatever. The scar he got from the 
curse leaves him with magical connections to Big V, but that is just 
an outcome of surviving an AK curse. ("alexcukier" believes that DD 
put the scar on him after he survives, but I think that the link it 
creates to Big V shows that Big V made the mark.) 

If Neville were to survive the same curse from Big V, on his own, 
without protection from anyone or anything else, he would probably 
get a scar too, either similar or different. But he would be the 
one, not Harry!

It raises fascinating possibilities for the resolution of the 
series. Harry, the warrior hero who is not chosen by destiny, who is 
mistakenly spurred on by the belief that he is chosen, dies in the 
penultimate showdown with Big V. Big V and followers are triumphant, 
everyone else is in despair and then Neville steps up and blows him 
away! Or maybe Neville and/or Big V die in the final showdown 
leaving Harry to survive. (Oops! I just had a thought. Is this going 
over ground already covered in Decoy!Harry theories?) 

Talisman: 
> Oh, yes. Sirius had to die.

Me:
Oh did he just!

Well now that I'm done and I've read through what I've written I 
have to say that my post contains a lot more speculation than I 
thought I would need to rebut your arguments Talisman. C?st la vie. 
At least, I hope, I've shown that there are other interpretations 
possible. And the text does tempt one to speculate doesn't it? That 
fatal 'jet of light'! What is JKR thinking? (as she skips off the 
bank - laughing!)

Nicholas 







From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Sat Sep  6 09:40:54 2003
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 09:40:54 -0000
Subject: Feelings on OoP
In-Reply-To: <bjc4kk+rbhc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjca36+4hjm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80004

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "slgazit" <slgazit at s...> wrote:
 
> 
> Where I did not like the book: I was not as enchanted with
> Ginny and Neville plotlines -  <snip>

>  Neville was this clumsy,
> rather dumb but sweet, self effacing kid who out of the blue
> becomes a leading character. I suppose JKR needed them to
> change for the sake of the plot (Neville set to become Harry's
> No. 2 and Ginny for the long expected romance w/Harry) but there was
> hardly any buildup in previous books for their personality change.
 
> 
> Salit

I disagree. Especially about Neville. I think his development was 
very well done and the most logical of all the character developments 
in the books. Already in the very first book Neville fought Crabbe 
and Goyle single handed, although he knew, that he had no chance 
against them. The end of OOTP was basically the same situation 
(although of course much graver). Again Neville knows exactly that he 
had basically no chance against the Death Eaters, especially with his 
broken nose. Yet he doesn't hesistate to rush to Harry's side, 
because his friend needs help. I found his behaviour very in 
character and exactly what Neville would do. I also have no problems 
with him doing well in the DA. We already saw in POA, that he is able 
to do well in DADA with the right teacher. Him going after Malfoy was 
indeed a surprise, but we shouldn't forget, that it was the first 
time Malfoy insulted Neville's parents (although Malfoy didn't intend 
to do so), which was for Neville probably way graver, than all the 
insults from Malfoy the previous years.

So I really don't think Neville's character development was that 
unbelievable.

Hickengruendler






From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sat Sep  6 10:29:38 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 10:29:38 -0000
Subject: Manners (was Re: Snape and Harry)
In-Reply-To: <bjat58+2bmj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjccui+ht49@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80005

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "feetmadeofclay" 
<feetmadeofclay at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "melclaros" <melclaros at y...> 
> wrote:
> 
> > Indeed. Drives me NUTS to have a 3year old wander up to me and 
call 
> > me by my 1st name. Or a 5 yo, or a 10 year old. Anything over 
that, 
> > in a social setting I would allow but sure would apppreciate the 
> > oppty to say, "Please call me..."
> 


Geoff:
I thought I would come back again to add my twopenny-worth to the 
subject of manners, both in respect of Harry and also in general.

Harry has had little opportunity to try to establish any empathy with 
Snape. I've mentioned it before but just look at his first encounter 
with Snape. PS (UK edition, pp.101-104)

"
..he paused at Harry' name.
`Ah, yes,' he said softly, `Harry Potter, our new ? celebrity.'
Draco Malfoy and his friends Crabbe and Goyle sniggered behind their 
hands

"

He then goes on to ask Harry a question which Harry cannot answer
.

"'Tut, tut ? fame clearly isn't everything.'"

He asks another question.

"'I don't know, sir'.
`Thought you wouldn't open a book before coming, eh, Potter?'
Harry forced himself to keep looking into those cold eyes. He /had/ 
looked through his books

"

More questions and Harry suggests that Snape asks Hermione. Result


"Over the noise, Snape said, 'and a point will be taken from 
Gryffindor house for your cheek, Potter'."

Neville has an accident


"'You ? Potter ? why didn't you tell him not to add the quills? 
Thought he'd make you look good if he got it wrong, did you? That's 
another point you've lost for Gryffindor.'"

This is the way Harry, as a new boy only days into a totally strange 
environment is greeted. To be quite frank, I seriously doubt Snape's 
qualification as a teacher in terms of relating to students. Two 
instances come to mind ( I can't quite pin down the page reference at 
the moment). One is where he calls Hermione a "know-all" and actually 
Hermione garners support for herself although the passage points out 
that most of the Gryffindors there had called her that on occasions 
themselves. The second is when Harry and Draco hurl spells at each 
other which rebound; Hermione teeth grow and (I think) Crabbe comes 
out in boils. Snape's reaction? Detention for Harry, a few points off 
for Malfoy and as far as Hermione's teeth are concerned "I see no 
difference". What a way to treat your pupils



As to the calling SS "sir" etc., it is the fact that he tells Harry 
to call him this /every/ time he speaks which is the ludicrous part. 
I believe as a teacher, you initially anticipate respect but beyond 
that you have to earn it. I have remarked on the group before that I 
taught for 32 years in South-West London. I was in the same school 
for all that time although it changed from 11-16 boys to 13-18 mixed 
over the years. IN the early days, I received "sir" or "Mr.Bannister" 
as a matter of course; I never once asked a class to address me in 
that way. As time went on, I began to get the children of my former 
pupils appearing and I think my reputation had gone before me by 
then. I tried for the whole time for hold to two rules for myself: 
(1) Be firm yet fair (2) Never ask a child to do something which I 
would object to myself. I also worked under a superb head for the 
first 12 years who trimmed a few excess reactions in the first year 
or so ( doubtless a Welsh Dumbledore!). Rarely did I have any 
problems in or out of the class. I took early retirement 10 years ago 
but last year joined the "Friends Reunited" website to see what my 
flock had been up to. I am now in fairly regular email contact with 
about three dozen ex-pupils; I consider I didn't do too badly.

Re Christian names. I think it is a question of when and where? My 
wife and I are youth coordinators at our local Baptist Church 
(despite my age!) and also run a thriving church boys' club for 8-14 
year olds. We encourage the lads to use our Christian names and have 
never known anyone take advantage of this. It helps to create an 
environment of cooperation, enthusiasm and fun without imposing a 
school type situation. I agree that in a more formal set-up, surnames 
are the norm unless the person involved indicates that they are happy 
for it to be different.

Geoff





From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sat Sep  6 10:41:26 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 10:41:26 -0000
Subject: House Points
In-Reply-To: <bjat58+2bmj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjcdkm+c0j0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80006

After I finished my  last post about manners and Harry's first 
encounter with Snape, a thought crossed my mind.

Do the houses start with a "float" of house points - perhaps deducted 
later in the year? The idea arose because, in the early days of his 
Hogwarts career, Harry loses a couple of house points in Potions. 
What happens if someone loses some right at the very beginning of the 
school year? 

We know that the system won't go into negatives in that rather 
amusing exchange in the last chapter of OOTP:

"'I'm trying to decide what curse to use of Malfoy, sir' said Harry 
fiercely. (remembers his manners though :-))

Snape stared at him.

'Put that wand away at once,' he said curtly. 'Ten points from Gryff='

Snape lookes towards the giant hour-glasses on the walls and gave a 
sneering smile.

'Ah, I see there are no longer any points left in the Gryffindor hour-
glass to take away. In that case, Potter, we will simply have to-'

'Add some more?'

Professor McGonagall had just stumped up the stone steps into the 
castle....."

Just curious as an ex-Maths teacher.

Geoff




From silmariel at telefonica.net  Sat Sep  6 10:58:23 2003
From: silmariel at telefonica.net (Carolina)
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 12:58:23 +0200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Turncoat!Tonks (was: Aurors/Unforgiveable Curses)
In-Reply-To: <003101c37444$3fc55140$1477d6d1@oldcomputer>
References: <bjb9d4+jtcd@eGroups.com> <003101c37444$3fc55140$1477d6d1@oldcomputer>
Message-ID: <200309061258.23710.silmariel@telefonica.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 80007


> --RTJ:
<< As it stands, Sirius's nearest blood relatives are the Malfoys, 
the Tonkses, and Bellatrix Lestrange (ugh!). I think that even if 
he doesn't have a will, the house will go to Harry--after all, not> 
only is he Sirius's godson and wizard guardian, Harry once saved
his life, which indicates a deeper attachment.>>

But deep attachments don't have much to say if there is not a will,
why would Harry inherit G.Place if there isn't a last will? When was 
Sirius made legal tutor for Harry? Aren't the Durdsleys his tutors?

I'm thinking on the kind of wills from Authors as Austen, Bronte or 
Eliot. 

Are we sure Sirius could decide what to do of Grimmauld? The Blacks 
could have add a clause stating specifically a condition for 
inheritance: that the family properties would remain in the family, 
here Bellatrix and Narcissa, or Andromeda if she has not been 
specifically excluded, wich I doubt. 

He may have the granted right to use the house as only propietary 
while he lived, I know Sirius states the house is his, but I know a 
case like this and the user of the house instists the house is his, 
and you have to be very close to the family to know it isn't. 

silmariel



From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Sat Sep  6 11:04:29 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 11:04:29 -0000
Subject: Weasley nationality WAS Re: Seamus and the Weasleys
In-Reply-To: <bjbse9+dvq8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjcevt+66jg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80008

   
> > Jeff:
> > >>The same can be said about how she presents the Weasley  
> > family.They're poor, red-haired, and have a large family. Sounds 
> > like a stab at the Irish to me.>> 
> > 
> > Kirstini:
> > Sounds like you implanting your own horrifically crude 
> > stereotyping upon an interpretation to me. Firstly, how a stab? 
> 
> > At which point in the narrative are the Weasleys portrayed as 
> > anything other than a highly interesting, enjoyable experience 
> > for Harry, experiencing a world other to his own? Secondly: at 
> > the point at which she created Ron and the Weasleys, JKR herself 
> > was struggling to feed her own daughter, and had red hair (
> > obviously, she acceeded to food and bleach as her fortunes took 
an upturn).
> > 
> Jeff:
>     Perhaps so, but it's just how she made Draco insult Ron by 
> mentioning his being poor, red-haired and freckled and having more 
> kids than they can afford. Sounds much like what I've read/seen 
> many English say about some Irish folk. Sod'em I say. Erin Go     
> Braugh! :) 

> So she just seems, imho, to be making a bit of a mockery of them a 
> bit. Even some other fans seem to think that judging from how they 
> write the Weasley family in their ficcies. Personally, I love the 
> Weasleys. Ron's my fave, but I think the rest are just as great. I 
> do find it funny that Jo loves the Weasleys and yet she did color 
> her hair. It's her right, but just funny.

Pip!Squeak:
Red hair can be a pain. Five kids run away from something they 
shouldn't be doing; and who gets caught? The redhead. Everyone can 
identify the redhead [grin]

I think red hair is related to the 'weasel' in Weasley. They have 
weasel coloured hair.

>    Oh, I agree that having ginger hair doesn't make a person full-
> blood paddy, but people seem to expect it, don't they? I know I 
> seem to run into that misconception myself, being redhaired and of 
> Irish blood as well. :)
>    I agree the Weasley family could be a few generations removed 
> from Ireland. Maybe their original family name is O' Weasel? :) 
> They would have more common Irish names, but living in England, 
> they might want to sound more English. 

Or they could be an old English Catholic family. That would explain 
the large family, the poverty, and the sneers of the Malfoys (who 
would never dream of placing principle over money and self interest).

It's not my idea; it was floated on the list about nine months back 
and I can't remember who suggested it. But it makes sense. JKR seems 
to have a good reading knowledge of English history - and for those 
who stuck to the 'Old Religion', Reformation England is a story of 
steadily losing power (as they are pushed out of government) and 
their inherited wealth (as they are fined to bankruptcy for not 
attending the Church of England).

The other misconception people often have in Britain and Ireland is 
that a Catholic background automatically means an Irish background 
[grin]. I've had this: I tell people that half my family are Roman 
Catholic and the response (often from Irish people ) is 'what part 
of Ireland are they from'? 

Errr... Lancashire. And the highlands of Scotland. Admittedly 
there's *one* great-grandmother from County Kildare, though [grin]. 
But most of my ancestors of the Catholic side represent those who 
resisted the Reformation. Northern English and Scottish. The slight 
red tint in my hair is unlikely to be from Ireland.

But English Roman Catholic would fit the Weasley's to a tee. A 
family history of principle above ambition - the story of Arthur 
Weasley's life.

It also would explain the strange hints that the Weasley's were once 
more powerful. Harry dreams of Ron in a crown, later the Slytherins 
sing 'Weasley is our king'. [Not 'A' king, which is what the Kings 
of Ireland are. 'Our' king brings to mind Roman Catholic aristocracy 
such as the Dukes of Norfolk, and the British national anthem ' God 
save *our* gracious Queen' (my emphasis). And then there's the 
Arthurian names, bringing to mind the 'Once and Future King.' ]

So the Weasley's are probably English. Old English. Very old 
English, probably so old they are Celtic or British, rather than 
Saxon. Arthurian English, which is a mixture of England, Wales and 
part of Scotland (plus occasional visits to Ireland to nick 
cauldrons). ;-)

Like Ollivander, and his sign showing that his family were making 
wands before the Romans invaded, never mind the Normans.

An old, old family.

Descended from whom?

Pip!Squeak





From silmariel at telefonica.net  Sat Sep  6 13:18:52 2003
From: silmariel at telefonica.net (Carolina)
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 15:18:52 +0200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:Time, Repetition and the Uber-Dimension (was: Narrative Function
In-Reply-To: <bjba5a+o9ec@eGroups.com>
References: <bjba5a+o9ec@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <200309061518.52212.silmariel@telefonica.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 80009


Laurasia:
<< If no-one has memory of the initial incident I don't see how
 it's going to come back into play. In fact, I don't see how it
 even becomes relevant anymore because there is the completely
 internally- consistent version of events that Harry now
 believes. >>

 Corinth replied:
<< Exactly.  It's not going to come into play because it doesn't
 exist, and never did exist, in the dimension we are concerned
 with.>>

It gives a context for the kind of time we are dealing with.

It is not only Snape's face,  It is the tts at MoM. Two Time clues 
in a book, when we didn't know if they were going to appear again. 
I hope TTravel is not used, but the tts were there.

In the it happened because it happened way, MoM Time use rules are 
pretty naive. If the rules to use a tt is don't change things and 
don't let you be seen/noticed, I find that quite a number of not so 
honest/Griffindor minds might understand them the other way.

Because if I don't know something (as H didn't know Buckbead was 
dead) I can activate the tt. If it functions, as I actually can't 
change the timeline, it means I always did, there was never a point 
when the timeline didn't include my travel, so I justify my own 
actions.

It gives me the chills if Voldie actually put his hands on a tt 
during the MoM assault and we are going with the 'it happened once' 
Time treatment.

By the 'it happened twice' theory, as you both point out, if memory 
records only the facts the 'victim' knows, because the first set is 
erased, you'd better be careful when you Time Travel, or you will 
erase your own memory, not speaking of unexpected changes.

silmariel



From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk  Sat Sep  6 13:24:13 2003
From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Ivan=20Vablatsky?=)
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 14:24:13 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Alchemy revisited: OOP prediction confirmed
In-Reply-To: <bf9ut7+7mcg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030906132413.83176.qmail@web21511.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80010

In message 71509 (Jul. 18) --- Arya wrote: 
>>I think that the fact that JKR seems to be following the true form and definition of an Epic with the septology means that there will be many classical "evolutions" or perhaps, milestones that will be found in the HP universe. 
 
>>Hans' theory is one of several that, I feel, may be superimposed to correlate with the past five books and to help predict the remaining two. Unfortunately, I have to say, that all of them that I have studied and compared to HP, seem to be leading towards the death of our beloved Boy Who Probably Will Not Live. :-( Personally, I sooooo, do not want this to be so. I love Harry like a true person and would mourn his death as surely as I would mourn a living breathing soul). 
 
>>However, we are repeatedly told by JKR in cannon that there is no coming back from the dead to return to life so I think that when he does die in Book 7, he will remain--Beyond the Veil.<< 
 
Hans responds:
If HP is a window on to the real Path of Liberation as taught by all the historical great spiritual leaders, and I think it is, then Harry's journey is exactly the opposite of what you state, and our beloved boy needs no mourning from us!
 
OK I agree there is no coming back from death, if we define death as the death of the ordinary natural human personality. In several messages I have mentioned the Gate of Saturn. I hope there are some classical scholars amongst us who can fill us in with all the interesting details. As I understand it Saturn was Chronos, old father time, the Grim Reaper, the man with the hourglass and the scythe (Saturn was the god of agriculture). Saturn is also linked to the metal lead. Anyway, the Gate of Saturn in alchemical traditions is a gate that we all pass through at the end of life. But we can pass through that gate in two ways: as a prisoner of the endless cycle of reincarnation OR as one liberated from that cycle. In the former case, it means the total death of the earthly personality as it prepares to wait for a new baby to be born with the appropriate opportunities to continue the karmic journey. In the latter case the earthly personality is no longer there, as it has already "died" in
 the alchemical process of changing the "lead" of the ordinary mortal personality into the "gold" of the eternal human being, the Son of the Original Spirit. And so the passage through the Gate of Saturn is the triumphal march of the prodigal son into the arms of the Father who forgives all.
 
We have all seen the many alchemical symbols and references in HP. The "Philosopher's Stone", John Dee, Nicholas Flamel, Paracelsus, and of course particularly the similarities to the 1616 Rosicrucian manifesto, "The Alchemical Wedding of Christian Rosencreutz". I'm not the only one to point these things out; John Granger in his book "The Hidden Key to Harry Potter" devotes a whole chapter to alchemy in HP. And we have seen a whole series of posts on the subject, "Harry IS the Philosopher's Stone". Too right he is! 
 
In view of all this it can't be a great surprise when I assert that the archway with the veil in OoP is the Gate of Saturn. How can it not be? We know Sirius went through there and that this meant his death.
 
In alchemical tradition the pilgrim passes through 4 initiations before passing through the Gate of Saturn. They are Mercury, Venus, Mars, and Jupiter. Harry has passed through three of them. Mercury is his association with Hermione - the female form of Hermes, the Greek equivalent of Mercury. Mars is the will - Harry has pitted his will against Voldemort in GoF and won. His willpower is greater than Voldemort/Lucifer. Jupiter is the leader of the gods and the Jupiter initiation means the pilgrim has shown leadership on the path of liberation. Harry clearly shows great leadership potential in Dumbledore's army.
 
Just an aside here - the beauty and the elegance of HP is supreme in describing the formation of DA, as it conforms absolutely precisely to the classical conditions for accepting a leadership role in bringing liberation to others: there has to be that modesty and surprise and feeling of unworthiness that one is chosen for this role. "Who, me? I'm no better than anyone else. What do I know that can help others? I'm just lucky." That scene brings tears to my eyes. But I digress.
 
Then there is Venus. This is obviously Love. This is what Harry has so much of! And here I point once again to the amazing "coincidence" of the locked room in the MoM and the locked room (on the fifth day!) in the Alchemical Wedding of CRC, where "Lady Venus" lies asleep. Two locked rooms, two rooms where Love reigns. The difference is that CRC opens the door and actually sees Venus, but Harry doesn't; not yet. 
 
And so I say: so far HP conforms exactly to the ancient alchemical and Rosicrucian traditions. Why should it deviate in Books 6 and 7? I'll be shocked and heart-broken if it does. But I don't thinnk it will, and therefore I'm confident that Harry will somehow open that locked door, either physically or symbolically, and behold Venus. That will be the first four initiations successfully completed. And that will mean the Saturn initiation will come in the last book. Harry will pass through the Gate of Saturn. But, as Harry is the living Philosopher's Stone, this gate will not be the gate of everlasting death, but the Gate of Everlasting Life. 
 
The death referred to in the spiritual death of alchemy is the total neutralization of all aspects of the consciousness, followed by the awakening of a new consciousness that is all-embracing, omniscient, and divine. That consciousness is without an ego; it knows no self-interest. 
 
But here we come back to Venus. Once a pilgrim on this long path has seen Lady Venus in all her breathtaking beauty, he is seized by such an overwhelming compassion for fallen humanity that he will not and can not turn his back on humanity. He returns through the Gate of Saturn as one of the great brotherhood of the Teachers of Compassion, one of the Lohans as the Taoists call them, or the Boddhisatvas as the Buddhists call them. And the Christians call this group: Corpus Christi. 
 
Hence there is absolutely no need to feel sorry for "our beloved boy". "It will be a far, far better thing that he does, than he has ever done; it will be a far, far better rest that he goes to than he has ever known."*
 
Arya again:
>>We have been being trained for this since Book 1 when Dumbledore says, "Life is but the next great adventure." that helps us feel like Death of a person/character is not so much the end of living but the begining of liberation to *BE*.<<
 
Exactly!
 
Hans in Holland
 
* adaptation of the last line in Charles Dickens' "A Tale of Two Cities"; JKR's favourite last sentence.


---------------------------------
Want to chat instantly with your online friends??Get the FREE Yahoo!Messenger

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From talisman22457 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 13:29:24 2003
From: talisman22457 at yahoo.com (Talisman)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 13:29:24 -0000
Subject: OoP - GUILTY Dumbledore (was Dumbledore's true sorrow motives)
In-Reply-To: <bjbu5u+bsbh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjcnfk+isie@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80011

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "njelliot2003" <nelliot at o...> 
wrote:yahoogroups.com, "njelliot2003" <nelliot at o...> wrote:
Nicholas
Replying to Talisman's post 66983:

>> <snip> JKR is cruel to Harry, but surely even she could not be 
that cruel. <snip>  Masterful manipulation or plotting? <snip> it 
allows JKR to introduce a fascinating plot development> Well now 
that I'm done and I've read through what I've written I have to say 
that my post contains a lot more speculation than I thought I would 
need to rebut your arguments Talisman. C?st la vie. <snip> What is 
JKR thinking? (as she skips off the  bank - laughing!)


Talsiman, rather busy at the moment, sorting through dark artifacts 
in the Malfoy cache, takes time to note:

I'm sorry that you don't regard Rowling as a competent author.

Good writing has textual integrity that allows the competent reader 
to gather meaning through careful observation. By making 
comparisons, noting consistencies and inconsistencies, following 
cause and effect, etc. the reader can achieve an enhanced 
understanding of the text. This is called explication. 

Though readers should be able to advert to the text with confidence 
in all good writing, this is particularly essential for a work 
partaking of the mystery genre. 

There are readers who are passionately committed to a safe and 
twinkly Dumbledor (though you may find bluesqueak's #79453 
interesting).  These readers often rely on a great deal 
of "coincidence" or, like you, blame what they see as Rowling's 
artless plot devices, in exculpating Dumbledore or otherwise 
explaining a character's actions. 

However, only the poorest writer forwards the action by use 
of "coincidences" and  disjointed authorial interventions in the 
flow of the plot.  I not only trust my own assessment as to the 
existence of a coherent and probative text, but I have more respect 
for Rowling's talent than to dismiss her writing as accident or 
convenience.

As you note, your general view has previously been offered.  There 
being no sport or profit to gain from debating whether Rowling is 
mean or "just does it that way," I leave you to your understanding 
of the matter. 

My own view of Dumbledore's death-chamber role, which includes 
his "pure" motives, remains fairly consistent with my original post 
on this thread, though I have refined my consideration of the spell 
in use, as in my #75836.

Talisman, tossing aside a shrunken head, and going for the 
intricately carved chest. . . .

P.S. You might want to read the Administrative posts regarding 1)
snipping; 2) the use of "Me."






From entropymail at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 13:30:16 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 13:30:16 -0000
Subject: Albus Dumbledore and the Socks in the Mirror (of Erised)
In-Reply-To: <002e01c37443$8a032a80$1477d6d1@oldcomputer>
Message-ID: <bjcnh8+7kg8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80012

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tim Johnson Family"
<tkj_etal at b...> wrote:
> 
> Sandy, aka "msbeadsely" wrote:
> >  A world in which Dumbledore could expect to receive something as
> warm, fuzzy, and prosaic as socks for Christmas would be one which
> did not hang in the balance.  It would be a world in which he would
> not have to be wary of having his caring for others turned back on
> him.  It would be a world in which he would not have to sacrifice the
> happiness (or the very life) of "the boy who lived." <<<

Just wanted to mention something about the whole "socks" thing. JKR
apparently spends a great deal of time in some Spanish-speaking
country (sorry, I've forgotten which one!).  In Spanish, spelling the
English word s-o-c-k-s results in the phrase "Eso si que es!" which,
translated, means "That's it!"

Just another silly reason those socks may be important.

Entropy, who just read this somewhere and is passing it on, but takes
no real responsibility for this silly theory!




From talisman22457 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 14:16:54 2003
From: talisman22457 at yahoo.com (Talisman)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 14:16:54 -0000
Subject: Time, Repetition and the Uber-Dimension (was: Narrative Function
In-Reply-To: <200309061518.52212.silmariel@telefonica.net>
Message-ID: <bjcq8m+bla5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80013

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Carolina <silmariel at t...> 
wrote:
> > By the 'it happened twice' theory, as you both point out, if 
memory records only the facts the 'victim' knows, because the first 
set is erased, you'd better be careful when you Time Travel, or you 
will erase your own memory, not speaking of unexpected changes.
> silmariel

Talisman, hauling a sack of loot up out of the Malfoy's coal-shute, 
pauses a moment to say:

I don't hold the opinion that memory is erased or modified in time-
travel.  I have proffered the accruing of experience, which would 
include memory, from the outset. Hermione remembers what she is 
taught in each lesson, etc.

If this question is raised in reference to Harry's experience with 
the dementors by the lake, I encourage you to carefully re-read both 
instances.  In the first, Harry's senses are overwhelmed as the 100 
dementors  close in.  He is fading in and out of consciousness.  
Sounds are rushing in his ears.  He can't see well, or at times at 
all.  Snape (or fill in your favorite benefactor) could have been 
doing the Dance of the Seven (grey) Veils, and he wouldn't have 
noticed.

Similarly, in the second instance, he is not aware of Snape at all, 
though we know Snape is close by.  The massive influx of dementors 
stand between Harry2 and whoever is on the other side.  After he 
produces Prongs, Harry2 can't take his eyes off the apparition.  As 
soon as Prongs dissolves, Harry2 turns to speak with Hermione. When 
he turns around again, Snape has already begun loading people onto 
the floating stretchers.

There is plenty of room for Snape (or whomever you like) to provide 
assistance that blends smoothly with the eventuality of Prongs. 

I have no commitment to any particular form of intervention, in 
fact, considering that Snape was tight with Fudge, is a Professor at 
Hogwarts and bears the Dark Mark, the dementors may well have 
recognized him as someone in authority, no matter who they were 
obeying the time.  Perhaps he only had to say, "stop." 

And then, because Harry lived to go back as Harry2, his Patronus 
was "always" a part of the experience.  Nothing needs to be erased. 

Talisman, wondering who Mundungus's fence is....
 





From wsherratt3338 at rogers.com  Sat Sep  6 14:34:10 2003
From: wsherratt3338 at rogers.com (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 14:34:10 -0000
Subject: Feelings on OoP
In-Reply-To: <bjbsca+cpfr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjcr92+ab03@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80014

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:

> 
> I honestly cannot read it through again.  Not yet.  I made it 
twice, 
> but now I just flip back and forth and look things up and read a 
> chapter or two, but not in order.  It is incredibly claustrophobic 
> (and I'm not, usually):  Sirius is closed up in the Black mansion, 
> and Harry is trapped first at the Dursleys and then inside his own 
> head.  He doesn't even have the occasional freedom of the skies; 
his 
> broom has been arrested.
>  
I read it once, and I think that'll be it for me.  I've read other 
people say that they disliked it at first but liked it better after 
they'd read it twice, three times, one person even FIVE times.  I 
don't know if it's really that the book's good qualities require 
this much reading, or that after enough repetition, one becomes 
numbed to all the distasteful elements.  I don't think that's the 
mark of a good book, frankly.  It's over 800 pages long; anyone who 
gets through that much verbiage is more than a superficial reader, 
and I think if a writer can't win her audience after that much 
attention and time, she's failed in her job.  I've gone this far, 
I'll read to the end of the series, but to be honest, JKR has gotten 
her last royalty from me.  I won't be pre-ordering the next book on 
Amazon like I did this time; I can wait to get a used copy.

Wanda





From foxmoth at qnet.com  Sat Sep  6 14:34:20 2003
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 14:34:20 -0000
Subject: "The Animagus Black!"
In-Reply-To: <002b01c37442$66e73d80$1477d6d1@oldcomputer>
Message-ID: <bjcr9c+g50t@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80015

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tim Johnson Family" 
<tkj_etal at b...> wrote:

> All right--it's possible that Bellatrix calls him the Animagus 
Black because that's what LV calls him. The question is, why 
would he? <

Because both "Sirius" and "Black" are ambiguous. If you heard 
someone shout "I was fighting Sirius Black!" you might think,  
"serious black what?"  One of the reasons for  military jargon is  
to avoid problems like that. 

There is a story that  the British term "air screw"  was dropped in 
favor of the American term "propeller" when an order was 
misunderstood and several air crew turned up instead of the 
propellers that had been requested. 

Pippin





From greatelderone at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 14:51:53 2003
From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 14:51:53 -0000
Subject: Professor Binns
Message-ID: <bjcsa9+dfuu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80016

Out of curiosity, but does anyone know why Dumbledore keeps Professor 
Binns around? I mean of all the bad professors(Snape, Trelawney and 
Binns) he is the least useful of the bunch while Snape is at least a 
competent and decent potions brewer, gives the kids exposure to a 
variety of personalities and is seemingly a loyal Dumbledore 
supporter who provides intelligence on Voldemort to Dumbledore while 
Trelawney through the use of her many predication makes the kids 
distrust things such as fate and destiny and is also sheltered by 
Dumbledore providing for him the occasional prophecy. However why 
does he have Binns around. The guy bores the students out of their 
skulls and usually fails to convey any of his knowledge to the 
students especially seeing how the information like the Goblin 
Rebellions and how the wizard world got started is quite important in 
figuring out why many of the non-human and half-human species act as 
they do.




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 15:17:48 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 15:17:48 -0000
Subject: "The Animagus Black!"
In-Reply-To: <002b01c37442$66e73d80$1477d6d1@oldcomputer>
Message-ID: <bjctqs+jgs0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80017

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tim Johnson Family" 
<tkj_etal at b...> wrote:
> 
> All right--it's possible that Bellatrix calls him the Animagus 
Black because
> that's what LV calls him. The question is, why would he? <snip> 
it's [a]derogatory term. Further evidence is the very low number
> of animagi. Yes, it's supposed to be difficult and dangerous to 
achieve, but
> it can't be THAT hard if smart fifth-year students and people like 
Rita
> Skeeter can do it. There's probably some other reason why people 
aren't keen
> to achieve that additional power.
> Anyway, Sirius is a very notorious wizard, and even Voldy, who 
hasn't been
> reading the papers for thirteen years, would probably speak of him 
by his
> name. When I talk about Britney Spears, I say Britney Spears, not 
The Young
> Singer and Entertainer Britney Spears.
> --RTJ

Laura:

But why would you talk about Britney Spears at all?  <grins-sorry, 
couldn't resist>

The way that horrible woman refers to Sirius sounds to me like a way 
of objectifying him, turning him into something non-human.




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Sat Sep  6 15:32:38 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 15:32:38 -0000
Subject: The other Blacks (was "The Animagus Black!")
In-Reply-To: <bjcr9c+g50t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjcumm+eokn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80018

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" <foxmoth at q...> 
wrote:
> Because both "Sirius" and "Black" are ambiguous. If you heard 
> someone shout "I was fighting Sirius Black!" you might think,  
> "serious black what?"  One of the reasons for  military jargon is  
> to avoid problems like that. 


Apologies if this posts twice--my browser did something funny the 
first time around, so I wasn't sure.

I had another theory about the comment, "the animagus Black." 

If it was written with a comma, it would read: "you know, the 
animagus, Black" as opposed to the other pesky animagi LV knows like 
Prongs and Wormtail (and perhaps others to be revealed?).

As it's written without a comma, I read: "the animagus Black, as 
opposed to the other Blacks who aren't animagi," i.e. Regulus or 
Andromeda.

We can pretty much assume LV knows Regulus is dead since Sirius and 
others know, and it was on LV's orders. More likely the comment could 
refer to Andromeda, who is presumably still alive as Tonks talks 
about her in the present tense when they are cleaning Harry's room.

Another point: someone on this thread mentioned that LV classifies 
people by their magical abilities that are important to him, thus 
Sirius is "the animagus". I would take this even farther to say that 
the Marauders and perhaps others who are animagi (i.e., the 
Longbottoms?) were succesful in defying Voldemort longer than their 
peers *because* of their animagi abilities. So LV is particularly 
interested in who has this ability and who doesn't.

Jen Reese




From tomatogrower88 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 16:01:03 2003
From: tomatogrower88 at yahoo.com (tomatogrower88)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 16:01:03 -0000
Subject: Professor Binns
In-Reply-To: <bjcsa9+dfuu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjd0bv+ps7n@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80019

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "greatelderone" 
<greatelderone at y...> wrote:
> Out of curiosity, but does anyone know why Dumbledore keeps 
Professor 
> Binns around? 

My answer:
I think that history is a subject taught by lecture (IMO the worst way 
to teach). I think if polled most members would say that history was 
the class they liked the least in school. JKR has used teacher 
stereotypes in her books. I have had teachers much like Binns. I am 
working on a MA degree. I had a class that was much like the History 
of Magic. The teacher would talk and talk and talk. I had three 
friends in the class we would take turns taking notes. The person 
taking notes would photocopy them for the rest of us. Then those of us 
who were not taking notes would finish homework for other classes. So 
I could relate to the students in Binns classes. I agree that this is 
sad. History of Magic is an important class. You can not know what is 
going on in the world without having knowledge of the past. So I think 
Binns is kept to show the steotypical boring teacher.

Myrth




From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 16:48:48 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 16:48:48 -0000
Subject: "The Animagus Black!"
In-Reply-To: <bjcr9c+g50t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjd35g+2esl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80020

> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tim Johnson Family" 
> <tkj_etal at b...> wrote:
> 
> > All right--it's possible that Bellatrix calls him the Animagus 
> Black because that's what LV calls him. The question is, why 
> would he? <
> 


hg's reply:
I think it also depersonalizes him.  He is "the Animagus" and not her 
cousin, Sirius.
hg.




From severusbook4 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 17:21:25 2003
From: severusbook4 at yahoo.com (severusbook4)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 17:21:25 -0000
Subject: Why the time turner stinks/Hermione's homework
In-Reply-To: <bjad88+knrr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjd52l+p0rl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80021

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003" <carolynwhite2 at a...> 
wrote:> > > > > 
> > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "severusbook4" 
> <severusbook4 at y...> wrote:
> > Hermione did use it for homework, that is why she was so exhausted 
> > all the time, it wasn't just the fact of adding 2 hours to her day, 
> > it was also the 2 - 3 hours she was adding for homework.  
> 
> CW replies:
> 
> Sevvie, can you give me a quote to back this up ? I didn't see any 
> indication she was using it to do her homework, only her classes. 
> Thanks.

Severus here:

O.K. this is my own interpretation, but it does seem to indicate that Hermione did use 
it for her homework as well as her classes.

Pg. 395 PoA US softback

"It's called a time turner," Hermione whispered "and I got it from Professor 
McGonagall on our first day back.  I've been using it all year to get to all my lessons."

This is Hermione talking about classes.  Then on the next page.

Pg. 395-396 PoA US softback

"I'd never, ever use it for anything except my studies...I've been turning it back so I 
could do hours over again, that's how I've been doing several lessons at once, see?"

Hermione is using the word "studies" indicating homework, and then uses the word 
"lessons" again to indicate classes.  The only thing she didn't use it for was more 
sleep, which she could have used.  But that is JMHO.  Feel free to tear it apart. And I 
think there is another reference but I can't seem to find it.  And sorry this took so 
long. 

Sevvie




From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Sat Sep  6 17:50:43 2003
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 17:50:43 -0000
Subject: Alchemy revisited: OOP prediction confirmed
In-Reply-To: <bf9ut7+7mcg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjd6pj+7od7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80022

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "J" <jdq53562 at a...> wrote:

> I  have also discerned many of 
> the same threads of thought on patterns and predictions.  I think 
that the fact that JKR seems to be following the true form and 
definition of an Epic with the septology means that there will be  
many classical "evolutions" or perhaps, milestones that will be found 
 in the HP universe.  Your theory is one of several that, I feel, may 
be superimposed to correlate with the past five books and to help 
> predict the remaining two. > Deep Thoughts, By Arya

Arya

I picked up your most recent response to Hans on the list, and went 
back to your original post (71509)to see what other theories you had 
compared with HP, but found no details !

Could you just mention the key ones you have been looking at ?

Thanks
CW




From sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 17:57:26 2003
From: sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com (sarcasticmuppet)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 17:57:26 -0000
Subject: Turncoat!Tonks (was: Aurors/Unforgiveable Curses)
In-Reply-To: <200309061258.23710.silmariel@telefonica.net>
Message-ID: <bjd766+k70e@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80023

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Carolina <silmariel at t...> wrote:
> 
> > --RTJ:
> << As it stands, Sirius's nearest blood relatives are the Malfoys, 
> the Tonkses, and Bellatrix Lestrange (ugh!). I think that even if 
> he doesn't have a will, the house will go to Harry--after all, not> 
> only is he Sirius's godson and wizard guardian, Harry once saved
> his life, which indicates a deeper attachment.>>
> 
> But deep attachments don't have much to say if there is not a will,
> why would Harry inherit G.Place if there isn't a last will? When 
was 
> Sirius made legal tutor for Harry? Aren't the Durdsleys his tutors?
> 
> I'm thinking on the kind of wills from Authors as Austen, Bronte or 
> Eliot. 
> 
> Are we sure Sirius could decide what to do of Grimmauld? The Blacks 
> could have add a clause stating specifically a condition for 
> inheritance: that the family properties would remain in the family, 
> here Bellatrix and Narcissa, or Andromeda if she has not been 
> specifically excluded, wich I doubt. 
> 
> He may have the granted right to use the house as only propietary 
> while he lived, I know Sirius states the house is his, but I know a 
> case like this and the user of the house instists the house is his, 
> and you have to be very close to the family to know it isn't. 
> 
> silmariel

Now me (sarcasticmuppet):
This occured to me, and I wondered why it had not been explored 
sooner.  There is NO proof that Sirius is even dead!  He/His body 
went through the veil, poof, right out of existence.  We have no 
reason to believe that Dumbledore told Fudge anything about Black, 
and even if he did, how could he prove it?  So the wizard lawyers or 
whoever handles the estate have no reason to give Grimmauld Place to 
anyone, because as far as they know, Sirius is still on the run from 
the law!




From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk  Sat Sep  6 18:25:36 2003
From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 18:25:36 -0000
Subject: The Greek tragedy of the Weasley family
Message-ID: <bjd8r0+mb3t@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80024

Hello all,

I'm getting rather fed up with the interpretation of Percy as nothing
more than a power-hungry bootlicker. It just makes him a trivial,
despicable and out-of-character toady, there has to be more to him and
the split in the family than that. The Sorting Hat made him a
Gryffindor, after all, and he's not IMO a bad person. So, I'm adding
another twist to the Weasley story to save him a bit of dignity...

One of the classic tragedies about civil disobedience is the story of
Antigone of Thebe. Her brother Polyneikes has tried to seize power in
the city of Thebe by starting a war and is killed. Their uncle Kreon
is made king and issues a decree that no one is to bury the fallen
attackers. Antigone, not wanting to leave her brother's corpse to the
vultures, disobeys the decree and is buried alive as punishment.

Percy's views of right and wrong has something of legal positivism in
them (IMO), the law must be obeyed because it is the law. You can't
disobey it just because you think it's wrong. You can't go against the
Ministry of Magic and undermine its authority just because you think
Voldemort is back. His position would be the one of Kreon, while the
rest of the Weasleys would side with Antigone and the right to rebel
against unjust laws and rulers.

And the tragedy is that both parties' values are right. Breaking the
law creates chaos, blind obedience to it is the stuff that
totalitarian regimes are made of. Right or Wrong is easier to resolve
than Right or Right. 

Or is Percy nothing more than a pompous toady? Am I reading too much
into the conflict when I want to put him inside a Greek tragedy?

Thoughts, comments? 

Alshain the Curious





From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk  Sat Sep  6 18:32:39 2003
From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Ivan=20Vablatsky?=)
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 19:32:39 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [HPforGrownups]Re: Alchemy: John Dee, Dijon and a question to Hans
Message-ID: <20030906183239.59751.qmail@web21506.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80025

In message 73023 (Jul 25) Iris wrote:

>>Dijon and Burgundy were alchemical centres during the 14th and the 15th
centuries. The Dukes of Burgundy used to protect alchemists, and some of
them had probably been initiated. From 1429 to 1474, there was also a
chivalry order, called the Order of the Golden Fleece. Some say that it was
also a hermetic order, I won't assert it myself. And in many churches,
castles or old mansions, there are alchemical symbols (sculptures,
tapestries, paintings). 

>>Now I'd like to ask Hans a question about the game between "Dijon" and
"John Dee". I read that alchemists used to play with words, that it was part
of their tradition. It was called "phonetic cabbala" if I remember well. Is
the "Dijon-john Dee game" an example? Are there other references of that
kind in HP? Thanks for your help.<<

Hans: Sorry it's taken so long. I've thought a lot about this question and
there are two interesting names that have alchemical/Rosicrucian
connections.

1. Firenze. (i.e. Florence)
Very alchemical and Hermetic! It immediately brings to mind Lorenzo de
Medici "The Magnificent" (1449-92), who got hold of the long lost Corpus
Hermeticum and had it translated from Greek into Latin by Marsilio Ficino
(1433-99). The Corpus Hermeticum is a sublime work of inestimable spiritual
value and majesty. It's about a gentleman named Hermes Trismegistus and his
discourses with some other chaps. One of them is Pymander, who symbolises
the new, omniscient consciousness that I've been writing about. Here again
the connection with Hermione.

I should also mention that Hermes is mentioned in the Fourth Day of the
Alchemical Wedding. The successful candidates to the Wedding are initiated
as Knights of the Golden Fleece at a ceremony during which they wash
themselves in a fountain. A lion is standing next to the fountain and he is
holding a tablet which starts with the words "I, Hermes, being the
primordial fount, flow forth here as a healing remedy.." This means that the
classical Rosicrucians were alchemists, Hermeticists and Gnostics.

Marsilio Ficino also wrote a book called, "On the Alchemical Art". Chapter 5
is called.... you guessed it... "The Philosopher's Stone"!

2. Paracelsus. (mentioned in PS in the chocolate frog cards)
Full name was Theophrastus Philippus Aureolus Bombastus von Paracelsus
(1493-1541).
He is mentioned in "The Alchemical Wedding". On the sixth day the successful
candidates enter the fourth floor of the Tower of Olympus and there they
find a great copper basin filled with yellow sand. An egg is buried in the
sand which is warmed. A large bird later hatches out. The copper basin is
square and on one of the sides the name of Paracelsus is inscribed. 

Paracelsus is also mentioned in a 1614 publication of the classical
Rosicrucians, the "Fama Fraternitatis RC". A whole paragraph is devoted to
him there, saying that Paracelsus was not a Rosicrucian but his work was
extremely valuable. He was prevented fromn doing his work properly by his
opponents.

There are undoubtedly more references in HP to all sorts of Alchemical
symbols and practices, but I'm not (yet) aware of them. 

All these works can be found on Internet. A book I have found particularly
helpful is "The Alchemical Wedding of Christian Rosycross - Esoteric
Analysis of Chymische Hochzeit Christiani Rosencreutz Anno 1459", by Jan van
Rijckenborgh. Vol 1 is ISBN 90 6732 058 7, Vol. 2 is 90 6732 078 1. I have
seen this book on the Amazon website.

Jan van Rijckenborgh has also written a book called "Dei Gloria Intacta". It
deals with the Path of self-initiation I have so often mentioned. Here's a
quote from the website: "In 'Dei Gloria Intacta' Jan van Rijckenborgh
announces the beginning of an entirely new phase. In clear language he
explains why the old religions and initiation systems no longer work and why
a new esoteric development is necessary today. He describes this spiritual
revolution and leaves us in no doubt that we stand before a concrete path of
initiation, which he explains using the symbolism of planets such as
Mercury, Venus, Mars and Jupiter." ISBN is 90 6732 118 4.

I hope I've been helpful to you and those who wish to research the
alchemical connections of HP.

Hans in Holland


________________________________________________________________________
Want to chat instantly with your online friends?  Get the FREE Yahoo!
Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk



From constancevigilance at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 18:47:28 2003
From: constancevigilance at yahoo.com (Susan Miller)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 18:47:28 -0000
Subject: Why the time turner stinks/Hermione's homework
In-Reply-To: <bjd52l+p0rl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjda40+9829@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80026

There is an ongoing discussion between Severusboo4 and Carolyn White 
about whether Hermione used the time-turner other than for attending 
class. Severusbook4 thinks she does:

> Pg. 395-396 PoA US softback
> 
> "I'd never, ever use it for anything except my studies...I've been 
turning it back so I 
> could do hours over again, that's how I've been doing several 
lessons at once, see?"
> 
> Hermione is using the word "studies" indicating homework, and then 
uses the word 
> "lessons" again to indicate classes. 

Constance Vigilance (me): I'm going to jump in here an disagree with 
Sev. I think Hermione is using the word "studies" to 
mean "education". If she had meant studying, as in homework, I think 
she would have used the British term "revising". I have to agree with 
Carolyn and say that I think Hermione is using the timeturner only 
for attending simulaneous lessons, and is using her own time for 
homework and studying.


CV





From gandharvika at hotmail.com  Sat Sep  6 18:49:45 2003
From: gandharvika at hotmail.com (Gail Bohacek)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 14:49:45 -0400
Subject: (FILK) They Don't See Them
Message-ID: <BAY9-F68YVRuGyLCz3j00046eec@hotmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80027

Rubber Soul Rocks!


They Don't See Them

(A FILK by Gail Bohacek to the tune of _You Won't See Me_ by the Beatles)

Midi is here:
http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Studio/7779/beatle10.html


Dedicated to my Fellow Filk Mavens


Harry (Ron, Ginny, Hermione and all the rest who couldn't see the 
thestrals):

When we all approached
The carriages
I saw at our coach
These images
Yes, I saw them there
I couldn't help but stare
But I became aware
That they don't see them  (We don't see them)
They don't see them  (We don't see them)

Heads shaped like dragons
Pupil-less eyes
With bat-like wings and
Reptilian hides
Just like skeletons
I wondered what my friends
Would think about them
But they can't see them  (We can't see them)
They can't see them  (We can't see them)

Year after year
Those coaches didn't need horses
They were all steered
And pulled by magical forces
I asked Ron what he
Thought of those things
But he couldn't see
Was he kidding?
Then Luna Lovegood
Said she also could
See where those creatures stood
Why can't they see them?  (We can't see them)
They can't see them   (We can't see them)

In Hagrid's class
He explained about the thestrals
We were aghast
In the forest these creatures dwell
People think thestrals
Are unlucky
But we heard him tell
Why few can see
They come into sight
When you've see someone die
Which then explains why I
Could only see them  (We can't see them)
I can see them  (We can't see them)


-Gail B.

_________________________________________________________________
Get 10MB of e-mail storage! Sign up for Hotmail Extra Storage.  
http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es




From marosifig at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 11:01:22 2003
From: marosifig at yahoo.com (marosifig)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 11:01:22 -0000
Subject: Angelina & George
Message-ID: <bjceq2+p7ja@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80028

Hi.

Recently I visited mugglenet, and read with surprise that Angelina 
and George supposedly began dating in OotP. (This statemente in 
written in "possible couples of book 6": Fred an Angelina aren?t a 
possible couple since she is with George now). I just wanted to ask, 
where in book five is that stated? Beacuse I clearly missed that!
Thanks!
Marosifig





From melpethaven at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 14:32:56 2003
From: melpethaven at yahoo.com (melpethaven)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 14:32:56 -0000
Subject: Watch out for those dentists!!!
Message-ID: <bjcr6o+1u60@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80029

First post after lurking for many months. I have enjoyed the posts. 
Could not resist putting forth this one. I do not understand what is 
T-BAY so if this falls there then I apologize. Middle age flushes 
affect the brain.
Anyway, after reading all the posts on Petunia and everyone thinking 
that she is the"late bloomer". Did anyone think about the Graingers? 
After all Hermione is a very powerful witch. Is it all recessive DNA? 
Is it a great granpapa or mama who had other gifts? We think that 
Harry's friends and the Dursley's are going to pay the price for 
being too close to the action. OK, what if Voldy goes after all those 
who participated in the MOM action? Who is the most vunerable? Best 
way to hurt children is to take out the parent. Best way to hurt 
Harry is to make him feel responsible. The parents most vunerable are 
the Graingers or are they? I wonder what a pair of pissed off 
dentists might suddenly develop in the way of latent skills. 
Especially if they are fighting for their lives or the life of their 
daughter. Next most vunerable would be the Longbottoms. But at least 
sane or insane they are wizard and witch. I think that JKR has plans 
for both the Dursleys and the Graingers as the latter is mentioned 
several times in the COS and in SS etc.

Frodo's Mom





From zanelupin at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 19:40:15 2003
From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 19:40:15 -0000
Subject: Professor Binns
In-Reply-To: <bjd0bv+ps7n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjdd6v+cr3r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80030

greatelderone asked:

>>Out of curiosity, but does anyone know why Dumbledore keeps 
Professor Binns around?<< 

Myrth answered: 

>I think that history is a subject taught by lecture (IMO the worst 
way to teach). I think if polled most members would say that history 
was the class they liked the least in school. JKR has used teacher 
stereotypes in her books. 
<snip> 
I agree that this is sad. History of Magic is an important class. 
You can not know what is going on in the world without having 
knowledge of the past. So I think Binns is kept to show the 
steotypical boring teacher.<

KathyK, who's had only one history teacher whose class she 
considered boring responds:

I think Dumbledore keeps Professor Binns around because he's not 
going anywhere.  Each year Dumbledore has to scramble to find a new 
DADA teacher.  Why make more work for himself by dumping Binns who 
is a guarantee to be there for as long as he's needed?  

Or maybe Dumbledore would feel badly about letting Professor Binns 
go.  The man died, became a ghost and still wants to teach.  What 
would he do without Hogwarts?  Perhaps Dumbledore just can't bear to 
hurt the ghost's feelings.  After all, he endangered Harry and the 
WW because he cared too much about Harry to tell him the whole truth.

KathyK (the above was a bit tongue-in-cheek if you couldn't tell <g>)




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Sat Sep  6 19:45:22 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 19:45:22 -0000
Subject: Feelings on OoP
In-Reply-To: <bjbsca+cpfr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjddgi+t81l@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80031

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> <snip>
> The first time I finished it I was sort of appalled; it was just so 
> incredibly bleak (that I had that "this can't be real" (canon) 
> reaction as well).  Harry and Sirius both seemed to have developed 
> personality disorders, and Sirius didn't even live long enough to 
> find his way out of his.
> <snip>
  It is incredibly claustrophobic 
> (and I'm not, usually):  Sirius is closed up in the Black mansion, 
> and Harry is trapped first at the Dursleys and then inside his own 
> head.  He doesn't even have the occasional freedom of the skies; 
his broom has been arrested.


Jen: That's exactly the word I thought of when reading OOTP--bleak. 
And it was an unceasing bleakness that permeated most of the scenes 
starting with the appearance of Grimmauld Place, to the basement of 
the MOM, then Umbridge's detentions in the surreal artsy-craftsy 
office, and finally back to the basement in the MOM (with the  
Forbidden Forst thrown in a few times).  

Finally, at the end, Harry emerges from the darkness to the sunshine 
by the lake, where he grieves for Sirius and, hopefully, all he's 
lost by being the *chosen* one.  Please let that be foreshadowing 
that Harry is through his "dark night of the soul" year! My emotional 
experience while reading OOTP was like going into a depression, then 
feeling a spark of hope at the end.


msbeadsley:
And I'm on board for 
> any theory that says that some part of Harry's OoP negativity was 
> actually Voldemort's serotonin shortage coloring Harry's 
perceptions 
> through that link.  I wonder if there's a vessel in the Bay...


Jen: 
Count me on board for this ship! 

Possible canon: The scene where Harry falls asleep by the fire and 
muses about the Confusing and Befuddlement draughts, "where the 
wizard is desirous of producing hotheadedness and recklessness..moste 
efficacious in the inflaming of the braine" and that leads to Harry 
wondering, "*why* did he know what Voldemort was feeling." I'm not 
sure how it all fits, but after reading that I definitely started 
wondering if Sirius was getting this draught somehow.

As for Harry, if exposure to a potion causes these reations, surely 
having LV and Snape poking around directly in his brain could produce 
an *undesirable* effect.  The greatest Dark Sorcerer in the world 
rearranging your thoughts? Inserting ideas? His essence mingling with 
yours?  Ugh--it's surprising Harry didn't act out more than he did.

Jen Reese




From ellyn337 at earthlink.net  Sat Sep  6 15:02:50 2003
From: ellyn337 at earthlink.net (mclellyn)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 15:02:50 -0000
Subject: The final solution
In-Reply-To: <20030905205327.54790.qmail@web21510.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjcsuq+s2qe@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80032

> jesmck wrote:
> >>I don't want (and can't picture) Harry to kill LV himself because 
it will take away whatever innocense the poor boy will have left.?
<snip> 
> Hans:
<snip> 
> I just can't understand that so many people still see HP just as a
> children's story. <more snipping> Could somebody please tell me why 
the sublime and supernal spiritual beauty of HP is not obvious to 
people?

Gadfly McLellyn writes: 

It occurred to me that how readers see the Harry Potter epic depends 
on where they are in their own personal development.  I think the 
best way to illustrate this is to use the Hindu? Chakra system.  It 
is based on centers up the spine of the body.  I first learned of 
Chakras from Joseph Campbell's "Power of the Myth" series.  I don't 
have the book so I am going to use the definition of Chakras from 
Carolyn Myss's book "Sacred Contracts".

The first Chakra has to do with family and survival.  Readers in this 
Chakra are focused on which house is better - Griffyndor vs Slyterin 
type thinking.

Second Chakra is sexuality and correlates to the readers who are 
dealing with sexuality issues.

Third Chakra is self-esteem and correlates to readers who can have 
their theories challenged without taking it personally.

Fourth Chakra is love and correlates to readers in the Shipping 
mindset.

Fifth Chakra is self-expression which correlates to the fanfic world.

Sixth Chakra is intellect and correlates to those readers who like 
intellectually picking apart the details of the story.

Seventh Chakra is the relationship to the divine (spirit).  That's 
where you are Hans, and why it is so clear to you that this is a 
spiritual story.

Now to the part of your theory where Harry goes through the veil is 
confusing to us in the western mode of thinking.  I'm wondering if it 
is a cultural misunderstanding.  The Veil in the USA is when your 
physical body has died, but your spirit and IMO your wisdom lives on 
(see my post 79480 Why the Veil AND Harry's power).  Joseph Campbell 
talks of the hero's journey and dying to your old self, but you do 
not have to physically die to accomplish that.  It is really your old 
ideas of the world die and you see with new eyes.  Slaying your 
dragon is what Joseph Campbell called it.  How ironic! <vbg>

Gadfly McLellyn










From tkj_etal at bellsouth.net  Sat Sep  6 17:46:58 2003
From: tkj_etal at bellsouth.net (Tim Johnson Family)
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 12:46:58 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] The other Blacks (was "The Animagus Black!")
References: <bjcumm+eokn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000d01c3749e$df6e2be0$bb74d6d1@oldcomputer>

No: HPFGUIDX 80033

Jen Reese wrote:
>If it was written with a comma, it would read: "you know, the
>animagus, Black" as opposed to the other pesky animagi LV knows like
>Prongs and Wormtail (and perhaps others to be revealed?).

>As it's written without a comma, I read: "the animagus Black, as
>opposed to the other Blacks who aren't animagi," i.e. Regulus or
>Andromeda.
<snip> More likely the comment could refer to Andromeda, who is presumably
still alive as Tonks talks about her in the >present tense when they are
cleaning Harry's room.
<snip> I would take this even farther to say that the Marauders and perhaps
others who are animagi (i.e., the Longbottoms?) >were succesful in defying
Voldemort longer than their peers *because* of their animagi abilities. So
LV is particularly >interested in who has this ability and who doesn't.

When it comes to "other Blacks who aren't animagi," there aren't any more
Blacks at all. It's stated, very decisively, that Sirius is the last of the
Blacks. Andromeda's name is Tonks. Regulus is dead. That's one of the things
that makes what she said stand out to me.
But, aha! More evidence that the Auror, Frank Longbottom, illegally became
an Animagus and never told his employer! Interesting if he was . . .  maybe
the Longbottoms are EVIL.
--RTJ





From tkj_etal at bellsouth.net  Sat Sep  6 17:56:24 2003
From: tkj_etal at bellsouth.net (Tim Johnson Family)
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 12:56:24 -0500
Subject: "The Animagus Black!"
References: <bjcr9c+g50t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001601c374a0$30cc7180$bb74d6d1@oldcomputer>

No: HPFGUIDX 80034

RTJ wrote:
> > All right--it's possible that Bellatrix calls him the Animagus
Black because that's what LV calls him. The question is, why
would he? < <

Pippin wrote:
>Because both "Sirius" and "Black" are ambiguous. If you heard
>someone shout "I was fighting Sirius Black!" you might think,
>"serious black what?"  One of the reasons for  military jargon is
>to avoid problems like that. >>>

"Animagus Black" is just as ambiguous. You could think, "Animagus Black?
what black animagus?"

RTJ wrote:
> > Anyway, Sirius is a very notorious wizard, and even Voldy, who
hasn't been reading the papers for thirteen years, would probably 
speak of him by his name. When I talk about Britney Spears, I say 
Britney Spears, not The Young Singer and Entertainer Britney Spears. > >

Laura:
>But why would you talk about Britney Spears at all?  <grins-sorry,
>couldn't resist> The way that horrible woman refers to Sirius sounds to 
me like a way of objectifying him, turning him into something non-human. >>>

I said Britney Spears because everyone knows who she is.  I was actually
thinking about my parents, who are terribly pop-culture illiterate (refuse
to watch TV). If I said "Avril Lavigne," he wouldn't know who I was talking
about, so I would have to qualify it ("y'know, that singer").  I say Britney
Spears, he knows who Britney Spears is.
If Bellatrix wants to objectify Sirius, then it follows that she feels
guilty about killing him.
--RTJ
 







From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 18:12:27 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 18:12:27 -0000
Subject: "The Animagus Black!"
In-Reply-To: <002b01c37442$66e73d80$1477d6d1@oldcomputer>
Message-ID: <bjd82b+furj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80035

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tim Johnson Family" 
<tkj_etal at b...> wrote:

> <snip>  LV sees Sirius in terms of strengths and weaknesses, OK, so 
> what are they? Sirius is a member of the Order, knows about 
> Wormtail, is an Animagus, and Harry's godfather. I'm sure Voldemort 
> thinks of him in those terms. <snip>

I beg to differ.  I think Voldemort calls Sirius the Animagus Black 
because Sirius's Animagus ability is the most obvious *magical* 
strength he has.  Voldemort has always been very intent on who has 
the most magic.  Canon for this follows:

In the Chamber of Secrets, Tom Riddle says:  "You think I was going 
to keep my filthy muggle father's name forever? <snip> No, Harry--I 
fashioned myself a new name, a name I knew wizards everywhere would 
fear to speak, when I had become the greatest sorcerer in the world!"

> <snip> Sirius being Harry's godfather. So the most logical thing 
> for Bella to say would be, "I was fighting his godfather!" But she 
> doesn't, leaving me to theorize that it's derogatory term. Further 
> evidence is the very low number of animagi. Yes, it's supposed to be
> difficult and dangerous to achieve, but it can't be THAT hard if 
> smart fifth-year students and people like Rita Skeeter can do it. 
> There's probably some other reason why people aren't keen to 
> achieve that additional power.

There may very well be some derogatory connotation to the term 
Animagus; but would Voldemort use it that way?  (He is, after all, 
comfortable possessing/manifesting as a snake.)  As for the low 
number of Animagi, I'm not sure that's true.  I think most of them 
don't register.  And I think it's also true that a lot of people 
don't become Animagi because it does take a great deal of work.

What is "people like Rita Skeeter?"  She is never portrayed as stupid 
or lacking ability; she's just nauseating and has no ethics.  She is 
also incredibly ambitious, willing to do whatever it takes to get a 
story.  I can easily imagine her completely obsessing about becoming 
an Animagus and doing nothing else until she achieved that goal; 
she'd know that it would mean she'd never have to depend on leaks or 
sources again.  She could literally be the proverbial "fly on the 
wall."

And the Marauders didn't just spend an afternoon mastering the 
ability; canon here, Lupin speaking:  "It took them the best part of 
three years to work out how to do it <snip>.  Your father and Sirius 
were the cleverest students in the school <snip>.  Peter needed all 
the help he could get.  Finally, in our fifth year, they managed it.  
They could each turn into a different animal at will."

The cleverest students in the school.  Imagine a pair of Hermiones, 
working together.  (Remember the Polyjuice Potion, something she 
pulled off at *twelve*?  Scary.)  I can't imagine *much* James and 
Sirius wouldn't have been able to accomplish, given each other and 
three years.

> Anyway, Sirius is a very notorious wizard, and even Voldy, who 
> hasn't been reading the papers for thirteen years, would probably 
> speak of him by his name. When I talk about Britney Spears, I say 
> Britney Spears, not The Young Singer and Entertainer Britney Spears.

I would probably refer to "that slapper Britney Spears."  <g>  (I 
hope that wasn't too rude; I just ran across use of the term as 
British slang meaning "a loose woman" and most of what I know about 
Britney Spears is how she dresses.)  And most of what Voldemort knows 
about Sirius is via Peter, who "needed all the help he could get." At 
what?  Becoming an Animagus.  Who did he get the help from?  James 
and Sirius.  That's my opinion, supported somewhat by canon, and I'm 
sticking to it.

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley"





From featheringstonehaugh at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 20:11:01 2003
From: featheringstonehaugh at yahoo.com (A Featheringstonehaugh)
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 13:11:01 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Responsiblity for Black's death  
In-Reply-To: <1062864248.13311.87046.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030906201101.31018.qmail@web20508.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80036

 I strongly disagree with  the idea that Dumbledore was responsible for Sirius' death. Sirius died because of how he lived; he was arrogant, impetuous, swaggering and bullyingly childish. In good times, these traits may be endearing.   In bad, they are irresponsible and dangerous. And the OOP was a chronicle of bad times. One might be tempted to defend his behavior given his long imprisonment, but remember - he behaved that way before his stint in Azkeban, but back in the good old days, his behavior was chuckled over and tolerated.  The "bad boy" image was then the stuff of Hogwarts legend. But times change and Sirius was incapable of growing up to meet the challenges of those changes  It's too easy to say that Sirius' confinement at Headquarters was the reason for his demise.  He was not in solitary confinement there; he was at the hub of Order activity and need never have been "lonely" from lack of companionship. He had plenty to do besides sit in his Mother's room with Beeky and
 sulk. What's more,  Sirius was an adult wizard, not a house elf incapable of disobeying his master's orders. DD could advise, direct, decree - whatever- but the fact remains that Sirius had freedom of choice and he chose to comply (however grudgingly) with DD's wishes .  I'd go so far as to say Sirius LIKED grumbling about his confinement.  It gave him the opportunity to paint himself as a victim and also as an "if only" hero..... "If only other people weren't stopping me, I'd whip that LV in a second."   Yeah, right.  Sounds  like a WW version of another wannabe hero growling, "Bring 'em on!"  from the safety of the homefront and massive security forces protecting his spoiled hindquarters. Sirius had an  inflated ego and that was his undoing. He gambled and taunted an adversary and he lost. Likewise it is too easy and sentimental to attribute the death to Sirius' devotion to Harry. That's what we fans of Harry want to believe.  That again, someone finally loves our boy so much he'd
 die for him.  Well, DD wasn't the only one not leveling with Harry. Why didn't Sirius explain what was happening and the reasons behind DD's thinking?  As his godfather - a position he seems to use readily enough when it's to his advantage and gives him a chance to throw his weight around -  he had an obligation to talk honestly to Harry.  The books are full of people confiding in one another, so it's not like this goes against some kind of WW Secrecy Code.  We know why the Weasley's didn't tell him - they honestly believed Harry was too young and the situation too dangerous for Harry to know. We heard them verbalize those reasons. They made a judgement call and stuck with it.  But notice that we didn't hear Sirius, the one person with real standing to do so,  saying those protective things. What we DID hear was Sirius offering vague advise about not doing magic and being polite but then goading the boy by comparing him to his father. Being surly and antagonistic to the very person
 the Order is fighting to protect. Some godfather.    
 
Sirius died of an overdose of hubris and no one was responsible for that but Sirius himself.   
 
AF 


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From vecseytj at tampabay.rr.com  Sat Sep  6 20:11:10 2003
From: vecseytj at tampabay.rr.com (vecseytj)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 20:11:10 -0000
Subject: The Greek tragedy of the Weasley family
In-Reply-To: <bjd8r0+mb3t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjdf0u+4h2n@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80037

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "alshainofthenorth"
<alshainofthenorth at y...> wrote:
> Hello all,
> 
> I'm getting rather fed up with the interpretation of Percy as nothing
> more than a power-hungry bootlicker. It just makes him a trivial,
> despicable and out-of-character toady, there has to be more to him and
> the split in the family than that. The Sorting Hat made him a
> Gryffindor, after all, and he's not IMO a bad person. So, I'm adding
> another twist to the Weasley story to save him a bit of dignity...
> 
> One of the classic tragedies about civil disobedience is the story of
> Antigone of Thebe. Her brother Polyneikes has tried to seize power in
> the city of Thebe by starting a war and is killed. Their uncle Kreon
> is made king and issues a decree that no one is to bury the fallen
> attackers. Antigone, not wanting to leave her brother's corpse to the
> vultures, disobeys the decree and is buried alive as punishment.
> 
> Percy's views of right and wrong has something of legal positivism in
> them (IMO), the law must be obeyed because it is the law. You can't
> disobey it just because you think it's wrong. You can't go against the
> Ministry of Magic and undermine its authority just because you think
> Voldemort is back. His position would be the one of Kreon, while the
> rest of the Weasleys would side with Antigone and the right to rebel
> against unjust laws and rulers.
> 
> And the tragedy is that both parties' values are right. Breaking the
> law creates chaos, blind obedience to it is the stuff that
> totalitarian regimes are made of. Right or Wrong is easier to resolve
> than Right or Right. 
> 
> Or is Percy nothing more than a pompous toady? Am I reading too much
> into the conflict when I want to put him inside a Greek tragedy?
> 
> Thoughts, comments? 
> 
> Alshain the Curious

Hello Alshain,  I would say reading between the lines, and finding a
whole new story is more acurate.  I'm glad You can like Percy. We all
have characters in Potterverse that we for some reason are drawn to. 
I love reading everyones ideas, and the differneces, between us all. 
I must say (IMO) the idea of a Greek tragedy; and Percy as Antigone is
a streach, because Antigone was not just concerned about the birds
picking her brothers bones it was his very soul that she was concerned
about.  She didn't want him to never rest in peace, so I also took
Antigone as expressing more of a religous motivation.  She was obeying
her religous, laws, not the kings law.  

In comparsion, Percy was laughing at Fudges poor jokes, and acting the
baffoon.  I can't see where he is helping anyone here except himself.
 But, I am going to go and re-read the DA' Army, chapter in DD office.
  I'm missing the part where Percy is upholding the law.  He seems to
be enjoying Harry's distress, and DD conflict with Fudge.  He is so
excited he has ink on his nose.  At the very least he should be upset
that his Headmaster (someone he used to admire) is cracking up (or so
he *says*)  Where is his compassion?  I don't want to rain on your
Greek tragedy parade, 'cause I really really like it.  But, I see
Percy *enjoying* hurting others too much to call him Antigone.    

Thanks  Tj  who is going to go and re-read Antigone. :)




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Sat Sep  6 20:25:36 2003
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 20:25:36 -0000
Subject: OoP - GUILTY Dumbledore (was Dumbledore's true sorrow motives)
In-Reply-To: <be0fvh+sjhe@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjdfs0+ee6c@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80038

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "talisman22457" 
<talisman22457 at y...> wrote:

> Evidence for the Prosecution:
> (All cites from OoP unless otherwise noted)
> 
> I. The Nature Of Lies is an important theme that informs OoP, 
> probably worthy of a separate post, but consider some 
examples:
<snipped>
>  6.) Dumbledore is the biggest liar of all. 
>  
>      Dumbledore has always been willing to lie, e.g. "It was only 
> when he was back in bed that it struck Harry that Dumbledore 
might  not have been quite truthful." (SS 214)
> 

In my tradition, a lie is  forbidden   if it is used to gain
something 
from another person that they would not be willing to give you 
otherwise. 

I don't know that Dumbledore thinks the same way, but you don't   
have to subscribe to any sort of "new" morality  in order to 
consider that there's a moral difference between fibbing about 
your desire for socks and lying after you have given your word to 
not to lie. 

 Dumbledore never promised that he would be telling Harry the 
whole truth in PS/SS, in fact he specifically said there were  
questions he could not  answer. The fact that the readers may be 
frustrated by Dumbledore's refusal to reveal more about his 
plans has nothing to do with whether Dumbledore is a moral 
person. Dumbledore did not ask Harry to believe that  he wasn't 
withholding anything relevant to the situation, so how does the 
fact that he did so violate Harry's trust?

*Harry*  accepts the judgement that there are things that he does 
not need to know. He may find it maddening, frustrating, baffling 
and ultimately impossible to keep his curiousity in bounds, but 
he never demands that Dumbledore, or anyone else, tell him any 
more than they think they should. 

 He does ask Snape "What's in the Department of Mysteries?" 
and many other questions, but he accepts that Snape is 
unwilling to answer some of them. Harry doesn't, for example, 
say that he is not going to study Occlumency untill  he gets a 
satisfactory explanation of what is going on. Instead, he 
childishly pretends that what he learns by stealth won't hurt him.

 Dumbledore's explanation, when we finally get it,  is necessarily 
obscure, but not because he wanted Harry to be a dupe.   No, 
Dumbledore doesn't state outright, "Voldemort knows I love you."  
Old school Brits don't find it easy to say stuff like that. And 
Rowling doesn't want him to say it because "I love you" are three 
of the corniest words you can write.

So Dumbledore tries to explain awkwardly that  "if" Voldemort 
knew about  the emotional connection between himself and 
Harry, he feared that Voldemort would exploit it. This is 
circumlocution; of *course* Voldemort knows about the 
connection, and always meant to exploit it.

Dumbledore doesn't explain, because Harry has already been 
told by Snape, that  he feared the  Dark Lord would gain  access 
to information in Harry's mind regardless.  But this is the reason 
that Dumbledore *couldn't*  write Harry a letter and explain the 
prophecy, or let McGonagall or anyone else make the 
explanations for him.  This is not speculation, it's right there in 
the text (533)

"The important thing is the Dark Lord is now aware that you are 
gaining access to his thoughts and feelings. He has also 
deduced that the process is likely to work in reverse; that is to 
say, he has realized that he might be able to access your 
thoughts and feelings in return--"

This point  seems to have caused more confusion to readers of 
Phoenix than any other. 

Dumbledore's plan didn't depend on Harry being unhappy or 
ignorant. It  *did* depend on being able to keep information 
secret from Voldemort. Harry's isolation was a foreseen but 
incidental consequence of that. In much the same way, Sirius's 
unhappiness at Grimmauld Place was incidental,  an 
unavoidable consequence of the plan, not the essence of it.

 Once it was discovered that Harry had another way to banish 
Voldemort from his mind, Dumbledore was willing to tell Harry 
everything, and only sorry that his own mistakes had prevented 
him from doing so sooner. 

 Harry has been willing to sacrifice his own life to stop Voldemort  
since Book One, so why would Dumbledore think that Harry 
would be unwilling to carry out his role as a 'weapon' if it were 
explained to him? That cannot be the reason for Dumbledore's 
silence. On the contrary, Dumbledore knew that Harry would 
willingly shoulder the burden, and that, paradoxically, was the 
reason for his silence. Normal wizard kids dream of being a 
Quidditch player or a Tri-wizard champion or an Auror.  
Dumbledore wanted Harry to have that chance.

And why would Dumbledore think Sirius needed to die in order to 
give Harry a reason to resist the Dark Lord? Harry is already 
thoroughly motivated by the death of his parents.

It is Rowling, of course, who is ultimately responsible for Sirius's 
demise, and she killed him, IMO, not to give Harry a fresh reason 
to hate Voldemort, which he hardly needs, but to give Harry a 
new motive to hate Snape. 

I am sure it is absolutely essential for the plot that Snape and 
Harry do not reconcile too soon.  But Harry is getting to the age 
where he ought to  realize that Snape's bad manners are 
Snape's problem, not Harry's, and he also knows now that the 
emnity between his father and Snape was at least mutually 
deserved. By making Harry blame Snape for Sirius's death, 
Rowling creates new difficulties between them, and also handily 
reverses the situation she set up in Book One. Before, Snape's 
hatred of Harry was unjustified, now the shoe is on the other foot.


Talisman:
> (Small rant here where I say that consigning Harry to 10 years 
of  child-abuse has more to do with Dumbledore's discomfort at 
being  around someone he is "using" than the fact LV might 
come back in 10  years. (835)  In 10 years Harry is at Hogwarts 
and the "Petunia pact" only protects him a few months or weeks 
out of the year.) <

Huh? Dumbledore didn't know when Voldemort would come 
back.  Also, both Dumbledore and Voldemort speak  as though 
the protection applies to Voldemort's servants as well, many of 
whom are still at large and undetected.

>    1) Contrary to what I've seen posted in the OoPFaq, Snape 
NEVER  searches the forest.  Dumbledore merely "says" (if we 
can trust him) that Snape "intended" to search for Harry. (830) 
And, he only "intends" that after sending the OoP to the M.O.M.
> 
>       Why would Snape assume Harry was at M.O.M.?  Umbridge 
went  into the forest.  Umbridge remained in the forest until 
Dumbledore  fetched her.  Why wouldn't it be MUCH more likely 
that Harry was  being assailed by 
Umbridge/centaurs/giants/werewolves/spiders/etc. 
> when he didn't come out soon enough to suit Snape? <<

It would. That's why Snape intended to search for him there. But  
Harry told Snape that  "he" had Sirius at the place where it's 
hidden.  Snape knows what that means, and also that Voldemort 
has been trying to lure Harry into the Department of Mysteries for 
months.  But he also thinks that Umbridge has Harry well in 
hand, so it doesn't immediately occur to him that Harry is at the 
MoM.
> 
>  Snape has special ways of communicating with OoP 
members (830), surely that includes Dumbledore? Why is 
Dumbledore just a little too  late arriving at Grimmauld Place?  
Just after Sirius left. (831)<

Why should it include Dumbledore? That would be a security 
risk, especially with Dumbledore wanted by the MOM. We've 
often remarked on the list that The Dark Mark is a danger to the 
Death Eaters.

 You seem to be overlooking that Snape contacted the Order 
twice. The first time, immediately on leaving Umbridge's office, 
he ascertained that Sirius had not been captured. AFAWK, he did 
nothing further at that point. The last he saw, Umbridge had 
Potter and his idiot friends well in hand, so there's no reason for 
Snape to think that  Harry is in any position to run off to the 
Ministry. 

Snape is on probation, so he probably doesn't think it's a good 
idea for him to go back to Umbridge's office any time soon.  He 
probably doesn't realize that Harry and his pals have gone 
anywhere until somebody discovers the hexed students in 
Umbridge's office, and who knows how long that took.

 Then Snape would have to get them to the hospital wing and it's 
only after the IS are in some condition to be interrogated that 
Snape can learn that Harry and his friends got Umbridge to go to 
the forest. He still doesn't know that none of them have come 
back. 

The other Gryffindors wouldn't be very anxious to let Snape know 
that Harry and his friends were  AWOL, and nobody cares about 
Luna, so it probably takes Snape a while before he's sure that 
they're missing and not just hiding up in the castle somewhere.

Snape intends to go to the forest and look for them, but before 
doing that he realizes that Harry could very possibly have gone to 
the Ministry. So *then* he gets in touch with the Order again, and 
sends everybody but Sirius to rescue Harry. Now, since the 
Order goes at once to the Ministry, and presumably notifies 
Snape that Harry and his friends are there, Snape never needed 
to search the forest at all. 


> How long did it take to interrogate Kreacher (assuming that 
was even 
> necessary)?  Why is Dumbledore so tardy to the party? 
> 
> No matter, he behaves badly enough when he arrives.
> 
> V. Dumbledore's guilty behavior at the M.O.M.
> includes his late arrival (OoP been fighting for 5 pages). 
> 
> But, he dashes down the steps to the floor of the Death 
Chamber, and 
> almost instantly neutralizes the Death Eaters. (805)
> 
> Oddly, "[o]nly one couple were still battling." (805)  Bellatrix
and 
> Sirius.  Bellatrix misses (with what is apparently a stunning 
spell) 
> and then . . . JK drops to a new, one sentence paragraph, for 
the 
> crucial shot.
> 
> "The second jet of light hit him . . ."
> 
> The jet is the subject of the sentence.
> The person who fired the shot, and the color of the jet, are 
> mysteriously missing from the sentence. 

The after-image of a red light is green. If the second curse was 
fired in quick succession, it's possible you wouldn't be able to 
tell what color the second one was. 

Harry was looking at Sirius, so he didn't see Bella fire the shot. 
But why would Bella taunt Harry "I thought you had come to 
avenge my dear cousin," if she hadn't killed Sirius herself?

I don't read the description as Dumbledore instantly neutralized 
the Death Eaters. Dumbledore shows up and one of the DE's 
immediately tries to run. Dumbledore pulls him back. The DE's,  
except Bella, stop their duels, watching while Sirius and Bella 
battle. Then Sirius falls, and Lupin seizes Harry. 

The other DE's have not been rounded up yet. The flashes and 
bustling Harry sees could be  other Order members exchanging 
fire with Bella, her trying to keep Dumbledore from rounding up 
the other DE's, them still trying to escape, and finally Kingsley 
trying to continue Sirius's duel. 

> Harry sees Sirius hit and leaps down the steps (compare 
>Neville 
> coming down 808) before Sirius, who is on the dais (804), falls 
> through he archway.(806) Remember how Dumbledore 
>controlled Harry's  fall to the Quidditch field in PoA? hmmmm. 
<snip>
> 
> Moreover, Dumbledore is fast on the draw. (814)  But he 
doesn't try  to shield/deflect Sirius from falling through the veil. 
> 

It's not going to help if Sirius is already dead. 

> Dumbledore is right by the dais.  Dumbledore doesn't offer 
comfort  to Harry.

Er, he's got  Bella and the DE's to deal with, only "most" of whom 
are immobilized by invisible ropes.  Lupin has Harry safe until 
Harry breaks away. Dumbledore can't pursue Harry until he's 
rounded up the rest of the DE's and put the anti-apparition 
charms on them. That is presumably not the work of a moment. 
There are also Neville and four other children to be concerned 
about, one of whom is seriously injured. 

 Anyway, how the  !@#$ do you comfort somebody for the death 
of the closest thing to a parent they've ever known?

 Dumbledore wisely doesn't try, even later when Harry is in his 
office. He is  accepting of Harry's rage and grief, hard as it must 
be for him to watch Harry suffer. He only once shows how tough 
it is, when Harry finally challenges him about keeping Sirius 
locked up.

 As for Sirius, he was not confined against his will, or only to 
keep the MOM capturing him. It is clear from Draco's "dogging" 
remark that the Malfoys  were already aware that Sirius and Harry 
were close. That was in September, *long* before Kreacher's 
supposed betrayal. Dumbledore wanted Sirius safe so that the 
Death Eaters couldn't  use him as Harry-bait. Sirius would 
understand that it wasn't only his life at stake. 

In short,  I think it's a stretch to say that Dumbledore engineered 
Sirius's death or had anything to gain by it. I will allow that 
Dumbledore did do things that he knew would cause Harry to 
suffer. But I see no proof that he did this for any reason but the 
one he gave: to keep Harry and other innocent people alive.

The thing Dumbledore did which caused Harry to suffer most, 
delaying to teach him Occlumency, he did for the sake of Harry's 
comfort. If Dumbledore had known that all he had to do was let 
someone close to Harry  die in order to develop Harry's power, 
why would he have bothered having Snape teach Harry 
Occlumency in the first place? 

Assuming Dumbledore deliberately arranged Sirius's death puts 
more holes in the plot than it takes out, IMO.

Pippin





From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sat Sep  6 20:26:18 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 20:26:18 -0000
Subject: Alchemy revisited: OOP prediction confirmed
In-Reply-To: <20030906132413.83176.qmail@web21511.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjdfta+coub@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80039

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Ivan Vablatsky 
<ibotsjfvxfst at y...> wrote:
> In message 71509 (Jul. 18) --- Arya wrote: 
> >>I think that the fact that JKR seems to be following the true 
form and definition of an Epic with the septology means that there 
will be many classical "evolutions" or perhaps, milestones that will 
be found in the HP universe. 
>  
> >>Hans' theory is one of several that, I feel, may be superimposed 
to correlate with the past five books and to help predict the 
remaining two. Unfortunately, I have to say, that all of them that I 
have studied and compared to HP, seem to be leading towards the death 
of our beloved Boy Who Probably Will Not Live. :-( Personally, I 
sooooo, do not want this to be so. I love Harry like a true person 
and would mourn his death as surely as I would mourn a living 
breathing soul). 
>  
> >>However, we are repeatedly told by JKR in cannon that there is no 
coming back from the dead to return to life so I think that when he 
does die in Book 7, he will remain--Beyond the Veil.<< 


  
> Hans:
> If HP is a window on to the real Path of Liberation as taught by 
all the historical great spiritual leaders, and I think it is, then 
Harry's journey is exactly the opposite of what you state, and our 
beloved boy needs no mourning from us!
>  

<heavily snipped>

Geoff:
I fear that I must disagree with Hans that Harry Potter is a window 
to the real Path of Liberation as outlined in his posts. If there is 
evidence pointing to such a route, it is the evidence which directs 
readers to Christian belief.

Let's consider some of the things which crop up. In the conversation 
between Harry and Dumbledore at the end of PS (p.216 UK edition):

"'But why couldn't Quirrell touch me?'
`Your mother died to save you. If there is one thing Voldemort cannot 
understand, it is love. He didn't realise that love as powerful as 
your mother's for you leaves it's own mark. Not a scar, no visible 
sign
 to have been loved so deeply, even though the person who loved 
us is gone, will give us some protection for ever. It is in your very 
skin
..'"

This echoes the very deepest Christian belief. Our world is a fallen 
one and many events are orchestrated by the devil who, like Voldmort, 
cannot understand selfless love and believes that because of the 
wrongdoing we are all guilty of, we are unable to reach God. Because 
he took on human guise in the form of Jesus, he died to save us. The 
difference with Lily's sacrifice and that of Jesus is that to gain 
the protection, we have to acknowledge what he did on the cross and 
in the resurrection but, if we do and accept him into our lives, it 
leaves a mark ? not a visible sign but evidence in our life that we 
belong to God and know his presence.

And then again, a well-worn quote from COS (p.245 UK edition):

"'Yet the Sorting Hat placed you in Gryffindor. You know why that 
was. Think.'
`It only put me in Gryffindor,' said Harry in a defeated 
voice, `because I asked not to go in Slytherin
'
`Exactly', said Dumbledore, beaming once more. `Which makes you very 
different from Tom Riddle. It is our choices, Harry, that show what 
we truly are, far more than our abilities.'"

This applies in respect of  what I said in the previous passage. 
Becoming a Christian is a choice. We are not born Christian, we are 
not Christians because our family are or because we go to church. It 
is because we are faced with a choice like Harry's ? to follow the 
Slytherin path, ie go the way of the world and the real world 
equivalents of Lord Voldemort or pick the true way as indicated by 
Jesus in John 3:16 and John 14:6. The latter verse indicates 
unequivocally the importance of making the right choice.

> Arya:
> >>We have been being trained for this since Book 1 when Dumbledore 
says, "Life is but the next great adventure." that helps us feel like 
Death of a person/character is not so much the end of living but the 
begining of liberation to *BE*.<<
>  

Geoff:
Dumbledore actually said:

"After all, to the well-organised mind, *death* is but the next great 
adventure." (PS p.215 UK edition).

Geoff:
To a Christian, one who has let Jesus Christ come into his or her 
life, death /will/ be the next great adventure. One perhaps 
approached with fear and apprehension but one which will lead to 
eternal life. Like Christians in the real world, Harry makes choices 
which he hopes will help him along the way; sometimes he messes up 
because of his own lack of understanding, patience or judgment, 
sometimes because he places to much reliance in the judgement of 
others. But, as we are protected by the love of God as expressed 
through Christ and the Holy Spirit, so Harry still has the protection 
given him by his mother. 

Stepping down from my pulpit, I too hope against hope that he will 
win through in one piece, because although only a character in a 
book, I have agonised with him, cheered with him and learned with him 
because he has brought back so many memories of the way things were 
when I was his age. Viva HP!





From rredordead at aol.com  Sat Sep  6 20:27:52 2003
From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 20:27:52 -0000
Subject: Latent Witch Petunia - Went to Hogwarts?
In-Reply-To: <f3.2f7f2b7f.2c8a784b@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bjdg08+fa40@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80040

*-Blue Eyes-* said:
I think that Petunia went to HOgwarts and maybe got bullied by some 
pure bloods or got hexed around alittle and couldn't take it. (snip)

Mandy again:
Yes I agree. I've been throwing that idea around today after posting 
yesterday.  

It would be wonderfully interesting if Petunia went to Hogwarts and 
was bulled terribly for being a mudblood. It would be possible too if 
she was sorted into Slytherin and she seems to be around the same age 
group as Lucius Malfoy and that 'gang of Slytherins' who all went on 
to become DE's. I'm sure they made her life hell.  She could have 
quit at 16 and gone on to muggle school where she fit it better and 
met Vernon, and denied she ever was a witch.
Just a thought.





From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 21:03:01 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 21:03:01 -0000
Subject: Weasley nationality WAS Re: Seamus and the Weasleys
In-Reply-To: <bjcevt+66jg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjdi25+3cm2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80042

Jeff:

> >    Oh, I agree that having ginger hair doesn't make a person 
full-
> > blood paddy, but people seem to expect it, don't they? I know I 
> > seem to run into that misconception myself, being redhaired and 
of 
> > Irish blood as well. :)
> >    I agree the Weasley family could be a few generations removed 
> > from Ireland. Maybe their original family name is O' Weasel? :) 
> > They would have more common Irish names, but living in England, 
> > they might want to sound more English. 
> 

Pip!Squeak
> Or they could be an old English Catholic family. That would 
explain 
> the large family, the poverty, and the sneers of the Malfoys (who 
> would never dream of placing principle over money and self 
interest).
> 
> It's not my idea; it was floated on the list about nine months 
back 
> and I can't remember who suggested it. 

> But English Roman Catholic would fit the Weasley's to a tee. A 
> family history of principle above ambition - the story of Arthur 
> Weasley's life.

> So the Weasley's are probably English. Old English. Very old 
> English, probably so old they are Celtic or British, rather than 
> Saxon. Arthurian English, which is a mixture of England, Wales and 
> part of Scotland (plus occasional visits to Ireland to nick 
> cauldrons). ;-)
> 
> Like Ollivander, and his sign showing that his family were making 
> wands before the Romans invaded, never mind the Normans.
> 
> An old, old family.
> 
> Descended from whom?


Sarah:
I completely agree with Pip!Squeak on this point.  Plus, I always 
thought that the red-hair gene is originally Scottish/Old English, 
and the red-hair in Ireland came from Scots who immigrated to 
Ireland.  My half-Irish grandmother, and ALL the Irish friends I 
have, have dark brown hair.  And freckles.  Plus, whenever I think 
of red hair and the UK or Ireland, I immediately think of the 
Duchess of York and all those weight-watcher commercials here in the 
US.  Or Queen Elizabeth I.  (She was a red-head, and very, very 
English.)  I've always assumed that red-hair or white blonde hair 
was common in England before the Normans with their French brown 
hair came and invaded.  We've got three pure-blood families that we 
know of: the Malfoys, the Blacks, and the Weasleys.  The Blacks go 
back to the Middle Ages, and their family motto is in French, so my 
guess is that they came to England along with the Normans, or 
shortly thereafter.  The Malfoys seem to be from the Anglo-Saxon 
invasion with their extremely light hair.  Well, Anglo-Saxons with 
Latin first names.  Hm, that doesn't seem to fit very well, does 
it.  And the Weasleys seem to be one of the original inhabitants of 
England, which does go along with the Arthurian names that the 
Weasley children all have.  

Kirstini-you crack me up!  "Beware of the banshee, begorrah, 
begorrah!"  Love it.

And Jeff-I had my first sip of alcohol at the tender age of about 
4.  My dad had a coke and bourbon, and I thought it was just a 
coke.  I insisted on having some, and spit it right back out.  He's 
given me alcohol whenever I wanted it since.  (Much to my  mother's 
chagrin.)  He let me have some of his beer when I was about 12, and 
my mother started shrieking "Take it away from her!"  At about 13 or 
so, I'd have some wine with the family at special occassions.  And I 
live in the US.  

Sarah




From iris_ft at yahoo.fr  Sat Sep  6 21:29:00 2003
From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 21:29:00 -0000
Subject: [HPforGrownups]Re: Alchemy: John Dee, Dijon and a question to Hans
In-Reply-To: <20030906183239.59751.qmail@web21506.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjdjis+io8r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80043

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Ivan Vablatsky 
<ibotsjfvxfst at y...> wrote:
> In message 73023 (Jul 25) Iris wrote:
> ?
> >>Dijon and Burgundy were alchemical centres during the 14th and 
the 15th
> centuries. The Dukes of Burgundy used to protect alchemists, and 
some of
> them had probably been initiated. From 1429 to 1474, there was 
also a
> chivalry order, called the Order of the Golden Fleece. Some say 
that it was
> also a hermetic order, I won't assert it myself. And in many 
churches,
> castles or old mansions, there are alchemical symbols (sculptures,
> tapestries, paintings). 
> ?
> >>Now I'd like to ask Hans a question about the game 
between "Dijon" and
> "John Dee". I read that alchemists used to play with words, that 
it was part
> of their tradition. It was called "phonetic cabbala" if I remember 
well. Is
> the "Dijon-john Dee game" an example? Are there other references 
of that
> kind in HP? Thanks for your help.<<
> 
> Hans: Sorry it's taken so long. I've thought a lot about this 
question and
> there are two interesting names that have alchemical/Rosicrucian
> connections.
<big snip> 
 
> I hope I've been helpful to you and those who wish to research the
> alchemical connections of HP.
> 
> Hans in Holland
> 
Thanks for your informations; I'm sure that Alchemy is a huge key of 
the HP series.

Iris, back to school after a nice travel to... Florence!
 
 
_____________________________________________________________________
___
> Want to chat instantly with your online friends?  Get the FREE 
Yahoo!
> Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk




From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 21:30:01 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 21:30:01 -0000
Subject: Book 6 Predictions (was: Predictions at Madison Square Garden)
In-Reply-To: <bjbg2t+8va8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjdjkp+l0v9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80044

>>>Kristini:
> But Ginny (and Arthur, who either you or das Remnant offered up 
for 
> sacrifice - sorry, I've got a bad history of deleting the wrong 
bits 
> of posts, so can't confirm) has already had a potential death 
kinda 
> situation. And, bearing in mind Talisman's recent comments 
aboutHarry 
> saying "I must lie" in PS, is Ginny's ability to lie convincingly 
> perhaps being flagged up for some major role, rather than just 
> getting her into trouble? Lying (as long as you do it towards some 
> noble end) has never been condemned as a punishable action in teh 
> Pottersverse. 

Sarah:
I actually just pegged Ginny for death because the boggart didn't 
appear as dead Ginny to Molly.  The boggart impersonated all the 
other Weasleys and Harry, but not Ginny.  Plus, Molly's comment that 
a Weasley is bound to get killed, and hence was born my prediction 
that Ginny (or Ron) will die before the end.  But then again, 
Molly's comment might end up to be true, and all the Weasleys 
miraculously survive.  I wasn't trying to suggest that JKR would 
insinuate that lying Ginny is bad by killing Ginny off.  I just 
thought that it would be an in-character way to off Ginny.  But if 
we're going for a JKR's-already-put-the-character-in-mortal-peril 
type thing, than Ron, Ginny, Hermione, and Harry are safe from 
getting killed off by JKR.  
Sarah




From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 21:45:54 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 21:45:54 -0000
Subject: Voldemort's attacks on Harry
In-Reply-To: <bjar8i+kb48@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjdkii+5bgl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80045

> "c.john":
> Why, oh why does Voldemort attempt to kill Harry in OOTP.
> 
> His first attempt to kill Harry resulted in his 'disappearance' 
for years. 
> 
> His second attempt (after he thought he'd overcome his previous 
problems with Harry) resulted in being on the wrong end of 'Priori 
Incantatem'.
> 
> He then spends the whole of OOTP trying to get hold of the 
prophecy, to allow him to understand his problems with Harry. Then 
after he fails, his response is to perform Avada Kedavra on Harry.
> 
> Is he stupid? How can he be sure the spell won't rebound again? 
And if he is sure he can kill Harry simply with Avada Kedavra, then 
why bother with the prophecy at all??
> 



Sarah:
Voldemort is extremely arrogant.  He continually discredits possible 
threats to him.  He underestimates Harry, and Dumbledore to an 
extent, and is sure that he will defeat anyone and anything that 
stands in his way.  He said he was going to kill Dumbledore (to 
Dumbledore's face, no less), and failed miserable in the process. 
True, it could have been false bravado, but it seems to be in 
character for Voldemort to be over-confident.  He also continually 
underestimates Harry.  He reminds me of Wille E. Coyote in the 
Looney Tunes cartoons: continually pursuing one goal, to kill off 
one person, and continually fails.  I think it might be that killing 
Harry is the one thing that Voldemort has ever failed at.  He was 
one of the brightest/most talented students to ever attend Hogwarts, 
and his knowledge of magic is second to none (if Dumbledore is to be 
believed).  He's never truly experienced failure before trying to 
kill Harry as a baby, and instead of thinking that maybe someone is 
more powerful than himself, he chalks it up to an accident.  PS/SS 
wasn't about killing Harry so much as it was about getting the 
stone.  Harry just got in the way.  Plus, Voldemort could ascribe 
that screw up to Quirrel, not himself.  Then in GoF, he 
underestimates Harry, and probably chalked it up to an accident 
again.  Now he's beginning to realize that Harry keeps thwarting his 
plans in OoP when Harry accidentally smashes the propechy.  
Voldemort probably ascribes Harry's escape this time to Dumbledore.  
Interesting that the only person that Voldemort fears was once a 
teacher and an authority figure of Voldemort's.  (Typical of a 
student/teacher relationship that went sour, Voldemort tries to 
prove that he's better than Dumbledore, and fails every time.)  

Anyway, the whole point of this was to say that Voldemort's believe 
in himself is absolute, and refuses to believe that anyone, save 
possibly Dumbledore, is anywhere near as powerful as he is.  
Considering that he meets his failures at Harry's hands, you'd think 
Voldemort would possible start to think that there is something to 
Harry.  But, true to Voldemort's over-confidence, he believes that 
everything that Harry does is an accident.
Sarah




From manawydan at ntlworld.com  Sat Sep  6 21:52:56 2003
From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan)
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 22:52:56 +0100
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Professor Binns
References: <1062864248.13311.87046.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <002401c374c1$3b1ef2e0$e87c0550@f3b7j4>

No: HPFGUIDX 80046

Myrth wrote:
>I think that history is a subject taught by lecture (IMO the worst way
>to teach). I think if polled most members would say that history was
>the class they liked the least in school. JKR has used teacher
>stereotypes in her books. I have had teachers much like Binns. I am
>working on a MA degree. I had a class that was much like the History
>of Magic. The teacher would talk and talk and talk. I had three

I'd have to disagree - history was very much my favourite subject _despite_
having a teacher who didn't just teach as you said, but wrote the notes on
the blackboard and we had to copy them down! But it didn't get in the way of
giving me a permanent fascination for the subject.

A good lecturer, of course (and I've had several of those) actually gets you
more rather than less interested as they go on...

>I could relate to the students in Binns classes. I agree that this is
>sad. History of Magic is an important class. You can not know what is
>going on in the world without having knowledge of the past. So I think
>Binns is kept to show the steotypical boring teacher.

Possibly the point is that in a school like Hogwarts which is designated as
a school "of Witchcraft and Wizardry" and whose curriculum has an
overwhelmingly practical bias, history of magic really _isn't_ that
important, and so the fact that Binns doesn't get his message across doesn't
really matter.

One point which does strike me about Binns is similar to a point that others
have made about Hagrid. Just as Hagrid doesn't start off by teaching the
_care_ of magical creatures - he's too wrapped up in teaching the _wonder_
of magical creatures, Binns isn't teaching the history of _magic_ -
developments in the techniques, spells, potions, etc; as far as we can see,
he teaches the history of the WW - goblin revolts, giant wars, wizard
rebellions, and so on.

But even so, I'd certainly be signing up for a NEWT with Binnsy!

Cheers

Ffred

O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon
Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion
Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri





From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 21:56:30 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 21:56:30 -0000
Subject: The Marauders Theory(Remus, Sirius, Peter, James)
In-Reply-To: <140.18737b5b.2c8a7c42@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bjdl6e+hvkm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80047

> *-Blue Eyes-*
Lupin was and is in the Order of the Pheonix and he's the only 
good Marauder left. >>>

Sarah:
Having Lupin be the only good Marauder left just adds to the tragic 
nature of his character.  But really, he's in the same situation 
that he was in at the start of PoA: believing two of his best 
friends are dead and one turned into a traitor.  Then he finds out 
that the traitor really wasn't a traitor, and one of his "dead" 
friends was alive and the real traitor.  Only to have the friend 
snatched away two short years later, and be put back at square one.  
Alone and isolated from the wizarding world because of what he is. 
And the Marauders were the first friends that Lupin ever had, and he 
never thought that he could have friends because of who he is.  
Despite being in the Order, Lupin is still very isolated from the 
rest of the wizarding world.  In that respect, he's just like Harry: 
Harry never had a parent, and then in his third year, he gets the 
next best thing.  His father's best friend.  Then two years later, 
its taken from him.   Harry parallels this: he's isolated because of 
the prophecy and because of his fame.  Harry, like Lupin, has few 
close friends.  Perhaps this will bring Harry and Lupin closer 
together in more of a father-son type relationship.  I for one would 
love to see that.  They've shared the same loses, that of James and 
Sirius, because of Wormtail.  

Sarah




From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Sat Sep  6 22:01:05 2003
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 22:01:05 -0000
Subject: Book 6 Predictions (was: Predictions at Madison Square Garden)
In-Reply-To: <bjdjkp+l0v9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjdlf1+3b4c@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80048

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mochajava13" 
<mochajava13 at y...> wrote:
 
> 
> Sarah:
> I actually just pegged Ginny for death because the boggart didn't 
> appear as dead Ginny to Molly.
>  The boggart impersonated all the 
> other Weasleys and Harry, but not Ginny. 

It didn't impersonate Charlie, too (or at least, not while Harry was 
around). But I sort of agree with you. My first thought was, that 
Ginny and Charlie might be the Weasleys, who get offed, just because 
they didn't appear as shapes of the boggart. On the other hand, it 
really is no proof.

>  I wasn't trying to suggest that JKR would 
> insinuate that lying Ginny is bad by killing Ginny off.  I just 
> thought that it would be an in-character way to off Ginny.

I agree. But every single character has a treat, that might put them 
in grave danger (like Sirius' recklessness). Percy's wish for power 
and the twins carelessness and irresponsibility, for example, could 
also put them in danger. And Ron has sort of the mixture of 
the "faults" of hid parents.

>  But if 
> we're going for a JKR's-already-put-the-character-in-mortal-peril 
> type thing, than Ron, Ginny, Hermione, and Harry are safe from 
> getting killed off by JKR.  
> Sarah

This argument doesn't count. Sirius was in mortal danger in POA, and 
he died in OOTP.  

Hickengruendler




From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 22:18:17 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 22:18:17 -0000
Subject: Feelings on OoP
In-Reply-To: <bjc4kk+rbhc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjdmf9+oma9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80049

>>>>>> Salit
Where I did not like the book: I was not as enchanted with
Ginny and Neville plotlines - I felt that their personality
change was a bit too abrupt and unconvincing. Until this
book Ginny had been this little wide eyed girl with a crash
on Harry, then without warning changes into this confident,
mischievous, social butterfly and fighter. Neville was this clumsy,
rather dumb but sweet, self effacing kid who out of the blue
becomes a leading character. I suppose JKR needed them to
change for the sake of the plot (Neville set to become Harry's
No. 2 and Ginny for the long expected romance w/Harry) but there was
hardly any buildup in previous books for their personality 
change.>>>>>

OoP is my new favorite HP book.  I loved it, and all the character 
developments, plot developments, and the like that we got with it.  
And I must say, that neither Ginny nor Neville's personalities have 
changed.  We've had hints about Ginny throughout the books: Ron told 
Harry in CoS that he was surprised at how quiet Ginny was being 
around Harry because she's normally a chatterbox.  We didn't see 
very much of her at all in PoA, probably because she was off 
somewhere else.  And she did know about Hermione and Krum in GoF, 
showing that she did talk to Hermione and other girls.  I feel like 
we've been given little tibits of Ginny's personality that we 
weren't shown until now.  (However, I have to disagree that Ginny 
and Harry will have a romance together.)  We've also seen Ginny hand 
out with the trio a lot: she sat with them in the train to Hogwarts 
in PoA, and she was with them at times in GoF.  Same with Neville: 
he showed similar personality traits whenever we've seen him, and he 
was in the SS/PS much more than any other side character.  And he 
was around the trio much more than any other Griffindor in their 
year.  I don't think that Neville or Ginny had a huge part in this 
book, just in the climax of it.  (I admit the fight scenes tend to 
stick out more, but I didn't feel like these two charcters had a 
huge amount of screen time.)  Especially with Ginny, I didn't feel 
like the characters underwent some drastic personality change; I 
think they've been developing towards this for the entire series.  

And with Harry's portrayal in this book, his anger and such: I felt 
like it was very realistic.  And I do think that he was at times too 
angry because of his connection to Voldemort.   (That's my theory.)  
I think this is where the prophecy comes in: Harry can't live as 
himself while Voldemort is around.  Sort of like Voldemort's 
personality is invading Harry, and possibly vice versa.  But, I 
don't think either realizes this.  Voldemort brings out the worst in 
Harry, but Harry doesn't realize this.  Harry could bring out the 
good in Voldemort (if there is any) without Voldemort realizing it.  
My theory is that one will, in a way, take over the other's mind 
until there is nothing left of the other person except an empty 
shell, but no remanant of the original person.

Sarah




From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com  Sat Sep  6 23:21:48 2003
From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 23:21:48 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?He=92s_My_Goyle_(filk)?=
Message-ID: <bjdq6c+7id7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80050

Vincent Crabbe in his first solo! 

He's My Goyle

To the tune of Tom Lehrer's She's My Girl

Hear a MIDI at:

http://members.aol.com/quentncree/lehrer/mygirl.htm

Dedicated to Pippin

THE SCENE: Slytherin Commons. Enter VINCENT CRABBE

CRABBE:
Shrakes gotta swim, and ghouls gotta moan,
I gotta have a sidekick all my own.
To Herm or Fred or Ron,
He may be a moron,
But to me, well,
He's my Goyle. 

He enters the classroom with a mind quite blurred
And he chortles and he snickers `cause he cannot speak in words.
His Full-Scale IQ
Is almost 22
But he's my Goyle, he's my Goyle, he's my Goyle,
`Cause I'm like him!

The Goyle whose affect's blunted 
The Goyle whose brain is stunted
The Goyle who loudly grunted
The Goyle that rat confronted
The Goyle Neville affronted
Is the Goyle that weighs three hundred three.

So when we tag alongside Draco as if we were glued
I know that I'm on the same wavelength as that dude.
And he's got such a knack
For making knuckles crack
So, oh well, can't you tell,
He's my Goyle,
`Cause I'm like him!

     - CMC

HARRY POTTER FILKS
http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm  





From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Sat Sep  6 23:54:17 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 23:54:17 -0000
Subject: The other Blacks (was "The Animagus Black!")
In-Reply-To: <000d01c3749e$df6e2be0$bb74d6d1@oldcomputer>
Message-ID: <bjds39+k7ao@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80051

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tim Johnson Family" 
<tkj_etal at b...> wrote:
> 
> When it comes to "other Blacks who aren't animagi," there aren't 
any more
> Blacks at all. It's stated, very decisively, that Sirius is the 
last of the
> Blacks. Andromeda's name is Tonks. Regulus is dead. That's one of 
the things
> that makes what she said stand out to me.


OK, you make a good point that *technically* Andromeda isn't a Black 
anymore, but that is strictly in name only.  In the WW of blood ties, 
she has pure Black blood. Now whether LV would know her by the name 
Black, I don't know, but Bellatrix hasn't exactly been spending 
quality time with the family for a number of years and may still 
think of her sister as a Black, and refer to her that way.

Jen 






From rubykelly at webtv.net  Sat Sep  6 23:59:21 2003
From: rubykelly at webtv.net (rubyxkelly)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 23:59:21 -0000
Subject: Inheriting Grim Old Place (was Turncoat Tonks; Aurors; etc.)
In-Reply-To: <bjd766+k70e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjdscp+p1ud@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80052

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sarcasticmuppet" <sarcasticmuppet at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Carolina <silmariel at t...> wrote:
> > 
> > > --RTJ:
> > << As it stands, Sirius's nearest blood relatives are the Malfoys, 
> > the Tonkses, and Bellatrix Lestrange (ugh!). I think that even if 
> > he doesn't have a will, the house will go to Harry--after all, not> 
> > only is he Sirius's godson and wizard guardian, Harry once saved
> > his life, which indicates a deeper attachment.>>
> > 
> > But deep attachments don't have much to say if there is not a will,
> > why would Harry inherit G.Place if there isn't a last will? When 
> was 
> > Sirius made legal tutor for Harry? Aren't the Durdsleys his tutors?
> > 
> > I'm thinking on the kind of wills from Authors as Austen, Bronte or 
> > Eliot. 
> > 
> > Are we sure Sirius could decide what to do of Grimmauld? The Blacks 
> > could have add a clause stating specifically a condition for 
> > inheritance: that the family properties would remain in the family, 
> > here Bellatrix and Narcissa, or Andromeda if she has not been 
> > specifically excluded, wich I doubt. 
> > 
> > He may have the granted right to use the house as only propietary 
> > while he lived, I know Sirius states the house is his, but I know a 
> > case like this and the user of the house instists the house is his, 
> > and you have to be very close to the family to know it isn't. 
> > 
> > silmariel
> 
> Now me (sarcasticmuppet):
> This occured to me, and I wondered why it had not been explored 
> sooner.  There is NO proof that Sirius is even dead!  He/His body 
> went through the veil, poof, right out of existence.  We have no 
> reason to believe that Dumbledore told Fudge anything about Black, 
> and even if he did, how could he prove it?  So the wizard lawyers or 
> whoever handles the estate have no reason to give Grimmauld Place to 
> anyone, because as far as they know, Sirius is still on the run from 
> the law!

Me: (Kat O'Klzmk/rxk)
Actually, there were plenty of witnesses to Sirius' death, and with the arrested DEs being among them (who'd have no interest in keeping it secret) I see no reason why it wouldn't be legally accepted. Sirius may have made a will when he bcame Harry's godfather, but whether or not he would have left the house (as opposed to any personal items or money) to Harry is another matter. 
I would think it would be more likely for the house itself to go to somone like Lupin or Dumbledore.
However, if the estate (house) is "entailed" it generally goes to the next closest male family member (occasionally female member).
If it's entailed to the male line, I don't know who that would e since his brother is dead, unless Regulus left any "legitimate" male heirs. Otherwise it could e an uncle; cousin; second cousin etc. If it's entailed to the nearest lood relative regardless of gender, it could possibly be whomever was the eldest of the three cousins mentioned, which includes Andromeda (or ONKS Y DEFAULT) or Narcissa (or even Draco, if it's an entailment clause arranged so that the property cn pass through a female relation ut only e inherited by a male). 
The real question is: why on Earth  would anyone want Harry to inherit that awful place? There aren't many associations to Sirius in a practical sense since he got the frick out of there as soon as posible, not to mention it's vile, depressing atmoshpere! Even if the nasty things the house was full of were gone, it stil is tres unappealing as a home. (Who on the list wants to volunteer living with the shrieking harridan in the painting of Mummy dearest?)
Since Harry apears to have been left a comfortale amount which is stashed at Gringot's, I'd hope Harry might inherit money, or personal items, or ust aout anything ut that house. Better to let Dumbledore get it for the Order; or for Lupin who'd then have a place to live.
Frankly, a better (and potentially dangerous) matter to be settled would be: WHO GETS KREACHER?
KAT/rxk




From sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 00:06:08 2003
From: sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com (sevenhundredandthirteen)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 00:06:08 -0000
Subject: Time, Repetition and the Uber-Dimension (was: Narrative Function
In-Reply-To: <200309061518.52212.silmariel@telefonica.net>
Message-ID: <bjdspg+q7ml@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80053

 
silmariel wrote:

> By the 'it happened twice' theory, as you both point out, if memory 
> records only the facts the 'victim' knows, because the first set is 
> erased, you'd better be careful when you Time Travel, or you will 
> erase your own memory, not speaking of unexpected changes.

But you would never remember doing it! And the new version of events 
would explain everything perfectly, hence, as Corinth said <<it 
doesn't exist, and never did exist, in the dimension we are concerned 
with.>>> 

silmariel wrote:

In the it happened because it happened way, MoM Time use rules are 
> pretty naive. If the rules to use a tt is don't change things and 
> don't let you be seen/noticed, I find that quite a number of not so 
> honest/Griffindor minds might understand them the other way.

But this explanation of events works exactly the same!! They let you 
change things, but not get seen/noticed. And once you've changed 
them, everyone's memory is modified to compensate for that change. In 
other words, Time deletes the old version so *there never was any 
change.* So, even though Hermione may change hundreds of things every 
time she goes back in time, she never remembers doing any of them- 
hence, those changes *never* existed. Like Corinth says <<it doesn't 
exist, and never did exist, in the dimension we are concerned with.>>

silmariel wrote:

> It gives me the chills if Voldie actually put his hands on a tt 
> during the MoM assault and we are going with the 'it happened once' 
> Time treatment.

But according to your theory Voldie never remembered changing time at 
all. He changed things (gave us 2 more books to read- Go Voldie!) but 
now he will never remember how lucky he was. In other words- he'll 
make the exact same mistakes all over again. Changing Time hasn't 
given him any advantage over the opposition. It's not as if he 
suddenly knows what their plans are (if he ever found out he forgot). 
All he's achieved is more time. BUT he doesn't *know* that he has 
more time. Instead of going 'Wow! Lucky I pulled that TT stunt- now I 
know all their secrets and have the time to impliment my plans!' he 
just goes 'Wow! I escaped!'

If you can't remember ever changing Time (no-one can for that matter) 
then where is point of having this version of time-travel? Why not 
just stick with the internally-consistent version (which every 
chanracter, incidentally, believes anyway).

silmariel wrote:

> Because if I don't know something (as H didn't know Buckbead was 
> dead) I can activate the tt. If it functions, as I actually can't 
> change the timeline, it means I always did, there was never a point 
> when the timeline didn't include my travel, so I justify my own 
> actions.

But those implications are *exactly* identical to the outcome of your 
TT theory. If we belive the 'memory was modified version' then even 
though there was an older version of reality, it no longer exists. We 
are left with exactly what you described above- the 
characters 'always' doing what they did, Harry justifies his own 
actions by saying he saw himself. In other words, the very things you 
don't like about the internally-consistent version of events appear 
exactly in your own.

silmariel wrote:

> It gives a context for the kind of time we are dealing with.

It gives us a context, but no implications. Context- you can change 
time at any moment- DANGER! DANGER! but, once you do you'll forget 
all about it... so all the danger is forfeited.

It reminds me of that movie 'Memento' where the main character has 
short-term memory loss, so even though he successfully takes revenge 
on the man he thought killed his wife, he never remembers doing it. 
He ends up consciously framing another guy for the murder- except, he 
knowingly forgets ever framing him, so ends up thinking that he was 
justified. (That's a good movie, btw.)

So, my understanding is that whilst this version of time-travel is 
perfectly plausible, it's implications are no different to the 
internally-consistent version of time-travel. The only thing it gives 
us is the ability to change time- but never remember it. That is, 
change but not experience the effects of the change. So, effectively 
it *doesn't* give us the ability to change time at all! Rather, it 
gives us the eternal *possibility* of changing time, but never 
actually *allows* us to change it and remember it.

~<(Laurasia)>~




From sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 00:16:59 2003
From: sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com (sevenhundredandthirteen)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 00:16:59 -0000
Subject: Time, Repetition and the Uber-Dimension
In-Reply-To: <bjcq8m+bla5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjdtdr+rmv3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80054

Talisman wrote:

> I don't hold the opinion that memory is erased or modified in time-
> travel.  I have proffered the accruing of experience, which would 
> include memory, from the outset. Hermione remembers what she is 
> taught in each lesson, etc.

<snip>

> And then, because Harry lived to go back as Harry2, his Patronus 
> was "always" a part of the experience.  Nothing needs to be erased. 

In other words, your theory has little to do with time-travel. Is 
your theory, then, that Harry's patronus *didn't* ward off the 
Dementors? Whilst Harry really saw the Patronus from both sides of 
the lake it was Snape that saved him. He saw the Patronus- with his 
inexperienced magical mind thought 'a Patronus is the only thing 
which could ward off a Dementor.' (But Snape stopped the Dementors 
without a Patronus). Then he cast the Patronus- with his 
inexperienced magical mind thinking 'this is the Patronus- the only 
things which can ward off Dementors. I am saving you all!' (But Snape 
stopped the Patronus without a Patronus).

Nothing was changed at all, then! Snape saved Harry all along.

In this instance Snape would have full memory of the entire incident!

So, whilst I've been bickering with you about Time-Travel- you theory 
doesn't require the use of *any* form of time-travel at all! All you 
need is Snape to stop a hundred Dementors without anyone noticing! ;-)

~<(Laurasia)>~
Who is very happy now, because whether or not she believed that Snape 
*could* ward off a hundred Dementors without a Patronus was never a 
part of her contribution to this discussion.





From fc26det at aol.com  Sun Sep  7 00:22:02 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 00:22:02 -0000
Subject: "The Animagus Black!"
In-Reply-To: <bj9au8+7bru@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjdtna+q9om@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80055

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "trishel2003" <tkj_etal at b...> 
wrote:
> "Master, I am sorry, I knew not, I was fighting the Animagus 
Black!" 
> sobbed Bellatrix.--P. 812
> 
> What a weird thing to call Sirius. When Bella could have called him 
> Sirius, or Sirius Black, or Black, or Mr. Black, or her cousin, or 
> her cousin Sirius, or her cousin Black, or basically anything, she 
> brings up the fact that he is an Animagus.
> 
> So, what's the deal? My personal theory is that the pureblood 
> fanatics think of Animagi as half-breeds, and therefore lesser 
> beings. That would also explain why Voldemort continually harps on 
> poor Peter, calling him "Wormtail." He, Voldemort, is angry because 
> his life depends on a lesser being.--RTJ

Now Susan:
I do not speak a second language but there are many people here in 
the US from other countries.  Could it be possible, since the Blacks 
are obviously French, that it is just the way Bellatrix translates 
what she is saying from French to English?  Just wondered.  I could 
be getting confused because Jim Dale uses a heavy french accent when 
he does Bellatrix's voice.
Susan




From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk  Sun Sep  7 00:25:34 2003
From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 00:25:34 -0000
Subject: The Greek tragedy of the Weasley family
In-Reply-To: <bjdf0u+4h2n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjdttu+f4i6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80056

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vecseytj" <vecseytj at t...> wrote:
 and Percy as Antigone is
> a streach, because Antigone was not just concerned about the birds
> picking her brothers bones it was his very soul that she was concerned
> about.  She didn't want him to never rest in peace, so I also took
> Antigone as expressing more of a religous motivation.  She was obeying
> her religous, laws, not the kings law.  

Drat, seems my point didn't come out the way I wanted it to. No, Percy
isn't Antigone by any kind of stretch, rather he'd side with the king.
The dilemma is similar in that both sides in the conflict are
convinced that they are doing The Right Thing.

Percy wants power, yes, but at the same time he's probably smugly and
genuinely convinced that he is doing The Right Thing and that
Dumbledore is wrong in trying to destabilise wizarding society. Why
would JKR otherwise describe him as "fussy about rule-breaking" (GOF,
"Weasleys' Wizard Wheezes")? In OOP he's an opportunist, but he's a
moralist too.

Alshain the Sleepyhead






From Zarleycat at aol.com  Sun Sep  7 00:57:53 2003
From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 00:57:53 -0000
Subject: Responsiblity for Black's death
In-Reply-To: <20030906201101.31018.qmail@web20508.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjdvqh+p8si@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80057

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, A Featheringstonehaugh 
<featheringstonehaugh at y...> wrote:

<some snippage>
> What's more,  Sirius was an adult wizard, not a house elf incapable 
>of disobeying his master's orders. DD could advise, direct, decree - 
>whatever- but the fact remains that Sirius had freedom of choice and 
>he chose to comply (however grudgingly) with DD's wishes .

>Likewise it is too easy and sentimental to attribute the death to 
>Sirius' devotion to Harry. That's what we fans of Harry want to 
>believe.  That again, someone finally loves our boy so much he'd
>  die for him.  Well, DD wasn't the only one not leveling with 
>Harry. Why didn't Sirius explain what was happening and the reasons 
>behind DD's thinking? 

Maybe you've already outlined the reason as above.  Sirius would have 
liked to, but he was (however grudgingly) following Dumbledore's 
wishes. Poor Sirius - we shouldn't feel sorry for him because he 
could have traipsed around London whenever he pleased.  He was not 
forced to stay in that house.  And, of course, when he makes the trip 
to the train station, he gets ripped for traipsing around London.  

And, somehow, had he told Harry *everything* that he knew and that 
Dumbledore didn't want spoken of, people would be taking Sirius to 
task for *daring* to abuse his position as Harry's godfather to tell 
him things he shouldn't be told at this point.

AF:
>As his godfather - a position he seems to use readily enough when 
it's to his advantage and gives him a chance to throw his weight 
around -  he had an obligation to talk honestly to Harry.  The books 
are full of people confiding in one another, so it's not like this 
goes against some kind of WW Secrecy Code.  We know why the Weasley's 
didn't tell him - they honestly believed Harry was too young and the 
situation too dangerous for Harry to know. We heard them verbalize 
those reasons. They made a judgement call and stuck with it. 

Umm, not entirely, they didn't. Arthur Weasley did not back Molly up 
when she insisted that none of the children be told anything of what 
the Order was up to or what they thought Voldmeort was up to on 
Harry's first evening at 12 Grimmauld Place.  Molly specifically 
asked Arthur to back her up and he tells her that Dumbledore accepts 
that Harry will have to be filled in to a certain extent now that his 
is staying at Headquarters... And Lupin jumps in and sides with 
Arthur. And Sirius, who, by the way, was the one at this point who 
wanted give Harry information. 

> But notice that we didn't hear Sirius, the one person with real 
>standing to do so,  saying those protective things. What we DID hear 
>was Sirius offering vague advise about not doing magic and being 
>polite but then goading the boy by comparing him to his father. 
>Being surly and antagonistic to the very person
>  the Order is fighting to protect. Some godfather.    

He made a mistake. Like most fathers, mothers, and other adults. 
Besides, if Sirius were perfect, wouldn't you hate him more???

 I think one of the themes that people have alluded to on the list 
for OoP is the idea of disillusionment.  Including the idea that 
people that Harry held in high esteem being revealed to be imperfect 
humans.  He finds that out about James, Sirius, and Dumbledore in 
this book.  


> Sirius died of an overdose of hubris and no one was responsible for 
that but Sirius himself.   

> AF 

Well, we'll have to agree to disagree.  I think a number of factors 
came into play in leading to Sirius' death, one of them being his own 
character.  I think you also sell JKR a little short if you think 
that a character operates solely in a vaccuum, and that other 
characters' actions, motivations, mistakes, personalities, or 
whatever don't have at least some cause and effect impact.

Marianne, going on vacation  






From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 01:29:45 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 01:29:45 -0000
Subject: "The Animagus Black!"
In-Reply-To: <001601c374a0$30cc7180$bb74d6d1@oldcomputer>
Message-ID: <bje1m9+rq45@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80058

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tim Johnson Family" > If 
Bellatrix wants to objectify Sirius, then it follows that she feels
> guilty about killing him.

Laura: 
 Not necessarily-it's a common practice in warfare to objectify and 
dehumanize your enemy so as to build up enough hatred to risk your 
own life trying to take theirs.  It also allows soldiers to overcome 
years of being taught that killing is wrong.  Racial/ethnic slurring 
is part of all wartime propaganda.  Note the current US stance 
of "all Muslims are terrorists until proven otherwise".




From vecseytj at tampabay.rr.com  Sun Sep  7 01:45:44 2003
From: vecseytj at tampabay.rr.com (vecseytj)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 01:45:44 -0000
Subject: The Greek tragedy of the Weasley family
In-Reply-To: <bjdttu+f4i6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bje2k8+9rrf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80059

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "alshainofthenorth"
<alshainofthenorth at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vecseytj" <vecseytj at t...> wrote:
>  and Percy as Antigone is
> > a streach, because Antigone was not just concerned about the birds
> > picking her brothers bones it was his very soul that she was concerned
> > about.  She didn't want him to never rest in peace, so I also took
> > Antigone as expressing more of a religous motivation.  She was obeying
> > her religous, laws, not the kings law.  
> 
> Drat, seems my point didn't come out the way I wanted it to. No, Percy
> isn't Antigone by any kind of stretch, rather he'd side with the king.
> The dilemma is similar in that both sides in the conflict are
> convinced that they are doing The Right Thing.
> 
> Percy wants power, yes, but at the same time he's probably smugly and
> genuinely convinced that he is doing The Right Thing and that
> Dumbledore is wrong in trying to destabilise wizarding society. Why
> would JKR otherwise describe him as "fussy about rule-breaking" (GOF,
> "Weasleys' Wizard Wheezes")? In OOP he's an opportunist, but he's a
> moralist too.
> 
> Alshain the Sleepyhead

Ahh now I understand... I see your point.  Thanks Tj




From jane_starr at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 02:45:48 2003
From: jane_starr at yahoo.com (Jane Starr)
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 19:45:48 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Book 6 Predictions (was: Predictions at Madison Square Garden)
In-Reply-To: <bjdjkp+l0v9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030907024548.99378.qmail@web13802.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80060

--- mochajava13 <mochajava13 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I actually just pegged Ginny for death because the
> boggart didn't 
> appear as dead Ginny to Molly.  The boggart
> impersonated all the 
> other Weasleys and Harry, but not Ginny.  

But it may be that Harry just didn't see the boggart
do Ginny - maybe that happened before he arrived.






=====
JES
Canada

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From rubykelly at webtv.net  Sun Sep  7 03:13:37 2003
From: rubykelly at webtv.net (rubyxkelly)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 03:13:37 -0000
Subject: The Greek tragedy of the Weasley family plus...
In-Reply-To: <bjdttu+f4i6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bje7p1+kbt8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80061

I suggest anyone reading this go up thread to ge the full commenary-it's worthwhile!
ME: Kat O'Klzmk aka KAT/rxk)
I don't see Percy as facing the same dilemma as Antigone. Sophocles shows that the choice she faces is the duty of what is owed to one's family compared to the obediene one owes to the State. It is not a religious dramaa (which would have been an alien concept in to them, in the terms we would think of); rather it concerns the tension betwenn what politics dictates as correct versus what one's own conscience demands. When given the opporunity to leave her broher's spiri to eternal restless wandering by not being properly buried (according to their belief system), or to have him enombed but join him there and sacrifie her own life Antigone chooses the latter. Then, when Creon's son AND Antigone's lover pleads fruitlessly on her behalf he breaks into the tomb. Upon finding that she has hanged herself he falls on his sword. 
Creon's inability to allow the small act of clemency for his niece to bury her brother thus costs him his own son. Antigone has chosen filial love over obediance to an unmerciful state and her betrothed joins his beloved in her fate (making the same choice). I don't see this applying to Percy.
Even if he's an overly ambitious git, Percy has no real need to do somehing aa radial as return the sweater his mother made him-I sincerely doubt even Fudge would eexpect nor appreciate such a radically ungracious "gesture". In fact, I'd think he would be nervous concerning  general parental WW public reaction & aout its reflection on himself.
For a differen Greek-myth spin, let's go back to CoS (especially as it's being dicussed at the moment regarding the "clues are all in it" i). Remember Percy's prefect from Ravenclaw GF who was (rather oddly) petrified at the same time Hermione was? They seemed to have been looking in a mirror when it happened-but there's no clear explanation HOW that happened or WHY they were both using it. Using a mirror at all seemed an odd thing to me for Hermione to do (at least in that book, when she was only 12 at most).
Let's go back to Homer and THE ODYSSEY. 

Penelope was the wife of Odysseus?Ulysses, who went off to fight in the Trojan War. She waites faithfully for his return, but in the last few years of her 20-year wait was besieged by suitors who desired her both for her husband's kingdom of Ithica, and for her great beauty. So, she came up with  a plan.

She promised she would finally choose one of them, but first had to finish weaving a burial cloth for Laertes (Odysseus' father) for his tomb-to which they agreed. 
>From then on she wove the cloth faithfully, in their view, every day. What they didn't know was that at night she secretly came back and picked apart just enough of the stitches to make it appear that some little progress was made while in reality almost none was. She appeared to be a dutiful wife and daughter-in-law, but was deceptively clearheaded whose stillness concealed very deep waters indeed. She was completely loyal to her beliefs, and managed to control those around her without appearing to. (Eventually Odysseus comes home to her and kills the unwanted suitors over-running his palace while in disguise as a traveler.)
So, my question-is Percy STILL seeing his Hogwarts girlfriend-Penelope Clearwater? (Think about THAT name!) If so, is SHE concealing anything-like ties/loyalties to the DEs? Is it possible that Percy is influenced by her still-maybe even under Imperious?
Can "clear waters" run as deep as still ones?
KAT/rxk   




From sollecks970 at aol.com  Sun Sep  7 03:35:22 2003
From: sollecks970 at aol.com (fawkes970)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 03:35:22 -0000
Subject: Why not Secret-Keep each other?
Message-ID: <bje91q+a0g6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80062

just a thought i'd like to throw out there: why wouldnt Sirius and 
James be each others secret keepers, this way Voldemort could not go 
after the other no matter what he did: as long as they did not let 
out their "secrets". Some body tell me cause it would help to put me 
at some sort of ease...or at least respond so i know im not just 
being dumb. ~Fawkes(pat)




From melclaros at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 03:39:36 2003
From: melclaros at yahoo.com (melclaros)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 03:39:36 -0000
Subject: Snape Vampire Theory
In-Reply-To: <bj3gk2+f8tt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bje99o+a1eo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80063

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mclellyn" <ellyn337 at e...> 
wrote:
>> 
> Gadfly McLellyn:  You have to admit that Snape is always pretty 
> murderous with Neville's toad!  


Ah but toad, you see is absolutey divine on cracked wheat with a port 
wine cheddar.

Melpomene, sucking the chocolate chips out of her ahoys.




From dwoodward at towson.edu  Sun Sep  7 03:42:05 2003
From: dwoodward at towson.edu (Deirdre F Woodward)
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 23:42:05 -0400
Subject: Wizen recessive gene/Petunia
References: <1062883863.10041.42785.m19@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <003001c374f2$04e91e40$79092244@parkvl01.md.comcast.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 80064

Hi all:

I've been reading posts that indicate that people seem to believe there is a
recessive wizen gene.  (Wizen being the plural, non-gender form of wizard or
witch, which I just made up, I think.  Is there a plural form of the noun?).

I don't buy a recessive gene.  I mean, we are talking about *magic* here.
Why on earth would magic be born of a logical and mappable explanation?  If
anything, wizen children of Muggle parents are born because magic settles on
them, inhabits them -- not that they received a gene from each Muggle
parent.

Also, Petunia:  I think she made it very very clear in Book One that she's
*always* been distant from wizen.  She must be close in age to Lily, and she
spoke quite clearly about her parents being proud there is *a* witch in the
family -- not *another* witch in the family.

SS (hardcover, Am ed of course) pg 53:  "Knew?  Of course we knew! How could
you not be, my dratted sister being what she was . . . I was the only one
who saw her for what she was -- a freak!  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!"

I think it's pretty clear that Lily was the only witch in the family.

Deirdre




From mongo62aa at yahoo.ca  Sun Sep  7 03:48:26 2003
From: mongo62aa at yahoo.ca (mongo62aa)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 03:48:26 -0000
Subject: Why not Secret-Keep each other?
In-Reply-To: <bje91q+a0g6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bje9qa+hvjo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80065

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "fawkes970" <sollecks970 at a...> 
wrote:

just a thought i'd like to throw out there: why wouldnt Sirius and 
James be each others secret keepers, this way Voldemort could not go 
after the other no matter what he did: as long as they did not let 
out their "secrets". Some body tell me cause it would help to put me 
at some sort of ease...or at least respond so i know im not just 
being dumb. ~Fawkes(pat)

Me (Bill):

This would be the obvious thing to do, unless there was a good 
reason not to do this.  My guess is that a 'feedback loop' would be 
set up, destroying (at a minimum) the fidelius charms.

Bill




From sollecks970 at aol.com  Sun Sep  7 03:52:46 2003
From: sollecks970 at aol.com (fawkes970)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 03:52:46 -0000
Subject: Why not Secret-Keep each other?
In-Reply-To: <bje9qa+hvjo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjea2e+h7t2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80066

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mongo62aa" <mongo62aa at y...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "fawkes970" 
<sollecks970 at a...> 
> wrote:
> 
> just a thought i'd like to throw out there: why wouldnt Sirius and 
> James be each others secret keepers, this way Voldemort could not 
go 
> after the other no matter what he did: as long as they did not let 
> out their "secrets". Some body tell me cause it would help to put 
me 
> at some sort of ease...or at least respond so i know im not just 
> being dumb. ~Fawkes(pat)
> 
> Me (Bill):
> 
> This would be the obvious thing to do, unless there was a good 
> reason not to do this.  My guess is that a 'feedback loop' would 
be 
> set up, destroying (at a minimum) the fidelius charms.
> 
> Bill

> Fawkes(again):
 thats true, a loop-hole, like in many of the laws (ie the loop-hole 
about the flying car for Mr. Weasley) there may be an opposite where 
u cant do something like be eachothers secret-keeper.




From logic_alley at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 04:08:27 2003
From: logic_alley at yahoo.com (logic_alley)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 04:08:27 -0000
Subject: Responsiblity for Black's death
In-Reply-To: <20030906201101.31018.qmail@web20508.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjeavr+ij0q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80067


The way I see it, responsibility for Sirius' death falls like this:

1) Bellatrix Lestrange -- she killed him intentionally

2) Voldemort -- he ordered his followers there and presumably let 
them understand they were to kill to obtain the prophecy.  He is 
also the one who lured Harry to the Ministry, causing those people 
who care about protecting him to come after him.   

And really, we could stop right there.   No one bears more blame 
than Bellatrix and Voldemort.    However ...

3) Sirius - he voluntarily brought himself to place, and engaged in 
battle.   He didn't have to, but I don't fault him for doing it.  He 
came to save Harry.  Sirius was supposed to stay at headquarters to 
protect himself from capture.   He is allowed to make the choice to 
put himself at risk in order to save Harry - that's his free choice 
and there is no evidence he was selfishly putting the Order at any 
greater risk by doing it.  Voldemort already knew Sirius was with 
the Order.  

He may have also been responsible because he taunted Bellatrix to 
hit him again.   We don't know really because we don't know exactly 
what killed him.   Did he let his guard down?  Was he careless?  Or 
is she just really good?   Who knows?  

I don't see him being grossly irresponsible though.  In coming to 
the Ministry he was no more irresponsible than any of the other 
rescuers, all of whom were at risk and could have been killed.  

Sirius also bears responsibility because he didn't have to give 
Harry a mysterious wrapped package - he could have just said "here's 
a way to communicate with me, I'll always carry it".  That would 
have thwarted Voldemort's ruse and prevented the encounter at the 
Ministry. 

4) Dumbledore - Yes, he is to blame because he mishandled everything 
in OOP and left Harry to make decisions without full information.  
The resulting decisions were bad ones.   No one should have ended up 
at the ministry fighting for the prophecy and Dumbledore had the 
ability to prevent it.   I don't get his behavior.   I see why he 
didn't want to talk to Harry, but why not tell someone else to talk 
to Harry?  Why not have a reliable watch on Harry all the time?  I 
see no other explanation than that he screwed up big. 

5) Harry - because he made a stupid decision to not open Sirius' 
present for irrational reasons ("I'm not going to be the one who 
gets Sirius to leave safety") - and if he had just opened it, he 
would have known he had a better way of communicating that might 
well have prevented Voldemort from luring Harry in the way he did.  
Opening the present wasn't the same as using it.  It was a really 
bad decision with bad consequences.  


But after #1 & #2, we are doing a lot of blaming the victims.   Yes, 
everyone's actions have consequences, but this was murder, not some 
kind of accident.  Two people (Bellatrix and Voldemort) acted with 
intent to kill.   They are the ones truly responsible.      

-- Logic Alley --









From tkj_etal at bellsouth.net  Sat Sep  6 20:41:44 2003
From: tkj_etal at bellsouth.net (Tim Johnson Family)
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 15:41:44 -0500
Subject: Fw: [HPforGrownups] Re: "The Animagus Black!"
Message-ID: <004301c374b7$49f5f980$1776d6d1@oldcomputer>

No: HPFGUIDX 80068

<What is "people like Rita Skeeter?"
Sandy, aka "msbeadsley"

Rita Skeeter deliberately avoids work, using a Quick-Quill Quotes pen instead of composing the stories herself.--RTJ


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From tkj_etal at bellsouth.net  Sat Sep  6 20:42:17 2003
From: tkj_etal at bellsouth.net (Tim Johnson Family)
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 15:42:17 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Grimmauld inheritance
References: <bjb9d4+jtcd@eGroups.com> <003101c37444$3fc55140$1477d6d1@oldcomputer> <200309061258.23710.silmariel@telefonica.net>
Message-ID: <004b01c374b7$5d4efa40$1776d6d1@oldcomputer>

No: HPFGUIDX 80069

Who will get Grimmauld Place? There's no indication in the book, and there's
no strict rule laid down on inheritance in general. In fact, Sirius getting
the house is the best clue we've got: Sirius inherited the house even though
he had run away from home, been disowned, blasted off the family tree, and
jailed for life for mass murder.
I think that indicates that the house itself might be enchanted to recognize
the true heir, and remain sealed to everyone else. (Dumbledore's office was
sealed to Umbridge.) Otherwise, wouldn't the Malfoys claim it? A prime piece
of London real estate, full of fascinating Dark objects and a replacement
House Elf to boot? Instead, it rots away while Kreacher puts around in it.
Of course, if the house can recognize the true heir, then the question of
who inherits it is easily solved: just get them all to try to get in the
front door.
I think that the original magical contract must have required the name
"Black." As Sirius is the last of the Blacks, who will it go to, then? The
nearest blood relative, or a heir Sirius named?
One key issue is to determine if Sirius had a will, and when he wrote it.
Did he write it before he was sent to Azkaban, or after he escaped?

Short list of possible heirs, arranged more or less from likeliest to the
least likely: The Order of the Phoenix, Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter,
Narcissa Malfoy, Bellatrix Lestrange, Andromeda Tonks, Remus Lupin,
Nymphadora Tonks, Draco Malfoy, Kreacher, Lucius Malfoy, some unnamed
relative from Sirius's mother's side of the family, the Weasleys, the
Dursleys (until Harry comes of age), or nobody and the Ministry auctions it
off.

Discussion, people?
--RTJ






From tkj_etal at bellsouth.net  Sat Sep  6 20:50:25 2003
From: tkj_etal at bellsouth.net (Tim Johnson Family)
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 15:50:25 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Responsiblity for Black's death
References: <20030906201101.31018.qmail@web20508.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <005a01c374b8$802f64e0$1776d6d1@oldcomputer>

No: HPFGUIDX 80070

AF wrote:
<snip>
"Sirius died because of how he lived; he was arrogant, impetuous, swaggering and bullyingly childish." <snip>

This is obviously worded to be controversial, but I'll take the bait: Sirius died because he fell through the veil. Why did he fall? He was cursed. Why was he cursed? Because there was a battle going on. Why was there a battle? Because there was a war going on. Let's not dig to deeply for "reasons." Remember, as Harry says, it would have been him instead of Cedric if the Dark Lord hadn't needed him.--RTJ


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From snapesmate at hotmail.com  Sun Sep  7 04:39:02 2003
From: snapesmate at hotmail.com (snapesmate)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 04:39:02 -0000
Subject: OoP - GUILTY Dumbledore 
In-Reply-To: <bjdfs0+ee6c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjecp6+pk4q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80071

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" <foxmoth at q...> 
<really big snip>> The thing Dumbledore did which caused Harry to 
suffer most, 
> delaying to teach him Occlumency, he did for the sake of Harry's 
> comfort. If Dumbledore had known that all he had to do was let 
> someone close to Harry  die in order to develop Harry's power, 
> why would he have bothered having Snape teach Harry 
> Occlumency in the first place? 
> 
> Assuming Dumbledore deliberately arranged Sirius's death puts 
> more holes in the plot than it takes out, IMO.
> 
> Pippin

I do not see Dumbledore as arranging Sirius' death either, although I 
thought the Occlumency lessons were handled in a very slipshod way.  
I think in the next book Harry will have to deal with his feelings of 
guilt over causing Sirius' death though, as well as his placing blame 
on Snape.  The bottom line is if Harry had used his noggin he would 
have spoken to Snape before sneaking into Umbridge's office. Instead 
he realizes AFTER he got caught when Snape was summoned by Umbridge 
for a veritaserum, that he could have told HIM.  Then to charge into 
the MoM, as he SHOULD have figured Voldemort wanted him to do...  How 
could he not know this was playing right into Voldemort's hands?  As 
you can tell, I am a tad bitter about Sirius getting killed.  I love 
the books, the characters and of course the author, BUT...  I want 
Sirius back, which isn't going to happen, since, as I understand, JKR 
has said he is definately dead.  Then again, that doesn't mean there 
is no way he will be back, does it?
Lynnette, who is way too attatched to several fictional characters! 
<BEG>




From mpjdekker at hotmail.com  Sat Sep  6 22:26:18 2003
From: mpjdekker at hotmail.com (mightymaus75)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 22:26:18 -0000
Subject: Professor Binns
In-Reply-To: <bjd0bv+ps7n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjdmua+k31a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80072

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "greatelderone" 
<greatelderone at y...> wrote:
>> Out of curiosity, but does anyone know why Dumbledore keeps 
Professor Binns around? >>


Could be budgetary reasons. I bet Binns is *dead* cheap.

Seriously the man doesn't need food or clothes. I wonder if 
Dumbledore pays him at all. On the subject of history, I always 
thought it was one of the most fascinating classes in school, but 
there you go. Such things do of course depend a lot on the teacher. A 
bad teacher can drain even the most mesmerising subjects of all 
exitement and interest.  

-Maus







From mev532 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep  6 22:34:33 2003
From: mev532 at yahoo.com (Mev532)
Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 22:34:33 -0000
Subject: Feelings on OoP
In-Reply-To: <bjbsca+cpfr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjdndp+sl74@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80073

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> "mom31" <mom31 at r...> wrote: <<I've been wondering how everyone 
else 
> is feeling about OoP now that we've had time to re-read it and let 
it 
> sink in.  

A lot of people have criticized this work as 'a downer' or bleak or 
depressing but in a way these are the aspects that really impressed 
me about the book. I feel the tone and content of the stories 
has 'grown up'  as Harry has begun seeing more gray in his 
previously black and white world. 

One point that I was impressed with was Harry's emotional state. So 
many times on television, in movies, or in novels people go through 
what should be very traumatic experiences and by the next 
installment they are all better. Real life doesn't work like this! 
If anyone had gone through what Harry had at the end of GOF he/she 
would have had emotional problems too. 

Harry has become a character with more depth, I feel, than many in 
novels. I thought the moments of furious self justification in which 
he exclaimed (I'm paraphrasing) 'who defeated quirrel? Who killed 
the basilisk? Who met lord voldemort and lived to tell about it, 
me!' were realistic, along with his completely conflicting 
statements about how he had always gotten lucky or had help when 
Hermione tried to convince him to teach the DA. This kind of 'look 
at things one way one second, look at them completely differently in 
a different situation/mood' seemed to me such a wonderfully human 
(and perhaps teenagerish) trait. We all get angry and are often 
unfair to those that we really owe a lot to.

I also loved the events of the story, which somehow manages to 
remain 'realistic' in a completely unrealistic setting. Though taken 
a little bit too far, the ministry of magic's resistance to DD and 
the idea of LV's return is completely understandable. How often do 
people choose to believe one thing when the opposite would mean the 
complete destruction of the comfortable life they have worked to 
achieve?  I also felt that Sirius' death was excellently done. I 
hope the comparison is not inappropriate but I see it akin to one of 
the stories in Tim O'Brians "The Things They Carried" (I don't know 
how to underline). One of the squad members is shot in the head by a 
sniper while going to the bathroom. 'Boom, down, like a sack of 
concrete' One instant and then Boom, dead. Unexpected, sudden, no 
chance to say heart felt farewells.

While sometimes painful to read I feel the realistic gritty feel to 
the characters made up for the books faults.  I feel every book in 
the series is better than the last, OOP included. Anyone else think 
so?

Big Harry Potter fan Dave 





From hulahulagirl205 at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 02:42:30 2003
From: hulahulagirl205 at yahoo.com (Nadia Kennedy)
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 19:42:30 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Things that will come into play later
Message-ID: <20030907024230.31373.qmail@web60109.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80074

"mom31" <mom31 at r...> wrote:

> > > Some things from OOP I think will come into play later.
> > > 
> > > 1.  Hermione's otter patronus and/or Cho's swan 
patronus.  ....  
> Was it to show us that Cho is a powerful witch or was 
> > it just a personality match? (Swans are beautiful from afar, but 
not 
> > very friendly and even a little dangerous up close> .......>


ab35ppw replied:

> Historically swans are a symbol of hypocrisy, as they have white 
> feathers, so they appear "pure", but they have black flesh. Cho's 
> swan patronus may very well be an indication that her pretty 
exterior 
> masks a darker interior.  
> 
<snip>

> 
 Hello!
 
 I just want to add another few meanings to the symbol of the swan. 
According to author J.E. Cirlot in "A Dictionary of Symbols", "...the 
swan always points to the complete satisfaction of desire, the swan-
song being a particular allusion to desire which brings about its own 
death." Another quote, then I'm done. The swan "...denotes melancholy 
and passion, self-sacrifice, and the way of tragic art and 
martyrdom." There is also a little bit about how the swan 
represents "philosophical Mercury" to alchemists.
 
 Interestingly, the book says nothing about otters.<wink>
 
 Nadia



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From dbonett at adelphia.net  Sun Sep  7 03:35:24 2003
From: dbonett at adelphia.net (dtbonett)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 03:35:24 -0000
Subject: hair color was Weasley nationality  (very long post)
In-Reply-To: <bjdi25+3cm2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bje91s+mddv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80075

Sarah wrote:

> I've always assumed that red-hair or white blonde hair 
> was common in England before the Normans with their French brown 
> hair came and invaded. 

This is a common mistake being made here.  The 'Normans' were not
darker than the "English" (whatever that was at the point, already
very mixed actually, dark-haired Celts and Picts and fair Angles,
Saxons and Danes, plus a lot of other peoples as well).  The Normans
were "Northmen" who had only left Scandinavia a generation or two
previously and had been given the land of Normandy as a bribe to stop
them from continuing to harass the French, and would have been tall,
fair-haired people, in spite of all the movies which show them as
having black hair and moustaches, in contrast to blond 'Saxons' (no
such thing really as a 'Saxon' in England by 1066). The Norman
conquest was not considered to be some sort of ethnic invasion at the
time-- we owe that myth to Walter Scott writing FICTION 800 years
after the fact and putting in nineteenth century preoccupations about
nationalism which didn't exist at the time of the Conquest. 

Red hair is a mutation of blond hair, and not separate racially or
ethnically.  Scotland has the greatest proportion in the world, I
believe, of redheads, something like 10%. I think JK Rowling made the
Weasleys redheaded just simply because she is a redhead.  She has dyed
her hair blond since becoming famous, she says to make herself a
little less noticeable.  I think that's a shame, as red hair is so
attractive, isn't it?

Queen Elizabeth I, possibly the world's most famous redhead, had a
blond father (Henry VIII) and a mother who was a very, very dark
brunette (Anne Boleyn, famous for her black eyes).  She was the usual
mishmosh of different backgrounds that you find in England, with
Plantagenet (Norman, that is) and Welsh (Celtic) ancestry on her
father's side; her mother, being non-royal would have been more
"English".  The family genetics are very convuluted because Dad had so
many wives, but the two other sibling who survived were blond, Mary I
taking after her blonde Spanish mother, Catherine of Aragon (like lot
of blondes, Mary's hair gradually darkened to a light brown once she
was past adolescence) and  Edward, who didn't live past adolescence,
and had a fair mother, also "English" Jane Seymour.

In answer to the rest of your post:
 >We've got three pure-blood families that we 
> know of: the Malfoys, the Blacks, and the Weasleys.  The Blacks go 
> back to the Middle Ages, and their family motto is in French, so my 
> guess is that they came to England along with the Normans, or 
> shortly thereafter.
> invasion with their extremely light hair.  Well, Anglo-Saxons with 
> Latin first names.  Hm, that doesn't seem to fit very well, does 
> it.  And the Weasleys seem to be one of the original inhabitants of 
> England, which does go along with the Arthurian names that the 
> Weasley children all have.  
1. The Black family motto being in French means nothing. Mottos are
always in French (well, sometimes in Latin). Doesn't mean anything
about your heritage.  I don't think we know what they are, although
Jim Dale, for some reason, has given cousin Bellatrix some of sort of
strange vaguely Eastern European sounding accent, I don't know why.
(That accent isn't French).
2.  "Malfoy" on the other hand, is about as Norman French a name as
you can get.  French translations of the book spell if "Malefoy" which
would make it even more medieval and ancient and aristocratic in
sound.  But they are certainly not more ancient than the Blacks.
3.  "ARthurian' names are also meaningless.  What we think of as
'Arthurian' names are mostly from 12th century France, when the French
took the originally British legends about King Arthur, Frenchified
them and made them popular all over Europe in the form we currently
know, sending them back to England in the new form. None of what we
think of as ARthurian names would have been familiar to the 'original'
inhabitants of Britain.  "Gawain' and "Kay" and "Guinevere" (it would
be Gwenhumara) are names from the Welsh versions of Arthur (in the
Mabinogion) which predate the Frenchification. But "Perceval" (which
other than 'Arthur' is the only Arthurian name in the Weasley family,
except if Ginny is a Guinevere) is definitely medieval French, as is
"Lancelot" (never existed in early "British" forms of the legend) and
most others. The original Arthur, BTW, was most probably a Roman 'dux
bellorum' or Duke of War, who fought to keep the Saxon invaders out of
a Britain that the Romans had only recently left, and succeeded in
delaying their taking over the country for perhaps a generation.

I don't think that Rowling intends us to take any of the old wizarding
families as being from different ancestries than the others--I think
what she wants us to get is that the Weasleys have made themselves
declasse (as did Sirius), because they are so accepting of new
(Muggle) blood.  I don't think that they are less aristocratic though
than the Malfoys and the Blacks--remember aristocracy doesn't mean
money, it means a certain bloodline, which the Weasleys definitely
have, she keeps repeating that they are 'purebloods' which is clearly
the only important thing to snobs in the wizarding world.  I don't
think the hair color tells you anything much at all about family
background, even less than it actually does in our world, in spite of
how hopeful Hitler got about it.  (I've always wondered how he
reconciled himself to exterminating all those blond Poles, while being
allied to Italians? and Japanese?  Among many other discrepancies?)

DBonett, who is a history professor and therefore it is in my nature
to be boring. Perhaps I am related to Professor Binns.






From snapesmate at hotmail.com  Sun Sep  7 04:53:38 2003
From: snapesmate at hotmail.com (snapesmate)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 04:53:38 -0000
Subject: Things that will come into play later
In-Reply-To: <20030907024230.31373.qmail@web60109.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjedki+1t7a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80076

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Nadia Kennedy 
<hulahulagirl205 at y...> wrote:
<snip> 
> ab35ppw replied:
> > Historically swans are a symbol of hypocrisy, as they have white 
> > feathers, so they appear "pure", but they have black flesh. Cho's 
> > swan patronus may very well be an indication that her pretty 
> exterior masks a darker interior.  
> >  <snip>
>  Hello!
>  I just want to add another few meanings to the symbol of the swan. 
> According to author J.E. Cirlot in "A Dictionary of 
Symbols", "...the 
> swan always points to the complete satisfaction of desire, the swan-
> song being a particular allusion to desire which brings about its 
own 
> death." Another quote, then I'm done. The swan "...denotes 
melancholy 
> and passion, self-sacrifice, and the way of tragic art and 
> martyrdom." There is also a little bit about how the swan 
> represents "philosophical Mercury" to alchemists.
>  
>  Interestingly, the book says nothing about otters.<wink>
>  
>  Nadia

No, but in an interview, JKR said (paraphrasing) she felt otters were 
fun and playful.  I think she had been asked what animal she would 
like to be.  As for swans...  not all swans are white.  There are 
also beautiful BLACK swans.  Since a patronus is silvery smoke, we 
cannot be sure what "colour" Cho's swan would be.




From msn.tsf at hccnet.nl  Sat Sep  6 22:16:09 2003
From: msn.tsf at hccnet.nl (Joris)
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 00:16:09 +0200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Clues in COS (was Re: Dumbledore's integrity)
References: <bjb7mc+eueb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <01c401c374c4$7969e160$0200a8c0@Newpc>

No: HPFGUIDX 80077

> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samwise_the_grey"
> <samwise_the_grey at y...> wrote:
> > Now, now, don't dismiss it too soon. The way I read that scene is LV
> > was counting on DD not to kill Harry. 'You kill me you'll kill the
> > boy too' as it were. He's taking a hostage now that he's been backed
> > into a corner.
> >
> > Clearly DD's decisions are effected by his fondness of Harry. Do you
> > destroy LV and save the WW at the cost of one life? It would be the
> > practical, ultimately good thing (assuming DD really could kill LV
> > while he possessed Harry). Did DD ever consider doing it? It doesn't
> > appear so.

wanda:
> I don't know if it's possible to be sure.  I took it the other way -
> that it was a trick.  Voldemort had some plan of escape, or knew the
> spell wouldn't hurt him, but he was trying to trick Dumbledore into
> finishing off Harry for him. Perhaps he just isn't sure if it's
> possible for him to kill Harry, he's tried and failed a number of
> times now and it's too risky, so he wanted to get Dumbledore to do
> it.  That way, any repercussions would hit HIM, not Voldemort.

I always assumed DD would kill Harrym not because of a trick which made DD
think he could kill Voldemort doing so (he would know it was a trick then
because he explained Harry on the end of OoP his fear) or because he could
really kill Voldemort that way (he would have surely done so! & it would be
a contradiction to the prophecy) but because the possessed!Harry would
endanger DD and/or other people so DD has to kill Harry to save
himself/those other people.

Yoris/Ender





From AutumnWhisperer at Aol.com  Sun Sep  7 04:50:57 2003
From: AutumnWhisperer at Aol.com (AutumnWhisperer at Aol.com)
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 00:50:57 EDT
Subject: Quick-Quotes Quill (was: "The Animagus Black!")
Message-ID: <6f.3c500673.2c8c1331@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80078

In a message dated 9/7/2003 12:30:16 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
tkj_etal at bellsouth.net writes:
<What is "people like Rita Skeeter?"
Sandy, aka "msbeadsley"

Rita Skeeter deliberately avoids work, using a Quick-Quill Quotes pen instead 
of composing the stories herself.--RTJ

See, I always thought of the Quick-Quill thing as a way of just writing her 
thoughts quickly, not actually writing the story for her, ya know? Like, she 
*thinks* it, then the quill *writes* it rather than the quill writing the story 
itself, because, if this was the case, then anyone could be a reporter, right? 
All they would need is the quill, not the writing skill. 
... But, that's just my opinion =0)
-Autumn


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 05:27:31 2003
From: ms_petra_pan at yahoo.com (Petra Pan)
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 22:27:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Alchemy revisited: OOP prediction confirmed
In-Reply-To: <bjdfta+coub@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030907052731.9568.qmail@web21104.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80079

Hans, in part:
> If HP is a window on to the real
> Path of Liberation as taught by 
> all the historical great spiritual
> leaders, and I think it is, then 
> Harry's journey is exactly the
> opposite of what you state, and
> our beloved boy needs no mourning
> from us!

Geoff, in part:
> I fear that I must disagree with
> Hans that Harry Potter is a window 
> to the real Path of Liberation as
> outlined in his posts. If there is 
> evidence pointing to such a route,
> it is the evidence which directs 
> readers to Christian belief.

Erm...why insist on the distinction?  
As I understand it, the teachings of 
Christ are *part* of what makes up 
the basis for Hans's "the real Path 
of Liberation."

I am at a complete loss as to why 
canon cited by Hans to support the 
teachings of those he terms "the 
great brotherhood of the Teachers of 
Compassion"/"all the historical 
great spiritual leaders" (in which 
Hans has included Christ) should be 
considered the sole property of one 
and only one out of the entire 
group.

Would it be possible to enlighten me 
without getting back on the pulpit?

Geoff, in part:
> This echoes the very deepest
> Christian belief. Our world is a
> fallen one and many events are
> orchestrated by the devil who,
> like Voldmort, cannot understand
> selfless love and believes that
> because of the wrongdoing we are
> all guilty of, we are unable to
> reach God. Because he took on
> human guise in the form of Jesus,
> he died to save us. The difference
> with Lily's sacrifice and that of
> Jesus is that to gain the
> protection, we have to acknowledge
> what he did on the cross and in
> the resurrection but, if we do and
> accept him into our lives, it 
> leaves a mark  not a visible sign
> but evidence in our life that we 
> belong to God and know his
> presence.

<snip>

> Becoming a Christian is a choice.
> We are not born Christian, we are 
> not Christians because our family
> are or because we go to church. It 
> is because we are faced with a
> choice like Harry's  to follow
> the Slytherin path, ie go the way
> of the world and the real world 
> equivalents of Lord Voldemort or
> pick the true way as indicated by 
> Jesus in John 3:16 and John 14:6.
> The latter verse indicates 
> unequivocally the importance of
> making the right choice.

Making the right choices in life is 
*universally* important...whether 
one is a part of the "we" that you 
referred to above is irrelevant.

Still Geoff:
> Like Christians in the real world,
> Harry makes choices which he hopes
> will help him along the way;
> sometimes he messes up because of
> his own lack of understanding,
> patience or judgment, sometimes
> because he places to much reliance
> in the judgement of others. But,
> as we are protected by the love of
> God as expressed through Christ
> and the Holy Spirit, so Harry
> still has the protection given him
> by his mother.

All these are lovely cites and 
arguments against those who insist 
that HP is anti-Christian but how is 
the fact that HP is in keeping with 
Christianity a good reason to 
suppose that HP is NOT in keeping 
with and thus canNOT be cited by 
other endeavors also in the search 
of the divine as demonstrative of 
their routes?

I rather suspect that it is 
precisely because HP cannot be 
easily co-opted (in the way that the 
works of CS Lewis and Tolkien often 
are) that it inspires attempts to 
ban it.

The way I see it, the themes in the 
HP books seem to make use of the 
HIGHEST (as opposed to the lowest) 
common denominators amongst the most 
enduring of the various 
denominations and belief systems in 
our world.  JKR has managed to move 
past the specificity of any 
particular religion and tapped 
directly into the humanity that we 
all seem to have *in common* - this 
is no mean feat and is surely part 
of her appeal across the globe.

I really must protest any attempt to 
tie her to one and only one 
religion.  If this is not what Geoff 
is intimating, then I hope he will 
explain further.

Petra
a
n  :)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From eligro2000 at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 05:38:25 2003
From: eligro2000 at yahoo.com (eligro2000)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 05:38:25 -0000
Subject: Give Black a break! (was: Responsiblity for Black's death)
In-Reply-To: <005a01c374b8$802f64e0$1776d6d1@oldcomputer>
Message-ID: <bjeg8h+f5i8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80080

AF wrote:
<snip>"Sirius died because of how he lived; he was arrogant, 
impetuous, swaggering and bullyingly childish." <snip>

While I agree that Sirius made some errors that may have led to his 
untimely demise ... He was in a terrible prison for 11 years, during 
which he did his utmost to avoid Dementor-imposed insanity. 11 years 
in solitary Azkaban confinement, much of which was spent living as a 
dog (followed by several years in hiding). Is it really any surprise 
that the guy lacks some social skills? ... 

Having said that, let me digress: Didn't he say that most others in 
Azkaban lost their minds because they couldn't animagus themselves 
into less human forms? Why, then, do all the escaped DE's seem to be 
sane (relatively speaking)? Maybe people will argue that the DE's are 
insane when they hit the MoM. But I disagree: Insanity, at least in 
the legal sense, implies a lack of awareness and understanding. 
Evildoers like Bellatrix seem to be fully in control of their 
faculties (may Neville live long and get the bwitch!!).

E





From erinellii at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 06:07:34 2003
From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 06:07:34 -0000
Subject: Clues in COS (was Re: Dumbledore's integrity)
In-Reply-To: <bjbpi8+5mta@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjehv6+iqfd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80081

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "wildfire_517" 
<wildfire_517 at y...> wrote:
> 
>   However, I do see transfer of powers as being highly likely.  The 
> two most powerful wizards we have seen (DD and LV) who are 
generally 
> considered the two most powerful alive both have, at one point or 
> another, "defeated" other wizards.  Since no other wizard seems to 
be 
> remotely close to them in power (Incidently, how would one measure 
> wizarding power?  Who can do what spells fastest?), it could be 
> assumed that their leaps and bounds came from slaying other wizards 
> and not just good old fashioned hard work.  I can definitely see 
this 
> as being a delightful plot twist in books to come.
> 
>     Wyld



Power transfers? I don't think so.  If wizards could gain other 
wizards powers by killing them (think Highlander) I'm pretty sure 
we'd have heard about it before now.  And there'd be a lot more of it 
going on.  Power-hungry Fudge and Umbridge, for example, would 
probably be offing people left and right.  I could see it working 
that way for Harry because of the connection he and Voldemort already 
share, but not for anyone else in the WW.

Erin




From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Sun Sep  7 06:09:29 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 06:09:29 -0000
Subject: Feelings on OoP
In-Reply-To: <bjdmf9+oma9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjei2p+a292@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80082

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mochajava13" 
<mochajava13 at y...> wrote:
> we've been given little tibits of Ginny's personality that we 
> weren't shown until now.  (However, I have to disagree that Ginny 
> and Harry will have a romance together.)

We have been given tidbits, but after 4 years of seeing her so shy
and tongue tied with Harry, suddenly have her flit from one boyfriend
to another (though she clearly does not love either one) and
talking back to Harry, acting as the twins' second in command, and
so on, seems a bit startling. I still feel the shift too abrupt -
not out of character, but not done as well. There was no indication
that she had any talent or interest in quidditch, for instance,
until the middle of OoP, when suddenly she becomes a Quidditch
star. I think JKR could have made that transition more believable
if she at the least shown her begging her brothers to let her play
when they were playing Quidditch with Harry for fun.

As for Ginny and Harry, it seems to me that that is what JKR has
been aiming at from book 1. Mind you, I don't particularly like this
pairing - I would love to see Harry and Hermione (my favorite
character of the series) together, but I have a feeling that JKR
has different ideas, and she is the mistress of the plot...

>  Same with Neville: 
> he showed similar personality traits whenever we've seen him, and 
he 
> was in the SS/PS much more than any other side character.

His role in SS/PS was a good preparation for OoP but there were
three books in between where he was downgraded and always portrayed
as this shy, bumbling kid with little confidence or magical talent.
Suddenly he is one of the top in the DA and showing a fighting
ability and skill better than any of the other kids, except Harry.
Again, not out of character perhaps, just a bit too abrupt. The
only convincing explanation I can think of is that perhaps that new
plant of his has some magical qualities in confidence building... :-)

> And I do think that he was at times too 
> angry because of his connection to Voldemort.   (That's my theory.)

It was fairly clear that he was aware when he was feeling his own
emotions and when he was feeling Voldemort's. No, the anger was his
own...

>  Voldemort brings out the worst in 
> Harry, but Harry doesn't realize this.  Harry could bring out the 
> good in Voldemort (if there is any) without Voldemort realizing it.

Well, there is one interesting point about Voldemort in that he
seems to have a soft spot for his own mother. He hated his father,
and murdered him, but always mentioned his mother with respect. That
even when he tells how she fell in love with a muggle - he is angry
that his father abandoned her, but does not express disdain for
her love of a muggle.
Perhaps that was one of the reasons he did not want to kill Harry's
mother - his own mother died giving birth for him. It will be
interesting if this will come to play later, especially that he
now carries Harry's mother protection in his blood as well.

> My theory is that one will, in a way, take over the other's mind 
> until there is nothing left of the other person except an empty 
> shell, but no remanant of the original person.

I don't think so. Voldemort surely will be destroyed (or what would
be the point of the series?). Whether Harry survives or not remains
to be seen. I keep thinking that the episode in SS/PS with the mirror
of Erised is a foreshadowing of a sort. Ron sees himself as Head Boy
and Quidditch captain - something we can already see to be in the
process of happening. Harry sees himself with his dead family. Again
in OoP he is the one most attracted to the whispering behind the
Veil in the Death room. I wonder if this is some sort of
foreshadowing of where he will end up being. It will be a fit end
to the story, but extremely sad. I hope he stays alive...

Salit





From annemehr at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 06:18:31 2003
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 06:18:31 -0000
Subject: The Greek tragedy of the Weasley family
In-Reply-To: <bjd8r0+mb3t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjeijo+flu2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80083

alshainofthenorth wrote:
<snip> 
> Percy's views of right and wrong has something of legal positivism 
in
> them (IMO), the law must be obeyed because it is the law. You can't
> disobey it just because you think it's wrong. You can't go against 
the
> Ministry of Magic and undermine its authority just because you 
think
> Voldemort is back. His position would be the one of Kreon, while 
the
> rest of the Weasleys would side with Antigone and the right to 
rebel
> against unjust laws and rulers.
> 
> And the tragedy is that both parties' values are right. Breaking 
the
> law creates chaos, blind obedience to it is the stuff that
> totalitarian regimes are made of. Right or Wrong is easier to 
resolve
> than Right or Right. 
<snip>

Annemehr:
Exactly!

In PS/SS we explored the concept of Good vs. Evil

In PoA we began, with Peter Pettigrew's excuses, and continued in 
GoF with Crouch and Fudge, to explore the choice between doing "what 
is right" and "what is easy."

In OoP we have people who wish to do what is right.  Good.  Now what?

Percy is, and I agree with you, someone who wanted to do what was 
right -- and then had to set about actually doing it.  He is not the 
only one in OoP who had difficulty.

Dumbledore has admitted to doing harm with only good intentions.  He 
needed to balance the good of all with the life and happiness of one 
boy.

Molly Weasley and Sirius Black have a huge fight in the kitchen at 
Grimauld Place on Harry's first evening with them.  They say hurtful 
things to one another.  They are fighting so desperately because 
each is trying to protect Harry's best interests -- and yet they are 
on opposite sides of the argument.

Harry and Hermione argue about what to do about Harry's vision of 
Sirius being tortured at the MoM.  They are also on opposite sides 
of the issue, yet both desperate to do the right thing.  As one has 
to give in to the other, Hermione capitulates, feeling perhaps that 
if Harry is determined to go, she'll be by his side.

This idea of the difficulty in discerning the right path runs right 
through OoP as a major theme.  Most of the characters I mentioned 
continue to struggle along with it, though it's hard.

Poor Percy seems to have run right off the rails, though, judging by 
his actions at Christmastime and that awful letter to Ron advising 
him to drop Harry.  I'll admit that I'd always had a soft spot for 
Percy, as I used to be one who took the "safe" course of trying to 
follow all the rules, but I think even he should have been able to 
see that his chosen course is leading him wrong.  Still, IMO, he 
began by wishing to do the right thing.

So, we have three sets of choices then.  Right vs Wrong, Right vs 
Easy, and Right vs Right, as Alshain so aptly put it.  Many are 
struggling with Right vs Right, and Percy's mischoice (can that be a 
word, please?) has led him wrong.  That *is* a tragedy, that evil 
comes when you meant to do good.

I'm still pulling for Percy, but I hope he's woken up already.

Annemehr
 




From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Sun Sep  7 06:59:02 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 06:59:02 -0000
Subject: OoP - GUILTY Dumbledore (was Dumbledore's true sorrow motives)
In-Reply-To: <bjbu5u+bsbh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjekvm+81u7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80084

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "njelliot2003" <nelliot at o...> 
wrote:
> This is the bit where Harry asks DD what he saw in the Mirror of 
> Erised. Sure, he probably did lie here. It was an extremely 
personal 
> question and their relationship is hardly one of equals. So I 
don't 
> think DD is obliged to tell the truth.

While I agree with you that Dumbledore is a good character and
acts out of the noblest of motives, I think we've seen quite
a few instances of him lying. In SS/PS when he tells McGonagall
that he does not know how Harry survived (first chapter). In OoP
he of course lies to Fudge when he says that he was the organizer
of the DA. He lies for a good cause in each case but he does lie.

> Harry's needs and preferences are to play the hero, to go after 
Big 
> V. I see nothing sinister or "cold-hearted" (and neither does 
Harry 
> going by the same quote from SS pg. 302 you use above) with DD 
> helping Harry to be Harry whether it's Weapon!Harry or Chosen!
Harry.

I think Dumbledore knows that Harry has to face Voldemort and
in some ways does facilitate these confrontations which prepare
Harry for the final showdown.

> We know he is a rebel and 
> risk-taker: Sirius is disappointed that Harry turns out to be less 
> like his father than he thought because Harry cautions him against 
> turning up at Hogsmeade for a lark (OoP pg. 273 .au ed).

I think that Sirius's and Harry's relationship developed a lot during
the year. Note the difference in Sirius' attitude during the misc.
floo-chats. In the first chat Sirius shows disappointment that
Harry is not like James. During the last chat (about the pensieve
incident) Sirius has completely accepted Harry as his own person,
and interfaces with Harry as himself rather than a re-incarnation
of his father - and he shows respect and love to Harry that is
not due to his feelings about his father. His love and respect was
the reason he went to the MoM and his death. Not rashness or
risk taking for its own sake. He went there to save Harry, no other
reason. I think people miss out on how much Sirius has matured
emotionally during OoP.

> *Harry forgot all about the 2 way mirror. (Digression to point out 
> one of my gripes about JKR. Why did she introduce the mirror? Is 
it 
> just another example of her many cruelties to Harry?)

Harry never knew about the mirror. Sirius gave it wrapped up and
told him "use it if you ever need me". Harry understood that this
would summon him in some fashion and he thinks to himself that
"he knew he would never use whatever it was" (paraphrased) because
he did not want Sirius to risk living the house. In other words, he
never even opened it and thus never found out that he could have
used it to communicate with Sirius without any risk to him.

I don't know the purpose of the mirror. Perhaps to illustrate
Harry's impulsiveness and his tendency to rash out without thinking.
I think JKR's plan in having Sirius portrayed as he had and then die
has been to have Harry learn the painfull lesson about how acting
rashly can bring about horrible consequences. He has never
had to face that in previous books.

> He's left Bellatrix alone 
> because she's caught up with first Sirius and then Kingsley. 
That's 
> all.

But she was the most dangerous of the lot. Would have made sense to
go after her first.
 
> (Another digression: which of Luna's loony ideas has ever been 
> proven to be crazy? We only have Hermione's snorts of derision and 
> the scepticism of the rest of the school as "proof" that she has 
> crazy ideas.)

Luna clearly has crazy ideas. She expresses complete belief with
every nonesense published by her father, including things that
are clearly untrue (Sirius as a singing sansation for instance,
Fudge cooking goblins, etc.). How much of it is tongue in cheek is
hard to tell. My impression of her is that she is mostly on a
different plane than other people and while she has great insight,
she also can go completely off. She does not quite live on the
same planet as the rest of the people in the story. For that reason
I don't believe she will be paired with anyone in the course of
the series...

> It raises fascinating possibilities for the resolution of the 
> series. Harry, the warrior hero who is not chosen by destiny, who 
is 
> mistakenly spurred on by the belief that he is chosen, dies in the 
> penultimate showdown with Big V. Big V and followers are 
triumphant, 
> everyone else is in despair and then Neville steps up and blows 
him 
> away!

I think this will cheapen the story. I am sure that Harry is the
one meant by the prophecy. It is possible that had Voldemort attacked
Neville, that he would be "chosen", but I don't think so. I think
he would have died. Harry's mother's skill in charms is alluded to
in several places. I don't think Neville's mother would have been
able to place the same charm on him. Once Voldemort hit, the victim
was marked, as indicated by the prophecy - and he was Harry, not
Neville.

Salit





From caseys_mom at comcast.net  Sun Sep  7 05:08:46 2003
From: caseys_mom at comcast.net (yukonpup)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 05:08:46 -0000
Subject: Was Fudge talking about Sirius?
Message-ID: <bjeegu+r1i0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80085

(Thanks again to my elf for watching over me as I am new to posting 
(an old hand at lurking) and letting me know if this has been 
covered a thousand times...

Was Fudge possible forshadowing the return of Sirius?  I know thats 
not a popular theory but wait, I think he's gone for good too then 
this...  American edition page 614

"Or was it Potter's identical twin in the Hog's Head that day?  Or 
is there the usual simple explanation involving a reversal of time, 
a dead man coming back to life, and a couple of invisible dementors?"

Fudge was talking to DD and it seems he knows about the time turner, 
believes Harry made up the dementor story (canon pg 142), and is 
maybe foreshadowing the return of a dead man?  Or as I'm typing this 
it just occurred to me he's probably talking about Lord Thingy.  But 
could it be Sirius?

Laurie





From msn.tsf at hccnet.nl  Sat Sep  6 20:42:48 2003
From: msn.tsf at hccnet.nl (Joris)
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2003 22:42:48 +0200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Neville's broken nose
References: <bj5go5+h1hj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00f801c374b7$6ee8e5e0$0200a8c0@Newpc>

No: HPFGUIDX 80086

talisman:
> > Do you know, the moment I saw Neville's nose break I thought of
> > someone else's nose.
> >
> > ".. . his nose was very long and crooked, as though it had been
> > broken at least twice.  This man's name was Albus dumbledore." (SS
> 8)
> >
> > There have been JKR interview hints that could indicate that
> Neville will end up a Professor at Hogwarts.
> >
> > If Neville gets another broken nose in book 6 . . .
> >
> > Talisman, now weeping openly, "Oh god, no time turners,
> > please. . . ."

greatelderone:
> :rolleyes: How utterly original. You are forgetting that Dumbledore
> also happens to have a brother which Neville lacks and has red hair.
> It's far more plausible for Albus and Alberforth to be Hermione and
> Ron's kids from the future which would explain Dumbledore's skill in
> transfiguration and his red hair.

If Dumbledore was a person from the future then why would he care about the
prophecy? Also he's MUCH too important in this specific tale and the entire
WW, if he wouldn't have been there in the first 'version' of events... the
whole WW would have been different... the dark wizard Grimmiwauld (or
whatever his name was again) would still be around, just like Voldemort and
what is the change of Future!Dumbledore (that's the syntax I believe this
group uses for things like this?!) being alive if he's so close to Harry
with 2 evil wizards around trying to kill him?

It's not a slight modification of events like when Harry sees himself
casting the patronus or Hermione being in 2 classes at the same time... it's
a totally different story in a totally different world-> MUCH too
complicated for only 2 books :)

Yoris/Ender (who doesn't like the idea of timetravelling just because there
is too much to go wrong and because it can be used to explain letterly
everything in some sort of way)





From autumnskeye at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 05:50:26 2003
From: autumnskeye at yahoo.com (autumnskeye)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 05:50:26 -0000
Subject: Grimmauld inheritance
In-Reply-To: <004b01c374b7$5d4efa40$1776d6d1@oldcomputer>
Message-ID: <bjegv2+brfj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80087

RTJ "Tim Johnson Family" <tkj_etal at b...> wrote:
> Who will get Grimmauld Place? There's no indication in the book, 
and there's no strict rule laid down on inheritance in general. In 
fact, Sirius getting the house is the best clue we've got: Sirius 
inherited the house even though he had run away from home, been 
disowned, blasted off the family tree, and jailed for life for mass 
murder.
<snip>
> One key issue is to determine if Sirius had a will, and when he 
wrote it.  Did he write it before he was sent to Azkaban, or after he 
escaped? <snip> >>>


********I have been rereading OOTP and on page 108 Kreacher 
addresses Fred as "Yound Master" and George as "and there's its 
twin."  Kreacher addresses Sirius as "Master."  I don't believe that 
Kreacher addresses anyone else as above.  Has anyone else thought 
this strange?  Could Fred be next in line to inherit the Black house?


Autumnskeye





From rosabella_rb at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 07:08:47 2003
From: rosabella_rb at yahoo.com (rosabella_rb)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 07:08:47 -0000
Subject: Why DE's may have not gone mad
Message-ID: <bjelhv+hr2f@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80088

In response to Eligro2000, I think that perhaps the only thing that 
may keep someone from going insane in Azkaban is holding off to a 
thought that is not terrible yet not happy, something that the 
Dementors cannot suck out. Sirius says in PoA that the one thought 
that kept him sane was that he knew he was innocent. I don't know 
about the others, but perhaps Bellatrix retained her sanity because 
she had hope that one day Voldemort would come back; she was proud of 
her loyalty; perhaps she even was so sure she was eventually going to 
get out that she summoned the will to block any happy memories - 
perhaps most prisoners go mad because they know they have little or 
no chance of leaving and to top off the Dementors?

I had another thought, though: would a highly skilled Occlumens be 
able to block his happy memories so that the Dementors couldn't get 
them? 

"rosabella_rb" 




From AutumnWhisperer at Aol.com  Sun Sep  7 07:18:49 2003
From: AutumnWhisperer at Aol.com (AutumnWhisperer at Aol.com)
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 03:18:49 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Was Fudge talking about Sirius?
Message-ID: <3f.21c189bb.2c8c35d9@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80089

Laurie, caseys_mom at comcast.net writes:
>>> Was Fudge possible forshadowing the return of Sirius?  I know 
thats not a popular theory but wait, I think he's gone for good too 
then this...  American edition page 614

"Or was it Potter's identical twin in the Hog's Head that day?  Or 
is there the usual simple explanation involving a reversal of time, 
a dead man coming back to life, and a couple of invisible dementors?"

Fudge was talking to DD and it seems he knows about the time turner, 
believes Harry made up the dementor story (canon pg 142), and is 
maybe foreshadowing the return of a dead man?  Or as I'm typing this 
it just occurred to me he's probably talking about Lord Thingy.  But 
could it be Sirius? >>>


When I read that, I assumed that Fudge was talking about Voldemort. 
Fudge believed, or would've liked to believe that Lord Voldemort was 
dead, so, when he mentions the reversal of time it's not in reference 
to the time turner but simply stating what would've had to happen if 
Lord Voldemort was back. Time would have to be reversed in order for a 
dead man to come back to life, you see? 

BUT, there's always room for another explanation and I would love to 
believe that this is foreshadowing the return of Sirius since he was one 
of my favorite characters :0)

"AutumnWhisperer"




From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Sun Sep  7 07:42:43 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 07:42:43 -0000
Subject: Responsiblity for Black's death
In-Reply-To: <bjeavr+ij0q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjenhj+ajfj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80090

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "logic_alley" 
<logic_alley at y...> wrote:
> 3) Sirius - he voluntarily brought himself to place, and engaged 
in 
> battle.   He didn't have to, but I don't fault him for doing it.  
He 
> came to save Harry.

I don't think he really had a choice. He has just heard that his
godson, the kid for whom he risked everything, went into a deadly
trap to save him (Sirius) from imagined torture. I don't think
there was any way that he could have stayed safely behind under
the circumstances, not and face himself in the mirror the next day.

> He may have also been responsible because he taunted Bellatrix to 
> hit him again.

Taunting your opponent during a duel in an attempt to weaken and
get them out of balance is a well known battle tactic. It did
not work with Ballatrix, but you can't possibly suggest that
he was responsible for his own death because his opponent was
more skilled (or lucky).

> Sirius also bears responsibility because he didn't have to give 
> Harry a mysterious wrapped package - he could have just 
said "here's 
> a way to communicate with me, I'll always carry it".  That would 
> have thwarted Voldemort's ruse and prevented the encounter at the 
> Ministry.

How could he have known in advance what Voldemort was going to do
or that Harry would never open the package?

> 4) Dumbledore - Yes, he is to blame because he mishandled 
everything 
> in OOP and left Harry to make decisions without full information.  
> The resulting decisions were bad ones.

Dumbledore made some mistakes, but I don't think he "mishandled
everything". He is leading a war. Some decisions are bound to be
wrong.

> 5) Harry - because he made a stupid decision to not open Sirius' 
> present for irrational reasons

That was certainly a mistake, but it does not make him in any way
responsible for Sirius' death. And trying to save your godfather
from harm is not an irrational decision. I think later on so
many things came up that he simply forgot about the package.

>  Two people (Bellatrix and Voldemort) acted with 
> intent to kill.   They are the ones truly responsible.      

That I completely agree with.

Salit





From greatraven at hotmail.com  Sun Sep  7 07:40:36 2003
From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 07:40:36 -0000
Subject: Professor Binns
In-Reply-To: <bjdd6v+cr3r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjendk+dlri@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80091

--
> I think Dumbledore keeps Professor Binns around because he's not 
> going anywhere.  Each year Dumbledore has to scramble to find a new 
> DADA teacher.  Why make more work for himself by dumping Binns who 
> is a guarantee to be there for as long as he's needed?  
> 
> Or maybe Dumbledore would feel badly about letting Professor Binns 
> go.  The man died, became a ghost and still wants to teach.  What 
> would he do without Hogwarts?  Perhaps Dumbledore just can't bear
to 
> hurt the ghost's feelings.  After all, he endangered Harry and the 
> WW because he cared too much about Harry to tell him the whole 
truth.
> 
> KathyK (the above was a bit tongue-in-cheek if you couldn't tell 
<g>)

Am I the only one who feels a bit sorry for Professor Binns? Imagine 
being dead and STILL having to teach, presumably till Hogwarts is 
closed!(g) How does he mark essays and exams, anyway?

Sue




From princessmelabela at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 07:48:45 2003
From: princessmelabela at yahoo.com (Melanie Black)
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 00:48:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Responsiblity for Black's death
In-Reply-To: <20030906201101.31018.qmail@web20508.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20030907074845.88803.qmail@web20710.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80092

AF wrote: I strongly disagree with  the idea that Dumbledore was responsible for Sirius' death. Sirius died because of how he lived; he was arrogant, impetuous, swaggering and bullyingly childish.
 
My reply:  This is very interesting to me do you really think it was irresponsible for Sirius to go to the ministry that night.  Here is a man who has just found out his "son" went to the ministry thinking that Sirius was there and caught by Voldemort.  Sirius went to protect Harry, had Harry not been there I am sure Sirius would not have gone. Sirius tried everything he could to protect Harry.  
 
AF wrote: He had plenty to do besides sit in his Mother's room with Beeky and
sulk. What's more,  Sirius was an adult wizard, not a house elf incapable of disobeying his master's orders. DD could advise, direct, decree - whatever- but the fact remains that Sirius had freedom of choice and he chose to comply (however grudgingly) with DD's wishes .  I'd go so far as to say Sirius LIKED grumbling about his confinement.  It gave him the opportunity to paint himself as a victim and also as an "if only" hero..... "If only other people weren't stopping me, I'd whip that LV in a second."   Yeah, right.  Sounds  like a WW version of another wannabe hero growling, "Bring 'em on!"  from the safety of the homefront and massive security forces protecting his spoiled hindquarters. 
 
My reply:  Wow, you really hate Sirius don't you.  The real reason that Sirius did not leave is because in his heart he knew that it was dangerous.  He did not want to leave Harry without someone to confide in.  I truly believe that Sirius was a prominent member of the order before, there is nothing anywhere to suggest that he was lazy.  Perhaps, arrogant but nothing anywhere that suggested that prior to Azkaban Sirius was not a primary member of the Order of the Pheonix.  I think the most annoying part this whole situation is that I really truly believe that he wanted nothing more than to protect Harry, yet, he could not.  
 
That's just my take on Sirius, take it or leave it.
 


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!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 08:06:14 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 08:06:14 -0000
Subject: Feelings on OoP - Neville, Ginny, and a little Harry
In-Reply-To: <000901c3741f$5d627e50$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
Message-ID: <bjeotm+lkfa@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80093

Sorry, I cut out all of the original post. I'm just going to make some
general comments on certain things that have been addressed by all the
posters in this thread.


General-
I found Order of the Phoenix a thoroughly enjoyable book, but I
wouldn't rate it the best in the series. The plot was a little flat in
places but overal I was satisfied. 

When many writers write, they have specific events or scenes in mind,
and the bulk of the book is writing the lead in and follow up to these
key scenes. Across a broader arc, a lot of writing is the fill to tie
the critical scenes together. I think JKR had a lot of key points, a
lot of crucial information, and a lot of critical scenes that had to
appear in this book to set up the next two, and I have no doubt that
it was a struggle to write a coherent story that tied it all together. 

In another post, I described the series like this... PS/SS is the
intro, CoS which is not the best story, is the set up for the next two
book which are really good. Now again we have OoP which is the setup
for the next two books which we reasonably assume will also be really
good. 

We have entered a whole new phase in the story. This latest book,
story wise, was a new beginning, and the framework and the context of
that new beginning needed to be established. I think that is why this
book comes of a little weak, just as many people think CoS came off a
little weak.

Don't get me wrong, none of them were bad; I loved them all, but
didn't find CoS that captivating of a story. So, in a sense, while I
on one hand liked the latest book, I can recognise it's weakenes, but
I can also logically and reasonably justify those weakenes.

As a side note, I don't deny anyone their opinion. This isn't my
attempt to tell you that they are wrong. I'm simply offering an
alternative perspective.


Neville-
Big Neville fan here... Several people have said they were shocked by
the change in Neville, but those of us who are big Neville fans and
who have been analysising his position in the storyline, have been
consistently predicting the change we saw in Neville since he was
first introduced. 

We have always known that the image of Neville that the stories
projected to us on a superficial level, was not the Neville we saw
hinted at in the deeper subtext. Neville fights with Crabbe and Goyle,
Neville challenges the Trio, Neville did exceptionally well in DADA
when Lupin was the teacher, Neville has the courage to ask two girls
to the Yule Ball, etc.... 

Neville is a bit of a loner; he fights his own battles on his own
terms. We never hear him whining, complaining, or crying to his
friends about how mean Snape is to him. He rarely speaks about his
insecurities regarding his studies in general. He never seeks sympathy
from people by telling them about his parents. 

In a sense, Snape is Neville's personal Umbridge. Just like Harry and
Umbrige, Neville isn't going to give Snape the satisfaction of know
that Snape is getting to him. He's not going to ask for help. He's not
going to complain to the administration about treatment that would get
most teachers fired, and in some places, come close to getting the
teacher into legal trouble. This is personal. This is between himself
and Snape, and he is never going to give Snape the satisfaction of
knowing that Snape beat him. Neville bravely faces Snape day after
day, something that I think is pretty brave considering how miserable
it is for him.

I have always known, and said it many times, that Neville was a great
and powerful wizard, and the current book just proved me right. It
didn't surprise me because I've been expecting it. While Neville is a
great and heroic wizard; sadly, I think in the end, he will be a
tradically heroic wizard. 

By the way, he still did his share of stubbling and bumbling in the
current book, but at the same time, we were allowed to see what his
true potential was.


Ginny-
We thought we knew Ginny's personality, but how much of Ginny have we
really seen in any of the books. She's hardly been in more than a
short scene or two in each book, and more often than not, she is not
talking, she is being talked about; either by people or in narrative. 

In CoS, she was only 11 years old, we can hardly take what we saw
their as a reflection of her teenage personality. And the
circumstances of that story put a strong emotional coloring on her
personality, so we can't really use that as a true model. 

Up until GoF, we really don't seen Ginny at all. In GoF, she seems
confident. She speaks openly around Harry. She and Hermione obviously
have their share of long conversations. But even with these hints of
her personality, she really doesn't appear on the page that much. 

In GoF, she is just entering puberty; age 13. She is already
interested in going to the Yule Ball. So we are seeing the first signs
of the real Ginny, but only the smallest sign because she is never on
the page. Just like all the other underclassmen, we see very little of
her because we see through Harry's eyes.

In the latest book, now age 14, I think we see a very reasonable
reflection of a likely personality for Ginny. It doesn't surprise me
at all that she takes after Fred and George. They are just about the
right age to influence her. Ron is too close to her in age, Percy is a
little too Percy, and Bill and Charlie are older and off on their own,
so their influence is limited. Although, she seem to really idolize Bill.

Also, being the youngest girl in a family of many older brothers, it
seems very reasonable that she would be comfortable and confident
around boys. She's lived with a pack of them her whole life; she know
how they think, and she know how to handle them. That also seems like
an environment where she would grow up being very strong willed and
independant in order to hold her own against a house full of boys.

Personally, Ginny as a younger female Fred and George struck me as the
perfect personality for Ginny. I loved it.

As a side note, I think Ron and Percy are a lot closer in personality
that either one of them would ever admit. They are both pigheaded and
stubborn as mules.


Harry-
I really don't see how people can NOT see or understand Harry's anger
in this latest book. It all seems perfectly logical to me. Also, I
think being 15 is only a small part of the anger we see.

Harry as been through hell. He's been through a massively tramatic and
emotional experience. He witnessed a classmate being killed, and came
very close to being killed himself, not to mention experiencing a few
well placed Cruciatus Curses. Then he has one short talk with
Dumbledore, and he is abandon at Privet Drive. Abondon in a place
where he it totally lacking in any kind of support. Then to top it
off, after the hell he went through, after being so intimately
involved in Voldemort's return that his own blood which was forcibly
taken from him and his own life was nearly taken, Harry is left
completely out of the aftermath. If I had been that intimately and
tramatically involved, I would expect to be kept abreast of what the
hell is going on. Then not only is he not kept up to date, but it is
very obvious from the people who he is in contact with that they are
actively and intentionally keeping information from him.

Damn, the boy is only human. Who wouldn't be furious after all that?
Personally, I can't imagine Harry acting any other way. He left
compeltely alone and unsupported, and the people he is counting on are
actively working against him, compounded by being trapped with his
hopelessly clueless and irrational relatives. Then at ever step of the
way through out the whole school year, circumstances and people are
conspiring against him, making his already miserable life a living
hell. I mean, it makes my blood boil just thinking about it.

You say, how could he act that way, and I say, how could he possibly not?

Just a few thougths.

bboy_mn




From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk  Sun Sep  7 08:27:32 2003
From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?udder=5Fpen=5Fdragon?=)
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 09:27:32 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:Inheriting Grim Old Place (was Turncoat Tonks; Aurors; etc.)
In-Reply-To: <bjdscp+p1ud@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030907082732.17355.qmail@web60210.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80094



rubyxkelly <rubykelly at webtv.net> wrote:
--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sarcasticmuppet" <sarcasticmuppet at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Carolina <silmariel at t...> wrote:
> > 
> > > --RTJ:
> > << As it stands, Sirius's nearest blood relatives are the Malfoys, 
> > the Tonkses, and Bellatrix Lestrange (ugh!). I think that even if 
> > he doesn't have a will, the house will go to Harry--after all, not> 
> > only is he Sirius's godson and wizard guardian, Harry once saved
> > his life, which indicates a deeper attachment.>>
> > 
> > But deep attachments don't have much to say if there is not a will,
> > why would Harry inherit G.Place if there isn't a last will? When 
> was 
> > Sirius made legal tutor for Harry? Aren't the Durdsleys his tutors?
> > 
> > I'm thinking on the kind of wills from Authors as Austen, Bronte or 
> > Eliot. 
> > 
> > Are we sure Sirius could decide what to do of Grimmauld? The Blacks 
> > could have add a clause stating specifically a condition for 
> > inheritance: that the family properties would remain in the family, 
> > here Bellatrix and Narcissa, or Andromeda if she has not been 
> > specifically excluded, wich I doubt. 
> > 
> > He may have the granted right to use the house as only propietary 
> > while he lived, I know Sirius states the house is his, but I know a 
> > case like this and the user of the house instists the house is his, 
> > and you have to be very close to the family to know it isn't. 
> > 
> > silmariel
> 
> Now me (sarcasticmuppet):
> This occured to me, and I wondered why it had not been explored 
> sooner.  There is NO proof that Sirius is even dead!  He/His body 
> went through the veil, poof, right out of existence.  We have no 
> reason to believe that Dumbledore told Fudge anything about Black, 
> and even if he did, how could he prove it?  So the wizard lawyers or 
> whoever handles the estate have no reason to give Grimmauld Place to 
> anyone, because as far as they know, Sirius is still on the run from 
> the law!

Me: (Kat O'Klzmk/rxk)
Actually, there were plenty of witnesses to Sirius' death, and with the arrested DEs being among them (who'd have no interest in keeping it secret) I see no reason why it wouldn't be legally accepted. Sirius may have made a will when he bcame Harry's godfather, but whether or not he would have left the house (as opposed to any personal items or money) to Harry is another matter. 
I would think it would be more likely for the house itself to go to somone like Lupin or Dumbledore.
However, if the estate (house) is "entailed" it generally goes to the next closest male family member (occasionally female member).
If it's entailed to the male line, I don't know who that would e since his brother is dead, unless Regulus left any "legitimate" male heirs. Otherwise it could e an uncle; cousin; second cousin etc. If it's entailed to the nearest lood relative regardless of gender, it could possibly be whomever was the eldest of the three cousins mentioned, which includes Andromeda (or ONKS Y DEFAULT) or Narcissa (or even Draco, if it's an entailment clause arranged so that the property cn pass through a female relation ut only e inherited by a male). 
The real question is: why on Earth  would anyone want Harry to inherit that awful place? There aren't many associations to Sirius in a practical sense since he got the frick out of there as soon as posible, not to mention it's vile, depressing atmoshpere! Even if the nasty things the house was full of were gone, it stil is tres unappealing as a home. (Who on the list wants to volunteer living with the shrieking harridan in the painting of Mummy dearest?)
Since Harry apears to have been left a comfortale amount which is stashed at Gringot's, I'd hope Harry might inherit money, or personal items, or ust aout anything ut that house. Better to let Dumbledore get it for the Order; or for Lupin who'd then have a place to live.
Frankly, a better (and potentially dangerous) matter to be settled would be: WHO GETS KREACHER?
KAT/rxk

udderPD

Shurely this house does not exist in the WWorld or to muggles? Dumble'd is the secret keeper and it has every other charm known to the WWorld on it. 

Udder pen Dragon

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. 



---------------------------------
Want to chat instantly with your online friends??Get the FREE Yahoo!Messenger

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From princesspeaette at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 08:52:15 2003
From: princesspeaette at yahoo.com (princesspeaette)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 08:52:15 -0000
Subject: Snape, Harry and the Pensieve WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity
In-Reply-To: <002201c3743f$52895740$1477d6d1@oldcomputer>
Message-ID: <bjerjv+ifr5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80095

>Margaret wrote: "I agree that going into the Pensieve is a far  
>greater violation than reading someone's diary."


RTJ: 
> Pleasant thought for today: the Occlumency lessons are a kind of
> metaphorical rape. No wonder Harry didn't like them.


Margaret again:

1. Please lets not start another rape thread.  I was horrified at the 
first one.  

2. That would only be true if Harry had refused lessons.  He agrees 
to the lessons, and sees that they are important, or more accurately, 
sees why everyone else thinks they're so important.  Hatred of 
Professor Snape, and curiousity about what was (wrongly) being kept 
from him about the DOM brought the lessons to an end.

~Margaret




From prof_uloth at hotmail.com  Sun Sep  7 09:01:02 2003
From: prof_uloth at hotmail.com (Fred Uloth)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 01:01:02 -0800
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Was Fudge talking about Sirius?
In-Reply-To: <bjeegu+r1i0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20030907005721.00a6a108@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 80096

At 05:08 AM 9/7/2003 +0000, yukonpup wrote:
><snip>Was Fudge possible forshadowing the return of Sirius?  I know thats
>not a popular theory but wait, I think he's gone for good too then
>this...  American edition page 614
>
>"Or was it Potter's identical twin in the Hog's Head that day?  Or
>is there the usual simple explanation involving a reversal of time,
>a dead man coming back to life, and a couple of invisible dementors?" <snip>

I believe this was in reference to Peter Petigrew, who is believed to be 
dead. This sounds like a summary of the whole PoA finally, but how does 
Fudge know about the time turner being involved?  




From princesspeaette at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 09:17:32 2003
From: princesspeaette at yahoo.com (princesspeaette)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 09:17:32 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's power, Transfer of power (was Clues in COS )
In-Reply-To: <bjc1ap+hc5s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjet3c+95md@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80097

> Beneficii
>But in OOTP, I recall the OWLs/NEWTs proctor saying that when 
>Dumbledore took his NEWTs, he "did things with a wand I've never 
>seen anyone do."  Perhaps he was just naturally powerful.  Of 
>course, this doesn't explain Aberworth Dumbledore (the headmaster's 
>brother) too well, who got in trouble for doing inappropriate charms 
>on a goat.



Inappropriate not incompetant.  Maybe he was just thinking outside 
the box, and ran up against the ban on experimental breeding or some 
other animal related law.  Maybe he's Hagrid without a broken wand.

And I for one will be relieved if we never hear exactly what was so 
*inappropriate* about Aberforth's charms ;-)


~Margaret




From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Sep  7 09:54:44 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 09:54:44 -0000
Subject: Legilimency, Occlumency, Snape, Harry
Message-ID: <bjev94+sib4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80098

Pip!Squeak wrote in 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/79633 :

<< Harry is the one who obstructs the lessons as much as he can by 
the passive method of I-haven't-done-my-homework-Sir and the active 
method of breaking into the pensieve. >>

I just read that part last night (while waiting 6 Hours for a process 
to run on my PC), and to me it seemed that Harry's hatred of Snape 
and distrust of what Snape was doing was only Harry's *excuse* for 
not learning, that his real reason was he wanted to continue the 
dreams, because of his curiosity as to what was behind the door/in 
the room/in the glass sphere/in the Department of Mysteries.

OoP UK edition, one sentence on the bottom of p 508, rest on 509: 
"... he remembered that he was supposed to be empyting his mind of 
all emotion before he slept ... He tried for a moment or two, but 
the thought of Snape on top of memories of Umbridge merely increased 
his sense of grumbling resentment ... He dreamed ... when he left 
the room he found himself facing... a plain, black door. He walked 
towards it with a sense of mounting excitement. He had the strangest 
feeling that this time he was going to get lucky at last, and find 
the way to open it..." Then Ron's snore woke him up and he felt "a 
feeling of mingled disappointment and guilt. He kkew he should not 
have seen the door, but at the same time felt so consumed with 
curiosity about what was behind it ... "  P. 560, Harry is awakened 
from another such dream: "He felt as though a wonderful treat had 
been snatched from him at the very last moment ... he had got so 
close that time."

*Was* it Harry's curiosity, or was it Voldemort's curiosity? I was 
wondering that last night, well before reading these posts:
Jen Reese in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/80031 
: << surely having LV and Snape poking around directly in his brain 
could produce an *undesirable* effect. The greatest Dark Sorcerer in 
the world rearranging your thoughts? Inserting ideas? His essence 
mingling with yours? Ugh--it's surprising Harry didn't act out more 
than he did.>>
and Sarah Mochajava in 
Http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/80049 :
<< And I do think that he was at times too angry because of his 
connection to Voldemort. (That's my theory.) I think this is where 
the prophecy comes in: Harry can't live as himself while Voldemort is 
around. Sort of like Voldemort's personality is invading Harry, and 
possibly vice versa. But, I don't think either realizes this. >>

Melpomene wrote in 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/79712 :

<< Why would it enter Snape's mind that Potter was looking in that 
pensieve for information on James and Lily? Oh no, Potter wasn't 
looking for Potters, he was looking for more "Fun with Snivellus" and 
we all know it. >>

Sarah Mochajava in 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/79841 and
Geoff Bannnister in 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/79841 and
Salit slgazit in 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/79843 explained
(what I was going to explain) that Harry was looking for information 
about the Department of Mysteries. IMHO it was fairly irrational to 
think that there might be something about the D of M in Snape's 
Pensieve. Was Voldemort pushing him to look to see what memories it 
was that Snape wanted to hide away from the chance of Voldemort 
seeing via Harry, if Harry succeeded in breaking into Snape's mind? 

Melpomene wrote in 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/79803 :

<< As to "But he never even told Ron and Hermione what he saw, now 
did he?" No, he didn't. But I'm absolutely SURE he would have done 
if Snape hadn't caught him in the act and thrown his tantrum. That 
scared him into silence. >>

It's as Elle wrote in 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/79804 :
<<Harry did not tell Ron and Hermione what he saw in the pensieve 
because he was *ashamed* of his father and Sirius's behavior >> 
(and Sandy MsBeadsley in 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/79839
and Fred Uloth in 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/79931 )

P. 573 "He had no desire to return to Gryffindor Tower so early, nor 
to tell Ron and Hermone what he had just seen. What was making Harry 
feel so horrified and unhappy wass not being shouted out or having 
jars thrown at him; it was that he knew exactly how it felt to be 
humiliated in the middle of a circle of onlookers, knew exactly how 
Snape had felt as his father had taunted him, and that judging from 
what he had seen, his father had been every bit as arrogant as Snape 
had always told him."

Steve bboy_mn wrote 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/79939 in: 

<< Let's look at what Legilimency really is in a practical sense. As 
far as I can see, it is hardly more than a highly accurate form of 
intuition. Voldemort or Dumbledore have a strong ituitive sense of 
when someone is lying based on subtle interpretations of their 
thoughts, emotions, and demeanor. Snape said it himself, that 
Legilimency is not 'mind reading' as the mind is not something which 
can be read; >>

I always get a (nasty) laugh from Snape saying that Legilimency is 
not mind reading. I don't even know Latin, and yet even I clearly see 
that Legi- means 'read' as in 'legible' and -Mency means 'mind' as in 
'mental'. Anyhow, Snape watching Harry's memories like they were 
movies is a great deal more than your suggestion of some highly 
insightful observation of 'body language' to tell when a person is 
lying.




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Sun Sep  7 09:56:45 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 09:56:45 -0000
Subject: hair color was Weasley nationality  (very long post)
In-Reply-To: <bje91s+mddv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjevct+h07s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80099

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dtbonett" <dbonett at a...> wrote:
> 
> clipped>

> I don't think that Rowling intends us to take any of the old wizarding
> families as being from different ancestries than the others--I think
> what she wants us to get is that the Weasleys have made themselves
> declasse (as did Sirius),--remember aristocracy doesn't mean
> money, it means a certain bloodline, which the Weasleys definitely
> have, she keeps repeating that they are 'purebloods' which is clearly
> the only important thing to snobs in the wizarding world. 
> 
> DBonett, who is a history professor and therefore it is in my nature
> to be boring. Perhaps I am related to Professor Binns.

Good post, Professor.

Bloodlines do seem to have  been a favourite indoor sport with the 
power brokers throughout English (British?) history. Never could
understand taking pride in the Baton Sinister. But if the family 
was going broke, it didn't stop them marrying some daughter of a 
rich merchantile upstart to help prop up the east wing of the family 
pile. Indeed, if an outsider family became rich enough, they were  
soon inducted into the aristocracy. Better inside the tent, pissing out...

The stance of the purebloods in the WW reminds me more of some
of the East European or Russian aristos, principle above pragmatism,
although we can boast examples of mind-boggling adherence to 
outdated social demarcations (Cardigan of the Crimea, for one).

I'd be interested to  hear if you have any more thoughts on parallels
between our past and the Potterverse.

Kneasy






From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Sep  7 10:04:24 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 10:04:24 -0000
Subject: Snape/Ulysses/Hermione'sHigherPurpose/Harry'sGrandparents/Binns/Christianity
Message-ID: <bjevr8+nk3p@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80100

Gadfly wrote in 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/79500 (nice round 
number) :

<< If Snape is responsible for Voldemort's AK curse backfiring, then 
you can understand why Dumbledore trusts him so. (snip) I think Snape 
the Slytherin loner has a vampire thirst <vbg> for knowledge. He 
studied under Voldemort to learn all he could, and now he is studying 
under Dumbledore to learn all he can. If this story goes the way of 
the Hero's Journey in mythology, then the hero always has another foe 
that comes to fore. To me that would be Snape. I think Snape wants to 
be the greatest wizard there ever was and is laying in wait until he 
sees some vulnerable spot to move in with all his knowledge. >>

If Snape is planning to seize some opportuntity to overthrow 
Dumbledore, it might not be so *accurate* of Dumbledore to trust him.

Fred Uloth wrote in 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/79617 :

<< I'm not familiar with the story of Ulysses and Penelope...
therefore I cannot comment. Everything I know about the story came 
from the film "O Brother, Where Art Thou." >>

The story of Ulysses (Odysseus in Greek) and Penelope is in The 
Odyssey, the classic epic by the legendary epic poet Homer. Odysseus 
was the king of Ithaca and Penelope was Odysseus's wife, who waited 
twenty years for him to return (from ten years at the Trojan War 
told in The Illiad and ten years of wandering more or less homeward 
(including IIRC eight years shacking up with Calypso) told in 
The Odyssey) with superhuman fidelity. She not only fought off 
innumerable suitors who wanted to marry her in order to to become 
king of Ithaca (that could have been just so that her son Telemachus 
could inherit), but never doubted that he was still alive and would 
eventually return. The choice of character name suggests that 
Penelope Clearwater is waiting loyally for her Percy, but that 
doesn't necesarily mean Percy will return to her.

Jim Ferer wrote in 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/79662 :

<< Without Harry's quest, [Hermione] would not have the higher p
urpose she has now. She is among the great of the wizarding world, 
and I bet she knows it, and would feel the hole in her life if Harry 
wasn't in it. >>

It seems to me that, even without Harry, Hermione would have started 
SPEW and cared about werewolf rights. That may be a lesser purpose 
than saving the world from Voldemort, but it may be a higher purpose 
than massaging Harry's feelings (as in your example of founding DA to 
cheer up Harry).

Entropy Mail wrote in 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/79676 : 

<< I do, however, wonder what's become of Lily's family, as they 
are, I believe, Muggles, and don't know if Voldemort's murderous ways 
would have extended to them. >>

I feel sure that Lily's parents are dead or incapacitated, as they 
(both together) shared Lily's blood more than Petunia does, so 
Dumbledore could have put baby Harry with them and still did his 
protective magic. And McGonagall would have said: "Lily's parents!" 
when Dumbledore gave her the excuse that the Dursleys are the only 
family Harry had left.

Sue "sbursztynski" Great Raven wrote in 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/80091 :

<< Am I the only one who feels a bit sorry for Professor Binns? 
Imagine being dead and STILL having to teach, >>

Is it 'having to' or that he *likes* it? I don't supposed that 
when he died, he chose to become a ghost because he enjoyed teaching 
so much that he didn't want to leave it, but now that he is a ghost, 
surely he could Hogwarts and haunt somewhere he preferred, just as 
Moaning Myrtle left Hogwarts to haunt Olive Hornsby until Olive got a 
restraining order against her.

<< presumably till Hogwarts is closed!(g) >>

Until he is laid to rest. I keep asking what that requires, in the 
Potterverse. There are various theories of what it requires in RL; 
sometimes merely to inform the ghost that he is dead (as he didn't 
know). Sometimes to fulfil a task that the ghost stayed around for 
(such as aresting his murderer). Sometimes some religious ceremonies. 

<< How does he mark essays and exams, anyway? >>

Maybe he has a quill that takes dictation.

Petra Pan wrote in 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/80079 : 

<< I rather suspect that it is precisely because HP cannot be easily 
co-opted (in the way that the works of CS Lewis and Tolkien often 
are) that it inspires attempts to ban it. >>

I don't think 'co-opt' is the right word for reading Christianity 
in the popular writings of Lewis and Tolkien, as they were both very 
committed Christians. Lewis put Christianity into his stories 
deliberately. Tolkien's beautiful essay "On Fairy-Stories" makes 
explicit, specific references to Christ. Apparently JKR is also a 
believing Christian, and I don't think she would use 'co-opt' to 
refer to someone reading Christianity into her work.

Other than that, I also read Geoff's post and wondered if he realised 
that he was agreeing with Hans, not disagreeing?




From oodaday at yahoo.co.uk  Sun Sep  7 07:31:56 2003
From: oodaday at yahoo.co.uk (dooda)
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 00:31:56 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Give Black a break! (was: Responsiblity for Black's death)
In-Reply-To: <bjeg8h+f5i8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030907073156.65074.qmail@web20708.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80101


eligro2000 <eligro2000 at yahoo.com> wrote: 
>While I agree that Sirius made some errors that may have led to his 
untimely demise ... He was in a terrible prison for 11 years>. 

Now Dooda:

Just to correct a few facts, Sirius was in Azkaban for 12 years, he was caught the day he was framed, and soon after went to prison. (You can go to the time line on the Lexicon, or Pgs. 59 and 363 of the U.S addition)   

Snip

>during which he did his utmost to avoid Dementor-imposed insanity. 11 years in solitary Azkaban confinement>

Dooda:

If by solitary confinement you mean that he was in a cell by himself, then I agree. But solitary confinement in the U.S. means that one is in a cell with no windows, no communication including the guards. Sirius could see and hear what was going on inside the prison.   

Snip

>Didn't he say that most others in Azkaban lost their minds because they couldn't animagus themselves into less human forms?> 

Dooda:

No, Sirius didn't lose his mind because he knew he was innocent, and that wasn't a happy thought. I gather that most everyone else went insane because they knew their guilt.

Snip

>Why, then, do all the escaped DE's seem to be 
sane...>

Dooda:

I don't think the Death Eaters went insane because they're just that evil. The are so wicked that there aren't any happy thoughts for the Dementors to suck out. It's the whole good and evil cannot occupy the same space at the same time. 

I hope this makes sense. 

Dooda, not meaning to flame anybody and hoping not to get flamed in return. 













From diversity33 at hotmail.com  Sun Sep  7 08:14:40 2003
From: diversity33 at hotmail.com (Kath Lane)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 09:14:40 +0100
Subject: Book 6 Predictions (was: Predictions at Madison Square Garden)
Message-ID: <BAY1-F143ZDmHZcBryj000062cf@hotmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80102

Some more predictions for Book 6:

It would be good if there was substantial scenes outside the school, and
some break from the (by now tiresome) "Harry misunderstood and blamed
by most of the school, finally winning out" pattern that was in No. 2, 4 and 
5.

The temptation for collaboration with LV will increase in the wizarding
world, particularly in the MoM, as many pure-bloods there would be quite
happy to continue running things for Voldemort, even if it involved
massercering millions of muggles. Others will simply want to keep their
heads down and not get involved in resistance to LV. [Obvious parallels
to occupied Europe in the war, perhaps?]

The barman at the Hog's Head will turn out to be Dumbledore's
goat-bothering brother, Aberforth.

In book 6 someone in the order will be betraying them. Harry
suspects Snape but it turns out to be Mundungus or someone
we haven't encountered yet. Also in book 6 the characters from
book 4 will put in an appearance -- Karkarof and Krum at
least.

A scene outside the UK is another possibility.

"Kath Lane"





From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 08:38:50 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 08:38:50 -0000
Subject: Was Fudge talking about Sirius?
In-Reply-To: <3f.21c189bb.2c8c35d9@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bjeqqq+c9vi@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80103

Laurie writes:
> Was Fudge possible forshadowing the return of Sirius?  I know 
> thats not a popular theory but wait, I think he's gone for good too 
> then this...  American edition page 614
> 
> "Or was it Potter's identical twin in the Hog's Head that day?  Or 
> is there the usual simple explanation involving a reversal of time, 
> a dead man coming back to life, and a couple of invisible 
> dementors?"
 
> Fudge was talking to DD and it seems he knows about the time 
> turner, believes Harry made up the dementor story (canon pg 142), 
> and is maybe foreshadowing the return of a dead man?  Or as I'm 
> typing this it just occurred to me he's probably talking about Lord 
> Thingy.  But could it be Sirius?

AutumnWhisperer wrote:
> When I read that, I assumed that Fudge was talking about Voldemort. 
> Fudge believed, or would've liked to believe that Lord Voldemort 
> was dead, so, when he mentions the reversal of time it's not in 
> reference to the time turner but simply stating what would've had 
> to happen if Lord Voldemort was back. Time would have to be 
> reversed in order for a dead man to come back to life, you see? 
<snip>

Me now:  I'm sorry to burst your (Droobles Best Blowing Gum is my 
FAVORITE!) bubble, but...

The reversal of time was in PoA, caused by the Time Turner.  The man 
wasn't dead, he was an Animagus who had not been out of rat form in, 
what, nearly eleven years?  Scabbers was revealed to be Peter 
Pettigrew, alive after all, by Harry and Co. and the events in the 
Shrieking Shack.  I think the "couple of invisible dementors," 
though, must be a reference to the ones in the opening of OoP, rather 
than the ones in PoA, because Fudge acknowledged those (PoA) 
dementors and dismissed them from Hogwarts duty.

And JKR has already said that Sirius really is *dead*; I think she 
means we aren't going to see him again.  Period.  Denial is one stage 
of grief; let's go on to the next one, whatever it is.

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley"





From deemarie1a at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 10:32:00 2003
From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 10:32:00 -0000
Subject: Feelings on OoP - Neville, Ginny, and a little Harry
In-Reply-To: <bjeotm+lkfa@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjf1f0+jtdr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80104

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
 
> Damn, the boy is only human. Who wouldn't be furious after all that?
> Personally, I can't imagine Harry acting any other way. He left
> compeltely alone and unsupported, and the people he is counting on 
are
> actively working against him, compounded by being trapped with his
> hopelessly clueless and irrational relatives. Then at ever step of 
the
> way through out the whole school year, circumstances and people are
> conspiring against him, making his already miserable life a living
> hell. I mean, it makes my blood boil just thinking about it.
> 
> You say, how could he act that way, and I say, how could he 
possibly not?
> 
> Just a few thougths.
> 
> bboy_mn

Sorry about the major snipping.  I agree with what you say here, 
bboy_mn.  There is another thought here too.  Whenever Harry has 
witnessed something, or overheard something when he was alone, he 
always, ALWAYS, ran to Hermione and Ron and told them everything. 
(The only exception was Neville.)  Now here he is after all that 
happended to him in GoF, alone on Privet Drive.  Yet he still 
receives letters from H and R.  But, in these letters, H and R say 
that Dumbledore told them not to tell Harry anything.  Just another 
addition to the isolation Harry is feeling.  Being angry is not just 
the teen angst Harry is feeling which imo, is entirely keeping in 
character.

Harry has started to keep his own secrets now.  He is reluctant to 
share a lot with R and H because of the treatment he received from 
them over the summer.  And, I don't know how significant this is, but 
in the Forbidden Forest, didn't one of the centaurs say that Harry 
was nearly an adult?  (Sorry, no book quote here to back me up.)  
Despite the situation going on, I think that might have stuck in 
Harry's subconcious and I think we will see that, combined with 
whatever Harry has gleaned from DD and the others, to make him grow.  

I think we will still see a very angry and depressed Harry in book 6, 
but I believe here is where we will see JKR make Harry into the man 
he will become.  I don't think that Harry will die.  If he does, then 
even if he has killed LV, the Dark forces will be able to take over 
WW.

DD knows, as he witnessed the prophesy first hand, that Harry is the 
one to vanquish LV.  He cannot change that, so therefore, he leads 
Harry on his path to acquire the skills needed to reach that 
conclusion.  DD didn't count on loving Harry.  That was a consequence 
of his watching Harry so closely.  That love clouded his decisions.  
He knew there was a risk in loving the boy, yet he believed that he 
could still guide Harry where he needed to go.

Oh, I am getting a little too long winded...just wanted to add a 
little.

D - who knows there will be those who disagree, but that's what this 
forum is for, isn't it?  Have a go...but be kind.






From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Sep  7 10:34:58 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 10:34:58 -0000
Subject: half-human Ferret (was: Sirius reservations
In-Reply-To: <bj8flc+10m5o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjf1ki+cfm4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80105

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mochajava13" wrote in 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/79860 : 

<< Something's up with Crookshanks; very bizzare. (My pet theory 
about Crookshanks is that he's either an animagus related to 
Mundungus or some kind of half-human offspring. >>

My pet theory of Crookshanks was that he was McGonagall's feline 
offspring, until JKR revealed in an interview that he's half Kneazle. 
Kneazles are explained in Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them,
but right now it's easier to reference the Lexicon: 
http://www.hp-lexicon.org/bestiary_h-m.html#Kneazle : "Cat-like 
creature, very intelligent. The Kneazle can detect unsavory or 
suspicious persons very well and will react badly to them. However, 
if it takes a liking to a Witch or Wizard, it makes an excellent pet 
(FB). The Kneazle has spotted fur, large ears, and a lion-like tail." 

<< Can a human that's been transfigured into an animal reproduce with 
that animal? Like ferret-Malfoy, could he have mated with a female 
ferret while a ferret? Kind of gross, but they would be an animal at 
the time.) >>

A human transfigured into an animal is different from the Animagus 
transformation, not merely because Animagic is wandless, but also 
because Animagic lets you keep your mind (as well as your clothes and 
the things in your pockets). Keeping his mind: The introduction to 
Quidditch Through the Ages (sorry, this is from memory) said that 
before broomsticks, the only way a wizard could fly was either if he 
was an Animagus with a winged animal form, but they are very rare, or 
if he had been transfigured into a flying creature such as a bat, but 
then having only a 'bat's brain', he wouldn't remember why he had 
wanted to fly in the first place. (Keeping her clothes: we see 
McGonagall do her Animagus transformation in front of class, and if 
her clothes had fallen off when she turned into a cat and she had 
been naked when she turned back into a human, someone would have said 
something.) So I assume that a  human transfigured into an animal 
could reproduce with natural animals of that species, but if the 
transfigured pregnant female animal was cured of being transfigured, 
resumed his or her human form, he or she would no longer be pregnant.

But I have elaborate theories about Animagic procreation ... to 
summarize, I believe that a female Animagus can transform throughout 
her pregnancy and her fetus safely transforms with her. There is only 
one or occasionally two fetuses, even if she an animal that usually 
bears large litters. The time of pregnancy adjusts itself to the form 
she is in, so the cat Animagus can cut her pregnancy down from nine 
months to forty days by spending it all in cat form. However, whether 
her offspring is born human or animal doesn't depend on what form she 
was in at conception, but on what form she was in when she went into 
labor (for the sake of there being a risk of having an animal baby, 
she can't transform while in labor). The animal offspring of an 
female Animagus is an unusually intelligent animal. I haven't figured 
out how this works for a witch who turns into something other than a 
mammal or bird, something that doesn't have a pregnancy, maybe not 
even internal fertilization.   




From sleepingblyx at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 11:46:56 2003
From: sleepingblyx at yahoo.com (sleepingblyx)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 11:46:56 -0000
Subject: Alchemy revisited: OOP prediction confirmed
In-Reply-To: <20030907052731.9568.qmail@web21104.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjf5rg+lukf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80106

Major snipage here:
 JKR has managed to move 
> past the specificity of any 
> particular religion and tapped 
> directly into the humanity that we 
> all seem to have *in common* - this 
> is no mean feat and is surely part 
> of her appeal across the globe.
> 
> I really must protest any attempt to 
> tie her to one and only one 
> religion.  If this is not what Geoff 
> is intimating, then I hope he will 
> explain further.
> 
> Petra

Short of asking for an, "Amen!" I am just going to say that I agree. 

However, I have a specific question-- we know J.K.R. likes to read, 
and I was sorting through the interviews, but is there any canon to 
suspect that she has actually even read the bible, or is a practicing 
Christian in the first place? Her more recent interviews seem to lead 
to the fact that she would be agnostic or even athiest (something 
about not really believing in any kind of magic, and that she wishes 
she could). 

I could understand her towing the line for controversy's sake, and it 
really isn't anyone's buisness who she is praying to, but to know 
might make this conversation move a bit along. It would be hard for 
me to buy that she uses the bible as a model if she had never even 
read it, or wasn't an actual in depth-quote-the-scripture-at-will 
type. You can't exactly divine the greater themes if you have just 
read about Noah once, and maybe the birth of Jesus twice during the 
holidays.

Which would lend back to greater truths: simple archetypes as old as 
time. Even the Bible borrowed from this place and that. Power, fear, 
love, hope.... you can't exactly credit thier origin in "liturature" 
unless you get your own time turner and find some oral history that 
is long gone.

Blyx






From wsherratt3338 at rogers.com  Sun Sep  7 11:50:20 2003
From: wsherratt3338 at rogers.com (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 11:50:20 -0000
Subject: Feelings on OoP - Neville, Ginny, and a little Harry
In-Reply-To: <bjf1f0+jtdr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjf61s+j98m@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80107

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Donna" <deemarie1a at y...> 
wrote:
> I think we will still see a very angry and depressed Harry in book 
6, 
> but I believe here is where we will see JKR make Harry into the 
man 
> he will become.  I don't think that Harry will die.  If he does, 
then 
> even if he has killed LV, the Dark forces will be able to take 
over 
> WW.
> 
Oh, God, please don't let it be true!  If Book 6 features a very 
angry and depressed Harry as you predict, I think Rowling really had 
better just kill him.  Frankly, I'd prefer her just to skip Book 7 
and have him hang himself in Book 6; no happy ending will make up 
for another volume of screaming, sulking, pouting and puking.

Wanda





From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Sun Sep  7 12:23:34 2003
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 12:23:34 -0000
Subject: Why the time turner stinks/Hermione's homework
In-Reply-To: <bjd52l+p0rl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjf806+rq6g@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80108

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "severusbook4" 
<severusbook4 at y...> wrote (80021):

Hermione did use it for homework, that is why she was so exhausted 
> > > all the time, it wasn't just the fact of adding 2 hours to her 
day, 
> > > it was also the 2 - 3 hours she was adding for homework.  
> > 
> > CW replies:
> > Sevvie, can you give me a quote to back this up ?> 
> Severus here:
> 
> O.K:
> Pg. 395 PoA US softback
> 
> "It's called a time turner," Hermione whispered "and I got it from 
Professor 
> McGonagall on our first day back.  I've been using it all year to 
get to all my lessons.
"I'd never, ever use it for anything except my studies...I've been 
turning it back so I 
> could do hours over again, that's how I've been doing several 
lessons at once, see?"
> 
> Hermione is using the word "studies" indicating homework, and then 
uses the word "lessons" again to indicate classes.  The only thing 
she didn't use it for was more sleep, which she could have used.  But 
that is JMHO.  Feel free to tear it apart. And I 
> think there is another reference but I can't seem to find it.  And 
sorry this took so long. 
> Sevvie

Reply from CW:

I guess you could read it this way at a stretch ! But the more 
circumstantial evidence, that we continually see her surrounded by 
towering piles of books, frantically trying to catch up on all sorts 
of essays, I think suggests that she is only using the time-turner to 
attend the actual classes. 

Surely, if she used the time-turner to do her homework, she would 
also be slightly calmer and more organised, if still very, very 
tired? That feeling you get when you finish a piece of work late at 
night, and you stagger to bed exhausted, but relieved ? (I speak as a 
self-employed person working long hours at home !)

Constance Vigilance in message 80026 further commented about the UK 
term Hermione would have used:

>I think Hermione is using the word "studies" to mean "education". If 
she had meant studying, as in homework, I think she would have used 
the British term "revising". I have to agree with Carolyn and say 
that I think Hermione is using the timeturner only for attending 
simulaneous lessons, and is using her own time for homework and 
studying.

(CW again):
As another Brit, I agree on the terminology here. But the situation 
is a bit more complicated isn't it ? Steve commented (79818):

>You have to understand that Hermione, when she is time-turning, is
experiencing linear time. That is, if she time turns 6 hours a day,
then her days (linear time) are 30 hours long even though the day
itself (timeline) is only 24 hourse long.I give some good examples of 
how time turning really puts a strain on the time tuner (the person) 
in this post -
Hermione Aging via Time turner
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/53555
And you are right... No wonder she was exhausted.

(CW again): and then there are the practical problems associated with 
time-turning:	

Nemi commented (79809): 

>I can understand WHY she couldn't use it for her homework though. 
She'd be in her dorm doing it. And you aren't allowed to see your 
past self, right? So it's a no go. Doesn't mean she still couldn't 
have used it between classes, or right after all of the classes were 
done, time turn back a few hours hide, do her home work. Seems to me 
Hermione just wasn't thinking.

Wyld commented (79820): And, on second thought, if she was sitting in 
the Gryffindor common 
room doing her homework, every time she turned it back there would be 
another Hermione sitting there beside her. I have to think someone 
would notice that.

Draco382 commented (79831):

>My thoughts on why she couldn't use the time turner to do homework 
was, if she could sleep in, spend all the time she wanted on 
homework, and use the time turner as and when she pleased, it 
wouldn't make her very different from any other student. What i mean 
is, she wouldn't really be any MORE challenged than any ordinary 
student at Hogwarts since she'll basically have all the time in the 
world to do her assignments. Since she's been singled out as 
a "exemplary student" i suppose she's got to have some challenge 
beyond the mad 9-10 class schedule. Otherwise, it would probably be 
too easy for Hermione i would imagine.

CW again:

Without wishing to get into the many complex theories about how time-
turning actually works that have been posted, it does seem to me that 
there are still some inconsistencies here. Whatever theory you 
believe in, I don't see why it shouldn't work equally well for 
classes and homework.

Hermione uses the time-turner to attend any class she needs to, 
wherever it conflicts with another class she needs to attend. 
Although she is doing some courses that Harry and Ron are not eg 
muggle studies, arithmancy and runes, surely some of her fellow 
Gryffindors are in these other classes too? Even if they are not, the 
different houses do talk to each other: did no-one notice Hermione 
was in one place, and not think it odd that she was also in another 
place at the same time ? Classes are not silent places, interaction 
goes on, jokes, swapping notes, all the usual stuff, Hermione would 
be part of all that a couple of times over each day.

Assuming this problem is easily sorted out by one of the time-turning 
theories (I liked Corinth's explanation in 79924 !), why can't the 
same principles be applied to let her do her homework ? Or, if she 
can't be seen doing it, there must be a room somewhere which would be 
suitable (?the room of requirement maybe) ?

However it works though, she has to retain a memory of what she's 
doing, obviously, or the whole exercise would be pointless.

Any thoughts ? (she said somewhat nervously, girding herself for the 
stinging replies from the experts on time travel and memory 
mutiliation..)

	
	




	
	





	
	






From fc26det at aol.com  Sun Sep  7 12:41:44 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 12:41:44 -0000
Subject: Was Fudge talking about Sirius?
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20030907005721.00a6a108@localhost>
Message-ID: <bjf928+uicm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80109

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Fred Uloth <prof_uloth at h...> 
wrote:
> 
> I believe this was in reference to Peter Petigrew, who is believed 
to be 
> dead. This sounds like a summary of the whole PoA finally, but how 
does 
> Fudge know about the time turner being involved?

Now Susan:
I believe he was talking about Pettigrew also.  He would know about 
the time turner being used because he is the minister of magic and 
Hermoine said that McGonnagall had to get approval from the ministry 
for her to use it.  I also think DD tried to explain how they knew 
Pettigrew was alive and Sirius was innocent at the end of POA.  Fudge 
just refused to believe it.
Susan




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sun Sep  7 13:56:21 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 13:56:21 -0000
Subject: Alchemy revisited: OOP prediction confirmed
In-Reply-To: <20030907052731.9568.qmail@web21104.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjfde5+cpee@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80110

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Petra Pan <ms_petra_pan at y...> 
wrote:
> Hans, in part:
> > If HP is a window on to the real
> > Path of Liberation as taught by 
> > all the historical great spiritual
> > leaders, and I think it is, then 
> > Harry's journey is exactly the
> > opposite of what you state, and
> > our beloved boy needs no mourning
> > from us!
> 
> Geoff, in part:
> > I fear that I must disagree with
> > Hans that Harry Potter is a window 
> > to the real Path of Liberation as
> > outlined in his posts. If there is 
> > evidence pointing to such a route,
> > it is the evidence which directs 
> > readers to Christian belief.
> 
> Erm...why insist on the distinction?  
> As I understand it, the teachings of 
> Christ are *part* of what makes up 
> the basis for Hans's "the real Path 
> of Liberation."
> 
> I am at a complete loss as to why 
> canon cited by Hans to support the 
> teachings of those he terms "the 
> great brotherhood of the Teachers of 
> Compassion"/"all the historical 
> great spiritual leaders" (in which 
> Hans has included Christ) should be 
> considered the sole property of one 
> and only one out of the entire 
> group.
> 
> Would it be possible to enlighten me 
> without getting back on the pulpit?
> 

Geoff:
This is where we do not agree because I do not believe that 
Christianity is part of the Path for Liberation. Rather, other faiths 
may contain part of what Christianity claims as a whole.

Just in passing, there is a subtle difference in my personal view 
between "religion" and "faith". Religion involves head knowledge and 
many folk who are "religious" see their religion as following a set 
of rules and that joining a particular religious group is a bit like 
joining a golf club or a dramatic society ? they sign on and follow 
the rules. I am sorry that that statement sounds possibly flippant; 
it is not easy to put in other terms. Faith, on the other hand, 
involves an intellectual, emotional and spiritual acceptance of the 
belief. Christianity claims to be unique in that true followers have 
made a personal commitment and, in return know the presence of Christ 
living within their lives. Part of the problem is that many folk who 
claim to be Christian are in fact not; George Carey referred to the 
distinction between  "Christianity" and "Churchianity" some years ago 
and the matter is clouded when observers who are not believers do not 
perceive the difference.

I believe people who like the Harry Potter novels and use them in 
their search can find it to be in keeping with their views as you say 
but I am viewing it from the standpoint of a committed believer that 
Jesus is God in human form. 

I might add, as an aside, that Tolkien and Lewis are not "co-opted" 
because both of them were Christians who wrote from their point of 
view as a foundation for their books. Various people try to "back" co-
opt them to cover their ideas but, at base, they both wrote from that 
angle and, Lewis, certainly intended that the Narnia books should be 
seen as reflecting his Christian experience.

OK, you feel that you must protest any attempt to tie JKR to one 
religion. I accept that although I speak from a personal view; I 
still see Harry as paralleling the Christian's search for and 
relationship with God. He was saved by a loving sacrifice and has 
enjoyed its protection. Christ gave himself lovingly as a sacrifice 
which will continue to protect those who accept it at face value. 
Harry's life and outlook have been influenced openly and 
subconsciously by what he has learned about his mother's "gift" and 
he sees the way in which his life ought to move forward as a result. 
Likewise, the life a genuine Christian is influenced in the same way 
by the gift of salvation through the resurrection and we learn to 
seek the way in which our lives in the real world should move 
forward. 

(It is an interesting fact about Harry that he inspires totally 
opposed reactions from Christians in particular. There are folk in my 
own church who are converted folk like myself who hold diametrically 
opposite views on the books; makes for interesting discussions.)

I can only put forward my own views; I accept that others may not 
agree because they have their own interpretation of what life is all 
about. The difficulty is that not all beliefs can lead to the same 
outcome. But that is OT as far as this discussion group is concerned.





From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sun Sep  7 14:12:06 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 14:12:06 -0000
Subject: Feelings on OoP
In-Reply-To: <bjdndp+sl74@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjfebm+cqi2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80111

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Mev532" <mev532 at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" 
<msbeadsley at y...> 
> wrote:
> > "mom31" <mom31 at r...> wrote: <<I've been wondering how everyone 
> else 
> > is feeling about OoP now that we've had time to re-read it and 
let 
> it 
> > sink in.  
> 

Dave:
> A lot of people have criticized this work as 'a downer' or bleak or 
> depressing but in a way these are the aspects that really impressed 
> me about the book. I feel the tone and content of the stories 
> has 'grown up'  as Harry has begun seeing more gray in his 
> previously black and white world. 
> 
> One point that I was impressed with was Harry's emotional state. So 
> many times on television, in movies, or in novels people go through 
> what should be very traumatic experiences and by the next 
> installment they are all better. Real life doesn't work like this! 
> If anyone had gone through what Harry had at the end of GOF he/she 
> would have had emotional problems too. 
> 
> Harry has become a character with more depth, I feel, than many in 
> novels. I thought the moments of furious self justification in 
which 
> he exclaimed (I'm paraphrasing) 'who defeated quirrel? Who killed 
> the basilisk? Who met lord voldemort and lived to tell about it, 
> me!' were realistic, along with his completely conflicting 
> statements about how he had always gotten lucky or had help when 
> Hermione tried to convince him to teach the DA. This kind of 'look 
> at things one way one second, look at them completely differently 
in 
> a different situation/mood' seemed to me such a wonderfully human 
> (and perhaps teenagerish) trait. We all get angry and are often 
> unfair to those that we really owe a lot to.
> 

<snipped>

Geoff:
For me, one of the defining moments in OOTP where Harry's increasing 
maturity comes through is where he admits - half to himself and half 
to Dumbledore - that he is feeling guilty about neglecting to master 
Occlumency. (p.731 UK edition).It is bad enough as an adult trying to 
admit guilt but for someone of Harry's age, it is a high barrier to 
surmount.




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Sun Sep  7 14:21:46 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 14:21:46 -0000
Subject: Feelings on OoP
In-Reply-To: <bjdndp+sl74@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjfetq+86ct@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80112

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Mev532" <mev532 at y...> wrote:
> 
> A lot of people have criticized this work as 'a downer' or bleak or 
> depressing but in a way these are the aspects that really impressed 
> me about the book. I feel the tone and content of the stories 
> has 'grown up'  as Harry has begun seeing more gray in his 
> previously black and white world. 

<snipped some good throughts here>

> While sometimes painful to read I feel the realistic gritty feel to 
> the characters made up for the books faults.  I feel every book in 
> the series is better than the last, OOP included. Anyone else think 
> so?

Jen:

Even though I'm one who characterizes OOTP as bleak, I didn't dislike 
the book in the context of the series.  

Yes, it was painful to read at times, watching Harry so tormented  
and disconnected from his support group.  On the other hand, he grew 
tremendously through this process of learning to rely on himself 
rather than depending on Ron, Hermione, Sirius or Dumbledore 
to "translate" the workings of the WW for him, and give meaning to 
his experience. Harry can do that for himself, now.

Watching one of my favorie characters, Sirius, essentially imprisoned 
again, spiraling down into a very dark place, and then killed 
(symbolically sacrificed for the plot)--ouch, not what I wanted to 
see happen. But on some level I knew Sirius's role had been fulfilled 
and that it would be very hard as a writer to continue to deal with a 
character who is backed in a corner with nowhere to go. So I could 
accept he had to exit.

And there were bright moments: Luna has a whole chapter named for 
her!  I think her intuitive gifts will be important for Harry's 
development in the future. And I found the introduction of the DA, 
with Harry's evolution into a leader and teacher, as both believable 
and essential for future books.

The bottom line for me with OOTP: I grieve for the more innocent, 
naive Harry who always had his friends to turn to, a seemingly 
infallible Dumbledore to explain the world, and exciting adventures 
with his friends where they always triumphed. But that ended at the 
graveyard in GOF, "time to put away childish things", and now the 
gritty part of growing up begins. 

As I parent, I sometimes want to shield my child from the ugly parts 
of the world, at the same time knowing that I won't always be able to 
do that. I have those same feelings about Harry. OOTP makes it clear 
that no one can shield him--he is the one bearing the burdens now.






From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk  Sun Sep  7 14:43:05 2003
From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Ivan=20Vablatsky?=)
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 15:43:05 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The magic power of love. Was: BANG! You're dead!
In-Reply-To: <bhbi2u+cj6k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030907144305.7816.qmail@web21508.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80113

 --- Golly (feetmadeofclay) wrote in message 76803 (Aug. 12th): 
>>we didn't see Harry show a great deal of magical skill in DADA either. 
Sure he's battled Voldemort a few times and he has a kick ass patronus, but
most of it is either his untapped talent (the Imperious) or just luck (the 
sister wand thing).<<

Hans:
Sorry about the long delay. Busy life!

It's really amazing how different people can read HP and end up with totally
different conclusions. For example I don't think Harry's victories are due
to luck at all. I think it's due to his refulgent inner qualities, his
supernal spiritual assets. I wish I had them!

Golly:
>>Harry's got intuition but he's never been shown to be a great 
strategist beyond the Patronus he's never really honed any skill - 
not even Occulumency. He is pretty much lucky most of the time. Book 
1 he barely did anything. Hermione was the smart one and Ron the 
stragegist.  Harry just had the Mum Gaurd on.<< 

Hans:
I'm just a tiny bit flabbergasted when I read this. Are you serious?

The only reason Voldemort was interested in Harry was because he had
extracted the Philosopher's Stone from the mirror. That, in my opinion is
the whole point of Book 1. Harry was able to do what Quirrel/Voldemort would
have been unable to do in a thousand years of looking at the mirror. And
Harry was able to get the Stone because he DIDN'T want to use it! 

This Stone is able to bring an unlimited healthy life amongst undreamed of
wealth and luxury. It can guarantee absolute and total power, fame, esteem.
Money ("gold") can buy all these things. Yet Harry wanted none of these. His
divine inner quality was beyond wanting any of that. He was more interested
in saving the world - you and me!

This is going to earn me a rap on the knuckles - but do you remember that
brilliant scene in the movie where Harry holds the Stone in his hands and
Voldemort tempts him? Did you see the longing in his eyes? But nothing
stopped him from his determination to stop Voldemort getting the Stone. 

How many of us can truly say we could pass that test? You never have to see
a doctor again, you can buy the best palace in the best spot, you can help
your poor grandmother who's dying of cancer by paying for the best doctor in
the world, and so on - without limit.

You call that "He barely did anything"?

By making THAT choice Harry invoked the wrath of Voldemort, and it was only
THEN that his mother's love-guard was needed.

Harry here shows supreme selflessness and courage.

Golly:
>>Fawkes saved him in book 2 and he got a a sword (though he succeeded in
using it).<<

Hans:
Yes Fawkes saved him. But why did Fawkes COME? Because Harry invoked him!
How? By showing his loyalty to Dumbledore. Have you forgotten what Harry
said to Tom Riddle?
'Youre not, he said, his quiet voice full of hatred.
Not what? snapped Riddle.
'Not the greatest sorcerer in the world, said Harry, breathing fast. Sorry
to disappoint you, and all that, but the greatest wizard in the world is
Albus Dumbledore.'
THEY were the magic words that brought Fawkes to Harry's aid. Dumbledore
even comliments Harry afterwards. He says, 'You must have shown me real
loyalty down in the Chamber. Nothing but that could have called Fawkes to
you.'

So it's Harry's own action that invoke Fawkes' help. This of course totally
leaving aside the fact that Harry was there to save Ginny, whom he didn't
even particularly know very well.

Harry's superb inner qualities shown here are compassion, loyalty, bravery.

Golly:
>>Book 3 he never showed any action because in the end he didn't need to.  
What we saw instead was compassion.<<


Hans: 
You're joking, aren't you! You're having us all on just to be provocative,
aren't you!

Oh yes, ONLY compassion. Are we talking about Harry Potter and the Prisoner
of Azkaban? In my copy Harry wins the battle against fear. Not just fear of
something, but the fear of fear itself (as Lupin says). In my copy Harry
summons a patronus that drives off 100 dementors! I don't want to get into
time travel; let's keep it simple. Harry summons the patronus because of the
practice he's had with Lupin. If he hadn't had that practice he wouldn't
have been able to do it. And why is the patronus a stag? As I've said in
several posts, the stag is the symbol for the soul's longing for God, as
expressed so powerfully in Psalm 42. You may not accept a Judeo-Christian
symbol, but he still summoned that Patronus. He still vanquished fear. 

Golly:
>>In book 4 he cheated his way through the tournament when it was clear 
that Barty expected him to be able to win of his own accord. Afterall 
he was Harry Potter...  Even after cheating Cedric nearly beat him.  
Really it wasn't expelleramus alone that saved him.  Harry had a big 
helping hand from fate with that wand thing.<<

With that wand thing? That wand thing!? If you or I or anyone else had faced
Voldemort with Harry's wand we would have been cinders in a nanosecond.
There was no luck there at all. It was a matter of will-power. 
I quote:"As the closest bead of light moved nearer to Harrys wand tip, the
wood beneath his fingers grew so hot he feared it would burst into flame.
The closer that bead moved, the harder Harry's wand vibrated; he was sure
his wand would not survive contact with it; it felt as though it was about
to shatter under his fingers - He concentrated every last particle of his
mind upon forcing the bead back toward Voldemort, his ears full of phoenix
song, his eyes furious, fixed . . . and slowly, very slowly, the beads
quivered to a halt, and then, just as slowly, they began to move the other
way . . . and it was Voldemort's wand that was vibrating extra-hard now . .
. Voldemort who looked astonished, and almost fearful. . . .
One of the beads of light was quivering, inches from the tip of Voldemorts
wand. Harry didn't understand why he was doing it, didn't know what it might
achieve . . . but he now concentrated as he had never done in his life on
forcing that bead of light right back into Voldemort s wand . . . and slowly
. . . very slowly ... it moved along the golden thread ... it trembled for a
moment. . . and then it connected. . . ." 

It's only AFTER Harry's will-power forces the bead into Voldemort's wand
that the Priori Incantatem begins to work. If Harry hadn't had that
extraordinary determination and will-power it would have all ended with book
4. Wand thing indeed!

Golly:
>>What is to stop her from saying that pushing Voldemort out of his 
mind is a kind of mental discipline?  Afterall he did succeed mildly 
with Snape in the end...  Perhaps that will be enough.  Lame I'll 
grant you. But I haven't your faith that the story has to have any 
internal logic.<<

Hans:
She (JKR) won't say that because Harry didn't push Voldemort out by mental
discipline. The whole point of book 5 is that the liberation of the mental
ego is NOT achieved by mental discipline but by Love. I really can't believe
you're serious. 

To sum up Harry's inner qualities:
Book 1: selflessness, courage.
Book 2: compassion, loyalty, bravery
Book 3: (as well as the above things:) victory over fear
Book 4: a will-power greater than Voldemort's
Book 5: a Love which is greater than any power one person can have over
another (my conclusion)

It's amazing how, what I consider the main point of each book, actually
takes only a line or two in each book. Is there just a chance of one in a
trillion that you're serious in what you're saying? That you missed those
vital few lines in each book?

Golly:
>>So ... I have a couple of packs of chocolate frogs.  I'll take that 
bet. I could use a decent cauldron. Mine current one's bottom is too 
thin.  Keeps leaking my draught of peace all over the floor.<<

Hans:
Right Golly, you're on. Three chocolate frogs (Aussie ones. is that
alright?)

Hans in Holland


________________________________________________________________________
Want to chat instantly with your online friends?  Get the FREE Yahoo!
Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk



From sylviablundell at aol.com  Sun Sep  7 14:55:09 2003
From: sylviablundell at aol.com (sylviablundell2001)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 14:55:09 -0000
Subject: Prank
Message-ID: <bjfgsd+97up@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80114

I'm getting increasingly worried about the use of this word "prank". 
It has such a light-hearted sound about it. My dictionary defines it 
as "a sportive trick, a mischievous act".  I can see nothing sportive 
or mischievous about an act that can lead to someone's death.  I 
can't believe DD's casual attitude to it.  Ask yourself how you would 
have reacted if one of your children had confessed to such a "prank".
Sylvia (who knows damn well what would have happened to any of hers)




From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com  Sun Sep  7 15:02:29 2003
From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 7 Sep 2003 15:02:29 -0000
Subject: Reminder - Weekly Chat 
Message-ID: <1062946949.30.28996.m4@yahoogroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80115


We would like to remind you of this upcoming event.

Weekly Chat 

Date: Sunday, September 7, 2003 
Time: 11:00AM - 7:00PM CDT (GMT-05:00) 

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 constancevigilance at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 15:14:04 2003
From: constancevigilance at yahoo.com (Susan Miller)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 15:14:04 -0000
Subject: FILK: You Gotta Have Smarts
Message-ID: <bjfhvs+36ho@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80116

In the continuing quest to ensure that all the founders get the 
tuneful recognition they deserve, I dedicate Rowena's filk to my 
mentor, Haggridd.

You Gotta Have Smarts!

Here's the midi: http://www.hamienet.com/7082.mid

THE SCENE:

The four founders are arguing about what makes the best Hogwarts 
student. Godric Gryffindor says it's bravery, Helga Hufflepuff 
proposes diligence, Salazar Slyterin wants cunning and guile. But 
Rowena Ravenclaw has something else in mind ....

Rowena:
[Spoken over the musical lead-in]
See guys, that's what I'm talking about. Magic is only one half 
skill, the other half is something else.....something bigger!

{sings}

You've gotta have smarts!
With the sciences and arts.
If you want to be a Ravenclaw plebe
Your IQ must be beyond the charts.

You gotta be wise
Enough to win a Nobel Prize.
When the cards are cut it's you with the ace,
No second place or ties.

If stupidity's your boggart,
Then you're halfway through the door,
If your last name isn't Lockhart
You're the one I'm looking for!
Be at the Tower in an hour.

You gotta be bright
For an Eagle House invite.
Oh it's fine to be a Quidditch jock, too.
The Bronze and the Blue Unite!
But ya gotta read and write.

You must be A-plus
Before becoming one of us.
You must carry that intelligence gene
You better be seen a genius.

You gotta earn praise,
Speak in witty repartes.
The head is better than a gray matter store,
An anchorage for toupees.

If your attic's a bit dusty,
And your belfry's full of fluff,
And your synapses are rusty,
Well, there's always Hufflepuff.
You will be glad you're with the Badger.

You gotta be smart
Put your head before your heart.
Oh it's fine to be impulsive of course,
But that's just a horse without a cart.
First you gotta be smart.

THE FOUR RESUME ARGUING, FADE TO BLACK ....

~ Constance Vigilance





From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Sun Sep  7 15:29:32 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 15:29:32 -0000
Subject: Prank
In-Reply-To: <bjfgsd+97up@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjfiss+9n70@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80117

Sylvia wrote:
> I'm getting increasingly worried about the use of this 
word "prank". 
> It has such a light-hearted sound about it. My dictionary defines 
> it as "a sportive trick, a mischievous act".  I can see nothing 
> sportive or mischievous about an act that can lead to someone's 
> death.  I can't believe DD's casual attitude to it.  


I suspect Dumbledore saw it as an incredibly stupid action by a 
notoriously impulsive 16 year old [Unless Sirius was less impulsive 
as a child than he was as an adult]. But felt that said 16 year old 
(Sirius) had never realised that what he was doing might actually 
kill Snape.

Further, if Dumbledore had punished Sirius, the whole story about 
Lupin being a werewolf would have come out. There would have been a 
huge outcry, and no doubt many parents would have insisted that this 
*proved* Lupin wasn't safe to have at Hogwarts. 

Lupin, who was as much an innocent victim as Snape [unless you 
support Pippin's Evil!Lupin], would have been punished as well. He 
would have had to leave Hogwarts. 

So I suspect it was mainly for Lupin's sake that the matter was 
hushed up. 

It's also becoming obvious that Sirius's parents weren't the type to 
complain if their son accidentally murdered someone -  Mother 
would've probably given Sirius a few hints on doing it better next 
time. ;-) Dumbledore was left with very few options.

As to the word 'prank' - try saying it with an ironic British 
inflection in the voice [grin]. 

Pip!Squeak




From jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 15:38:43 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 15:38:43 -0000
Subject: FILK: You Gotta Have Smarts
In-Reply-To: <bjfhvs+36ho@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjfje3+81lb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80118

Brava, Susan!
This is a lovely, lighthearted splendid filk, and quite well crafted.
My favorite verse:

> 
> If stupidity's your boggart,
> Then you're halfway through the door,
> If your last name isn't Lockhart
> You're the one I'm looking for!
> Be at the Tower in an hour.


What a tribute to the Founders!

Haggridd




From sylviablundell at aol.com  Sun Sep  7 16:44:59 2003
From: sylviablundell at aol.com (sylviablundell2001)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 16:44:59 -0000
Subject: Prank
Message-ID: <bjfnab+5tjf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80119

Oh come on! A sixteen year old boy wouldnt realize that the nasty 
jape he was engaged in might actually kill Snape!!  What sort of an 
idiot was he!Sirius knew perfectly well that his "prank" might 
involve the death of either Snape or Lupin, he just didn't care, so 
long as he got a laugh out of it.
I agree that DD had a duty to protect Lupin and so would not want to 
bring the whole nasty matter out into the open, but he still seems to 
have taken a rather light-hearted "boys will be boys" attitude. You 
don't hear of any repercussions from Snape's parents.Probably he 
didn't tell them, given what we later see of them.Must admit your 
take on Sirius' mother's reaction had me giggling.
Sylvia (who is English, has tried saying "prank" with an ironic 
British inflection, and still doesn't like it)




From melclaros at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 17:39:25 2003
From: melclaros at yahoo.com (melclaros)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 17:39:25 -0000
Subject: Prank
In-Reply-To: <bjfnab+5tjf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjfqgd+73ua@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80120

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sylviablundell2001" 
<sylviablundell at a...> wrote:
> I agree that DD had a duty to protect Lupin and so would not want 
to 
> bring the whole nasty matter out into the open, but he still seems 
to 
> have taken a rather light-hearted "boys will be boys" attitude. You 
> don't hear of any repercussions from Snape's parents.Probably he 
> didn't tell them, given what we later see of them.


me:
A couple of things--as to your 1st post, I think if a child of mine 
confessed to being a part of an ambush like that (or if I'd  been 
informed by school authorities) he'd be in much the same condition as 
yours <G>. He'd damned well be hoping he's not expelled because life 
at home would be no picnic for very, very long time.

Snape's parents--I've been supressing my gut reaction to this for a 
few reasons. One of which is the opposite of my above statement--if 
I'd found out my child was the target of such an action--well let's 
just say HW would be looking for a new castle. I wonder if Snape 
didn't tell his parents out of fear of being ridiculed for 
being "weak" or if he was told NOT to inform them (stomach starting 
to churn) as part of this "vast coverup". Silence was bought somehow 
I'm sure. Now if we were talking about an adult cutting a deal that 
would be one thing, but we're talking about at 16 year old who 
believes he's nearly been murdered, (Based on the previous treatment 
he likely had good reason--and yes, don't go on about how he was just 
as bad. I'm sure he did plenty of vile things to MMWP but we never 
hear Sirius or Lupin claim that he ever endangered anyone's life and 
you KNOW Sirius would have jumped on that wagon right away--"But 
he...!") 
Now here's a really sickening thought. What if Snape's parents *were* 
told and (Daddy Dearest especially) were in on this silence deal? Can 
you imagine the sense of betrayal? Not only his school support system 
was turning it's collective back on him, but his family as well.
It's crushing either way--if he didn't tell them for fear of being 
further humilated or he didn't tell them because he was either 
threatened or paid off--the whole thing makes my skin crawl.


Melpomene who really knows better than to get involved with "prank" 
threads.





From elizabeth1603 at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 17:42:40 2003
From: elizabeth1603 at yahoo.com (elizabeth1603)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 17:42:40 -0000
Subject: Inheriting Grim Old Place (was Turncoat Tonks; Aurors; etc.)
In-Reply-To: <20030907082732.17355.qmail@web60210.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjfqmg+i19c@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80121


>snip<
<< As it stands, Sirius's nearest blood relatives are the Malfoys, 
> > > the Tonkses, and Bellatrix Lestrange (ugh!).  The Blacks 
> > > could have add a clause stating specifically a condition for 
> > > inheritance: that the family properties would remain in the
family, here Bellatrix and Narcissa, or Andromeda if she has not been 
> > > specifically excluded, wich I doubt. 
>snip<
> > > silmariel
> > 

> 
Kat O'Klzmk/rxk:
>snip<
 However, if the estate (house) is "entailed" it generally goes to 
the next closest male family member (occasionally female member).
>snip< 
Otherwise it could e an uncle; cousin; second cousin etc. If it's 
entailed to the nearest lood relative regardless of gender, it could 
possibly be whomever was the eldest of the three cousins mentioned, 
which includes Andromeda (or ONKS Y DEFAULT) or Narcissa (or even 
Draco, if it's an entailment clause arranged so that the property cn 
pass through a female relation ut only e inherited by a male). 
>snip<

Now me (Elli):
The idea of Draco's receiving the house is very interesting. I can't, 
offhand think of another male, blood relative who is more closely 
related to Sirius. What if he inherited it, but couldn't find it 
because Dumbledore didn't lift the secret keeper spell? What if he 
somehow ended up helping the Order (big if) by letting them have it 
back?




From deemarie1a at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 17:43:12 2003
From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 17:43:12 -0000
Subject: Feelings on OoP - Neville, Ginny, and a little Harry
In-Reply-To: <bjf61s+j98m@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjfqng+973i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80122

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Wanda Sherratt" 
<wsherratt3338 at r...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Donna" <deemarie1a at y...> 
> wrote:
> > I think we will still see a very angry and depressed Harry in 
book 
> 6, 
> > but I believe here is where we will see JKR make Harry into the 
> man 
> > he will become.  I don't think that Harry will die.  If he does, 
> then 
> > even if he has killed LV, the Dark forces will be able to take 
> over 
> > WW.
> > 
> Oh, God, please don't let it be true!  If Book 6 features a very 
> angry and depressed Harry as you predict, I think Rowling really 
had 
> better just kill him.  Frankly, I'd prefer her just to skip Book 7 
> and have him hang himself in Book 6; no happy ending will make up 
> for another volume of screaming, sulking, pouting and puking.
> 
> Wanda

Oh dear!  I didn't mean that he would remain angry and depressed 
through the whole of book 6.  I do believe that Harry, who is really 
quite intelligent will begin the story in book 6 that way.  But with 
the help of his friends and mentors will move beyond that.  He is 
still a child after all.  But he will really begin to mature and 
understand who he is and what he is going to accomplish.

Understandably, he will probably rebel against what he thinks he has 
to do, but by the end of the story, we will see Harry with a resolve 
and understanding of what might happen.  I believe book 6 will be 
where Harry comes to terms with DD and what he did.  We will see a 
more mature relationship with DD.  And Harry will learn to deal with 
his own guilt, for I believe while he still blames Snape, he still 
thinks it was partly his own fault that Sirius died.  

This story will be the set up for the final showdown in Book 7.  The 
last story will be filled with adventure, tension, tragedy, comedy; a 
whole gamut of emotions and action.  It should be a rip roaring 
read.  At least I hope so.  I finally realize what anticipation is.

D - I feel like a kid waiting for Christmas!




From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Sun Sep  7 18:21:12 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 18:21:12 -0000
Subject: Prank
In-Reply-To: <bjfnab+5tjf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjfsuo+9der@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80123

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sylviablundell2001" 
<sylviablundell at a...> wrote:
> Oh come on! A sixteen year old boy wouldnt realize that the nasty 
> jape he was engaged in might actually kill Snape!!  What sort of 
> an idiot was he!Sirius knew perfectly well that his "prank" might 
> involve the death of either Snape or Lupin, he just didn't care, 
> so long as he got a laugh out of it.

The 'we were too stupid to realise' is almost canon. It's Lupin's 
view of the 'werewolf outings'. 

"There were near misses, many of them. We laughed about them 
afterwards. We were young, thoughtless - carried away with our own 
cleverness.' [PoA, UK paperback, Ch. 18 p.260]

In other words, MWPP were the Golden Boys. Nothing could hurt them, 
nothing could go wrong. Everything they did was right. Whatever plan 
Sirius came up with would scare Snape to death, but couldn't go 
wrong enough to kill him. No, the Golden Boys were too clever for 
that [grin].

Sirius, frankly, was a pillock. Which he shows in PoA, GoF and OOP. 

I mean, sorry, but what does he actually *do* in GoF apart from 
worry Harry half to death because Sirius has put himself in deadly 
danger for him? 


Pip!Squeak [grinning, ducking and running]





From marcuscason at charter.net  Sun Sep  7 16:40:37 2003
From: marcuscason at charter.net (Marcus Cason)
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 12:40:37 -0400
Subject: Feelings on OoP
Message-ID: <NHBBKCEDCLBKJHNFIGEKMEDPCAAA.marcuscason@charter.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 80124

Dave Said:

"One point that I was impressed with was Harry's emotional state. So
many times on television, in movies, or in novels people go through
what should be very traumatic experiences and by the next
installment they are all better. Real life doesn't work like this!
If anyone had gone through what Harry had at the end of GOF he/she
would have had emotional problems too."



I don't think anyone has a problem with Harry reacting emotionally to
events.

I believe the contention is how JKR has him reacting.  A lot of people that
I have talked to seems to believe that Harry would react to events with introvert behaviour (by withrawing from those around him, depression, shouting, etc.) rather than extrovert behavior (temper tantrums, jealousy, violent behavior, etc.).

Considering the childhood he has with the Dursley and his previously seen personality, it does make sense.

Harry has never really before exhibited much of a temper or jealousy, but he
always did have a tendency to withdraw when things were bothering him.

Kyntor
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.514 / Virus Database: 312 - Release Date: 8/28/03





From Barbara_Bowen at hotmail.com  Sun Sep  7 18:49:07 2003
From: Barbara_Bowen at hotmail.com (barbara_mbowen)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 18:49:07 -0000
Subject: Questions about year 6:  the Prank, the Marauders & Snape
Message-ID: <bjfuj3+fdn7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80125

Many apologies if what I say has been discussed
before: I tried a Snape and werewolf search but the sheer 
volume of things not altogether pertinent wore me out.

So, please let me know if I'm stepping on your own
theory, and guide me to the post #.  I'd love to see
what others have thought on these subjects and revive
the discussion.

Okay, while waiting for JKR, here are the questions I
want answered.

The Marauders:  What happened to Sirius and James in
6th year?  This is the year Harry will be in book 6,
at age 16.  At 16 Sirius, newly become an animagus,
almost got Snape killed, and ran away from home.  At
15, James was a "berk" and Lily hated him.  At 17 he
was Head Boy and dating Lily.  I really want to know
in Book 6 what happened at age 16 to both of these
characters.

Sirius:  did almost getting Snape killed cause his
parents to go berserk and goad him into running away? 
Or, (more likely IMO seeing what creeps the Black
parents were) did they go berserk because their
pureblood boy was hanging out with a werewolf?  It's
no wonder Sirius did some awful things.  What's
miraculous (considering his background) is that he
ever did any good. (And hey, Black bashers, he *did*
do some good:  he was the only adult to offer Harry
unconditional love and support, something Harry
desperately needed.). For Sirius' salvation we can
thank James and Remus' friendship; and Dumbledore. 
The crux of all this is year 6, when they were 16.

Lupin:  why is he still Sirius' friend?  He might have
bitten Snape and turned him into a werewolf.  He might
have killed Snape.  In either case, what would have
happened to Lupin?  Azkaban?  Or a death sentence? 
Why has he forgiven Sirius?  Remus is an understanding
guy, but sheesh.  So, there must be something else we
don't know about that prank.

Which brings me to Snape.  Maybe he did get bitten. 
Then it would be logical that he knows (perhaps even
invented) the potion that keeps werewolves "safe".  It
would also explain why the prank got hushed up: 
Dumbledore now had two werewolves to protect. And it
could be why Remus, not Sirius, had the right to talk
to Snape about the Occlumency lessons.  It could also
explain why Snape went to Voldemort, then left him. 
Voldy is happy to exploit dark creatures, but his
agenda is: purebloods rule.  Not outcasts like
werewolves. It could also explain why Dumbledore
trusts Snape:  he saved Snape from exposure as a
werewolf and protects him at Hogwarts then and now.
Snape knows from experience that only a world where
Dumbledore has triumphed will be safe for him.  And
no, I don't think the fact that he "outed" Lupin in
book 3 contradicts this theory.  What could Lupin say?
 "Yeah, I'm a werewolf:  but so is he!  I bit him
right here at Hogwarts!"  (Besides, he needs that
potion of Snape's...he can't out Snape, or Snape would
never give it to him again.) Snape's bitterness would
be all the more understandable.

And so, my thought is that the mutual love and
friendship of the Marauders "saved" them from becoming
evil.  There's got to be a lot of that for Lupin to
forgive Sirius, and for James to transcend what he was
at 15.  (With some sympathetic guidance from DD, of
course.)  I think this points right toward Harry's
sixth year, and his friendships with Ron, Hermione,
and I hope Luna and Neville.  Snape glowers in the
corner, a man who cut himself off from such intense
friendships.  If he is to be saved, he needs to
connect, somehow, with Harry, with *someone*.

Oh, and hey.  We *will* meet Stubby Boardman in book
6, I can feel it!  He *is* Regulus Black!  More on
that theory when I'm less exhausted by this one.

Marmelade Mom, off to feed her zoo, none of whom are
Kneazles








From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 19:06:04 2003
From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 19:06:04 -0000
Subject: Alchemy revisited: OOP prediction confirmed
In-Reply-To: <20030706131216.10329.qmail@web21503.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjfvis+b86j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80126

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Ivan Vablatsky 
<ibotsjfvxfst at y...> wrote:
<snip>
> Please tell me whether I'm a loony Lucy, a raving idiot or
> whether this is all Double Dutch. Is this theory above your
> head or beneath contempt? 
<snip> 

Says me (Richard) ...

OK, I'll be honest and say that your theory is interesting, but dies 
horribly at the edge of Occam's Razor.  The tale is about love and 
maturation, which is not totally dissimilar from your alchemical 
journey of liberation.

A *MATURE* person is "liberated" from many things over the course of 
his or her life, and many of these "liberations" occur during those 
important adolescent years, though it continues throughout the life 
of a personality that remains "genital" in the clinical psychological 
sense through that life.  In a tale set in an ethos of magic and 
alchemy, alchemical symbolism is not at all out of place.  However, I 
think reading a far deeper (and frankly arcane) symbology into such 
development is a radical over-reach.  Why?  There are many reasons, 
but the simplest is that Harry's Wizarding World is essentially 
devoid of the real historical, mythical and mystical trappings of our 
World's wizardry, witchcraft, magic and alchemy.

We are never told any of the symbolism of alchemical objects and 
ingredients.  Spells are devoid of spiritual invocation.  Magical 
power emanates from the self and from pure object, and not from 
control of any other being, spirit or such.  Rather, we are faced 
with the Wizarding-World-as-Proxy, within which JKR can set many 
synthetic ills as proxies for real world ones, teaching life-lessons 
about tolerance, patience, love and understanding WITHOUT necessarily 
tripping too many real world ideological and religious hair-triggers.

So, nice bit of hypothetical reasoning ... much like Hegel's analysis 
of the ways of this World ... and suffering from the same kind of 
criticism Kierkegaard leveled at Hegel's work (paraphrasing): If 
Hegel had just presented it as a theoretical idea, he would be ranked 
as one of the great thinkers of all time, but as Hegel claimed Truth 
for his ideas he comes out as more than a little crazy.





From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk  Sun Sep  7 19:21:15 2003
From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?udder=5Fpen=5Fdragon?=)
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 20:21:15 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Questions about year 6:  the Prank, the Marauders & Snape
In-Reply-To: <bjfuj3+fdn7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030907192115.43386.qmail@web60210.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80127

Barbara wrote
 
 

Barbara wrote

Many apologies if what I say has been discussed
before: I tried a Snape and werewolf search but the sheer 
volume of things not altogether pertinent wore me out.   <snip>

Which brings me to Snape.  Maybe he did get bitten. 
Then it would be logical that he knows (perhaps even
invented) the potion that keeps werewolves "safe". 

Udder+pen_Dragon

Snape can not be a Werewolf as in POA he is out in the full moon coming back from the shrieking shack with Lupin etc.

Sorry 

Udder_pen_Dragon






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. 



---------------------------------
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  Sun Sep  7 19:31:13 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 19:31:13 -0000
Subject: Feelings on OoP - Neville, Ginny, and a little Harry
In-Reply-To: <bjf1f0+jtdr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjg121+da9h@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80128

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Donna" <deemarie1a at y...> wrote:

> Donna said in part:
>
> ...edited...
> I think we will still see a very angry and depressed Harry in book
> 6, but I believe here is where we will see JKR make Harry into the 
> man he will become.  I don't think that Harry will die.  If he does,
> then even if he has killed LV, the Dark forces will be able to take 
> over WW.
> 
> ...edited...
> 
> D 

bboy_mn:

One additional comment about Harry's mood in the up coming book (6).
But first, I have to talk about something very unsettling, but bear
with me, it is just a setup to a couple points I want to make. 

Sometimes people are morbidly depressed to the point of becoming
suicidal. Suicide is not about a lack of desire for life. Many times
people who commit suicide are deparate for life. Suicide is really
about pain. When the pain of life becomes so unrelenting that you will
do anything to escape it, that's when suicide becomes an option. 

OK, bear with me just a few seconds more, I am almost to the point I
want to make.

Once a person is resigned to suicide as the only way to escape the
pain, they suddenly feel better; their mood improves, they become
friendlier, are more prone to heart-to-heart talks. To the outside
observer, they appear to have resolved their depression. But in
reality, knowing that the end is near, knowing that finally the pain
will stop, they feel a great weight has been lifted from their
shoulders. In their mind, it seems that all their problems have been
solved. In some ways, it's almost like a euphoria comes over them.

This euphoria or sense of peace is the key point I am trying to make.
When someone finally accepts an unwanted unpleasant destiny, their
mood changes for the better; at least their external mood.

One last sadly equally morbid point, when my father was dying of
cancer, the doctors gave us this little booklet that explained what we
could expect in terms of my father's behavior as he went throught the
various phychological stages of dying. At some point during the
process, the dying person becomes very isolated. They no longer want
their friends and family to visit; I assume, because there isn't much
to talk about anymore, and any conversation they might have is going
to be a painful reminder of 'life' that they are never going to have.
So, it's better to stay by yourself, and mentally prepare for the end.

So, two key points in this overly morbid rambling; euphoria and isolation.

I can see Harry in the next book as having an apparently improved
state of mind. Although, we may see some transition period from his
angry mood, he will be polite, friendly, and not easily drawn into
extremes, good or bad, of emotion. He has resigned himself to his
fate; he as accepted his destiny. This resignation to his fate will
bring on an outer peacefulness, but I think inwardly, he will still be
angry and in an ever changing state of emotional turmoil. 

Picture yourself being a little boy who really hasn't had a very great
life, then discovering that beyond your control, your life has been
forced into a kill or be killed situation. Can Harry or any neutral
outside observer, like the reader, see that as anything other than
miserably and tragically unfair?

Then comes the isolation. Harry said it himself, although I
paraphrase, near the end of OoP, that he felt very isolated from
everyone; completely separated from them. I think once Harry has
accepted his fate, we will see this emotional and phychological
isolation. He will be able to be amoung people, but he will never be
able to be one of them. He will always be separated by his miserable
destiny.

Certainly, Ron and Hermione, and I'm sure others, will sense this
emotional distance between Harry and themselves, but it will be very
uncertain and unsettling, because on one hand Harry, while internally
tormented, will be calm, friendly, and polite on the outside, and yet
his close friends will know that something isn't quite right. 

In the latest book, we also saw Harry come very close to getting his
friends killed because of a mistake he made. I think this will also be
an extention of his isolation. While he will remain on friendly terms
with everyone, he will no longer act like a friend. Why? Because it's
not safe to be a friend of Harry Potter. People who get too close to
Harry Potter, people who love him, invariably die, and he doesn't wish
that death on anyone. Also, he doesn't every want to feel the pain of
the death of someone he loves again. Solution? If you never love
someone, then you can never lose someone you love. 

This is how I see Harry in the next book; mood apparently improved,
calm and friendly, but while friendly, unwilling to be a friend. I
think that this is what Harry will need to resolve in the next book in
terms of his own internal landscape. To realize, that the only way to
accept life and live it to the fullest, is to accept that the risk of
death comes with it. Death is something we all risk, but if we let
fear of death stop us from living, then we lose the very life we are
trying to save.

"Better to die living than to live dying."

That ended up being quite a bit longer than I intended, but I think
you see my point. 

Apologies for the very depressing and morbid setup for my key points,
but I wanted to establish that the are genuine phychological
precidence for the points I was making.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn




From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 19:37:03 2003
From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 19:37:03 -0000
Subject: Prank
In-Reply-To: <bjfgsd+97up@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjg1cv+3g7s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80129

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sylviablundell2001" 
<sylviablundell at a...> wrote:
> I'm getting increasingly worried about the use of this 
word "prank". 
> It has such a light-hearted sound about it. My dictionary defines 
it 
> as "a sportive trick, a mischievous act".  I can see nothing 
sportive 
> or mischievous about an act that can lead to someone's death.  I 
> can't believe DD's casual attitude to it.  Ask yourself how you 
would 
> have reacted if one of your children had confessed to such 
a "prank".
> Sylvia (who knows damn well what would have happened to any of hers)

And I (Richard) reply:

Having been a "boys will be boys" kind of boy just a few decades ago, 
I take a much different view of all this than do you.  Dumbledore is 
looking at things from three perspectives: greatly seasoned age, the 
same of wisdom, and from decades after the fact.  He knows what was 
done was dangerous, but also that those parties grew out of their 
callous youths and lived to fight real battles against real evils, 
with courage and confidence.  He knows Harry sees the danger in what 
was done, and that belaboring Harry with righteous condemnation would 
serve little or no purpose but to alienate Harry.

Now, for some perspective of my own ...

As children, various friends, relatives and I did a good many things 
that were just plain dangerous.  In several of our escapades, I now 
know there was a real risk of death for one or more of us.  If a 
child of mine were to try similar things, I'd hit the roof ... though 
more as act than in real anger, as I would be trying to convince 
him/her/them that this wasn't a good idea at all, and not because I 
thought such "pranks" so unusual or horrible.  Children can generally 
do with more thinking and less reacting, or worse, acting upon 
impulses.

Having done things ranging from falling off a cliff, to jumping off 
other cliffs, to talking calmly to my mother while a dart was stuck 
in the back of my head (trying very hard to ensure she didn't see it, 
as then we would have ALL been in serious trouble), to playing with 
live copperheads and water moccasins, and a good many things in 
between, as well as having seen friends do like things and worse, I 
also know that none of us died.  We were boys ... OK, so we were 
mostly American Indian boys, which means some things that most non-
AmerInds will never understand ... and simply trying to find the 
limits of what we could and could not do.  I also know that the lot 
of us grew up to be about as confident, calm and self-assured as you 
can get.  None that I still know of today has been a failure in life, 
even if others might not agree with their personal senses of success.

Looking back, I can see a lot of humor in what we did as children, 
even as I now see and understand the dangers involved.  I would not 
trade places with anyone who has never tested any of their personal 
limits, as I think they must surely live in much greater doubt of 
themselves than those of us who pushed the limits regularly and 
firmly.  Still, you do have to impress upon children such as we were 
that there are risks, and that they really do need to be calculated 
with some care.

Having said this, let's look at modern "extreme" sports.  I think 
there is a good deal more danger in some of these sports than most 
parents and almost all children realize.  I've seen kids do things 
that I find brazenly reckless, involving significant risk to 
themselves and others.  Worse, I've seen their parents act as if this 
is just fine, and bitterly attack other adults who question the 
prudence of some of those actions.  At the same time, we've all seen 
the World become a good deal more litigious.  Everything is someone 
else's fault, even if the injured party had ample time and cause to 
know better.  This trend among parents during their childrens' 
developmental years is to me far more disturbing than the acts of the 
children themselves, as the moderating influence that parents should 
have too often doesn't exist at all.

So, I guess one of my points is that it is perhaps wiser to be calm 
at a more distant time even if the events themselves call for thunder 
and lightening at the time they happen.


Richard






From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 19:43:15 2003
From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 19:43:15 -0000
Subject: Feelings on OoP - Neville, Ginny, and a little Harry
In-Reply-To: <bjf61s+j98m@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjg1oj+hb79@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80130

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Wanda Sherratt" 
<wsherratt3338 at r...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Donna" <deemarie1a at y...> 
> wrote:
> > I think we will still see a very angry and depressed Harry in 
book 
> 6, 
> > but I believe here is where we will see JKR make Harry into the 
> man 
> > he will become.  I don't think that Harry will die.  If he does, 
> then 
> > even if he has killed LV, the Dark forces will be able to take 
> over 
> > WW.
> > 
> Oh, God, please don't let it be true!  If Book 6 features a very 
> angry and depressed Harry as you predict, I think Rowling really 
had 
> better just kill him.  Frankly, I'd prefer her just to skip Book 7 
> and have him hang himself in Book 6; no happy ending will make up 
> for another volume of screaming, sulking, pouting and puking.
> 
> Wanda

Excuse me, but I don't expect a happy ending at all, regardless of 
what happens in book 6.  Wars may end with jubilation for the winning 
side, but not without considerable grief, in the vast majority of 
cases.  Book 6 will see the marshalling of forces and the early 
battles of the war, as well as Harry as a sixteen-year-old.  Harry 
will be more identifiably the father of the man he will become, but 
it is still a difficult age, and Harry is bearing burdens beyond his 
years, so be prepared for at least an occasional out-break of angry 
adolescence ... but a few less than in OotP.

Richard





From princessmelabela at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 19:48:02 2003
From: princessmelabela at yahoo.com (Melanie Black)
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 12:48:02 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: The importance of Luna  (Was Feelings on OOP)
In-Reply-To: <bjfetq+86ct@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030907194802.70396.qmail@web20709.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80131

Jen Wrote
And there were bright moments: Luna has a whole chapter named for 
her!  I think her intuitive gifts will be important for Harry's 
development in the future. And I found the introduction of the DA, 
with Harry's evolution into a leader and teacher, as both believable 
and essential for future books.

My reply:  I loved the character of Luna, I personally believe that Luna is going to be a very pivitol character in future books to come.  I wrote a small essay on Luna awhile back that I am going to repost patially here right now:
 
  One of the things I loved about this book
is how relatable the characters were, especially the new ones. Luna and I are
very similar to eachother in that for the majority of
my young life I was the center of a great deal of
teasing from my peers. I tried to get over it, I even
tried to be nice to other people in hopes that they
would end up liking me. Hogwarts also reminded me so
much of my school at this point because I mean you
have the "good" guys who are still not going to be
nice to you...because being nice to you will end up
causing them a lot of pain. It's true..kids are very
scared of their reputation so they ignor "odd" people
in order to make themselves feel better. 

There were times when I cried for Luna. Call me a
dork but it's true. And I wanted to say another
interesting thing about her...even with all that has
happened she is the character that to me embodies the
true essence of innocence and faith. I say that
because of the conversation she had with Harry at the
end of the term.
OOP pg. 863(US edition)
Luna: "Anyway, it's not as though I'll never see Mum
again is it?" 
Harry: Er-isn't it?

Luna: "Oh come on. You heard them, just behind the
veil didn't you?"

Harry: "You mean?"

L:"In that room with the archway. They were just
lurking out of sight that's all. You heard them." 

To me and I know it's debateable but cleary JKR is
putting a homage to heaven in this part. Luna is
talking about how she will see her mother again in
heaven. I also say this because of something she says
shortly after this: pg. 864 "No I think I'll just go
down and have some pudding and wait for it all to turn
up....It always does in the end." 

To me Luna is saying to Harry that everything will
turn out okay in the end. It will all work out for
the best..she will not just get her things back from
whereever they are but life itself will get better. 
You can't dwell on things that are all wrong...you
just have to keep going. 

But then again..maybe I have just as extraordinary
beliefs as Luna. 

The other character that I related to very well...is
Tonks. She has been given a great deal of crap
because of her clumsiness, which offends me a bit. 
Clumisness does not equal unintelligence...or evil. 

I am a very clumsy person...so I admire Tonks. And I
love her seemingly geniune desire to want to help. If
she turns out to be evil like many people think I
would be very hurt. 

~Melanie 


 
 


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From princessmelabela at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 19:56:31 2003
From: princessmelabela at yahoo.com (Melanie Black)
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 12:56:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Harry's Temper Was Re: Feelings on OoP
In-Reply-To: <NHBBKCEDCLBKJHNFIGEKMEDPCAAA.marcuscason@charter.net>
Message-ID: <20030907195631.97557.qmail@web20708.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80132

Kytnor wrote:
I believe the contention is how JKR has him reacting.  A lot of people that
I have talked to seems to believe that Harry would react to events with introvert behaviour (by withrawing from those around him, depression, shouting, etc.) rather than extrovert behavior (temper tantrums, jealousy, violent behavior, etc.).

My reply:  I personally believe that his jealous, rage, and semi-violent behavior is one of lovely traits Harry has inherited from his father.  Yes, I believe that James and Harry have a great deal more in common than what what the books will allude to.  I am currently working on an essay on this very point.  
 
However, I believe that now Harry will move to a more introverted way of venting.  I think the scariest thing that is going to happen in the next books is that Harry will pull away from his family and friends.  I believe that with my whole heart that he will force himself to stop loving.  He does not want to be the cause of another loved ones death.  I think this is not only the most dangerous outcome that will likely result, but I think that it will quite possibly the most sickening for Harry.  
 
I just pray that I am wrong, however, I know in my heart that this is likely to happen.  
 
~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!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 19:59:08 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 19:59:08 -0000
Subject: Charlie Weasley's age
In-Reply-To: <bh6a7k+nbsf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjg2mc+a1n9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80133

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "scoutmom21113" 
<navarro198 at h...> wrote (post 76434):


(snip)...if Arthur was also a seventh son, the seventh son of a 
seventh son is supposed to be a seer or have other magic powers... 
(snip)  Is Arthur a 7th son?  Or is Molly a 7th?  And does it apply 
to a 7th child, not just a son?  I'm thinking about Ginny of course.


hg replying:
I noticed that in their replies to this post, no one addressed this 
tidbit about Ginny, possibly because the thread was a speculation 
about Charlie's age.  But it's an interesting idea that I have 
wondered about also.  I don't know what canon there would be to 
defend such an idea, but I wonder if anyone else has considered it.

hg.








From silmariel at telefonica.net  Sun Sep  7 20:30:47 2003
From: silmariel at telefonica.net (Carolina)
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 22:30:47 +0200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:Time, Repetition and the Uber-Dimension (was: Narrative Function
In-Reply-To: <bjdspg+q7ml@eGroups.com>
References: <bjdspg+q7ml@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <200309072230.47233.silmariel@telefonica.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 80134

Laurasia:
>But this explanation of events works exactly the same!!

Only you just travel in time because you want, not because you are 
bound to do it, even if you are not aware.  

> In other words, the very things you
> don't like about the internally-consistent version of events
> appear exactly in your own.

Oh, no. The thing I don't like about the "internally-consistent 
version of events", I'll call it static timeline for short, is that 
every explanation I've seen so far comes to: 

"why? 
because it has to be static. 
why? 
because Harry saves himself
but he couldn't, could he?
yes, because the timeline is static
but why?
because he saves himself."

ok, that seems an axiom, something I have to buy because the author 
says that, I've already bought magic and time travel, but then, 
I've read a lot on time travel, and if I have to buy a 
"self-fullfiling" sequence of events for such a simple travel, 
well, for me is the cheapest trick you can use in Time Travel. You 
don't have to deal with broken physic laws, as "you have to be 
alive in orther to activate a time turner, and not, once you are 
dead an older version of you can't save you, you were dead, 
remember?". You are the author. If you say the character is alive 
because he is his own father, we readers buy it. Why? It happened 
because it happened. 

I roleplayed a year lasting game with eight travels in time along 
one thousand years, and the author used that trick, but then, it 
was just for a game, a consumible, nothing that will be re-read by 
millions. I think Jo is far more intelligent than that, but that's 
IMO.

I wanted an explanation that only required the usual axioms for time 
travel, went fine with Talisman an the Uber-Kitchen.

If the text can be read and explained both ways, is fantastic.

Silmariel said:
<< By the 'it happened twice' theory, as you both point out, if 
memory  records only the facts the 'victim' knows, because the 
first set is erased, you'd better be careful when you Time Travel, 
or you will  erase your own memory, not speaking of unexpected 
changes.>>

Laurasia replied:
But you would never remember doing it! And the new version of events 
would explain everything perfectly, hence, as Corinth said <<it 
doesn't exist, and never did exist, in the dimension we are 
concerned 
with.>>>

Talisman added:
>I don't hold the opinion that memory is erased or modified in 
>time-travel.  I have proffered the accruing of experience, which 
>would  include memory, from the outset. Hermione remembers what 
>she is  taught in each lesson, etc.

The first mistake is mine, if I understand Talisman. One thing is 
static-dynamic timeline and other is supposing memory is erased. I 
did a reference posts ago wich said more or less "unless the 
author's rules include an static bubble for the people using the 
timeturmer to retain their memories", wich can be done, of course, 
there are nice tt histories in wich the characters retain memory.

But Hermione here has nothing to do. Why wouldn't she remember each 
class? she didn't change the fact that she had gone to them. I 
don't say memories change, I say memory records what 
sees/feels/whatever for the individual. If the facts that person 
has lived have changed, the person's memory will change at the same 
rate the user is recordindg it, so hermione retain both memories. 
Unless the author includes the rule (the axiom) that changes physic 
rules for memories. I didn't knew the Uber-Kitchen theory included 
an axiom for preserving memories of deleted set of facts, but I 
will not use it unless its clear from canon.

Then, experience accrue, of course, Hermione lives twice in the same 
period, and by appling laws, she remembers both instances. They 
don't conflict.

Now if Hermione 2 goes back in time and steals the text book for H1, 
that's changing what H1 did, so why memories of H1 shouldn't 
reflect the book has been lost? 

Not only that, H2 going to another class only works if the memories 
of her classmates are modified, because there was a point in the 
sequence when she didn't attend to class, then H1, at 10:00, jumped 
to 9:00 and went to class, altering the fact that she didn't go 
previously, so that is what her classmates remember (the second 
time). 

Talisman:
>Perhaps he only had to say, "stop." 

But then, why should Harry even try to stay by the lake, he knew 
everything went ok, why the patronus if his experience didn't 
include one? He was lectured not to change things, and he did have 
nothing to change. Dementors just came and then flied. Harry even 
might deduct they went after something, Fudge has call them, or 
anything. Why cast a patronus?

>And then, because Harry lived to go back as Harry2, his Patronus 
>was "always" a part of the experience.  Nothing needs to be erased. 

Oh, no. It was erased the fact that the patronus wasn't part of the 
experience.

Laurasia:
<< That is, change but not experience the effects of the change. So, 
effectively it *doesn't* give us the ability to change time at all! 
Rather, it gives us the eternal *possibility* of changing time, but 
never actually *allows* us to change it and remember it.>>

No memories. Tricky, isn't it? What is the minumun change required 
for you to achieve your objectives and in a way that it won't mind 
later if you remember it? Isn't DD fantastic?

But are two types of changes, there is nothing bad with going to the 
past and change something, as far as the result of this change 
isn't incompatible with you remembering it. Hermione uses it for a 
whole year, changing things that were not incompatible with her 
memory.

silmariel







From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 20:38:44 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 20:38:44 -0000
Subject: The importance of Luna... and the New Trio
In-Reply-To: <20030907194802.70396.qmail@web20709.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjg50k+mq9s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80135

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Melanie Black
<princessmelabela at y...> wrote:

> 
> My reply (Melanie Black):  
>I loved the character of Luna, I personally believe that Luna is 
> going to be a very pivitol character in future books to come.  
>
> ...edited... 
> 
> There were times when I cried for Luna. Call me a
> dork but it's true. And I wanted to say another
> interesting thing about her...even with all that has
> happened she is the character that to me embodies the
> true essence of innocence and faith. 
> 
> ...edited...
> 
> ... something she says shortly after this: pg. 864 "No I think I'll 
> just go down and have some pudding and wait for it all to turn
> up....It always does in the end." 
> 
> To me Luna is saying to Harry that everything will
> turn out okay in the end. It will all work out for
> the best..she will not just get her things back from
> whereever they are but life itself will get better. 
> You can't dwell on things that are all wrong...you
> just have to keep going. 
> 
> But then again..maybe I have just as extraordinary
> beliefs as Luna. 
> 
> ..edited...
> 
> ~Melanie 


bboy_mn:

In Post 80128 -- Feelings on OoP - Neville, Ginny, and a little Harry,
I made some additional comments about Harry mood and state of mind in
the next book. The extremely short version would be - calm and isolated.

After I pressed the [Send] button, I realized how important Luna, and
probably Neville, will be to helping Harry resolve his withdrawnal
from friendship and love.

Luna has a calmness and emotional detachment to her, I think Harry
picked up on that when he talked to Luna about her missing things near
the end of OoP. Harry felt calm around her, he didn't feel threatened
or challenged, no sign of hero worship, no strong emotional
attachment, no guarding her words because of emotional uncertainty. 

He could talk to her and she could talk to him because of this
apparent emotion detachment Luna displays. Plus, she speaks very
bluntly and honestly. She doesn't get emotional, and she doesn't try
to guard Harry's emotions.

Because of this, in the next book, I see Luna and Harry getting much
closer. She represents a friend that he can talk to and get honest
responses without things getting complicated by emotions. She
represents a safe haven for him. I see Luna as a very old soul, who
has a deep calm wisdom and insight that will help Harry greatly.

To take that one step farther, I could include Neville in the mix.
Neville is also a man of few words, who doesn't react emotionally, or
establish close emotional friendships. Like Luna, he speaks his mind
bluntly, then lets it go. 

Harry and Neville also have a common bond. The prophecy is about the
both of them. They share a common destiny, although fate seems to be
pushing that destiny far more strongly in Harry's direction. None the
less, it give Harry and Neville a bond that others can't understand. 

I could actually see a new Trio forming. Because Neville and Luna have
an emotionally detacted calm, deep wisdom and insight, and would
maintain somewhat distant detached friendships, Harry will feel far
more comfortable around them than he will around Ron and Hermione.
Plus, he loves Ron and Hermione a great deal, and he won't want to be
responsible for anything that might happen to them. So, he will have
strong incentive to distance himself from them. He will still remain
polite and friendly with Ron and Hermione, but on a deeper friendship
level, he will be detached.

I think the book will end with Harry having establish a much deeper
and truer friendship with Neville and Luna, but in the end, once he
has learned the lessons he needs to learn, he will go back to his old
pals Ron and Hermione. This also presents the perfect opportunity for
Ron and Hermione to spend more time together and establish that
relationship that we have all been waiting for, or dreading, as the
case may be.

In some ways, I can see the next book as being a spiritual book. A
book where Harry learns some very deep spiritual lessons from Neville
and Luna, lessons that will be invaluable in establishing his ability
to carry on in the fight against Voldemort. 

I like the Luna character in the current book, but thought she was
pretty much a one trick (one book) pony, but now that I have thought
about it, and read other people's opinions, I think Luna will be one
of the most important characters in the next book. 

Just a few thoughts.

bboy_mn







From featheringstonehaugh at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 20:41:09 2003
From: featheringstonehaugh at yahoo.com (A Featheringstonehaugh)
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 13:41:09 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Responsibility for Black's death
In-Reply-To: <1062923262.5137.32767.m16@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030907204109.42169.qmail@web20509.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80136

RTJ  wrote that my post about Sirius' death was "obviously worded to be controversial.".   ( I had said that Sirius died as a result of his arrogance, impetuousness etc.)
 
Really?  Sorry to disappoint, RJT,  but your ability to discern "obvious" intent needs some fine tuning.  No,  I worded my statement as I did because those words best describe my opinion of the character and the cause of his death.  I have neither the time nor inclination to incite faux controversy in a book discussion group. The "bait" you chose to take was of your own design, not mine.
 
As for your pedantic recap of the death of Sirius "He died because he fell through the veil...there was a war going on...let's not dig to (sic) deeply for reasons..." .  Oh dear. How does one respond to that sort of literal approach?   Perhaps you think the fall actually killed him; that the veil covered an open mine shaft or something?  
 
I mistakenly assumed participants in an adult group would be able to read beyond the  actual words but apparently your ability to understand literary devices needs some fine tuning as well.
 
AF
 
 
 
 
 

 






---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From princessmelabela at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 20:53:56 2003
From: princessmelabela at yahoo.com (Melanie Black)
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 13:53:56 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The importance of Luna... and the New Trio
In-Reply-To: <bjg50k+mq9s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030907205356.87815.qmail@web20709.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80137

bb_mboy:
I could actually see a new Trio forming. Because Neville and Luna have
an emotionally detacted calm, deep wisdom and insight, and would
maintain somewhat distant detached friendships, Harry will feel far
more comfortable around them than he will around Ron and Hermione.
Plus, he loves Ron and Hermione a great deal, and he won't want to be
responsible for anything that might happen to them. So, he will have
strong incentive to distance himself from them. He will still remain
polite and friendly with Ron and Hermione, but on a deeper friendship
level, he will be detached.

I think the book will end with Harry having establish a much deeper
and truer friendship with Neville and Luna, but in the end, once he
has learned the lessons he needs to learn, he will go back to his old
pals Ron and Hermione. This also presents the perfect opportunity for
Ron and Hermione to spend more time together and establish that
relationship that we have all been waiting for, or dreading, as the
case may be.

 

My reply:  I'm not sure you could get much blunter than Hermione Granger in this last book.  She isn't afraid to tell Harry how stupid he is acting and he is the one person who has always managed to change his mood to some degree.  I see Ron and Harry pulling away from eachother however, I do not think Hermione will be willing to let this happen very easily.  However, on the same token I do think that Harry is going to have a much easier time discussing these things with Luna and Neville rather than Harry and Hermione.  

 

Luna and Neville have experienced pain just as Harry has.  This makes them easier to relate to than Harry.  




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!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From rsteph1981 at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 22:07:56 2003
From: rsteph1981 at yahoo.com (Rebecca Stephens)
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 15:07:56 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Prank
In-Reply-To: <bjg1cv+3g7s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030907220756.77421.qmail@web20003.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80138


--- Richard <darkmatter30 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com,
> "sylviablundell2001" 
> <sylviablundell at a...> wrote:
> > I'm getting increasingly worried about the use of
> this 
> word "prank". 
> > It has such a light-hearted sound about it. My
> dictionary defines 
> it 
> > as "a sportive trick, a mischievous act".  I can
> see nothing 
> sportive 
> > or mischievous about an act that can lead to
> someone's death.  I 
> > can't believe DD's casual attitude to it.  Ask
> yourself how you 
> would 
> > have reacted if one of your children had confessed
> to such 
> a "prank".
> > Sylvia (who knows damn well what would have
> happened to any of hers)
> 
> And I (Richard) reply:
> 
> Having been a "boys will be boys" kind of boy just a
> few decades ago, 
> I take a much different view of all this than do
> you.  Dumbledore is 
> looking at things from three perspectives: greatly
> seasoned age, the 
> same of wisdom, and from decades after the fact.  He
> knows what was 
> done was dangerous, but also that those parties grew
> out of their 
> callous youths and lived to fight real battles
> against real evils, 
> with courage and confidence.  He knows Harry sees
> the danger in what 
> was done, and that belaboring Harry with righteous
> condemnation would 
> serve little or no purpose but to alienate Harry.
> 

snip

> Having done things ranging from falling off a cliff,
> to jumping off 
> other cliffs, to talking calmly to my mother while a
> dart was stuck 
> in the back of my head (trying very hard to ensure
> she didn't see it, 
> as then we would have ALL been in serious trouble),
> to playing with 
> live copperheads and water moccasins, and a good
> many things in 
> between, as well as having seen friends do like
> things and worse, I 
> also know that none of us died.  We were boys ...
> OK, so we were 
> mostly American Indian boys, which means some things
> that most non-
> AmerInds will never understand ... and simply trying
> to find the 
> limits of what we could and could not do.  I also
> know that the lot 
> of us grew up to be about as confident, calm and
> self-assured as you 
> can get.  None that I still know of today has been a
> failure in life, 
> even if others might not agree with their personal
> senses of success.


> Richard
> 


Not to be a brat, but there is a difference between
the things you are describing and what the Marauders
did.  What you describe put chiefly you and your
friends, the people who chose to do these things, in
danger.  Not others.  There's a world of difference.


Rebecca




=====
http://wychlaran.tripod.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 22:07:45 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 22:07:45 -0000
Subject: Prank
In-Reply-To: <bjfqgd+73ua@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjga7h+j70o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80139

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "melclaros" <melclaros at y...> 
wrote:
<snip> 
I wonder if Snape didn't tell his parents out of fear of being 
ridiculed for  being "weak" or if he was told NOT to inform them 
(stomach starting to churn) as part of this "vast coverup". Silence 
was bought somehow I'm sure. Now if we were talking about an adult 
cutting a deal that  would be one thing, but we're talking about at 
16 year old who  believes he's nearly been murdered, (Based on the 
previous treatment  he likely had good reason--and yes, don't go on 
about how he was just as bad. I'm sure he did plenty of vile things 
to MMWP but we never hear Sirius or Lupin claim that he ever 
endangered anyone's life and you KNOW Sirius would have jumped on 
that wagon right away--"But he...!") 
> Now here's a really sickening thought. What if Snape's parents 
*were*  told and (Daddy Dearest especially) were in on this silence 
deal? Can you imagine the sense of betrayal? Not only his school 
support system was turning it's collective back on him, but his 
family as well. It's crushing either way--if he didn't tell them for 
fear of being further humilated or he didn't tell them because he was 
either  threatened or paid off--the whole thing makes my skin crawl.


Laura:

Sirius and Remus didn't have to produce any anecdotes to show that 
Snape was a dangerous person-he was a DE, remember?  That should 
cover it.

As for your second point, that would be dreadful for Snape.  But if 
it played out that way, it's hard for me to believe that he would 
have made a career out of teaching at Hogwarts.  Snape has a lot of 
pride, and it seems unlikely that he'd want to work for DD at the 
very site of his humiliation and blackmail.  And why would he ever 
trust DD again, especially enough to become a double agent under 
him?  I don't know how exactly things were resolved about the Prank 
either, but I can't see Snape allowing himself to live and work at a 
place where he was so deeply betrayed.  




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 22:14:34 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 22:14:34 -0000
Subject: Prank
In-Reply-To: <bjfsuo+9der@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjgaka+k4cn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80140

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bluesqueak" <pipdowns at e...> 
wrote:
> 
> The 'we were too stupid to realise' is almost canon. It's Lupin's 
> view of the 'werewolf outings'. 
> 
> "There were near misses, many of them. We laughed about them 
> afterwards. We were young, thoughtless - carried away with our own 
> cleverness.' [PoA, UK paperback, Ch. 18 p.260]
> 
> In other words, MWPP were the Golden Boys. Nothing could hurt them, 
> nothing could go wrong. Everything they did was right. Whatever 
plan 
> Sirius came up with would scare Snape to death, but couldn't go 
> wrong enough to kill him. No, the Golden Boys were too clever for 
(> that [grin].
> 
> Sirius, frankly, was a pillock. Which he shows in PoA, GoF and OOP. 
> 
> I mean, sorry, but what does he actually *do* in GoF apart from 
> worry Harry half to death because Sirius has put himself in deadly 
> danger for him? 
> 
> 
Laura:

I have to ask-which is worse, a berk or a pillock?  My knowledge of 
contemporary British slang isn't what it should be, obviously 
(although I'm not bad on Victorian era usage, being a Holmes fan.  
Much good it does me now.).

As for the rest-you're just looking for a fight, and I choose to rise 
above your provocation.  Sirius IS the man.  *grins back*




From sylviablundell at aol.com  Sun Sep  7 22:20:28 2003
From: sylviablundell at aol.com (sylviablundell2001)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 22:20:28 -0000
Subject: Prank
Message-ID: <bjgavc+24ed@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80141

Richard wrote:
It is perhaps wiser to be calm at a more distant time, even if the 
events call for thunder and lightening at the time they happen.

Now me (Sylvia)
That is just my point.  There doesn't seemto have been any thunder 
and lightening at the time the "prank" happened.  All very well for 
DD to take a calm and forgiving attitude many years after in talking 
to Harry, but what sort of a punishment did he hand out at the time?
I acknowledge that children can get up to really dangerous things. My 
own certainly have and I have myself, but it never involved 
deliberately putting someone at risk of death or serious injury.
And now I'm starting to worry about why Snape's father never did 
anything about it.  It all sounds like a really nasty cover-up with 
the golden boys getting off scot-free and poor bloody Snape feeling 
more alone than ever.  
Sylvia (who is sorry to get so mad, but bullying makes me more angry 
than anything in the world)




From Barbara_Bowen at hotmail.com  Sun Sep  7 22:30:19 2003
From: Barbara_Bowen at hotmail.com (barbara_mbowen)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 22:30:19 -0000
Subject: Questions about year 6; rock'n'roll star Stubby Black
Message-ID: <bjgbhr+l5g@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80142

Udder+pen_Dragon wrote:

,Snape can not be a Werewolf as in POA he is out in the full 
moon coming back
from the shrieking shack with Lupin etc.

Sorry.>

Details, details!  ;>)  Oh well, I knew there had to be a reason it 
wasn't as hot a topic as Snape as vampire.

Still think Stubby Boardman is Regulus Black:.  think of it!  Poor 
little Reggie is no where near as strong willed as his big brother, 
so he's afraid to cross Mom and Dad Black.  But he wants to b
e a rock'n'roll star...it's the only thing he wants....<g>....But he 
can't be a star in the WW, Mommy Dearest would find out.  So, 
he has to set up as a rock musician in the Muggle world.  He's 
so bad, he gets vegetables thrown at him.

 To please Mommy, he's also a DE.  But a bad one. ( Maybe he 
even wears his DE outfit onstage!)  He was supposedly killed 
fifteen years ago, so Sirius says in OoP.  That's just when 
Voldemort attacked the Potters and just when Stubby Boardman 
had to retire from the stage.  Maybe Reg wasn't killed, first 
because there were so many more important killings going on, 
then because Voldemort was cut down by his own AK curse.  
And Reg slipped between the cracks.  He's been hiding out ever 
since.

But of course he looks so very much like Sirius.   This would 
feed into JKR's theme of people treating other people as if they 
were someone else (some one dead else):  Sirius thinking of 
Harry as James; Snape thinking of Harry as James; now Harry 
thinking of Reg as Sirius.  A sad theme.   Harry would insist on 
trusting Reg against other peoples' advise.  Only Crookshanks 
would know for sure....

Just a thought....

Marmelade's Mom








From fc26det at aol.com  Sun Sep  7 22:35:17 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 22:35:17 -0000
Subject: Prank
In-Reply-To: <bjgavc+24ed@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjgbr5+lll3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80143

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sylviablundell2001" 
<sylviablundell at a...> wrote:
> Richard wrote:
> It is perhaps wiser to be calm at a more distant time, even if the 
> events call for thunder and lightening at the time they happen.
> 
> Now me (Sylvia)
> That is just my point.  There doesn't seemto have been any thunder 
> and lightening at the time the "prank" happened.  



> And now I'm starting to worry about why Snape's father never did 
> anything about it.  It all sounds like a really nasty cover-up with 
> the golden boys getting off scot-free and poor bloody Snape feeling 
> more alone than ever.  
> Sylvia (who is sorry to get so mad, but bullying makes me more 
angry 
> than anything in the world)

Now Susan:
Is it possible that Snape's father was either dead or maybe he left 
Snape and his mother?  Could Snape also have been orphaned?
Just a thought.
Susan




From meltowne at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 22:41:06 2003
From: meltowne at yahoo.com (meltowne)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 22:41:06 -0000
Subject: Prank
In-Reply-To: <bjga7h+j70o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjgc62+nbu1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80144

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
> Laura:
> 
> Sirius and Remus didn't have to produce any anecdotes to show that 
> Snape was a dangerous person-he was a DE, remember?  That should 
> cover it.
> 
> As for your second point, that would be dreadful for Snape.  But if 
> it played out that way, it's hard for me to believe that he would 
> have made a career out of teaching at Hogwarts.  Snape has a lot of 
> pride, and it seems unlikely that he'd want to work for DD at the 
> very site of his humiliation and blackmail.  And why would he ever 
> trust DD again, especially enough to become a double agent under 
> him?  I don't know how exactly things were resolved about the Prank 
> either, but I can't see Snape allowing himself to live and work at 
a 
> place where he was so deeply betrayed.

Melinda:

We also don't really know that much about the prank.  What was the 
plan if Snape had entered the tunnel?  I agree it was meant to scare 
Snape, but I'm not so sure it was meant to truly harm him (even if 
thinking it through completely would lead you to that conclusion).  
I'm not sure Sirius really thought it all the way through.  If he 
had, I suspect the others would not have remained friends with him 
after all - had Lupin killed Snape, head would have rolled, and Lupin 
would have had to be expelled; I don't think I would have forgiven a 
friend who risked my future like that.  It's also possible Snape 
could have handled the situation.  I think Snape may have already 
known or at least suspected that Lupin was a werewolf, and if he 
really is qualified for the DADA position, he may have been able to 
defend himself.  That means Sirius was putting Lupin LIFE on the 
line.  Again, not something I would dismiss lightly.

I still hold to the "pensieve is subjective" theory, and believe that 
Snape was pretending to examine his papers while listening in on 
MMWP.  Of course, that would explain why he didn't want Harry to 
access that memory - then he might realize that Snape knew all along, 
and let James believe he had saved his life.

I accept the term "prank" because I believe that was the intent.  
There have been many instances of Fraternity pranks going wrong, and 
students being hurt of killed - but they are still pranks.  Yes, 
stupid, ill-planned pranks, but still pranks.





From Barbara_Bowen at hotmail.com  Sun Sep  7 23:03:41 2003
From: Barbara_Bowen at hotmail.com (barbara_mbowen)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 23:03:41 -0000
Subject: Prank
Message-ID: <bjgdgd+bkhq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80145

 Richard said:

<Having been a "boys will be boys" kind of boy just a few 
decades ago, 
I take a much different view of all this than do you. Dumbledore <
snip> knows what was 
done was dangerous, but also that those parties grew out of 
their 
callous youths and lived to fight real battles against real evils, 
with courage and confidence.  <snip>
Now, for some perspective of my own ...

As children, various friends, relatives and I did a good many 
things 
that were just plain dangerous. In several of our escapades, I 
now 
know there was a real risk of death for one or more of us.<snip>

also know that none of us died. We were boys ... OK, so we were 
mostly American Indian boys, which means some things that 
most non-
AmerInds will never understand ... and simply trying to find the 
limits of what we could and could not do.>

Now Barbara replies:

I agree with you.  I remember things I did at 16 that were 
extremely dangerous for myself and others.  Like the time I 
"borrowed" my brother's sports car, and allowed a friend of a boy 
I liked to drive it flat out on the highway to see how fast it would 
go..(.we never found out, because the hood popped up at 104 
mph....)  We could have been killed a dozen times over that night.  
And there were other things I'm not about to confess to!  (If my 
ten year old daughter *ever* *ever* does anything like!!!!!!!) <
painful G>

 I know what it's like to be a reckless, thoughtless teenager.  
Which Sirius was.  I had no more thought for potential 
consequences than the man in the moon.  I suspect people who 
are horrified by this came from good homes and orderly 
families.  I didn't, and Sirius didn't.  we were both acting out.

I think Sirius drank, or the WW equivalent as a teenager.  He has 
too many of the  hallmarks .  He probably was an alcoholic by the 
time he ran away; I'll bet James' parents saved him, and this 
contributed to his intense loyalty to all Potters. Only once  back at 
Grimmauld Place, he went back to old, evil habits.

Marmelade's Mom



38 	Re: Prank 	Rebecca Stephens 	rsteph1981 	Sun? 9/7/2003 	? 
? Message 80129 of 80143 ?|? Previous | Next ?[ Up Thread ] 	
Message Index 	
? 	?Msg # 	 Go 
Reply | Forward | View?Source | Unwrap?Lines 

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright ? 2003 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy - Terms of Service - Copyright Policy - Guidelines - 
Help - Ad Feedback
? 






? 	Replies 	Name/Email 	Yahoo! ID 	Date 	? 
80138 	Re: Prank 	Rebecca Stephens 	rsteph1981 	Sun? 9/7/
2003 	? 
? Message 80129 of 80143 ?|? Previous | Next ?[ Up Thread ] 	
Message Index 	
? 	?Msg # 	 Go 
Reply | Forward | View?Source | Unwrap?Lines 

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright ? 2003 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy - Terms of Service - Copyright Policy - Guidelines - 
Help - Ad Feedback
?




From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Sep  7 23:27:08 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 23:27:08 -0000
Subject: Prank
In-Reply-To: <bjgavc+24ed@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjgesc+4brg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80146

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sylviablundell2001" 
<sylviablundell at a...> wrote:

> And now I'm starting to worry about why Snape's father never did 
> anything about it.  It all sounds like a really nasty cover-up with 
> the golden boys getting off scot-free and poor bloody Snape feeling 
> more alone than ever.  

That is surely Snape's view of the events, but for all we know the 
'golden boys' were very severaly punished, just not with Snape 
watching. And for all we know, Snape's father rushed out to duel with 
Dumbledore or Mr. Potter about this incident and got his arse kicked.




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 23:27:30 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 23:27:30 -0000
Subject: Legilimency, Occlumency, Snape, Harry
In-Reply-To: <bjev94+sib4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjget2+j1s9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80147

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)"
<catlady at w...> wrote:

> 
> Steve bboy_mn wrote 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/79939 in: 
> 
> << Let's look at what Legilimency really is in a practical sense. As 
> far as I can see, it is hardly more than a highly accurate form of 
> intuition. Voldemort or Dumbledore have a strong ituitive sense of 
> when someone is lying based on subtle interpretations of their 
> thoughts, emotions, and demeanor. Snape said it himself, that 
> Legilimency is not 'mind reading' as the mind is not something which 
> can be read; >>

> Catlady:
> 
> I always get a (nasty) laugh from Snape saying that Legilimency is 
> not mind reading. ... Legi- means 'read' as in 'legible' and -Mency 
> means 'mind' as in 'mental'. Anyhow, Snape watching Harry's memories
> like they were movies is a great deal more than your suggestion of 
> some highly insightful observation of 'body language' to tell when a
>  person is lying.

bboy_mn:

For details, see my published works...
"Legilimens!" Spell & Gift
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/72153

Legilimency takes two forms in the book. One is the gift or skill of
Legilimency and the other is the Legilimens charm.

It speculate that the Legilimens charm simply causes a cascade of
random memories to flash before the caster and his victum's eyes. I
could give you some interesting insight, but it's pretty random,
subject to interpretation, and not too good for determining specific
real-time immediate thoughts and intent.

The gift or skill of Legilimens, on the other hand, is as deep strong
psychic intuitive sense of a persons feelings, thoughts, and emotions
at the moment. If they are lying, you pick up on the sense of
insecurity, guilt, and worry that are in their mind, and the
associated feelings of fear in their emotions. 

Legilimency as a gift is a form of Divination or a psychic skill; in a
sense, the person with this gift is an intuitive Seer.

As a side note, there are all kinds of psychic Seers. Most Psychics
are intuitive psychics; they sense things. Others are visionary
Psychic; they divine through psychic visions. Still other's like
Trelawney are trance psychics. And of course, many other forms. 

So being an intuitive senser or seer is a valid form of psychic
ability, and this is how I see Legilimency.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn






From eowynn_24 at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  7 23:45:11 2003
From: eowynn_24 at yahoo.com (eowynn_24)
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 16:45:11 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Prank
In-Reply-To: <bjgesc+4brg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030907234511.38131.qmail@web60209.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80148



"Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" <catlady at wicca.net> wrote: 
--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sylviablundell2001" 
<sylviablundell at a...> wrote:

> And now I'm starting to worry about why Snape's father never did 
> anything about it.  It all sounds like a really nasty cover-up with 
> the golden boys getting off scot-free and poor bloody Snape feeling 
> more alone than ever.  

That is surely Snape's view of the events, but for all we know the 
'golden boys' were very severally punished, just not with Snape 
watching. <snip>

Eowynn:

I tend to agree with Catlady. We honestly don't know all that happened that night. Somewhere between the "poor snape" version, and the "golden boys" version lies the truth. All that we do know as fact is that James stopped Snape, but not before Snape saw werewolf Lupin at the end of the tunnel. IMHO, Sirius was punished, but not PP,RL,or JP, because they weren't involved in the planning of the prank, and Sirius is the type to not let his friends take the fall for (or with) him. I also believe that Snape is a stubborn git, and there was now way that he was going to acknowledge what happened, because that would mean sub coming to the fact that his biggest school rival had saved his life. I don't believe that there was any forced cover up by DD or anyone else from HW.

Eowynn (ready with a barrel of H2O, just in case.[grinning])










---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From mongo62aa at yahoo.ca  Mon Sep  8 00:29:43 2003
From: mongo62aa at yahoo.ca (mongo62aa)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 00:29:43 -0000
Subject: Alchemy revisited: OOP prediction confirmed
In-Reply-To: <bjf5rg+lukf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjgihn+pl8j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80149

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sleepingblyx" 
<sleepingblyx at y...> wrote:

However, I have a specific question-- we know J.K.R. likes to read, 
and I was sorting through the interviews, but is there any canon to 
suspect that she has actually even read the bible, or is a 
practicing Christian in the first place? Her more recent interviews 
seem to lead to the fact that she would be agnostic or even athiest 
(something about not really believing in any kind of magic, and that 
she wishes she could). 

Me (Bill):

This is from a CBC interview in July 2000; the entire interview can 
be found here (watch the wrap):

http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/2000/0700-cbc-
solomon.htm

E: When you talk about dealing with death and loss in the books, 
does this come out of your own - you've had loss with the loss of 
your mother - did it come out of a personal spirituality? I mean, 
are you are religious person? Does your spirituality come from a 
certain place? 

JK: I do believe in God. That seems to offend the South Carolinians 
more than almost anything else. I think they would find it...well 
that is my limited experience, that they have more of a problem with 
me believing in God than they would have if I was an unrepentant 
atheist. 

E: You do believe in God. 

JK: Yeah. Yeah. 

E: In magic and... 

JK: Magic in the sense in which it happens in my books, no, I don't 
believe. I don't believe in that. No. No. This is so frustrating. 
Again, there is so much I would like to say, and come back when I've 
written book seven. But then maybe you won't need to even say 
it 'cause you'll have found it out anyway. You'll have read it. 

E: But in your own life, I mean, are you a churchgoer? 

JK: (Nods) Mmm hmm. Well I go more than to weddings and 
christenings. Yes, I do. 

Bill




From furkin1712 at aol.com  Sun Sep  7 18:28:37 2003
From: furkin1712 at aol.com (furkin1712 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 14:28:37 EDT
Subject: The Marauders Theory(Remus, Sirius, Peter, James)
Message-ID: <160.254c3437.2c8cd2d5@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80150

Sarah:
>>Harry, like Lupin, has few close friends.? Perhaps this will 
bring Harry and Lupin closer together in more of a father-son 
type relationship.? I for one would love to see that.? They've 
shared the same loses, that of James and Sirius, because of 
Wormtail.?(snip) <<

Blue Eyes:
I think that the relationship should've been closer but it seems 
distant, really more distant than it should under the circumstances 
and it seems like it's mostly Remus that's doing that. I think the 
theory about James and Remus switching souls or what not might be 
possible, it's something JKR would do. But I also think that they 
are just suspiciously parted when you are so right and they 
should be closer together.

RTJ:
>>Remus doesn't have supremacy over the Godfather. Quite the opposite 
-- Remus, though the most fair-minded and kindest of the Mauraders, 
has a courage problem and often doesn't stand up to his friends when 
he knows they are wrong. Lately that's changed. When Lupin restrains 
Sirius, he's showing a new streak of courage, besides a determination 
to "fix" the wrongs he did as a younger man. <<

Blue Eyes:
Still doesn't answer why he would take a decision from Sirius that 
is legally his. I mean, in all sense Sirius was Harry's replacement 
father, now why would that have to be restrained by Remus. I mean I get 
that Sirius would've done something rash, but that phrase bothers me. I 
mean, think on it. It's just odd that it's phrased like that, I mean he 
could've said Calm down and think striaght Sirius a different way.

Sandy: 
(snip)
>> but Lupin wrenched him back down again.
  "If anyone's going to tell Snape it will be me!" <<

Blue Eyes:
I know that he's trying not to get him killed but I'm just thinking 
that it's odd he phrased it like that, I mean technically it is Sirius' 
right to protect Harry and such, but why would Remus say "...it will 
be me!" 

Just makes me wonder on the theory of the Soul Switching. Just something 
thats been tickling me oddly.

*-Blue Eyes-*






From furkin1712 at aol.com  Sun Sep  7 18:50:03 2003
From: furkin1712 at aol.com (furkin1712 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 14:50:03 EDT
Subject: Inheriting Grim Old Place (was Turncoat Tonks; Aurors;...
Message-ID: <aa.21e1becd.2c8cd7db@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80151

Elli: (snip)
>> I can't offhand think of another male, blood relative who is 
more closely related to Sirius. <<

Blue Eyes:
I know this sounds like a fic or something, but what if Sirius 
has a kid somewhere? I mean, from what we hear about him in OotP 
he was sexy man on Hogwarts campus, I mean he could've easily gotten 
some girl pregnant accidentally and then *boom* he's a convicted mass 
murderer, I mean, yes you're really going to tell the baby that his (or 
her) daddy is a convicted felon. And of course the first thing you're 
going to do is send Sirius a box of cigars to start passing out to the dementors.

I know this sounds fanfic-ish but it's just being suggested to remind 
everyone that JKR could throw us a major curve ball.


*-Blue Eyes-*






From jdr0918 at hotmail.com  Mon Sep  8 00:43:17 2003
From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 00:43:17 -0000
Subject: Alchemy revisited: OOP prediction confirmed
In-Reply-To: <bjf5rg+lukf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjgjb5+c6rn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80152

<<<"sleepingblyx" wrote:...I have a specific question-- we know 
J.K.R. likes to read, and I was sorting through the interviews, but 
is there any canon to suspect that she has actually even read the 
bible, or is a practicing Christian in the first place? Her more 
recent interviews seem to lead to the fact that she would be agnostic 
or even athiest (something about not really believing in any kind of 
magic, and that she wishes she could)...>>>

The Sergeant Majorette says

If you have been researching the transcripts and have not come across 
any discussion of JKR's religion, then I may be spouting from the 
wrong bodily orifice, but I could swear I saw her tell a television 
interviewer that she was a practicing Christian, and that her faith 
was key to the resolution of the story. As for the not believing in 
magic, that is totally old-time religion, but I'm pretty sure what 
she said was that ..."if you mean magic like in the books, then, no." 
She said this to an audience of children who responded with a muted 
(but obviously horrified) gasp.

Of course, I was also completely sure she had said that Harry and 
Draco would never work together, but I was corrected on that one by 
an unimpeachable authority...

--JDR




From furkin1712 at aol.com  Sun Sep  7 19:04:42 2003
From: furkin1712 at aol.com (furkin1712 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 15:04:42 EDT
Subject: James/Harry Theory
Message-ID: <6d.188ef292.2c8cdb4a@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80153

Blue Eyes:
Wow, I feel really really really stupid for not seeing this right away. So 
far is everyone else seeing the connections between dearest James and Harry?

Obviously the looks, the Seeker (and yes he was a Seeker because he was 
playing with a Snitch in Ootp), the not being a Prefect and having his best friend be one.

He's liked Cho since book like 3 correct? And currently (age 15) Cho thinks 
he's a bit of a jerk and at 15 Lily thought James was a complete idiot. 

They both have the same enemies, Snape and a Malfoy who seem to be plotting 
against them. They are both in Gryffindor and are strangely connected with 
Godric Gryffindor (James and Lily lived and died in GODRIC's Hollow and Harry 
pulled the Gryffindor sword from the Soring Hat). They both save someone they hate passionately (James saved Severus from Sirius' Prank involving Remus and Harry saved Pettigrew from Sirius and Remus).

They both dueled Voldemort and he used AK on both of them (but it never seems 
to work on Harry does it?).

It would be the oddest oddest thing if Lily wasn't a Gryffindor, like if she 
were in Ravenclaw liike Cho. That would almost scare me.

They like the same spot by the same tree...... I dunno but this is tickling 
me. 

Theory: By 7th year Harry will be Head Boy and so will Cho and they will 
start going out, Harry will defeat Voldemort while dueling him. Harry will 
have a kid, a son that look like him but has his mom's eyes. 

I dunno.
Blue Eyes








From furkin1712 at aol.com  Sun Sep  7 18:38:34 2003
From: furkin1712 at aol.com (furkin1712 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 14:38:34 EDT
Subject: Give Black a break! (was: Responsiblity for Black's d...
Message-ID: <2b.472ec29f.2c8cd52a@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80154

Dooda:
>> I don't think the Death Eaters went insane because they're just 
that evil.  The are so wicked that there aren't any happy thoughts 
for the Dementors to suck out. It's the whole good and evil cannot 
occupy the same space at the same time. <<


They wouldn't of gone insane because they didn't think what they 
were doing was wrong, that's not a good thought. It's like Sirius' 
innocence, in their minds they knew they weren't doing something 
wrong but it's not a really happy thought so it couldn't be sucked 
out of them.

BLue Eyes








From HimemyaUtena at aol.com  Sun Sep  7 23:53:17 2003
From: HimemyaUtena at aol.com (HimemyaUtena at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 19:53:17 -0400
Subject: Why the time turner stinks/Hermione's homework
Message-ID: <549B94E2.67974D5B.1E595A1B@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80155

In a message dated 9/4/2003 12:53:52 PM Eastern Daylight Time, severusbook4 at yahoo.com writes:

[Sevvie]
> And to 
> answer another question, the reason an individual cannot travel back 
> in time and change a major event that already took place is. They 
> can, but at an extreme cost,  their minds would be bombarded with 
> new memories if the event was not kept linear as it was with Harry 
> and Hermione.  What I am saying is, could you imagine what would 
> happen to your brain if it was re-written to acount for the new 
> memories?  

Hmmm...I'm thinking there has to be more to it than that. The reason I'm thinking this, and I'm kinda suprised no one has brought it up is remember in POA when Hermione forgot to go to her Charms class. When Harry and Ron remind her of this she's very upset about having missed it. She doesn't simply turn the time turner back a few extra hours and attend charms. Why?

Adrianna




From anita_hillin at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 00:21:33 2003
From: anita_hillin at yahoo.com (AnitaKH)
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 17:21:33 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Snape & Potter = Hatfields & McCoys?
Message-ID: <20030908002133.38991.qmail@web20714.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80156

All right, all you brainy people out there.  I've been cogitating on this one, perhaps because I'm unwilling to believe James Potter is as big a jerk as he comes across in the Pensieve scene.  
 
Given that we're told James Potter hated the Dark Arts and that Snape appeared at school knowing more about them than most seventh years, and that the pureblood world is small and shrinking, I began to wonder if the bad blood (no pun intended) between James Potter and Severus Snape goes back beyond their years at Hogwarts.  The Potters may have not been on good terms with the Snapes, and the two boys' experience at school amplifies the difference, and James, being a kid and not a mature adult, brings his prejudice to school and taunts the hated Snape.  SS, at the same time, would be reluctant to let the folks at home know he's not getting the best of one of those pesky Potters, so he keeps quiet about his humiliation.  
 
"The fact that he exists" would be sufficient excuse for James to dislike and pick on Severus; Sirius, determined to reject his Dark Arts heritage, would perhaps be inclined to join in with James and be perhaps even more virulent. (As I imagine many of us have observed, former smokers can be much harder on smokers than we non-smokers.)
 
This notion is still in the formative stage, so any support/criticism is most welcome.
 
akh
 


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From sollecks970 at aol.com  Mon Sep  8 01:03:02 2003
From: sollecks970 at aol.com (fawkes970)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 01:03:02 -0000
Subject: The importance of Luna... and the New Trio
In-Reply-To: <20030907205356.87815.qmail@web20709.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjgkg6+bpd5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80157

<snip>  I see Ron and Harry pulling away from eachother however, I 
do not think Hermione will be willing to let this happen very 
easily.  However, on the same token I do think that Harry is going 
to have a much easier time discussing these things with Luna and 
Neville rather than Harry and Hermione.  
> 
 I see Harry and Ron sort of drifting on a more personal level: but 
Hermoine, being a girl, is easy to tlak to and therefore Harry will 
seek reverence in somebody he knows and trusts, but not Ron because 
guys dont talk to guys about personal feelings, which is why we tend 
to form certain friendships with girls. ~Fawkes(pat)
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From sollecks970 at aol.com  Mon Sep  8 01:13:12 2003
From: sollecks970 at aol.com (fawkes970)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 01:13:12 -0000
Subject: Why the time turner stinks/Hermione's homework
In-Reply-To: <549B94E2.67974D5B.1E595A1B@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bjgl38+44p1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80158

> Hmmm...I'm thinking there has to be more to it than that. The 
reason I'm thinking this, and I'm kinda suprised no one has brought 
it up is remember in POA when Hermione forgot to go to her Charms 
class. When Harry and Ron remind her of this she's very upset about 
having missed it. She doesn't simply turn the time turner back a few 
extra hours and attend charms. Why?
> 
> Adrianna

fawkes:
 The whole idea of time-travel is simple, yet the idea of changing 
history is impossible because in your past history, the present(or 
future) you would have gone back just as u were then to change is 
and ur life would be the same. nothing is changed that hasnt been 
changed before. its so complicated that in my head i undertsand yet 
when i try to explain it to people i feel so lost of words. Its as 
if fate knew u were coming back because u always do in every life, 
and you cant change that because fate brings you to the point where 
you travel to the past and change(or not) something(or nothing) 
complicated when in words. fawkes(pat)




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 01:25:15 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 01:25:15 -0000
Subject: Legilimency, Occlumency, Snape, Harry
In-Reply-To: <bjget2+j1s9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjglpr+lelk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80159

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:

> 
> For details, see my published works...
> "Legilimens!" Spell & Gift
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/72153
> 
> Legilimency takes two forms in the book. One is the gift or skill of
> Legilimency and the other is the Legilimens charm.
> 
> It speculate that the Legilimens charm simply causes a cascade of
> random memories to flash before the caster and his victum's eyes. I
> could give you some interesting insight, but it's pretty random,
> subject to interpretation, and not too good for determining specific
> real-time immediate thoughts and intent.
> 
> The gift or skill of Legilimens, on the other hand, is as deep 
strong
> psychic intuitive sense of a persons feelings, thoughts, and 
emotions
> at the moment. If they are lying, you pick up on the sense of
> insecurity, guilt, and worry that are in their mind, and the
> associated feelings of fear in their emotions. 
> 
> Legilimency as a gift is a form of Divination or a psychic skill; 
in a
> sense, the person with this gift is an intuitive Seer.
> So being an intuitive senser or seer is a valid form of psychic
> ability, and this is how I see Legilimency.
> 
> Just a thought.

Laura:


Your theory is interesting and I'm willing to be convinced, but could 
you cite some canon to show which is which?  I don't think JKR 
distinguishes between the 2 in so many words, does she?  If in fact 
there's a difference, the two would seem to have different uses as 
well.  Trying to get an intuitive sense of someone will give you one 
sort of information; looking into someone's mind at specific memories 
would give you another kind, wouldn't it?
> 





From meltowne at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 01:31:25 2003
From: meltowne at yahoo.com (meltowne)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 01:31:25 -0000
Subject: Why not Secret-Keep each other?
In-Reply-To: <bje9qa+hvjo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjgm5d+qe48@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80160

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mongo62aa" <mongo62aa at y...> 
wrote:

> Bill):
> 
> This would be the obvious thing to do, unless there was a good 
> reason not to do this.  My guess is that a 'feedback loop' would be 
> set up, destroying (at a minimum) the fidelius charms.

Me (Melinda):

I suspect it has to do with the way the spell works - only the secret 
keeper, or someone else who has been told by the secret keeper can 
find them.  That might be fine if they want to hide from everyone 
forever - but they don't; they just want to hide from Voldemort.  If 
Sirius is James' secret keeper, only Sirius can tell DD where they 
are.  But if Sirius' location is being kept secret as well, how can 
Sirius tell DD?  If James is his secret keeper, DD (or anybody else, 
for that matter) can't find either of them - they can only find each 
other!

Melinda




From Meliss9900 at aol.com  Mon Sep  8 01:38:50 2003
From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 21:38:50 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] James/Harry Theory
Message-ID: <46.3d977f04.2c8d37aa@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80161

In a message dated 09/07/2003 7:49:46 PM Central Daylight Time, 
furkin1712 at aol.com writes:


> Theory: By 7th year Harry will be Head Boy and so will Cho and they will 
> start going out, Harry will defeat Voldemort while dueling him. Harry will 
> have a kid, a son that look like him but has his mom's eyes
> 
> 
> Umm it quite possible that Cho could be Head Girl *however* Harry is a year 
> .


Melissa



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From editor at texas.net  Mon Sep  8 01:27:45 2003
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 20:27:45 -0500
Subject: About list tone, was Responsibility for Black's death
References: <20030907204109.42169.qmail@web20509.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <000a01c375a8$70585ae0$7a05a6d8@texas.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 80162

Irritated List Poltergeist on deck, speaking for the ears of the list as
much as A Featheringstonesomethingorother.

AF recently responded to a message, that had been responding to some of
his/her own comments. So far, so good.

However, the tone and slant of this post was very critical and
patronizing--NOT of the point, which is allowed, I'm quite critical of some
discussion points myself*--but of the POSTER. This is manifestly NOT okay.
Challenges of interpretations are fine. Challenges of a fellow listmember's
maturity, intelligence, perception, or other attributes are NOT.

I speak from the perspective of (a) someone who has been on this list for
very close to three years and (b) a list admin, that AF's tone was much more
in the nature of argument than discussion. And this is not an argument list.
This is a discussion list.

If any of you have a burning need to humiliate, ridicule, patronize, or
otherwise ill-use a fellow listmember, please do so offlist and do not
burden the rest of us with your rudeness.

~Amandageist

*Snape is NOT a vampire




From sleepingblyx at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 02:05:20 2003
From: sleepingblyx at yahoo.com (sleepingblyx)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 02:05:20 -0000
Subject: Alchemy revisited: OOP prediction confirmed
In-Reply-To: <bjgjb5+c6rn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjgo50+eiet@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80163


> The Sergeant Majorette says
> 
> If you have been researching the transcripts and have not come 
across 
> any discussion of JKR's religion, then I may be spouting from the 
> wrong bodily orifice, but I could swear I saw her tell a television 
> interviewer that she was a practicing Christian, and that her faith 
> was key to the resolution of the story. 

Maybe you should see a doctor about that bodily orifice 
condition.... :)

Anyhow, the interviews I "quick searched" were more of the basic "how 
did you come up with the story" shorts, and her bio talking about 
being a little girl and writing. As I don't memorize her interviews, 
and I am still getting my favorites in order after being wormed, I 
simply asked. 

<<Bill:

This is from a CBC interview in July 2000; the entire interview can 
be found here (watch the wrap):

http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/2000/0700-cbc-
solomon.htm

E: When you talk about dealing with death and loss in the books, 
does this come out of your own - you've had loss with the loss of 
your mother - did it come out of a personal spirituality? I mean, 
are you are religious person? Does your spirituality come from a 
certain place? 

JK: I do believe in God. That seems to offend the South Carolinians 
more than almost anything else. I think they would find it...well 
that is my limited experience, that they have more of a problem with 
me believing in God than they would have if I was an unrepentant 
atheist.>>

This is the one I was thinking of, thank you! The thing that hit me 
about the interview was that she was a bit stand-offish about her 
faith. "God" can mean several different religions, and even different 
Christian faiths sometimes interpet the Bible in different ways, so 
if this is the best she has given, then it is still possible to say 
that we don't know from where her themes are sprouting. 

If she is a regular church goer, and did make a clear choice to 
follow the Bible in her books, then I can't presume to know which 
story she is modeling Harry's plight after until we see if he is 
shouting, "Dumbledore, why have you forsaken me?" at the end of the 
books. And even if this has been the path thus far-- what if she 
thows cattion to the wind at the end... I don't need to read every 
J.K.R interview to know she doesn't like doing what is expected of 
her in her writing.

--Blyx






From talisman22457 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 02:30:34 2003
From: talisman22457 at yahoo.com (Talisman)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 02:30:34 -0000
Subject: OoP - GUILTY Dumbledore (was Dumbledore's true sorrow motives)
In-Reply-To: <bjdfs0+ee6c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjgpka+9r9u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80164

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" <foxmoth at q...> 
wrote:
> Pippin
> --- <giant snip of lenghty discussion> Assuming Dumbledore 
deliberately arranged Sirius's death puts 
> more holes in the plot than it takes out, IMO.

Talisman, having a tea party with Tibbles, Snowy, Mr. Paws and 
Tufty, asks if they would mind a small interruption, and being 
indulged in the matter, explains:

Well, pippin_999, that  rather depends on your understanding of the 
plot structures and how they are unfolding.

If you are convinced that DD is just a kindly but deteriorating old 
wizard, doing his best amid events that are out of his control, then 
his having an active role in Sirius's death is doubtless a jarring 
proposition.

(By the way, Rowling still considers DD "a very wise man" who is 
preparing Harry for what is to come, and who "has had to step back 
from Harry to teach him some of life's hard lessons." Albert Hall 
interview, June 2003.  Sounds like MAGIC DISHWASHER to me, though if 
I recall correctly, you don't like that theory either. Certainly 
doesn`t sound like poor befuddled DD.)

If you believe, as I do, that DD is firmly in control of events up 
to and including Book 5, then his role in Sirius's death is 
consistent with the continuing pattern.

One of the difficulties with this subject is that it is impractible 
to review DD's entire history in a post.  I have a great many pages 
of analysis on this topic, but whether I condense them into 
digestible posts, and whether I want to put up with the aggravation 
of Troll attacks, is another matter.

Nonetheless, to the extent that you articulated cognizable points 
contra, I'll respond.

I don't know what you mean by "new morality," but your personal rule 
for lying doesn't seem to be in play in the HP series.

As to the "socks" lie, how venial it was or what DD may have gained 
by  telling it remains to be seen.  Since we don't know the truth, 
we can't judge the impact of the lie.  If he saw Harry's head on a 
platter, for instance . . .

That said, most readers understood that I was avoiding a mini-
treatise on the subject.  I was hardly hanging my hat on the SS 
example, but was using it to show that the issue of DD's veracity 
was introduced and highlighted in the first book.  There are many 
old threads exploring DD's ongoing prevarications, and I commend you 
to the archives for them.

Your post keeps trying to defend DD's morality, as if I were calling 
him evil.  He is certainly responsible for a great many things, 
including  Sirius's death.  But though I was playfully dramatic in 
the original post, I have repeatedly said that DD does everything  
he does for the very best reasons.  See, e.g. #75836. 

You may impose your own judgment on these issues, but I have no 
interest in debating your personal ideas regarding morality.

The HP saga is not "pure myth," there are no gods in it.  The world 
of magic invokes the Romantic literary Mode.   Myth may inform it, 
but it is displaced.  Therefore DD, as the most god-like character, 
is a displaced god.  And to quote Omar Khayyam, he "moves and mates 
and slays" like one.  

There are quite a few paragraphs in your post that never crystallize 
to a point.  Whatever you are trying to say, I'll note that:

1) What Harry childishly accepts as "his due" is irrelevant to the 
question of  what DD is doing.

2) No one I know is confused by the idea that Harry and LV have a 
special, reciprocal, form of mental/emotional communication. There 
is nothing in any post of mine that doesn't acknowledge this, and I 
don't recall ever seeing  a post by anyone else denying the thought-
sharing phenomenon.  What then, is your point?

I do think that if DD told Harry in chapter one, "Hey, LV can use 
this power to show you things that aren't true and will probably try 
to lure you into the Dept. of Mysteries," Harry might well have 
declined the bait.
 
There wouldn't have been any danger per se if LV came visiting and 
found Harry thinking, "LV is a tricky bastard and I'm not falling 
for it."

Harry didn't have to know about the prophecy to know this. 

 (As an aside it's still hard to see how knowing the whole prophecy 
would really help LV.  He`s already trying his best to kill Harry, 
and he's cottoned on to the fact that Harry keeps getting away.  He 
knows about the Lily-blood thing, and he knows  he couldn`t stand 
being in Harry because he hates experiencing Harry`s  loving 
emotions.  If he's still overlooking the value of love, how is being 
told there's "a power he knows not of" going to help him? )

The danger to telling Harry is that DD wants Harry to be tricked.

As usual DD has co-opted LV's plans, and is using them to his own 
ends.

You can see for yourself as the plot unfolds, and JKR brings to your 
attention repeatedly, that Harry's communication with LV 
signifiantly increases after his Occlumency lessons begin, and both 
he and others see this as a result of those lessons.  (See. e.g. 
542, 553-554.) 

Moreover, Harry's Dept.of Mysteries vision has stalled out, he can't 
make progress in it--until he has some break-throughs sessions 
DURING Occlumency lessons.(537,593)

Dumbledore himself reveals that the Occlumency lessons were enabling 
LV to access Harry's mind: " . . .nothing could have been more 
dangerous than to OPEN YOU MIND FURTHER to Voldemort while in my 
presence." (833) 

Occlumency was all about getting Harry back on track to go to the 
Dept. of Mysteries within DD's timeline (before the end of term).

There are old threads on this issue, too, but I'll repeat that the 
prophecy-orb was nothing but LV bait.

DD couldn't care less when he hears it has been destroyed, because 
by that time his goals have been achieved.

DD keeps the orb because he knows LV wants to hear it.  He also 
knows LV is still lying low and won't come to the M.O.M. unless 
there is no other choice.  His first choice is to use Harry.   And 
DD knows LV will use his special bond with Harry to lure Harry there.

Lets take a look at this for a moment:

All OoP members who do guard duty at the Dept. of Mysteries are put 
at risk (as well as those that go to fight the DE's at the end).

Three OoP guards pay the price:

1) Arthur Weasley is savaged and almost dies;

2) Sturgis Podmore is now in Azkaban , for trying to break in under 
an Imperious curse;

3) Broderick Bode was put under the Imperious, driven insane by 
touching the orb, and finally murdered by Devil's Snare to keep him 
from talking.

You can add these to DD's collateral damage (bodies are scattered 
throughout the books), all for protecting a superfluous (except as 
bait) orb.

In spite of the great cost spent on its protection, when DD hears 
that the orb was smashed, he is wholly unconcerned.  He says  it 
was "merely the record" (840) and proceeds to run the little 
Trelawny thought-video in his pensieve. 

DD's plan DOES require Harry's unhappiness and controlled ignorance 
in many ways; starting with his dark childhood at the Dursley's and 
moving through each terrifying confrontation with LV.

DD is not doing this for sadistic pleasure, he is doing it to save 
the world.  But he is doing it.

Again, I don't know why you are arguing about whether Harry is 
willing to "shoulder his role,"  no one, including me, has suggested 
otherwise, so I'll just move on.

Regarding your points about Sirius, except for DD's little plan to 
save the world, Sirius did not have to be confined to Grimmauld 
place. (And, I won't even make you listen to how DD chose not to 
clear Sirius's name.)

All the other OoP members are running missions in disguise or under 
invisibility cloaks.  Sirius could have taken his turn in these 
missions.  No one can recognize you under an invisibility cloak. But 
DD doesn't want to risk losing Sirius until the fullness of time, 
when all the elements are there and his goal can be accomplished.   

The confrontation between Harry and LV has to take place in DD's 
sight and in close proximity to Sirius's death.

You are totally wrong about Harry's love for his parents negating  
Sirius's need to die in order to activate Weapon!Harry.

Harry never knew his parents.  They remain largely abstract notions 
to him. However fond Harry is about the *idea* of his parents, we 
see throughout OoP that this does not stop LV from "awake[ning] 
inside him. (828).

It is not until after Sirius's death that Harry is Voldemort-proof.

Sirius is "the *one* person whom [Harry} would go to any lengths to 
rescue" (831) and likewise, Harry is the person "Sirius cared most 
about in the world." (831)

(Someday, depending on  the condition of my patience, I'll tell you 
how DD engineered that, too.)

As I note in my original post, DD realizes that LV is about to 
possess Harry in the Atrium, this is what he has been waiting for.  
DD tells Harry to stay where he is while LV disappears and (does 
whatever one does to prepare for possession).  It is the first time 
DD shows fear, because this is  the proof of the pudding.  It's show-
time.  Has DD's plan succeeded?  (815)

LV is expelled the moment Harry thinks of Sirius and  longs to be 
with his beloved godfather.  As soon as Harry's heart "fills with 
emotion."  (816)  As he feels a love for Sirius that is greater than 
his fear of death. 

And DD knows all of this immediately. He planned for this to 
happen.   He immediately changes his demeanor toward Harry.  DD now 
puts in face just inches from Harry's, looks Harry in the eye and 
begins talking to him.

Back in his office, DD-- who has avoided Harry all year-- won't LET 
Harry leave his presence, and won't STOP speaking to him!  And the 
fact that he does tell Harry about the Prophecy, demonstrates that 
this is not temporary.  He's not telling Harry and then hoping that 
Harry will manage to master Occlumency sometime next year--before LV 
visits his brain again.  He's telling Harry because Harry no longer 
needs to learn Occlumency (at least for LV, though personally I 
think he may want to control other people's mind-tapping, too.)

Everything has changed because of Sirius's death.  You have to be 
actively "not looking" to fail to see this.

And, as much as I love Snape and believe him to be central to the 
plot, it's not all about him.  It's about Harry's power vis-?-vis LV.

There is no doubt Snape has become Harry's psychological scapegoat, 
but this started before Sirius's death (see, e.g. first 7 lines OoP 
577). The additional hate is helpful to the Snape/Harry plot.  And, 
I do agree that in OoP Harry's hatred has become irrational.  But, I 
don't see any evidence that Harry and Snape were in danger of 
becoming "premature friends," without Sirius's death.  

Sure, it is all part of Rowling's plot.  It is a book.  But to say 
that things happen by coincidence or are just clumsily inserted 
because Rowling finds it convenient is to call the book rubbish.  
See my #80011.  
I wonder why you are reading it , at all.

As to the need to abandon Harry at the Dursley's, it is DD (through 
JKR) who sets the 10 year lower limit for LV's return.  You may 
see "10 years" as a code for "next week," I do not.  You may find it 
mere "coincidence" that in 10 years Harry will be off to Hogwarts --
spending most of his years away from the blood-safe house.  But you 
know my opinion of analysis by coincidence.  I'm quite sure JKR 
meant 10 years.

Nor is there any question that DD had other ways to keep Harry safe 
from the DE's prior to LV's return.  DD has never said that he is 
not a match for any DE.

Perhaps I will post my TBAY, after all.  D.O.L.L.A.R.: Dumbledore 
Obviously Lies Like A Rug. I'll go over the whole it-was-necessary-
to protect-you blood-pact hooey there. Look for it in the near 
future.

Maybe someday I'll even tell you how the SS was LV bait, too.  "Pick 
it up when you go to get Harry, Hagrid. That way I can lure LV to 
Hogwarts to meet unshielded Harry at the first available 
opportunity. We know LV will come for it, but we won't destroy it 
until after we've prepared Harry and let him have a little 
adventure."

It goes on in every book.

I believe DD used the same "invisible rope" spell  he was throwing 
around at the DE's to immobolize Sirius, so that Sirius could not 
dodge or return fire.  After Bella stunned Sirius, DD pulled him 
through the veil for a clean, painless death  (as refined in my # 
75836).  If you want to think Bella's spell was fatal, it's okay 
with me.  DD still engineered it.

Of course Bella thinks it's all about her, she wants the glory and 
she's not DD's confidant.

However you see it, all fighting but Bella/Sirius ended almost 
immediately upon DD's appearance.  DD went directly to a position by 
the dais and remained there for the entire time we see him in the 
chamber.

It is ridiculous to believe that the only reason DD didn't bind 
Bella (and bind her first, as she was the only active one) was that  
DD was so busy with the other, "subdued" DE's .  

Once you see that DD requires Sirius's death for his development of 
Harry, you can't believe he was just hoping Bella would take care of 
things.  He was actively involved.  

  You can't buy into the belief that DD couldn't control Bella as 
she fled the death-chamber (he doesn't want too) but can 
effortlessly handle both Bella and LV as soon as he gets to the 
Atrium. 

 And again,  it makes no sense to say that DD was so busy with the 
no-longer-fighting DE's that his first concern wouldn't be for 
Chosen!Harry, gone off to battle Bella alone.  DD postponed showing 
himself in the Atrium  because he required LV's appearance to 
achieve the plan for which all the sacrifices had been made.

I do think DD orchestrated events, and that Snape, as his lieutenant 
was aware of the plan.  You "create" a lot of story to explain a 
timeline for Snape/DD that presumes ignorance, but it's all your own 
invention.

Both DD and Snape were expecting LV to bait Harry.  They have 
their "special" OoP methods of communication and there isn't any 
reason they wouldn't be in contact at Harry's first alarm. There is 
just no integrity in asserting that DD  "coincidently" showed up  
and stood right by the dais with perfect timing to see Sirius 
dispatched, and then hung back and "coincidently" didn't appear in 
the Atrium until LV appeared and all was set for the final test.

To explain all this by fabricating text or calling it a coincidence 
is just bad, or wishful, reading.

DD's behavior in OoP, not the least of which involves his behavior 
in the death-chamber and subsequent "explanation" of events, would 
create a lot of holes in the plot YOU imagine.  I'd say it creates 
enough holes to scrape that plot altogether. 

Talisman, who wonders if Tibbles would like another crumpet?




























  






  

  














> 





From melclaros at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 02:32:57 2003
From: melclaros at yahoo.com (melclaros)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 02:32:57 -0000
Subject: Prank
In-Reply-To: <bjga7h+j70o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjgpop+49ae@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80165

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
> 
> Sirius and Remus didn't have to produce any anecdotes to show that 
> Snape was a dangerous person-he was a DE, remember?  That should 
> cover it.
>

Mel
He was not a DE at 16. We all know he became a DE later on, but even 
Sirius didn't know that until he found out in GoF.

Melpomene




From jdr0918 at hotmail.com  Mon Sep  8 02:42:25 2003
From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 02:42:25 -0000
Subject: In defense of the bad guys (was: The importance of Luna)
In-Reply-To: <20030907194802.70396.qmail@web20709.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjgqah+pfnh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80166

People are talking about:
<<Luna has a whole chapter named for her!  I think her intuitive 
gifts will be important for Harry's development in the future.>>
<<Tonks...has been given a great deal of crap because of her 
clumsiness...Clumisness does not equal unintelligence or evil>>
<<the dreaded prank>>
<<Snape and/or Malfoy vs. Hermione>>

The Sergeant Majorette says

Childhood is supposed to be challenging; adolescence is supposed to 
be rough. Only the strong survive, otherwise the planet would be 
overrun with...oh, wait, it is.

Theory is, you get tested while you still have parents you can run 
home to if you flunk the test the first time. You have plenty of 
opportunity to develop an adaptive strategy that suits you. Then, 
after you qualify, you administer the test to the next generation.

Strategies demonstrated:
Harry is no wuss to begin with, despite a near-Dickensian level of 
psychological and physical abuse. He has figured out just how much 
defiance he can get away with; he continually pushes the envelope; 
Dudley kicks his physical butt on a regular basis, but Harry never 
loses his self-esteem.

Hermione is persecuted and insulted by Malfoy: her reaction? 
Annoyance. Notice how she never takes him seriously as a Dark threat? 
Snape drives her to tears, but what's her boggart? Someone she 
respects telling her she failed at something she wants to do. 
(Freebie, guys: learn to distinguish between tears of hurt and 
sadness and PMS-amplified tears of rage.)

Luna is targeted by her peers, but never tormented. Well, it would be 
torment if she let it be, but that's her adaptive strategy: "the 
golden girls don't want to hang out with me, but I ask myself why? Is 
it because I don't want to do the things they want to do? And do I 
want to hang out with them? Not really, I answer myself." Luna has 
the wisdom and sense of self to respect the opinions of those who 
don't like her.

Now, Snape should have done what Neville does: accept his 
limitations, not let his resentment lead him to bite off more than he 
can chew. Neville knows he's either going to grow out of them or find 
compensatory strengths that draw friends to him. In the meantime, he 
understands that the golden ones can't help it if they're better than 
you.

Sirius had his own family problems, no doubt just as tragic as 
Snape's, but less compelling because he was goodlooking. Even a 
scrawny (back in the day) four-eyed nerd like myself often found 
herself wondering why people were so mean to pretty girls. Given the 
chance, do you really think Snape wouldn't have done something 
equally horrific to Sirius?

And Peter Pettigrew, give me a break, what a leech. How soon do you 
think the other three were regretting the charitable impulse that 
brought him into their inner circle? I was a squad leader in basic 
training, which is a little like the boarding school prefect (no, I 
wasn't popular or likely to be-- I think the drill sergeant simply 
realized I was too old to care); one quickly learns that some people 
are so needy that protecting them imperils the mission. That's the 
difference between a geek and a nerd: nerds have friends, other nerds 
whom they like and respect, whereas geeks dislike themselves and 
others like them.

Ahh, they're screaming, you're blaming the victim! Yeah, I am, at 
least in these cases. Not every victim is an innocent victim; maybe 
it was a fair fight so why demonize the winner?

--JDR




From Lynx412 at aol.com  Mon Sep  8 02:44:59 2003
From: Lynx412 at aol.com (Lynx412 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 22:44:59 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Prank
Message-ID: <e4.3d490423.2c8d472b@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80167

       Sigh. My basic reaction to The Prank, especially after the 2nd Pensive 
scene is...WHAT KIND OF AN IDIOT IS SNAPE? [Yes, I'm yelling.]
       Here is the crew that, presumably, has taunted and bullied him all 
through his time at Hogwarts. And when Sirius tells him to go through a hidden 
tunnel at night, he goes? Frankly, after that I'd expect him to turn up on the 
Darwin List for self-elimination from the gene pool. Instead of sending him to 
his potential death, he could have been headed on a snipe hunt, with the 
Marauders and half the school waiting to laugh at him when he came out.
       Why DID Snape go through the tunnel that night?

       Cheryl the Lynx


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From talisman22457 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 02:58:59 2003
From: talisman22457 at yahoo.com (Talisman)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 02:58:59 -0000
Subject: Time, Repetition and the Uber-Dimension
In-Reply-To: <bjdtdr+rmv3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjgr9j+ehv2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80168

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sevenhundredandthirteen" 
<sevenhundredandthirteen at y...> wrote:
Laurasia
> > In other words, your theory has little to do with time-travel. > 
> Nothing was changed at all, then! Snape saved Harry all along.
> <snip>
> So, whilst I've been bickering with you about Time-Travel- you 
theory doesn't require the use of *any* form of time-travel at all! 
All you need is Snape to stop a hundred Dementors without anyone 
noticing.

Talsiman, who thinks that Laurasia should check her pockets for 
rouge time-turners so we don't have to keep returning to this well-
worn subject, explains:

You may recall (or not) that this all began with a query about how 
Fudge knew the dementors tried to kiss Harry.  In the process the 
question arose as to whether Snape (or whomever you like) needed to 
be conscious to preserve Harry so that he could become the older 
self who created the Patronus. This person would also know about the 
kiss attempt. 

Obviously, my theory DOES include the lengthy time-travel discussion 
that followed.

What you are really trying to ask is: "if Snape could save Harry 
from the dementors, why did Harry have to go back at all?"

You may as well ask, if DD knew Voldemort was going to get to the 
Mirror of Erised, why did he wait to destroy the SS until after 
Harry's little adventure?  Harry didn't save the stone, it was 
destroyed. And DD didn't need Harry to destroy it. (Or, in CoS, why 
did DD let students go on being petrified instead of sending them 
home, etc.) 

Because in the process of these adventures, DD is preparing Harry 
for an ultimate showdown with LV.  DD is also working out other 
parts of his plan.

I thought you recognized the value to Harry of learning how to 
produce the Patronus, as well as the Prongs/James aspect of it.

Harry doesn't confront LV in PoA, but the "saving Sirius" adventure, 
which includes the dementors-by-the-lake scene, takes the place of 
the usual LV confrontation as a practical lesson in life and DADA.

Also, a big part of the time-travel was saving Sirius.

Talisman, suggesting we find something fresh to talk about.

 






From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Mon Sep  8 03:17:27 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 03:17:27 -0000
Subject: The importance of Luna... and the New Trio
In-Reply-To: <bjg50k+mq9s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjgsc7+967h@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80169

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> 
> Luna has a calmness and emotional detachment to her, I think Harry
> picked up on that when he talked to Luna about her missing things 
nearthe end of OoP. Harry felt calm around her, he didn't feel 
threatenedor challenged, no sign of hero worship, no strong emotional
> attachment, no guarding her words because of emotional uncertainty. 
> 
<snipped large portion here> 

I like the Luna character in the current book, but thought she was
> pretty much a one trick (one book) pony, but now that I have thought
> about it, and read other people's opinions, I think Luna will be one
> of the most important characters in the next book. 



Jen: I had a similar reaction to Luna on my first read-through--why 
the heck was this character suddenly plopped down in the middle of 
Book 5, with quite a bit of page time at that....

Then after Sirius's death and the interaction with Harry described 
above, I realized that like the mythical "good Slytherin" people are 
hoping will be revealed, Luna is the "good mystic" who contradicts 
the previous negative sterotypes of seers, prophets and intuition in 
general.

It's amazing really, that a series depending on a prophecy to create 
the story we see before us has so many characters who are derisive of 
the metaphysical foundation it's built on! 

But JKR makes it work. She can have the characters show irreverence 
toward Trelawney, divination, even the centaurs to a lesser extent, 
but when the time comes to change the character's (and our) reality, 
she gives us Luna, the Prophecy, and the Veil to light our way. I 
can't wait to see what's next....









From prof_uloth at hotmail.com  Mon Sep  8 06:08:39 2003
From: prof_uloth at hotmail.com (Fred Uloth)
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 22:08:39 -0800
Subject: [HPforGrownups] James/Harry Theory
In-Reply-To: <6d.188ef292.2c8cdb4a@aol.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20030907214844.00a6a270@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 80170

At 03:04 PM 9/7/2003 -0400, furkin1712 at aol.com wrote:
>Blue Eyes:
><snip>Obviously the looks, the Seeker (and yes he was a Seeker because he was
>playing with a Snitch in Ootp), the not being a Prefect and having his 
>best friend be one.

Actually JKR states in an interview that he was a chaser 
(http://www.hp-lexicon.org/james.html or 
http://www.scholastic.com/harrypotter/author/transcript2.htm)...in the SS 
the movie they made James a seeker, but he wasn't. The playing with the 
snitch bit was just for fun...just because he was a chaser doesn't mean he 
couldn't play seeker (look at Ginny who is moving from one position to the 
other). I, Fred Uloth, would equate this to me passing the American 
football around with my friends...one might assume that I was a quarter 
back or a receiver when in actuality I was an offensive tackle, In a game I 
only touched the ball when there was a fumble.





From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com  Mon Sep  8 06:18:20 2003
From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 06:18:20 -0000
Subject: People Should Free All Their Elves (filk)
Message-ID: <bjh6vc+fsjs@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80171

People Should Free All Their Elves (GoF, Chap. 14 & 21)

The 10th A!Kedavra filk to the tune of People Will Say We're In Love 
from Rodgers and Hammerstein's  Oklahoma!

Dedicated to Gail "People will say she loves filks" Bohacek

THE SCENE: Gryffindor Commons. HERMIONE impresses Harry & Ron to join 
her in fighting for elvish rights.

HERMIONE
Why do I care that elfish welfare should be advanced?
Why do I fight so all of their rights can be enhanced? 
Here's what we'll do to organize SPEW for lobbyin'
Soon we'll have won the liberation of Dobby's kin


Don't deny them their pay
Don't keep their clothes away
Don't work them on holidays
People should free all their elves.

Don't roll your eyes at me.
You must wear this new badge.
You two bearing this SPEW badge
People will know we love elves!

Let's start correcting things
We can do it all ourselves.
Self-rule our directing brings!
People should free all their elves.

(Segue to Hogwarts Kitchen, where WINKY sets forth the case for 
continued elf-servitude.)

WINKY
I was set free though I'd rather be in my old place
I must oppose the giving of clothes to the elf race
Independence just doesn't make sense to a born serf
You would be kind your own beeswax mind when on our turf.

Don't raise my pay too much
Don't give those jeans to me
Don't keep on demeaning me
People should not free their elves.

Don't bad-mouth Crouch too much
Don't try to elf-coddle 
Dobby's not our role-model
People should not free their elves.
Don't abuse secrecy
Keep butterbeer on shelves
Don't be so gol-darned PC
People should not free their elves!

     - CMC

HARRY POTTER FILKS
http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm 





From dicentra at xmission.com  Mon Sep  8 06:58:38 2003
From: dicentra at xmission.com (Dicentra spectabilis)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 06:58:38 -0000
Subject: Responsiblity for Black's death
In-Reply-To: <20030906201101.31018.qmail@web20508.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjh9au+g6an@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80172

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, A Featheringstonehaugh
<featheringstonehaugh at y...> wrote:

> It's too easy to say that Sirius's confinement at Headquarters was 
> the reason for his demise. ... Sirius died of an overdose of hubris, 
> and no one was responsible for that but Sirius himself. 

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.  

The fact that Sirius had left Headquarters wasn't the problem.  He
wasn't killed because some Ministry official recognized him.  He
wasn't killed because he revealed his existence to the DEs. (They
already knew he was in London from Malfoy.) 

The only place you can hang the hubris charge is on his taunting of
Bellatrix, but even that is debatable.  The text doesn't indicate that
he stopped duelling to taunt her nor that he had let his guard down. 
It looks like Bella just got lucky with that one curse (assuming she's
the one who cast it).

Sirius wasn't perfect: none of the characters in the Potterverse are.
 But his character flaws aren't what got him killed.

I don't think that Sirius's death is supposed to be an example of the
hazards of hubris.  I think it's to show a good many things, one of
which is the way that our strengths can also be weaknesses, sometimes
tragically so.  Harry's heroic instincts led him down the wrong path
this time, Dumbledore's love for Harry weakened his judgment, and
Sirius's being a "brave, clever, and energetic man" are what got him
into the Ministry that night.

--Dicentra




From AutumnWhisperer at Aol.com  Sun Sep  7 21:01:37 2003
From: AutumnWhisperer at Aol.com (AutumnWhisperer at Aol.com)
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 17:01:37 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Was Fudge talking about Sirius?
Message-ID: <f.1877ac4a.2c8cf6b1@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80173


Laurie writes:
> Was Fudge possible forshadowing the return of Sirius? < <

AutumnWhisperer wrote:
> <snip> Time would have to be > reversed in order for a dead 
man to come back to life, you see? <snip> > >

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley":
>> I'm sorry to burst your (Droobles Best Blowing Gum is my 
FAVORITE!) bubble, but...

The reversal of time was in PoA, caused by the Time Turner.  The 
man wasn't dead, he was an Animagus who had not been out of rat form 
in, what, nearly eleven years?  Scabbers was revealed to be Peter 
Pettigrew, alive after all, by Harry and Co. and the events in the 
Shrieking Shack.  I think the "couple of invisible dementors," 
though, must be a reference to the ones in the opening of OoP, rather 
than the ones in PoA, because Fudge acknowledged those (PoA) 
dementors and dismissed them from Hogwarts duty.

And JKR has already said that Sirius really is *dead*; I think she 
means we aren't going to see him again.  Period.  Denial is one stage 
of grief; let's go on to the next one, whatever it is. <<<


Yes, but when Fudge says this, it's in OOTP... and Harry and DD have been 
trying to convince the ministry (Fudge) of Voldemorts return since the end of 
GOF... so it makes sense that fudge would be talking about Voldemort when he says that. He even goes along to talk about the 'invisible dementors' after, and that all goes together with what happens and the explanation that Harry gives.  Lord Voldemort has returned. DD thinks it was him who sent the dementors. DD tells this to fudge in not so many words and fudge doesn't believe it, but somehow, Harry gets off. So, at the time of that quote, Fudge is trying to catch Harry. He doesn't want him to get off... so, I take it like Fudge is a little irritated when he says this, and takes Harry's explanation of Voldemort being back and the Dementor attack before school starts and mocks it with this quote--->"Or was it Potter's identical twin in the Hog's Head that day?  Or is there the usual simple explanation involving a reversal of time, a dead man coming back to life, and a couple of invisible dementors?"

Furthermore, we all have our opinions here and " I'm sorry to burst your 
(Droobles Best Blowing Gum is my FAVORITE!) bubble," is not a very nice way to 
start a post. After all, you are 'Sandy', not 'JKR'... so you don't really know 
what's gonna happen either, do you?

And, "JKR has already said that Sirius really is *dead*; I think she means we 
aren't going to see him again.  Period.  Denial is one stage of grief; let's 
go on to the next one, whatever it is"  And, don't confuse this with *Denial*, 
but just because he's dead, doesn't mean we won't see any more of him. After 
all, both of Harry's parents are dead and we see them through bits and 
glimpses since book 1, right?

-Autumn.







From hannahwonder at aol.com  Mon Sep  8 02:30:52 2003
From: hannahwonder at aol.com (hannahwonder at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 22:30:52 EDT
Subject: The Importance of Luna.. the new Trio
Message-ID: <ca.217a50ec.2c8d43dc@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80174

<<bb_mboy:

I could actually see a new Trio forming. Because Neville and Luna have

an emotionally detacted calm, deep wisdom and insight, and would

maintain somewhat distant detached friendships, Harry will feel far

more comfortable around them than he will around Ron and Hermione.

Plus, he loves Ron and Hermione a great deal, and he won't want to be

responsible for anything that might happen to them. So, he will have

strong incentive to distance himself from them. He will still remain

polite and friendly with Ron and Hermione, but on a deeper friendship

level, he will be detached.>>

<<Melanie: 
I'm not sure you could get much blunter than Hermione Granger in this last 
book.  She isn't afraid to tell Harry how stupid he is acting and he is the one 
person who has always managed to change his mood to some degree.  I see Ron 
and Harry pulling away from eachother however, I do not think Hermione will be 
willing to let this happen very easily.  However, on the same token I do think 
that Harry is going to have a much easier time discussing these things with 
Luna and Neville rather than Harry and Hermione.>>

Hannah (me):
I have to agree with bb_mboy on this one. While I agree that Hermione 
wouldn't want to let Harry pull away, part of the reason for that is her emotional 
attachment to him, which is exactly what Harry would be avoiding. Hermione /is/ 
blunt and straightforward at times, but usually when it concerns things like 
his relations with Cho (the conversation about the Valentines Day fiasco, for 
example, or why Cho would cry about kissing Harry), not things that concern 
Harry himself. When she brings up the DA for the first time, she and Ron both are 
very hesitant and cautious -- not blunt at all, because they don't want him 
to get angry. I think it's for the soul-searching or "spiritual," as bb_mboy 
said, reasons that Harry will enjoy Luna and Neville's company more. 

Hannah




From pinoypartygal at aol.com  Mon Sep  8 03:14:31 2003
From: pinoypartygal at aol.com (Emily)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 03:14:31 -0000
Subject: James/Harry Theory
In-Reply-To: <46.3d977f04.2c8d37aa@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bjgs6n+djdn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80175

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Meliss9900 at a... wrote:
> In a message dated 09/07/2003 7:49:46 PM Central Daylight Time, 
> furkin1712 at a... writes:
> 
> 
> > Theory: By 7th year Harry will be Head Boy and so will Cho and 
they will 
> > start going out, Harry will defeat Voldemort while dueling him. 
Harry will 
> > have a kid, a son that look like him but has his mom's eyes


Sure there are similarities between Harry and his father, but their 
are a lot of differences too. We don't really know what James was 
really like in Hogwarts after all, he doesn't seem all that much 
like Harry in personality.We also must remember, Cho is a year older 
than Harry so unless she becomes exceptionally daft and fails this 
year or her 6th year, she won't be 
head girl the same year as Harry (personally I believe it will be 
Hermione) and Cho didn't dislike Harry like Lily obviously disliked 
James...in fact I'd say that Cho rather liked Harry she always 
smiled at him since she was introduced. It just so happened that 
Cedric got to her first. 

~Emily~





From gandalph3 at hotmail.com  Mon Sep  8 02:27:14 2003
From: gandalph3 at hotmail.com (gandalph_3)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 02:27:14 -0000
Subject: Questions about year 6:  the Prank, the Marauders & Snape
In-Reply-To: <20030907192115.43386.qmail@web60210.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjgpe2+nbvt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80176

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, udder_pen_dragon <udderpd at y...> 
wrote:
> 
> Barbara wrote
> 
> Many apologies if what I say has been discussed
> before: I tried a Snape and werewolf search but the sheer 
> volume of things not altogether pertinent wore me out.   <snip>
> 
> Which brings me to Snape.  Maybe he did get bitten. 
> Then it would be logical that he knows (perhaps even
> invented) the potion that keeps werewolves "safe". 
> 
> Udder+pen_Dragon wrote
> 
> Snape can not be a Werewolf as in POA he is out in the full moon 
coming back from the shrieking shack with Lupin etc.
> 


Also, he could not be a werewolf because Snape was teaching DADA 
while Lupin was sick due to the effects of being a werewolf. He was 
also having the students do homework about werewolfs and if he was 
one he would not want to out himself.

BloodDevils





From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 08:13:54 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 08:13:54 -0000
Subject: Legilimency, Occlumency, Snape, Harry
In-Reply-To: <bjglpr+lelk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjhdo2+k0a9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80177

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> 
>
> > 
> > Legilimency takes two forms in the book. One is the gift or skill
> > of Legilimency and the other is the Legilimens charm.
> > 
> > It speculate that the Legilimens charm simply causes a cascade of
> > random memories .... edited...
> >
> > 
> > The gift or skill of Legilimens, on the other hand, is as deep 
> > strong psychic intuitive sense of a persons feelings, thoughts, 
> > and emotions at the moment. ....edited...
> > 
> > Just a thought.
> 

> Laura:
> 
> Your theory is interesting and I'm willing to be convinced, but 
> could you cite some canon to show which is which? ...edited...
>

bboy_mn:

I don't think it's necessary to cite the book to you if you have read
it. Although, I can and will do that if you really want me to.

We have two examples of types of Legilimency in the book which
demonstrate my theory. The first is Dumbledore's and other's
descriptions of the skill of Legilimency for detecting lies. Both
Voldemort and Dumbledore have this skill.

Then we have the Legilimency classes between Harry and Snape. The
examples of the Legilimens charm used in the classes don't seem to be
of much use for detecting lies. Snape casts the charm, the cascade of
random memories comes spilling out, and when Harry gets to a memory
that he doesn't want anyone to see, he forces the cascade to stop.
That is the only form that we see the Legilimen charm taking, and we
see it repeatedly. 

Like I said, the charm could give you some insight, but the examples
we see seem too random to really determine Harry thoughts, emotions,
and motivations at that given moment. Therefore, I conclude that some
general truth could be gathered, and attempts could be made to
reconstruct the viewed thoughts into something coherent, and thereby
hope to interpret it's meaning, but it all seems to random and
generalized to be used to determine if the words just spoken were true.

Now the gift or skill of Legilimency can be used to interpret truth,
therefore, the sensations, the intuitive sense that the Legilimist
divines must be more immediate and must be more specific. I base all
this not so much on text, but on a logical conclusion regarding what
must occur to accomplish the task at hand. 

We all have an intuitive sense to help us determine when people are
lying. We take our clues from many sources. A gifted Legilimist
abilities go far beyond common general intuition; it's not JUST a
suspicion or a hunch. As I said, a Legilimist, or Legilimizer, or
whatever you want to call him, is a Seer; someone gifted in a specific
form of Divination. Someone with a strong psychic sense. So the clues
that a Legilimist picks up go much much deeper that our common
suspicious muggle intuition. They are people who sense other people's
emotions and intent. In addition, in the process of detecting lies,
they may even be able to sense some degree of the truth.

We see the Legilimens charm repeatedly in the book, and it seems to be
just what I said it was. It forces a cascade of random memories, and
that doesn't seem at all effective in determining if someone is lying.

Since a Legilimist is able to detect lies, he must therefore be able
to see and feel more that a random cascage of memories. For me, the
logical conclusion is that the Legilimist has a deep strong intuitive
psychic sense of a persons emotions and intent at the moment the other
person is trying to perpetrate a lie. 

One last reminder that this skill goes far far deeper than common
muggle intuition. Also, I accept that not only are emotions and intent
sensed, but there may also be some mental images that accompany this,
but I suspect they are specific to the moment and are more of a visual
intuitive sense than actual images pulled from the other persons mind.  

I guess if intuitive psychic doesn't do it for you, you could look at
a Legilimist as a psychic empath. They have an empathic psychic
insight into the other person's thoughts, intent, and emotions, and
are therefore able to detect lies. 

Again, just a thought.

bboy_mn








From deemarie1a at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 11:04:53 2003
From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 11:04:53 -0000
Subject: Prank
In-Reply-To: <bjgpop+49ae@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjhnol+f1c4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80178

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "melclaros" <melclaros at y...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
> > 
> > Sirius and Remus didn't have to produce any anecdotes to show 
that 
> > Snape was a dangerous person-he was a DE, remember?  That should 
> > cover it.
> >
> 
> Mel
> He was not a DE at 16. We all know he became a DE later on, but 
even 
> Sirius didn't know that until he found out in GoF.
> 
> Melpomene

I do not have access to the books right at the moment.  My daughter 
has them hidden.  Could someone please quote cannon where the Prank 
was first called that?  I would like to know who first referred to 
the incident as a prank.

D




From jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 11:11:42 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 11:11:42 -0000
Subject: The Department of Mysteries (a filk)
Message-ID: <bjho5e+9n9k@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80179

This is a filk of the song "Lullaby of Broadway" from the musical
"Forty-Second Street, titled "The Department of Mysteries,"


I dedicate this filk to Amy Z., whom I don't get to talk to as much
anymore, now that she's on the Left Coast.   :-(

               The Department of Mysteries
(SCENE:  The Forbidden Forest. Harry is anxious to go with Ron and
Hermione to rescue his godfather from Lord Voldemort, but is reluctant
to include Ginny, Luna or Neville.)

HARRY: 
[Spoken]
I'm sorry that your help isn't for me. I'm goin' back there all alone!

NEVILLE:
What was it you you've just said, "All alone?"
We were all in the D.A. together, and this is the first chance 
We've had to do something real, and you say: "All alone?"

NEVILLE, LUNA and GINNY:
We'll come along and hurry to 
The Department of Mysteries.
All the rest of the D.A. too, 
The Department of Mysteries.
We want to help fight You-Know-Who,
We want to see him cursed.
We know what we're getting into, 
We haven't been coerced.


HARRY:
When those Death Eaters "A.K." recite,
They really aren't kidding.
If you get hit by that green light,
It means you're gone.
Hang on, Padfoot, 
Hang on, though you're on your knees.
Hold tight, Padfoot,
Hold tight, Harry hears your pleas,
He'll fly to the Department of Mysteries..

NEVILLE, LUNA and GINNY:
Come on and let us all go to 
The Department of Mysteries.
The three of you are far too few, 
For Department of Mysteries.


We've trained hard for the main event,
We're certain they can't harm us.
We've practiced our Impediment-
A and Expelliarmus

HARRY:
Hush! I can't believe I'm hearin' this;
You don't know what you're sayin'.
If you get a Dementor's Kiss
Your soul will freeze:
Hold on, Snuffles,
Hold on, try not to appease.
Hang tight, Snuffles,
Hang tight, Harry's sure that he's
Comin' to the Department of Mysteries.


NEVILLE, LUNA and GINNY:
Come on Harry, we cannot wait,
The Department of Mysteries
Is far away, and if we get there late 
Poor Sirius is history.
The rumble of the Thestrals' wings,
Shows how to do the rescue.
Now, Harry, we can see those things, 
But how about Ron? 
Hang on, Sirius.
Hang on, we're all on our way.

HARRY:
[Spoken]
Let's do it!

NEVILLE, LUNA, GINNY, RON AND HERMIONE:
[Cheers!]


ALL:
[Singing]
Come on along-
Come on along we're goin' to 
The Department of Mysteries.
The Death Eaters are good as through. 
The Department of Mysteries.
Our band will fly to London town,
And ev'ryone is ready.
We'll knock all the Dark Wizards down. 
They'll rue the day!
Hurry to the Department of 
Mysteries!

(The contingent of Dumbledore's Army mounts their Thestrals and set
off for London.)


-Haggridd




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 12:40:59 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 12:40:59 -0000
Subject: Legilimency, Occlumency, Snape, Harry
In-Reply-To: <bjhdo2+k0a9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjhtcr+jh4u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80180

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> > > Legilimency takes two forms in the book. One is the gift or 
skill of Legilimency and the other is the Legilimens charm.  It 
speculate that the Legilimens charm simply causes a cascade of
random memories .... edited...

> > > The gift or skill of Legilimens, on the other hand, is as deep 
> > > strong psychic intuitive sense of a persons feelings, thoughts, 
> > > and emotions at the moment. ....edited...
> > > 
> > > Just a thought.
> > 
> 
> > Laura:
> > 
> > Your theory is interesting and I'm willing to be convinced, but 
> > could you cite some canon to show which is which? ...edited...
> >
> 
> bboy_mn:
> 
> I don't think it's necessary to cite the book to you if you have 
read
> it. Although, I can and will do that if you really want me to.
> 
> We have two examples of types of Legilimency in the book which
> demonstrate my theory. The first is Dumbledore's and other's
> descriptions of the skill of Legilimency for detecting lies. Both
> Voldemort and Dumbledore have this skill.
> 
> Then we have the Legilimency classes between Harry and Snape. The
> examples of the Legilimens charm used in the classes don't seem to 
be
> of much use for detecting lies. Snape casts the charm, the cascade 
of
> random memories comes spilling out, and when Harry gets to a memory
> that he doesn't want anyone to see, he forces the cascade to stop.
> That is the only form that we see the Legilimen charm taking, and we
> see it repeatedly. 
> 
> Like I said, the charm could give you some insight, but the examples
> we see seem too random to really determine Harry thoughts, emotions,
> and motivations at that given moment. Therefore, I conclude that 
some
> general truth could be gathered, and attempts could be made to
> reconstruct the viewed thoughts into something coherent, and thereby
> hope to interpret it's meaning, but it all seems to random and
> generalized to be used to determine if the words just spoken were 
true.
> 
> Now the gift or skill of Legilimency can be used to interpret truth,
> therefore, the sensations, the intuitive sense that the Legilimist
> divines must be more immediate and must be more specific. I base all
> this not so much on text, but on a logical conclusion regarding what
> must occur to accomplish the task at hand. 
> 
> We all have an intuitive sense to help us determine when people are
> lying. We take our clues from many sources. A gifted Legilimist
> abilities go far beyond common general intuition; it's not JUST a
> suspicion or a hunch. As I said, a Legilimist, or Legilimizer, or
> whatever you want to call him, is a Seer; someone gifted in a 
specific
> form of Divination. Someone with a strong psychic sense. So the 
clues
> that a Legilimist picks up go much much deeper that our common
> suspicious muggle intuition. They are people who sense other 
people's
> emotions and intent. In addition, in the process of detecting lies,
> they may even be able to sense some degree of the truth.
> 
> We see the Legilimens charm repeatedly in the book, and it seems to 
be
> just what I said it was. It forces a cascade of random memories, and
> that doesn't seem at all effective in determining if someone is 
lying.
> 
> Since a Legilimist is able to detect lies, he must therefore be able
> to see and feel more that a random cascage of memories. For me, the
> logical conclusion is that the Legilimist has a deep strong 
intuitive
> psychic sense of a persons emotions and intent at the moment the 
other
> person is trying to perpetrate a lie. 
> 
> One last reminder that this skill goes far far deeper than common
> muggle intuition. Also, I accept that not only are emotions and 
intent
> sensed, but there may also be some mental images that accompany 
this,
> but I suspect they are specific to the moment and are more of a 
visual
> intuitive sense than actual images pulled from the other persons 
mind.  
> 
> I guess if intuitive psychic doesn't do it for you, you could look 
at
> a Legilimist as a psychic empath. They have an empathic psychic
> insight into the other person's thoughts, intent, and emotions, and
> are therefore able to detect lies. 
> 
> Again, just a thought.
> 


Laura:

A couple of questions (I'm not trying to be argumentative here, just 
clarifying your ideas in my mind):  it sounds like your first kind of 
Legilimency, the super-intuitive kind, might be something also found 
in the muggle world.  There are, after all, people who do seem to 
have an extraordinary ability to sense the feelings (if not precise 
thoughts) of others.  Now whether you would call this "magic" in the 
JKR sense or whether it is something else is another question.  Maybe 
some muggles have a bit of magic in them that they don't recognize as 
such.  :-)

But the other kind of Legilimency, the spell kind, seems rather 
pointless.  If all you can see is a bunch of jumbled images, I'm not 
sure what you can learn from using the charm.  I'd think you'd need 
both kinds to make sense of what you see as a result of the charm.  
If you don't have the intuitive ability, why bother to learn the 
spell?  Just to be able to do it?  I guess there would be people like 
that-Bertha Jorkins comes to mind, not that I'm suggesting she was a 
Legilimens, just that she was nosy.

When DD interrogated Kreachur about Sirius's whereabouts, he must 
have used the second kind of Legilimency.  Just getting a sense of 
Kreachur's emotions wouldn't have given DD the specific information 
he needed.  Right?

I still wonder why JKR would have used the same terminology for two 
rather different sets of skills.  She's usually very precise in her 
use of words.




From koticzka at wp.pl  Mon Sep  8 12:34:12 2003
From: koticzka at wp.pl (Koticzka)
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2003 14:34:12 +0200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape and Harry WAS Re: Pensieves objectivity AND: Dumbledore's integrity
Message-ID: <009301c37608$680aa590$24104cd5@ola>

No: HPFGUIDX 80181

I snipped a lot of the message below as it is very long and I intend to
comment only parts of it:

melclaros:
<snip> Snape has EVERY right to 'demand' to be called "sir"
> or "professor". He IS "Sir". He IS "Professor".

msbeadsley:
The *words* can be demanded (and that will result in tremendous
success, I'm sure), but the respect the words imply must be *earned*;
something Snape seems oblivious to or bent on ignoring.

melclaros:
> What would you have him do? "Well Harry, we're here in private, we
> can drop the act, call me Sevvy. Want a beer?" Sheesh. This is
> STILL a student/teacher relationship.

****Koticzka's comment:
After what I have found out about Professor Snape's treatment in the School
I am not surprised that everyone insists that Harry to addresses him with
the utmost respect. He deserves it, in my personal opinion.
In general, calling someone "Sir" or "Professor" is not extraordinary.
I do consider it a rule of common savoir-vivre.

Old fashioned? Exaggerating?  I do not think so  Students talking amongst
themselves can use any nicknames they want.  Try to force them to act
differently... But it is still expected that a student or even colleagues
call teachers by their proper names and titles, especially scientific ones
as Doctor or Professor. And it was common when I attended high school, it
was common both when I was a student and then an academic teacher. I have
not noticed any extreme changes in this area unless it is an official
situation.


melclaros:
> There was NO excuse for Harry to look in that Pensieve. NONE. I
> don't care if Snape was baiting him. I don't care if he'd hung a
> big blinking sign over it saying "Don't look in here, Potter!
<snip>

msbeadsley:
No excuse needed.  Just human nature.

****Koticzka's comment:
As far as private situations(the Pensieve in this case) are considered... I
do not allow children rummage through my flat. Yes, of course when I am
conscious that I cannot trust a child's responsibility (paradox, isn't it?)
I lock everything I want to keep secret. Were it necessary for plot reasons,
this would be one more piece of proof for me that Harry is a reckless rascal
who cannot be trusted

Koticzka from her local Hogwarts again! *****
How can you hurt a man who has nothing? 
Give him something broken
http://rambambula.fm.interia.pl/chitchats.htm - Chitchats with Professor Snape
http://www.infofirma.pl/koticzka

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From tomatogrower88 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 13:23:45 2003
From: tomatogrower88 at yahoo.com (tomatogrower88)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 13:23:45 -0000
Subject: Vernon Dursley
Message-ID: <bjhvt1+1ruu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80182

As I have been reading the lists for the past week or so I have found 
my self thinking about Vernon Dursley. Before OOP came out I was of 
the opinion that the Dursley role in each book would grow less as 
Harry became more powerful. The first few chapters of OOP changed my 
mind on this. I think that Aunt Petunia will play a larger role. I do 
not think she will ever really like Harry but I think they will have 
an understanding with each other. I think this based on one line "All 
of a sudden, for the first time in his life, Harry fully appreciated 
that Aunt Petunia was his mother's sister"(POA page 38). Next I am in 
the redeemable Dudley camp so I think he and Harry will come to 
agreement in the end. That leaves Uncle Vernon. I can't come to any 
ideas of what he and Harry's relationship will be in book 7. I do not 
think it will be good or postive in any way. Could any one share 
thoughts on this? If this has been brought op before could you direct 
me to the thread.

Mryth 




From erinellii at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 13:56:07 2003
From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 13:56:07 -0000
Subject: Prank
In-Reply-To: <bjhnol+f1c4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bji1pn+604n@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80183

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Donna" <deemarie1a at y...> wrote:
> 
> I do not have access to the books right at the moment.  My daughter 
> has them hidden.  Could someone please quote cannon where the Prank 
> was first called that?  I would like to know who first referred to 
> the incident as a prank.
> 
> D


  It is never called a prank in the books.  That is a fan expression.
Snape does sarcastically call it a "highly amusing joke".

Erin




From wsherratt3338 at rogers.com  Mon Sep  8 14:11:46 2003
From: wsherratt3338 at rogers.com (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 14:11:46 -0000
Subject: Legilimency, Occlumency, Snape, Harry
In-Reply-To: <bjhtcr+jh4u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bji2n2+e5rl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80185

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
> 
> But the other kind of Legilimency, the spell kind, seems rather 
> pointless.  If all you can see is a bunch of jumbled images, I'm 
not 
> sure what you can learn from using the charm.  I'd think you'd 
need 
> both kinds to make sense of what you see as a result of the 
charm.  
> If you don't have the intuitive ability, why bother to learn the 
> spell?  Just to be able to do it?  I guess there would be people 
like 
> that-Bertha Jorkins comes to mind, not that I'm suggesting she was 
a 
> Legilimens, just that she was nosy.
> 
I think maybe the way Snape was using the Legilimens charm on Harry 
was a bit different from the way Voldemort would use it.  Snape 
wasn't looking for anything in particular; he was just demonstrating 
his ability to get inside Harry's mind, and persisting until Harry 
could throw him out.  Maybe if one is looking for some particular 
information, the wizard doing the spell would have the ability 
to "focus" it in one particular direction, so that the information 
wanted would come out.  I can't imagine Voldemort patiently sitting 
through many sessions of Bertha Jorkins's random memories until 
something useful came out; I figured he zeroed in on particular 
areas of thought until her defences broke down.

Wanda





From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 14:30:53 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 14:30:53 -0000
Subject: Was Fudge talking about Sirius?
In-Reply-To: <f.1877ac4a.2c8cf6b1@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bji3qt+ippc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80186

> Yes, but when Fudge says this, it's in OOTP... and Harry and DD 
> have been trying to convince the ministry (Fudge) of Voldemorts 
> return since the end of GOF... so it makes sense that fudge would 
> be talking about Voldemort when he says that. <snip>

I can accept that Fudge is talking about Voldemort.  As you put it, 
it even seems likely.  That makes more sense than what I said; but 
even though I no longer think Fudge was talking about Pettigrew, I 
still think it is a notion that makes more sense than trying to have 
it come out as some sort of foreshadowing about Sirius returning.

> Furthermore, we all have our opinions here and " I'm sorry to burst 
> your (Droobles Best Blowing Gum is my FAVORITE!) bubble," is not a 
> very nice way to start a post. After all, you are 'Sandy', 
> not 'JKR'... so you don't really know what's gonna happen either, 
> do you?

None of us know what's going to happen.  If we did, there wouldn't be 
much point in postulating via posting here.  As for not being very 
nice:  I'm sorry.  As I am still being moderated and anything I 
posted saying, gee, well, you're right, would likely bounce right 
back to me if I didn't scrape up some canon point or other to make 
the statement an addendum to, I am responding offline.

I don't think your tone in pointing out that *I* wasn't very nice is 
very nice, either.  It hurt.  I was not being intentionally unkind or 
snarky.  I got exasperated with what I perceived as people clinging 
desperately to any rationale they could manage to shore up for Sirius 
being "not really dead," "only kind of dead," "only dead for a few 
chapters," or "dead, but destined still to be a vital part of the 
continuing narrative," and got overly intense about it (which I am 
probably still doing here).

I sense/imagine/empathize with a lot of very real pain out there over 
Sirius's death and it was getting to me; I have grief of my own over 
Sirius.  I had a particular fondness for the Dog Star long before HP, 
and it hit me hard when he died.  However, I am trying to get on with 
it, and voices which seem determined to stand still or even go 
backwards inspire in me a flat rejection which I will hereafter (no 
pun intended) keep to myself.  *My* intent was not to "thump" anyone 
over the head; it was directed at getting their train of thought to 
jump the tracks it was on and onto one which might actually have a 
destination other than the trainyard junk heap (and I'm probably 
doing it again, that thing you took exception to already).

Although I am not JKR and do not know her intentions (as is indicated 
by the fact that I *did* say later in the post that "I *think* she 
means we aren't going to see him again") and only know her intentions 
to the degree that I or others whose interpretations I choose to 
agree with are able to fathom them, I, like most of the people in 
this group, sometimes state what I believe as if it were an 
absolute.  Speech gets increasingly cumbersome with each "from my 
point of view" and "what I believe she mean to say is".  I think your 
pointing out of this *in the way in which you did it* is petty and 
mean; I get a sense that you were responding, as you perceive it, in 
kind.  Perhaps it is only because this time I was on the receiving 
end, but you seem to me to have overshot the mark and gone right into 
petty meanness.  So you have left me with much less a sense that my 
behavior was something I might want to examine and much more with a 
sense that you chose to be provoked by it and attack me.

If your only intent is to "thump" me again, please don't bother 
responding to this.  Thanks for sharing your considerations with me 
and the rest of the group.




From urghiggi at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 14:53:23 2003
From: urghiggi at yahoo.com (urghiggi)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 14:53:23 -0000
Subject: Alchemy revisited: OOP prediction confirmed
In-Reply-To: <bjgo50+eiet@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bji553+9ehs@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80187

Blyx wrote (discussing JKR quote re God):
> "God" can mean several different religions, and even different 
> Christian faiths sometimes interpet the Bible in different ways, so 
> if this is the best she has given, then it is still possible to say 
> that we don't know from where her themes are sprouting. 
> 
> If she is a regular church goer, and did make a clear choice to 
> follow the Bible in her books, then I can't presume to know which 
> story she is modeling Harry's plight after until we see if he is 
> shouting, "Dumbledore, why have you forsaken me?" at the end of the 
> books. And even if this has been the path thus far-- what if she 
> thows cattion to the wind at the end... I don't need to read every 
> J.K.R interview to know she doesn't like doing what is expected of 
> her in her writing.


Urghiggi responds:

JKR is a Protestant Christian, a member of the Church of Scotland, which is 
analagous to being a Presbyterian in the U.S. This has been documented in 
many interviews, including this one in the Washingon Post:
http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/1999/1099-post-
weeks.htm

Here is a link to a quite lengthy and revealing interview about a lot of the 
current relevant topics on HPfGU, including JKR's religious ideas:

http://www.cbc.ca/programs/sites/hottype_rowlingcomplete.html

This was with the CBC, sometime between the release of GoF and OoP (not 
dated on the website). The religion talk is in the 3rd section of the interview. If 
you don't want to plow through it-- it is quite long--basically she says that 
churchgoing is a "more than weddings and christenings" thing for her, but that 
she has some problems with organized religion as well. She also says that 
her religion was not too comforting for her at the point of her mother's death, 
but that she has come back to it. Also that she expects religion to provide 
some answers, and that she expects to find some answers within herself.

>From all this, and from the fact that Presbyterianism are a somewhat liberal 
branch of Christianity, one can probably surmise that she has a grounding in 
the Christian faith tradition but puts her personal spin on that. (Certainly 
Christian symbolism is pervasive in the books, though whether this is going in 
a "harry as christ" or "harry as job" direction or even someplace totally 
different from either one is unclear as yet. I'm betting on Harry as everyman 
rather than Christ.) Blyx is right -- exactly where she's going with all this 
remains to be seen. I don't think she's interested in pure allegory (though you 
CAN make a case for the end of CoS as allegory; at least John Granger does 
so fairly convincingly in "Hidden Key to Harry Potter"). In general, though, I 
believe JRK's working with spiritual themes that are informed by the religious 
beliefs of her faith tradition (but not boxed in by orthodoxy, and always 
influenced by her very strong beliefs in the importance of tolerance in all 
aspects of life).

BTW, JKR also makes a blunt statement in that CBC interview that 
"Dumbledore is the epitome of goodness" -- which sort of undermines the 
theory posted here previously that he is (deep down) wicked. But her 
interviews tend to frustrate me as she is (naturally) far from completely 
revealing about many, many subjects, as is her right....

urghiggi, Chgo




From annemehr at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 15:09:16 2003
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 15:09:16 -0000
Subject: Legilimency, Occlumency, Snape, Harry
In-Reply-To: <bjhtcr+jh4u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bji62s+ikle@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80188

 
> Laura:
> 
> A couple of questions (I'm not trying to be argumentative here, 
just 
> clarifying your ideas in my mind):  it sounds like your 
[bboy_mn's] first kind of 
> Legilimency, the super-intuitive kind, might be something also 
found 
> in the muggle world.  There are, after all, people who do seem to 
> have an extraordinary ability to sense the feelings (if not 
precise 
> thoughts) of others.  Now whether you would call this "magic" in 
the 
> JKR sense or whether it is something else is another question.  
Maybe 
> some muggles have a bit of magic in them that they don't recognize 
as 
> such.  :-)
> 
> But the other kind of Legilimency, the spell kind, seems rather 
> pointless.  If all you can see is a bunch of jumbled images, I'm 
not 
> sure what you can learn from using the charm.  I'd think you'd 
need 
> both kinds to make sense of what you see as a result of the 
charm.  
> If you don't have the intuitive ability, why bother to learn the 
> spell?  Just to be able to do it?<snip>
> 
> When DD interrogated Kreachur about Sirius's whereabouts, he must 
> have used the second kind of Legilimency.  Just getting a sense of 
> Kreachur's emotions wouldn't have given DD the specific 
information 
> he needed.  Right?
> 
> I still wonder why JKR would have used the same terminology for 
two 
> rather different sets of skills.  She's usually very precise in 
her 
> use of words.

Annemehr:
I'm jumping in here because I like this thread...

I think these are actually all one skill, used to different degrees. 
I do also think it goes beyond the best muggle intuition.  There is 
a reason, IMO, why the instances of legilimency appear so different.

The times when Voldemort, Dumbledore, and Snape seem to be able 
to "read minds" are when they are being secretive about it.  True, 
Voldemort says something like "Don't lie.  Voldemort always knows," 
but even he isn't saying how.  And Harry has had several moments of 
thinking that DD or Snape were reading his mind when he was looking 
into their eyes.  I believe these are examples of using legilimency 
in a very gentle, subtle way just to glean a sense of either 
truthfulness or deceit, or maybe courage or fear -- whatever is on 
the "surface" of the subject's mind, without making it obvious 
what's happening.  It is also, perhaps, partly limited in its 
efficacy by being done without a wand.

On the other hand, in the lessons Snape was putting Harry through, 
he was giving the spell full power.  He used his full force; he used 
his wand; the concentration was evident on his face and he was 
muttering.  This took Snape beyond Harry's immediate thoughts and 
feelings and allowed him to rifle through his memories.  Such a use 
of legilimency is, of course, completely obvious to the subject.  It 
would not be something Snape or Dumbledore would have done to Harry 
before in the normal course of events, so we never see it until the 
lessons.

I don't think this "full powered" legilimency is pointless.  I don't 
think it only brings up jumbled images.  Snape seems to have been 
bringing up memories that were painful, yes, even the one of kissing 
Cho because she was crying so much.  I think that is at least a hint 
that Snape was able to control the spell; he was trying to give 
Harry an incentive to succeed at Occlumency.  After all, if these 
were truly random images, we would have seen Harry doing things like 
riding the Hogwarts Express, vegetating in History of Magic, eating 
lunch, catching the Snitch, whatever.

Even if the mental images *are* necessarily jumbled like that, which 
I doubt, I still can see Voldemort trying it on Harry just to see 
what he could learn.  Suppose he saw him entering a secret passage 
in the basement of Honeydukes or the Shrieking Shack, for example?

Annemehr




From urghiggi at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 15:17:40 2003
From: urghiggi at yahoo.com (urghiggi)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 15:17:40 -0000
Subject: Alchemy revisited: OOP prediction confirmed
In-Reply-To: <bji553+9ehs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bji6ik+geo8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80189

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "urghiggi" <urghiggi at y...> wrote:
> http://www.cbc.ca/programs/sites/hottype_rowlingcomplete.html
> 
Re the above link and my previous post about it, just noticed that the religion 
stuff is actually in section 4, not section 3, as I originally said. (The subheads 
are smallish, I missed the last one...)

mea culpa...

urghiggi




From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Mon Sep  8 15:26:01 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 15:26:01 -0000
Subject: Prank AND the subversive point of view
In-Reply-To: <bjhnol+f1c4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bji729+jqra@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80190

Laura:

> I have to ask-which is worse, a berk or a pillock? My knowledge of 
> contemporary British slang isn't what it should be, obviously. 

[Grin]. They're about the same: berk and pillock both mean a stupid 
person. But I'd rather be a berk than a pillock ? `berk' is often 
said as `a bit of a berk', whereas `pillock' is often said as `a 
complete pillock'. Both are fairly mild, btw, and often quite 
affectionate.

Laura:
> As for the rest-you're just looking for a fight, and I choose to 
> rise above your provocation. Sirius IS the man. *grins back*

I prefer `trying to provoke discussion' rather than `looking for a 
fight'. [Grin] 

But for those who don't know me: I'm one of the subversives on the 
list. Do not expect a `face value reading' from a subversive 
theorist. Subversives specialise in taking a much loved, admired 
character and explaining why they are Ever So Evil, Ever So 
Manipulative, or in this case, Ever Such A Pillock. 

We don't do it with the deliberate intention of starting fights ;-)  
It's just that we have a knack for seeing the alternative view. 
Sometimes we're even right [grin]. 

A 'subversive' post is a call for lively discussion. It is not a 
Declaration of Flame War.

Subversive theorists have started some of the best discussions on 
the list. Challenging the face value interpretation of canon is 
perfectly OK on this list. Just as it is perfectly OK for posters to 
respond by defending the face value interpretation.

But both challenge and response should try to attack theorIES, and 
not the theorISTS.

Preferably by using lots of canon ;-)

Donna wrote:
> Could someone please quote cannon where the Prank 
> was first called that? I would like to know who first referred to 
> the incident as a prank.

Sorry, Donna, you're quite right. As Erin pointed out, `Prank' 
appears nowhere in canon. 

It's list slang; short for `That incident at the Shrieking Shack. 
No, not *that* incident. The first one, where Snape nearly became 
Wolfie Chunks. You know, Sirius's prank?'

Other list slang terms are MWPP (Mooney, Wormtail, Padfoot and 
Prongs) and `Marauders' (MWPP).

Cheryl the Lynx wrote:
>> Sigh. My basic reaction to The Prank, especially after the 2nd 
Pensive scene is...WHAT KIND OF AN IDIOT IS SNAPE? [Yes, I'm 
yelling.]

Here is the crew that, presumably, has taunted and bullied him all 
through his time at Hogwarts. And when Sirius tells him to go 
through a hidden tunnel at night, he goes? Frankly, after that I'd 
expect him to turn up on the Darwin List for self-elimination from 
the gene pool. Instead of sending him to his potential death, he 
could have been headed on a snipe hunt, with the Marauders and half 
the school waiting to laugh at him when he came out.

Why DID Snape go through the tunnel that night?
>>

I suspect that it may have something to do with the fact that Lupin 
was with a staff member when he was taken to the tunnel. Lupin said 
that Snape `had seen me crossing the grounds with Madame Pomfrey' 
[PoA, Ch. 18, p.261 UK paperback]. So whatever was in that tunnel, 
it was staff approved. Just out of bounds. 

Plus, I doubt Sirius told him in a friendly, helpful manner. 

It's speculation. But Snape continually snipes at Sirius in OOP, for 
staying safely at home, leading to the final comment of `why yes, I 
suppose I am' when Sirius finally says `Are you calling me a 
coward?' This suggests that quite possibly Sirius previously used a 
taunt of `coward' on him.

And that taunt makes 16 year old boys do incredibly stupid things.

Also, a public taunt of `coward' would mean that Snape would not 
expect a snipe hunt. Half the school would be laughing at him if he 
*didn't* go in. Sirius's version of events would be: Snivellus 
sticks to the rules because he's too scared to break them. He's 
trying to get us expelled because he wishes he were as brave as we 
are ? we don't care about rules.

Speculation. But in 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/39662 
[which, incidentally, is a full blown example of the subversive 
posting style] I argue that Snape's behaviour in the Shack 
emotionally reverses the trick Sirius played on him. He puts Sirius 
in a position where he thinks he's going to die. 

Using Sirius's obedience to Dumbledore's rules as a pretext for a 
taunt of `coward' would be in exactly the same pattern ? IF Sirius 
had used the same trick on him. 

Snape is not nice. Snape prefers revenge to forgiveness. What is 
often brought up in OOP is that many of Snape's actions do have a 
reason behind them. Equally, Sirius's actions have a pattern of `it 
seemed like a good idea at the time'. The Prank is a prime example 
of this.

I'm not sure whether Sirius underestimated Lupin's dangerousness, or 
underestimated Snape's courage. Either would explain why Sirius 
would see it as a `Prank' style joke, and why Snape (with a clearer 
idea of the dangerousness of werewolves and a better knowledge of 
his own courage) would see it as a murder attempt. 

Sirius either believed that his friend Lupin wouldn't *really* hurt 
anyone, or that his victim Snivellus wouldn't *really* go down the 
scary tunnel.

But that's another of Sirius's patterns. Lupin, Snape, Peter, 
Bellatrix.

He underestimated what people are capable of.

Pip!Squeak








From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 15:32:19 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 15:32:19 -0000
Subject: And Now For a Really Complete Foul-up; Was Fudge talking about Sirius?
In-Reply-To: <bji3qt+ippc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bji7e3+v7a2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80191

> nice:  I'm sorry.  As I am still being moderated and anything I 
> posted saying, gee, well, you're right, would likely bounce right 
> back to me if I didn't scrape up some canon point or other to make 
> the statement an addendum to, I am responding offline.

Well, I *meant* to respond offline.

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley" now taking her chastised, chastened self and 
outraged sensibilities off for a nice cuppa.

Note to moderator:  the one I meant *not* to post went through; 
please pass this one as well; I solemnly promise not to even attempt 
to make a habit of this sort of thing.




From sleepingblyx at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 15:37:29 2003
From: sleepingblyx at yahoo.com (sleepingblyx)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 15:37:29 -0000
Subject: Vernon Dursley
In-Reply-To: <bjhvt1+1ruu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bji7np+51ru@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80192

Myrth writes:
> That leaves Uncle Vernon. I can't come to any 
> ideas of what he and Harry's relationship will be in book 7. I do 
not 
> think it will be good or postive in any way. Could any one share 
> thoughts on this? If this has been brought op before could you 
direct 
> me to the thread.


I am in the stands cheering, "DIE VERNON, DIE!"

Actually it is not /that/ harsh, but he *is* an easy Target, not 
having any of the "Protected Blood" that keeps the Dark Lord at bay 
(unless he is somehow related in that "Deliverance" kind of way.) For 
the sixth book, I don't think any other major character would die... 
they all have a last stand to mount... but Vernon...

When I heard the "Begenning of the deaths" statement from JKR, I 
immediatley put Vernon on that list. People talk about Sirius not 
being needed anymore for the plot-- well that certainly puts Vernon 
up there. And there have also been posts about the next death needing 
to hit Harry where it hurts-- I think Vernon might not be a sad sight 
to leave, but it will definatley make Harry stand up and take notice. 

...Unless he turns out to be Dumbledore in disguise, I think he will 
bite it-- something that goes back to showing Harry how he is not 
safe, and that as the DL grows in power, so is the inescapeable fate 
that Harry must come out and meet him-- not simply hide from him on 
Pivet drive. 

-Blyx-




From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com  Mon Sep  8 15:58:37 2003
From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 15:58:37 -0000
Subject: Look Out, MOM! (filk)
Message-ID: <bji8vd+a56a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80193

Look Out, MOM! (OOP, Chap. 34)

To the tune of Tom Lehrer's So Long Mom!

Hear a MIDI at:

http://members.aol.com/quentncree/lehrer/solongmo.htm

Dedicated to Phyllis M. 

THE SCENE: High over the British skies. Six members of the DA, HARRY, 
RON, HERMIONE, GINNY, LUNA and NEVILLE make a rapid thestral-back 
flight toward the Ministry of Magic (MOM) to rescue Sirius. Midway on 
their journey, they break out in savage and barbaric song of ancient 
provenance:

THE DA SIX:
Look out MOM!
Towards Mysteries dot com,
We rush to join the fight
We hit the ignition
On our rescue mission
In magic flight
As the winds bite

With we six mounted thestrally
We now will veer off westerly
While John Williams orchestrally 
Performs a stirring score**
We soon will launch the first fierce volley of the second anti-Voldy 
war. Yeah!

RON:
Little Neville L., he is an Aurors' offspring
Who's now roaring off things to me.

HARRY:
He was mighty raged when Ms. Lestrange did escape
Not even Snape'd disagree!

GINNY
And this is what he bellowed
On his way to blow up Bella:

NEVILLE
Look out MOM!
We're Dumble A. dot com
A most heroic crew
And now we grown youth
Land before the phone booth
Now dial, please do
6-2-4-4-2

Remember Mommy,
Waylayed by friends of Tommy
Who turned her to a zombie
So vengeance I must vow!

ALL
Look out for us when the war is startin':
A chapter and a half from now!

(The phone booth descends to the Ministry)

  -	CMC

HARRY POTTER FILKS
http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm 

**unless, of course, the OOP movie is reduced to 2 ? hours, in which 
case the scene might be excluded





From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Mon Sep  8 16:16:52 2003
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 16:16:52 -0000
Subject: Vernon Dursley
In-Reply-To: <bjhvt1+1ruu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjia1k+pnhr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80194

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tomatogrower88" 
<tomatogrower88 at y...> wrote:
> That leaves Uncle Vernon. I can't come to any 
> ideas of what he and Harry's relationship will be in book 7. I do 
not 
> think it will be good or postive in any way. Could any one share 
> thoughts on this? If this has been brought op before could you 
direct 
> me to the thread.
> 
> Mryth

First of all, I agree with you about Aunt Petunia and Dudley. :-)

It's hard to say, what will happen with Vernon. He is definitely the 
Dursley I dislike the most (not counting his horrible sister). But I 
think he really loves Petunia and Dudley, and if Petunia and Dudley 
really accept Harry, I think Vernon will, too, although grudgingly. I 
don't really think, that he'll die. Currently, it seems that Petunia 
is in much graver danger, because she is the one, who gives Harry his 
protection. He might die trying to defend Petunia, however.

I can also imagine, that both, Vernon and Petunia will continue to 
dislike Harry and treat him badly. But I am convinced (and yes, I 
know that I have not much canon to back that up) that Dudley will 
start to accept Harry. They grew up like brothers and Harry saved his 
life (or soul) after all. And even in this case I don't see his 
parents doing anything, that could make Ickle Diddykins unhappy. So 
currently I think Vernon, too, will start to treat Harry better.

Hickengruendler





From n_longbottom01 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 16:39:50 2003
From: n_longbottom01 at yahoo.com (n_longbottom01)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 16:39:50 -0000
Subject: Vernon Dursley
In-Reply-To: <bjhvt1+1ruu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjibcm+n4j9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80195

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tomatogrower88" 
<tomatogrower88 at y...> wrote:
> As I have been reading the lists for the past week or so I have 
found 
> my self thinking about Vernon Dursley. Before OOP came out I was of 
> the opinion that the Dursley role in each book would grow less as 
> Harry became more powerful. The first few chapters of OOP changed 
my 
> mind on this. I think that Aunt Petunia will play a larger role. I 
do 
> not think she will ever really like Harry but I think they will 
have 
> an understanding with each other. I think this based on one 
line "All 
> of a sudden, for the first time in his life, Harry fully 
appreciated 
> that Aunt Petunia was his mother's sister"(POA page 38). Next I am 
in 
> the redeemable Dudley camp so I think he and Harry will come to 
> agreement in the end. That leaves Uncle Vernon. I can't come to any 
> ideas of what he and Harry's relationship will be in book 7. I do 
not 
> think it will be good or postive in any way. Could any one share 
> thoughts on this? If this has been brought op before could you 
direct 
> me to the thread.
> 
> Mryth

Now me (n_longbottom01):

My best guess is that Uncle Vernon and Harry will never warm up to 
one another in any way.  Harry's feelings about Uncle Vernon may 
soften somewhat with time, after Harry is no longer forced to live 
with the Dursleys, but I don't see that Vernon's feelings toward 
Harry will ever change.

I think Vernon will receive his just deserts at some point in book 7 
for being such a lousy Uncle throughout the series.  A fitting end 
for Vernon would be to end up on the cover of a tabloid, in an absurd 
article like: "Local Man Believes Elves Are Bewitching His Pudding."  
Or something along those lines.  The think Vernon values the most is 
appearing perfectly normal... after a tabloid article like that, he 
would always be thought of as The Man Who Sees Elves.

I don't think Harry will directly cause Vernon's final (comic) 
downfall.  It would reflect poorly on our hero if he intentionally 
ruins the life of someone weaker than him.  I think something might 
happen at the beginning of book 7, as Harry leaves the Dursleys' for 
the last time (along the lines of a flying car, or an blown-up aunt), 
that leaves Vernon looking foolish.  And then, sometime later in book 
7, Harry will be shown the tabloid article (or whatever) that comes 
out in connection to the incident (whatever it turns out to be).

I am not sure if this is the form it will take, but my best guess is 
that Vernon will receive his just deserts in the end.

n_longbottom01






From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Mon Sep  8 17:14:15 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 17:14:15 -0000
Subject: The Importance of Luna.. the new Trio
In-Reply-To: <ca.217a50ec.2c8d43dc@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bjidd7+fbnf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80196

<<bb_mboy: 
> I could actually see a new Trio forming. Because Neville and Luna 
have an emotionally detacted calm, deep wisdom and insight, and would
maintain somewhat distant detached friendships, Harry will feel far
more comfortable around them than he will around Ron and Hermione.
Plus, he loves Ron and Hermione a great deal, and he won't want to 
be responsible for anything that might happen to them. So, he will 
have strong incentive to distance himself from them. He will still 
remain polite and friendly with Ron and Hermione, but on a deeper 
friendship level, he will be detached.>>

> <<Melanie: 
> I'm not sure you could get much blunter than Hermione Granger in 
this last book.  She isn't afraid to tell Harry how stupid he is 
acting and he is the one 
> person who has always managed to change his mood to some degree.  I 
see Ron and Harry pulling away from eachother however, I do not think 
Hermione will be willing to let this happen very easily.  However, on 
the same token I do think that Harry is going to have a much easier 
time discussing these things with Luna and Neville rather than Harry 
and Hermione.>>



I think writing Ron out of Harry's close circle might be a bit 
premature. After all, Harry is a teenage boy. And while having
someone to pour his feelings out to sounds nice, it doesn't feel very 
realistic to me. IMO, Harry enjoys Ron's company--nothing more, 
nothing less. They're best pals and are always there for each other 
when action is needed. But they also know better than to get into 
each other's business emotionally.

In fact, one of Hermione's strengths has been this same
understanding. She only interjects herself quick and blunt to keep 
Harry/Ron on the right general track.

Harry's reaction to Luna seemed more revelatory in that she has a 
solid understanding that she is a complete individual, and that her 
worth to herself is not based on others' values. What is going on 
around her does not change her; and that is a lesson Harry does need 
to learn. He needs to become calmer in the face of evildoings, since 
he'll be facing more in the books to come.

But Luna is more teaching by example here. I don't see her as Harry's 
therapist.

-Remnant




From n_longbottom01 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 17:33:01 2003
From: n_longbottom01 at yahoo.com (n_longbottom01)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 17:33:01 -0000
Subject: Vernon Dursley
In-Reply-To: <bji7np+51ru@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjiegd+j482@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80197

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sleepingblyx" 
<sleepingblyx at y...> wrote:
> Myrth writes:
> > That leaves Uncle Vernon. I can't come to any 
> > ideas of what he and Harry's relationship will be in book 7. I do 
> not 
> > think it will be good or postive in any way. Could any one share 
> > thoughts on this? If this has been brought op before could you 
> direct 
> > me to the thread.
> 
> 
> I am in the stands cheering, "DIE VERNON, DIE!"
> 
> Actually it is not /that/ harsh, but he *is* an easy Target, not 
> having any of the "Protected Blood" that keeps the Dark Lord at bay 
> (unless he is somehow related in that "Deliverance" kind of way.) 
For 
> the sixth book, I don't think any other major character would 
die... 
> they all have a last stand to mount... but Vernon...
> 
> When I heard the "Begenning of the deaths" statement from JKR, I 
> immediatley put Vernon on that list. People talk about Sirius not 
> being needed anymore for the plot-- well that certainly puts Vernon 
> up there. And there have also been posts about the next death 
needing 
> to hit Harry where it hurts-- I think Vernon might not be a sad 
sight 
> to leave, but it will definatley make Harry stand up and take 
notice. 
> 
> ...Unless he turns out to be Dumbledore in disguise, I think he 
will 
> bite it-- something that goes back to showing Harry how he is not 
> safe, and that as the DL grows in power, so is the inescapeable 
fate 
> that Harry must come out and meet him-- not simply hide from him on 
> Pivet drive. 
> 
> -Blyx-

now me (n_longbottom01):

ARGH... NOOOOOOOO!!! RUN FOR IT UNCLE VERNON!!!

whew... sorry about that... It hadn't occured to me that Vernon might 
be marked for death, but Blyx makes a lot of sense.  Now I'm 
concerned for Vernon's well being.  I like Vernon (as a character, 
not as a person I would like to know), and I would hate to see him 
killed off.

I can see where it could serve the story to kill off Vernon, but I 
hope it doesn't happen.  As we know, there are fates worse than 
death, and for Vernon, being publicly branded Not Normal would be a 
worse fate than death.  

As for Cedric being "just the beginning of the deaths," I'm really 
hoping that this doesn't mean that more people connected to Harry 
have to die.  The beginning of the deaths could just refer to 
Voldemort's new reign of terror.  So random wizards and muggles might 
start dieing all over the place now that the Wizarding World is aware 
that Voldemort is back, but I don't need to see all my favorite 
characters killed off.  Wishful thinking on my part?

n_longbottom01




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 17:46:38 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 17:46:38 -0000
Subject: Prank AND the subversive point of view
In-Reply-To: <bji729+jqra@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjif9u+ov82@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80198

> Laura:
> 
> > I have to ask-which is worse, a berk or a pillock? My knowledge 
of 
> > contemporary British slang isn't what it should be, obviously. 
> 
> [Grin]. They're about the same: berk and pillock both mean a stupid 
> person. But I'd rather be a berk than a pillock ? `berk' is often 
> said as `a bit of a berk', whereas `pillock' is often said as `a 
> complete pillock'. Both are fairly mild, btw, and often quite 
> affectionate.
> 

Laura:

Okay, one more question about slang.  Where does "git" fit in with 
the above?

>  Pip!Squeak
> But for those who don't know me: I'm one of the subversives on the 
> list. Do not expect a `face value reading' from a subversive 
> theorist. Subversives specialise in taking a much loved, admired 
> character and explaining why they are Ever So Evil, Ever So 
> Manipulative, or in this case, Ever Such A Pillock. 
> 
> We don't do it with the deliberate intention of starting fights ;-
)  
> It's just that we have a knack for seeing the alternative view. 
> Sometimes we're even right [grin]. 
> 
> A 'subversive' post is a call for lively discussion. It is not a 
> Declaration of Flame War.
> 
> Subversive theorists have started some of the best discussions on 
> the list. Challenging the face value interpretation of canon is 
> perfectly OK on this list. Just as it is perfectly OK for posters 
to 
> respond by defending the face value interpretation.
> 
> But both challenge and response should try to attack theorIES, and 
> not the theorISTS.
> 
> Preferably by using lots of canon ;-)
> 
> Donna wrote:
> 
<snip> Why DID Snape go through the tunnel that night?
> >>
> Pip!Squeak again:

> I suspect that it may have something to do with the fact that Lupin 
> was with a staff member when he was taken to the tunnel. Lupin said 
> that Snape `had seen me crossing the grounds with Madame Pomfrey' 
> [PoA, Ch. 18, p.261 UK paperback]. So whatever was in that tunnel, 
> it was staff approved. Just out of bounds. 
> 
> Plus, I doubt Sirius told him in a friendly, helpful manner. 
> 
> It's speculation. But Snape continually snipes at Sirius in OOP, 
for 
> staying safely at home, leading to the final comment of `why yes, I 
> suppose I am' when Sirius finally says `Are you calling me a 
> coward?' This suggests that quite possibly Sirius previously used a 
> taunt of `coward' on him.
> 
> And that taunt makes 16 year old boys do incredibly stupid things.
> 
> Also, a public taunt of `coward' would mean that Snape would not 
> expect a snipe hunt. Half the school would be laughing at him if he 
> *didn't* go in. Sirius's version of events would be: Snivellus 
> sticks to the rules because he's too scared to break them. He's 
> trying to get us expelled because he wishes he were as brave as we 
> are ? we don't care about rules.
> 

Laura:

But what makes you think anyone else in the school knew about the 
Prank?  If Sirius told anyone of the plan beforehand, he would have 
given away Remus's secret, and we have no evidence he did so.  
Indeed, we have evidence by implication that he *didn't* do so-Remus 
didn't have to leave the school as a student.  
And as many people have pointed out, all of the parties concerned 
(except possibly Snape) would have had good reason not to spread the 
story around afterwards.  Besides, I bet a whole lot of the school 
would have sympathized with Snape if they'd heard what 
happened.  "James and Sirius set up Snape to go after a werewolf?  
What are they, crazy?"

Pip!Squeak:
<snip>> I'm not sure whether Sirius underestimated Lupin's 
dangerousness, or 
> underestimated Snape's courage. Either would explain why Sirius 
> would see it as a `Prank' style joke, and why Snape (with a clearer 
> idea of the dangerousness of werewolves and a better knowledge of 
> his own courage) would see it as a murder attempt. 
> 
> Sirius either believed that his friend Lupin wouldn't *really* hurt 
> anyone, or that his victim Snivellus wouldn't *really* go down the 
> scary tunnel.
> 
> But that's another of Sirius's patterns. Lupin, Snape, Peter, 
> Bellatrix.
> 
> He underestimated what people are capable of.

Laura:

It's a good assumption that Sirius did underestimate werewolf!Remus's 
dangerousness, because that creature (who wasn't Remus, imo) was 
never a threat to Padfoot and Company.  However, whether you can call 
Snape's behavior in going into the tunnel courageous is another 
question.  That description assumes that Snape knew something 
dangerous was waiting for him, and we don't know that to be the 
case.  Canon doesn't take a position on what Snape knew the night of 
the prank.  

If, however, you make the not unreasonable assumption that SS did in 
fact have a very educated guess about what would be waiting in the 
Shack, then his actions seem just downright stupid to me, not 
courageous.  And if you add to that the fact that SS saw Remus going 
into the Shack with a staff member (which means that this was 
officially permitted activity), then you can add nosiness to the 
description.  If SS had deduced that Remus had a little lycanthropy 
problem, then he had to know also that (1) the person who transforms 
has no control over the process and (2) the werewolf is a mortal 
threat to any human it encounters.  

Long live subversives, and their posts!  They're what make this list 
so much fun.  Rock on, Pip!


> 
> 




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Mon Sep  8 17:50:43 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 17:50:43 -0000
Subject: OoP - GUILTY Dumbledore (was Dumbledore's true sorrow motives)
In-Reply-To: <bjbu5u+bsbh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjifhj+bl93@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80199

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "njelliot2003" <nelliot at o...> wrote:
> Replying to Talisman's post 66983:
> 
> 
>nicholas> 
>  snip>
> My thoughts are that Dumbledore has finally realized that this is 
> all really happening, and he's got a tremendous burden to carry, 
> maybe even as much or more of a burden than Harry. He's the leader, 
> the one that everyone looks to for protection and advice, the head 
> of The Order, and the person Harry has always looked to. 

Kneasy
IMO DD realises that last time round he didn't win. You could say he
lost on points - many more deaths of innocents than of DEs and V 
was going to make a comeback someday. If we believe the prophesy
applies to Harry, then an unexpected weapon has been placed in DD's
hands, one he didn't have last time. Are you suggesting he's going
to throw this advantage away?

Nicholas:
> In conclusion, I just won't believe that those "twinkling" blue eyes 
> and half-moon spectacles are hiding anything but love for Harry and 
> hope for the Wizarding World. Guilty, yes. Guilty of love and of 
> wanting to do the right thing, but his guilt has finally made him 
> realize what's at stake.
>

Kneasy
I'm sorry, but given the situation this 'love'  is not a positive thing,
it's a pair of handcuffs.  Hope is no  good either; DD can't fall into
the trap of 'hoping things work out', they didn't last time, why should
they this? He has bitter memories of friends and colleagues dead in a
struggle that gained at best, a breathing space. He knows more will
die - his job is to make certain they don't die for no purpose, brave
but ultimately pointless sacrifices. If Harry has to go so that V  is
defeated, then Harry will go. He'll probably suscribe to the fund for
the statue, but he'll have done his job. 

  
Nicholas:
> DD loves Harry! 
> " 'I cared about you too much. I cared more for your happiness than 
> your knowing the truth, more for your peace of mind than my plan, 
> more for your life than the lives that might be lost if the plan 
> failed. In other words, I acted exactly as Voldemort expects we 
> fools who love to act. 


Kneasy:
Impassioned and interesting.
In essence it states that Harry comes first in everything; above the 
truth, the plan (note that there *is* a plan),  above any other lives.
This is either patronising bulls***t or a calculated lie. Any reading
that considers this to be truth must accept that Harry is to be
wrapped in cotton wool and everyone else can go hang. The WW
can fall to Voldy so long as Harry is safe. Rubbish. Claptrap. DD is
at it again - " Just let me fit this spun product of the ovine species
over your ocular orifices, Harry"
There's more:

>Is there a defence? I defy anyone who has 
> watched you as I have ? and I have watched you more closely than you 
> can have imagined ? not to want to save you more pain than you had 
> already suffered.'" 

Kneasy:
Of course he *wants* to - but that is not the same as *not going to cause
you any more pain*. This a warning for those that  can hear. More
'unavoidable, regretable, I'm so sorry, Harry,' pain coming up.
The old "This hurts me more than it hurts you." ploy.

Nicholas:
> Harry's needs and preferences are to play the hero, to go after Big 
> V. I see nothing sinister or "cold-hearted" (and neither does Harry 
> going by the same quote from SS pg. 302 you use above) with DD 
> helping Harry to be Harry whether it's Weapon!Harry or Chosen!Harry. 

Kneasy:
Nothing sinister in allowing, encouraging an 11 year old untrained
student wizard to face the Voldy monster!? A creature so powerful
and evil that the rest of the WW won't even say his name?
If it's not sinister then it must be stupidity; it's certainly not the 'lov=
e'
that he keeps vapouring on about. You don't allow someone you
love to  take risks of that magnitude, a level of risk that Harry can't 
really comprehend - unless there is a plan that requires it. And if it 
does, it must also accept the strong possibility of failure.

Harry does not THINK! He reacts. He does not foresee  difficulties or
drawbacks, he will not listen to other opinions. Wind him up, and off
he goes, like a clockwork mouse. Entirely predictable to V *and to* DD.
  
Nicholas
> So to "recap", DD is watching over and helping Harry to go after 
> whomever and whatever he wants, to fulfill his needs and desires as 
> best he (Harry) knows how. DD is acting out of love for the boy, 
> love which grew as he got to know Harry, whatever his feelings were 
> before Harry arrived at Hogwarts. 

Kneasy:
This is good? So Harry is the one making all the plans to defeat Voldy?
And DD keeps him in the dark because it's more helpful that way?
DD thinks, "No need to worry, Harry knows what he's doing. I'll just
take a back seat while he cleans up Voldy." Arrgh!

Nicholas:
> I think Sirius would have helped Harry into the fight with Big V. 
> Sirius' idea of happiness would have been to have Harry become a 
> member of the OoP and Harry would have gone along with that. 


Kneasy
Sirius' idea of happiness would be for Harry to become as rash and 
unthinking as himself or James. Make the big gesture Harry!


Nicholas;
>  Sirius (correctly?) 
> realised that Harry was old and mature enough to know things sooner 
> than DD; and had Sirius been allowed to fully answer Harry's 
> questions, Harry would have had his eyes opened sooner. Harry is 
> Harry and he will go after Big V, *whatever he knows*, until one of 
> them dies.
>

 Kneasy:
DD doesn't want Harry to have his eyes open until DD is ready and he
thinks Harry is ready. Does Harry even know enough to ask the *right* 
questions as opposed to the ones that occur to  him at the moment?
How about "How are we going to win?" "What's my function?" "When 
in your judgement, will I be ready?" "Do I have the necessary skills
for what I must do?"

There is a general acceptance that Sirius knows Harry well. He doesn't.
Up to the scenes in the Grimmaud Place house, Sirius has spent 
less than 3 hours with Harry and none of it face to face with no-one 
else present. They  are sympathetic strangers full of  misconceptions.
Inside Grimmaud little advance on this is made: a big crowd, lots of
bickering. Harry learns a bit about the Black family, nothing else.
They  are still strangers.

Harry has *never*  gone after Voldy. He just  wanders off to follow one
of his bright ideas and then falls over him. Without luck or outside
intervention he'd be dead four times over. And however he's protected
against Voldemort, there's no  guarantee that an AK green flash from 
another DE can't get  him.    

DD  makes Harry take the Occlumency lessons for a reason - V can get
into Harry's head, mislead him, trap him.
What are Harry's vulnerabilities, what would make him act? Both V and 
DD know - Sirius. Sirius is the only thing that would get Harry out of
safety into danger. So Sirius is to stay at Grimmaud where Harry knows
he's safe. Meanwhile Harry is to develop protection. He doesn't. So he's
fooled into  believing the one thing DD doesn't want him to believe.
Sirius is in danger. Off he goes, knee-jerk reaction. If it can happen 
once, it can happen again. Sirius can be regarded as a liability. 

I'm not totally convinced that DD terminated  Sirius. It's a possibility.
But I don't think DD  is totally broken up about it. Sirius is now a
poignant memory and no  longer one of Harry's weaknesses. DD must
regard that as a plus.

Kneasy





From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Mon Sep  8 17:51:33 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 17:51:33 -0000
Subject: Legilimency, Occlumency, Snape, Harry
In-Reply-To: <bji62s+ikle@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjifj5+it1s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80200

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" <annemehr at y...> 
wrote:
> I don't think this "full powered" legilimency is pointless.  I 
don't 
> think it only brings up jumbled images.  Snape seems to have been 
> bringing up memories that were painful, yes, even the one of 
kissing 
> Cho because she was crying so much.  I think that is at least a 
hint 
> that Snape was able to control the spell; he was trying to give 
> Harry an incentive to succeed at Occlumency.

I would go further than that. I think Snape had control over what
images came in. They all had the common theme of Harry in a helpless,
scary, embarassing or humiliating situations. Notice that we never
see Voldemort in these sessions. Snape avoids memories that can
hurt or affect himself, but I think he pulled especially memories
of schoolmate type humiliation, perhaps subconsciously, perhaps not.
I think he took some pleasure in these, and that is partly why he
was so incensed that Harry saw his memories - he probably assumed
that Harry takes the same pleasure at seeing Snape humiliated as
he did at seeing Harry in a similar situation.

Salit




From sylviablundell at aol.com  Mon Sep  8 18:03:26 2003
From: sylviablundell at aol.com (sylviablundell2001)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 18:03:26 -0000
Subject: English slang
Message-ID: <bjig9e+ntje@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80201

Berk is Cockney rhyming slang for an extremely rude name i.e. 
Berkshire Hunt.  Most people have forgotten the original meaning or 
they wouldn't use it so readily!  Git I think comes from misbegot, 
i.e. a bastard.  Again, the original meaning has vanished.  Where 
pillock comes from, I haven't a clue.  Should be glad to know though.
Sylvia (not usually this pedantic)




From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Mon Sep  8 18:06:09 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 18:06:09 -0000
Subject: Prank AND the subversive point of view
In-Reply-To: <bjif9u+ov82@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjigeh+kfj5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80202


 Laura:
>>Okay, one more question about slang.  Where does "git" fit in with 
the above?>>

"Git" is never used affectionately. Except in the case of "you lucky 
git" i.e. Ron to Harry: "I've just shagged Fleur Delacour, mate!" 
Harry to Ron: "You lucky git!"

Laura again, to Pip:
>>But what makes you think anyone else in the school knew about the 
Prank?  If Sirius told anyone of the plan beforehand, he would have 
given away Remus's secret, and we have no evidence he did so.  
Indeed, we have evidence by implication that he *didn't* do so-Remus 
didn't have to leave the school as a student.>>
  
No, Pip didn't say that. She said:
>>>Snape continually snipes at Sirius in OOP, for staying safely at 
home, leading to the final comment of `why yes, I suppose I am' when 
Sirius finally says `Are you calling me a coward?' This suggests that 
quite possibly Sirius previously used a taunt of `coward' on him.
<snip>
Also, a public taunt of `coward' would mean that Snape would not 
expect a snipe hunt. Half the school would be laughing at him if he 
*didn't* go in.>>> 

 - Pip's getting inside Snape's head here (gaah. Hope she's feeling 
alright), trying to offer motivation for why Snape would take Sirius 
at his word. She's not suggesting that Sirius taunted Snape as a 
coward publically on this occasion, but that he had done before and 
Snape, not knowing that there was a top secret werewolf at the end of 
the tunnel, assumed that this would happen again if he didn't go 
through with it. Which is kind of cowardly in itself, actually. I'm 
sticking with nosiness as primary motivation.

Although, A Thought Occurs - do we know that Remus *wasn't* removed 
from the school at this point? Feel free to correct me at any point, 
as I'm canon free with a memory like a (non-Pen)sieve today - but is 
it possible that Remus was removed from Hogwarts after the Prank? 
Permitted to finish his education at home, perhaps, and then employed 
again at the school due to developments in potion technology? It 
would certainly explain that whole pesky Prefect/Headboy thing, and 
make Sirius' hatred for Snape a bit more understandable. Although 
technically it should have been Sirius removed from school. (Hey,  
Kneasy, look, I found another example of Ever Such a B*stard!
Dumbledore.)

Kirstini.




From smaragdina5 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 14:48:38 2003
From: smaragdina5 at yahoo.com (smaragdina5)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 14:48:38 -0000
Subject: hair color was Weasley nationality  (very long post)
In-Reply-To: <bjevct+h07s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bji4s6+63pm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80203

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:

> The stance of the purebloods in the WW reminds me more of some
> of the East European or Russian aristos, principle above pragmatism,
> although we can boast examples of mind-boggling adherence to 
> outdated social demarcations (Cardigan of the Crimea, for one).
> 

Good point.  Even today, there are exiled Hohenzoller-descended 
European royalty who are now of modest means, due to the results of 
politics.  But those they associate with totally recognize them as 
royalty, with or without wealth.

Smaragdina5


ADMIN: When responding to this post, please take care to focus your answer on how real-life situations parallel canon.  If you'd prefer to further discuss the RL situations themselves, move your answer to OT-Chatter.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hpfgu-otchatter/




From entropymail at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 19:46:59 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 19:46:59 -0000
Subject: Vernon Dursley
In-Reply-To: <bjibcm+n4j9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjimbj+fv1g@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80204

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "n_longbottom01" 
> I am not sure if this is the form it will take, but my best guess is 
> that Vernon will receive his just deserts in the end.
> 
> n_longbottom01

I've never given Vernon much thought, but now that you've brought it up...

It seems to me that just leaving Uncle Vernon dangling there with no
real "come-uppance" would be wrong, wrong, wrong.  Like Professor
Umbridge, Vernon finds far too much pleasure in torturing Harry, and I
think JKR will surely have to give Vernon a comical, humiliating
ending (similar to Umbridge's). I don't think Harry will be involved
in it, however. He's far too nice of a person to do such a thing.  But
fate, or karma, or whatever will intervene in the end, and Vernon will
surely get what's coming to him!

Entropy




From princessmelabela at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 19:53:18 2003
From: princessmelabela at yahoo.com (Melanie Black)
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2003 12:53:18 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Importance of Luna.. the new Trio
In-Reply-To: <bjidd7+fbnf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030908195318.96395.qmail@web20709.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80205

Remnant wrote: I think writing Ron out of Harry's close circle might be a bit 
premature. After all, Harry is a teenage boy. And while having
someone to pour his feelings out to sounds nice, it doesn't feel very 
realistic to me. IMO, Harry enjoys Ron's company--nothing more, 
nothing less. They're best pals and are always there for each other 
when action is needed. But they also know better than to get into 
each other's business emotionally.

 

My reply:  I do not believe that Ron will ever be written out of Harry's close circle.  I just see them pulling further and further away, in the end the book is pretty much about the relationship between Ron, Harry and Hermione and it will remain that way.  

 

 





---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From przepla at ipartner.com.pl  Mon Sep  8 19:59:55 2003
From: przepla at ipartner.com.pl (Przemyslaw Plaskowicki)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 21:59:55 +0200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Importance of Luna.. the new Trio
In-Reply-To: <bjidd7+fbnf@eGroups.com>
References: <bjidd7+fbnf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F5CDFBB.6090702@ipartner.com.pl>

No: HPFGUIDX 80206

On 2003-09-08 19:14, boyd_smythe wrote:

>I think writing Ron out of Harry's close circle might be a bit 
>premature. After all, Harry is a teenage boy. And while having
>someone to pour his feelings out to sounds nice, it doesn't feel very 
>realistic to me. IMO, Harry enjoys Ron's company--nothing more, 
>nothing less. They're best pals and are always there for each other 
>when action is needed. But they also know better than to get into 
>each other's business emotionally.
>
>In fact, one of Hermione's strengths has been this same
>understanding. She only interjects herself quick and blunt to keep 
>Harry/Ron on the right general track.
>  
>
Yes. Did you notice that somehow, it seems that Trio's "binder" position 
is slowly shifting from Harry to Hermione? I mean previously Trio was 
Trio mostly because both Ron & Hermione liked spending time with Harry. 
Now, somehow, I've got hunch that Trio is still Trio because both Ron 
and Harry like spending time with Hermione. I'm not saying that Ron and 
Harry are no longer very good friends, but I believe that tip of Harry's 
scales (I'm not sure if I got that English idiom right) changed in 
favour of Hermione instead of Ron.


Additional References:
Post#: 73561 by Buttercup signaling Hermione's being new Harry's best 
friend; # 73710 by myself initially stating the idea above.

Regards,
Pshemekan





From pegruppel at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 20:00:28 2003
From: pegruppel at yahoo.com (Peggy)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 20:00:28 -0000
Subject: Vernon Dursley
In-Reply-To: <bjimbj+fv1g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjin4s+kmc3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80207

> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "n_longbottom01" 
> > I am not sure if this is the form it will take, but my best guess 
is 
> > that Vernon will receive his just deserts in the end.
> > 
> > n_longbottom01

Then Entropy:
> I've never given Vernon much thought, but now that you've brought 
it up...
> 
> It seems to me that just leaving Uncle Vernon dangling there with no
> real "come-uppance" would be wrong, wrong, wrong.  Like Professor
> Umbridge, Vernon finds far too much pleasure in torturing Harry, 
and I
> think JKR will surely have to give Vernon a comical, humiliating
> ending (similar to Umbridge's). 

Now Me:

Like Entropy, I hadn't given Vernon much thought, except as a major 
barrier to Harry's happiness.

About an Umbridge-like comeuppance--perhaps Peeves makes house 
calls.  Can you imagine Uncle Vernon pursued down the street by a 
batch of his own drills poking him in the posterior, wielded by a 
little man that only he can see?  

"Make him stop, make him stop!" he screams, as all the neighbors 
stare at him and then pull the curtains . . .

Sweet, sweet revenge.

Peg




From meboriqua at aol.com  Mon Sep  8 20:18:25 2003
From: meboriqua at aol.com (jenny_ravenclaw)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 20:18:25 -0000
Subject: Vernon Dursley
In-Reply-To: <bjia1k+pnhr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjio6h+6mti@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80208

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hickengruendler" 
<hickengruendler at y...> wrote:

>But I think he really loves Petunia and Dudley, and if Petunia and 
Dudley really accept Harry, I think Vernon will, too, although 
grudgingly.> 

and:
 
> I am convinced (and yes, I know that I have not much canon to back 
that up) that Dudley will start to accept Harry. They grew up like 
brothers and Harry saved his life (or soul) after all. And even in 
this case I don't see his parents doing anything, that could make 
Ickle Diddykins unhappy. So currently I think Vernon, too, will start 
to treat Harry better.>

There's also the small matter of members of the Order rather openly 
threatening Vernon if he didn't suck it up and treat Harry with more 
respect.  I think the fear Vernon has of the WW is what would push him 
to treat Harry better.  He did also back down when Petunia stood her 
ground about Harry staying, but again, that is related to the fear he 
(and Petunia, but with more real understanding) has of the WW and what  
those wacky wizards can do to Vernon as well as his reputation.  

As far as Dudley goes, I also felt that there was a strange bond 
between him and Harry, possibly due to the fact that neither of them 
want to spend time with Vernon and Petunia.  We found out in OoP that 
Dudley was openly and consistently lying to his parents about his 
whereabouts and activities.  At this point in the series, he doesn't 
seem too fond of his parents and simply uses them to his advantage.  
If this means he and Harry will get along better, fine, but I don't 
think Dudley will be nicer to Harry because of the Dementors.  He may 
very well blame Harry for their appearance or resent Harry for having 
to save him the first place and then witness Dudley puke his guts out 
at home.  Or he might just continue to avoid Harry, which seems to be 
how they both like it.

--jenny from ravenclaw, who loved the tabloid article title about 
Vernon and the Elves **********************




From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Mon Sep  8 20:46:22 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 20:46:22 -0000
Subject: Prank 
In-Reply-To: <bjigeh+kfj5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjipqu+iuli@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80209

Kirstini, wrote:   
> No, Pip didn't say that. She said:
> >>>Snape continually snipes at Sirius in OOP, for staying safely 
> at home, leading to the final comment of `why yes, I suppose I am' 
> when Sirius finally says `Are you calling me a coward?' This 
> suggests that quite possibly Sirius previously used a taunt of `
> coward' on him.<snip>
> Also, a public taunt of `coward' would mean that Snape would not 
> expect a snipe hunt. Half the school would be laughing at him if 
> he *didn't* go in.>>> 
> 
Kirstini:
>  - Pip's getting inside Snape's head here (gaah. Hope she's 
> feeling alright), 

It's OK, I'm a professional. But don't try this at home. ;-)

> trying to offer motivation for why Snape would take Sirius 
> at his word. She's not suggesting that Sirius taunted Snape as a 
> coward publically on this occasion, but that he had done before 
> and Snape, not knowing that there was a top secret werewolf at the 
> end of  the tunnel, assumed that this would happen again if he 
> didn't go through with it. 

Yes, exactly. Kirstini's expressed it a lot better than I did.

There is some evidence that Sirius did tell at least one other 
person about the Prank - James was not *told* by Sirius what he'd 
done. Lupin describes it as James 'who'd *heard* what Sirius had 
done' [Ch. 18, p.261, PoA]. This implies James heard from a third 
party.

It may have been Peter. Sirius would have been safe announcing 
loudly to Peter that Snivellus was too cowardly to go into the 
tunnel against school rules. Peter already knows the secret. 

Laura argues that calling Snape courageous 

>>assumes that Snape knew something dangerous was waiting for him, 
and we don't know that to be the case. Canon doesn't take a position 
on what Snape knew the night of the prank.
>> 

Laura could be right. The Prank could *almost* be a comedy of 
errors. Sirius thinks Snape knows or strongly suspects Lupin is a 
werewolf [he saw Lupin with Madame Pomfrey, he's very good at DADA], 
so thinks he wouldn't dare go down the tunnel. A lovely chance to 
humiliate dear Snivellus. Almost as good as taking his pants off. ;-)

Snape thinks werewolves would never be allowed at Hogwarts [see 
Lupin explaining that it was only by very special permission that he 
could attend Hogwarts], so doesn't actually suspect the truth. 

Sirius thinks Snape would never dare; Snape thinks it's the ordinary 
kind of dare and he can probably deal with whatever is at the other 
end. A lot better than he can deal with Sirius announcing loudly 
that Snivellus won't go into a dark tunnel on his own. 

And then when all hell breaks loose, Snape thinks Sirius *knew* that 
Snape had no idea what was at the other end of that tunnel.

Kirstini writes:
> Which is kind of cowardly in itself, actually. 
> I'm sticking with nosiness as primary motivation.
> 

Ummm. Well, *I* wouldn't go through a dark tunnel which is out-of-
bounds just because someone called me a coward. But I'm a girl. Boys 
are different, in my experience ;-) 

Given a choice of facing possible death and being publicly referred 
to as a coward, most boys seem to prefer possible death. Whether 
it's biological, or societal, I don't know. [grin]

Kirstini:
> Although, A Thought Occurs - do we know that Remus *wasn't* 
> removed from the school at this point? 

No. But the implication is that he wasn't. Snape was 'forbidden to 
tell anybody', which implies that Lupin [who Dumbledore saw as the 
innocent party] was continuing at Hogwarts. 

Laura writes:
>>
It's a good assumption that Sirius did underestimate werewolf!
Remus's dangerousness, because that creature (who wasn't Remus, imo) 
was never a threat to Padfoot and Company.
>>

Yup. Padfoot and Prongs were big enough to control Lupin. You'd 
think it would have occurred to Sirius that someone without the 
ability to turn into a large, hairy animal might have a few 
problems, though ;-)

The worrying bit about Sirius is that James seems to have been told 
by a third party. Even when Snape actually went into the tunnel, 
Sirius doesn't seem to have made the effort to tell anyone, or go 
get Snape out. Instead it was left to James to play the hero.

The problem with the 'the werewolf isn't really Remus' idea is that 
it is not supported by canon. Sirius's attitude is much more 
understandable if he thinks the werewolf *is* Remus, and Remus 
wouldn't hurt anyone.

Remus himself remarks that his mind is less wolfish while he is with 
the Marauders [PoA Ch. 18 p. 260]. Further, he can remember 
everything he does while he's a werewolf.

Unfortunately, his memory seems to fail him when it comes to taking 
his medication [evil grin - see 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/39146 and thread 
following for 'Lupin the werewolf-in-denial' ]

Pip!Squeak




From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Mon Sep  8 20:52:07 2003
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 20:52:07 -0000
Subject: Prank/Uncle Algie's eclair/Neville & the Prophecy
In-Reply-To: <bjgavc+24ed@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjiq5n+874t@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80210

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sylviablundell2001" 
<sylviablundell at a...> wrote:
> Richard wrote:
> It is perhaps wiser to be calm at a more distant time, even if the 
> events call for thunder and lightening at the time they happen.
> 
> Now me (Sylvia)
> That is just my point.  There doesn't seemto have been any thunder 
> and lightening at the time the "prank" happened.  (snip) It all 
sounds like a really nasty cover-up with 
> the golden boys getting off scot-free and poor bloody Snape feeling 
> more alone than ever.  
> Sylvia (who is sorry to get so mad, but bullying makes me more 
angry 
> than anything in the world)

CW comment:
Well, before getting too het up, remember this is the WW. Think of 
all the really dangerous hexing that goes on all the time (including 
Hermione setting light to Prof Snape); and what about Uncle Algie 
dropping little Neville out the window when someone passed him an 
eclair !! Talk about irresponsible ! That could have killed Neville 
too, though luckily this was the point that they found he was a 
wizard. I have to admit, I think JKR's casual use of violence is one 
of her best skills, for me it catches the essence of the jungle that 
is the playground.

BTW (and I have adjusted the topic heading to reflect this 
diversion), this incident of dropping Neville out the window really 
makes me wonder if anyone in his family knew about the prophecy. 
Surely none of them could have thought he really would be a muggle if 
they knew about the prophecy ?






From patnkatng at cox.net  Mon Sep  8 21:03:02 2003
From: patnkatng at cox.net (Katrina)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 21:03:02 -0000
Subject: English slang
In-Reply-To: <bjig9e+ntje@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjiqq6+nbkn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80211

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sylviablundell2001" 
<sylviablundell at a...> wrote:
> Berk is Cockney rhyming slang for an extremely rude name i.e. 
> Berkshire Hunt.  Most people have forgotten the original meaning 
or 
> they wouldn't use it so readily!  Git I think comes from misbegot, 
> i.e. a bastard.  Again, the original meaning has vanished.  Where 
> pillock comes from, I haven't a clue.  Should be glad to know 
though.
> Sylvia (not usually this pedantic)

According to A Dictionary of Slang at 
http://www.peevish.co.uk/slang/p.htm :

Pillock:
Noun. Idiot, fool. Originally a slang term for the penis but fairly 
inoffensive now that this meaning has been forgotten. Derog. 

Katrina  (who sometimes also tends to the pedantic)




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 21:09:27 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 21:09:27 -0000
Subject: The Importance of Luna.. the new Trio
In-Reply-To: <bjidd7+fbnf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjir67+2n3e@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80212

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "boyd_smythe"
<boyd.t.smythe at f...> wrote:
> <<bb_mboy: 
> > I could actually see a new Trio forming. Because Neville and Luna 
> have an emotionally detacted calm, deep wisdom and insight, and 
> would maintain somewhat distant detached friendships, Harry will 
> feel far more comfortable around them than he will around Ron and 
> Hermione. ... He will still remain polite and friendly with Ron and 
> Hermione, but on a deeper friendship level, he will be detached.>>
> 
> > <<Melanie: 
> > ... Hermione Granger ... isn't afraid to tell Harry how stupid he 
> > is acting and he is the one person who has always managed to 
> > change his mood to some degree. I see Ron and Harry pulling away 
> > from each other however, I do not think Hermione will be willing 
> > to let this happen very easily. ... >>
> 

> Remnant:
> 
> I think writing Ron out of Harry's close circle might be a bit 
> premature. IMO, Harry enjoys Ron's company--nothing more, 
> nothing less. They're best pals and are always there for each other 
> when action is needed. ...
> 

bboy_mn:
No one is saying the Ron will be written out. I said Harry will
continue to maintain a polite and friendly relationship with Ron and
Hermione. To take that one step farther, he will still continue to
hang out with them and do homework with them to some extent, but they
will notice that he is somewhat distant and detached. On the surface
it will appear to an outsider that life is going on a usual, but Ron
and Hermione will sense the emotional distance in Harry. And Harry
will spend more tme with Neville and Luna, because they are
emotionally safe people to be with.


> Remnant:
> 
> Harry's reaction to Luna seemed more revelatory in that she has a 
> solid understanding that she is a complete individual, ... that is 
> a lesson Harry does need to learn. ...
> 
> But Luna is more teaching by example here. I don't see her as 
> Harry's therapist.
> 
> -Remnant


bboy_mn:
We have already seen several examples in the books where Harry
withholds information for Ron and Hermione because he knows how they
are going to react; emotionally.

In GoF, Harry dreads telling Ron and Hermoine about the dream of the
Riddle house and his scar hurting at the beginning of the book. When
he does finally tell them, they react exactly the way he predicts;
anxious, worried, and emotional. 

Having to worry about creating Ron and Hermione's emotional reactions,
and having to worry about facing those same reactions is exactly the
thing that Harry will want to escape. He has enough on his mind
without having to guard their emotions too, and I'm sure he will
REALLY not be in the mood to put up with the 'fuss' and worry.

Of course, they react this way because they love Harry and are deeply
concerned about him. But when Harry has a problem, he is trying to
calm his own emotions, and having Ron and Hermione 'freak out'
(slightly exaggerated) everytime he tries to talk about something
serious is not much of an incentive to go talk to them.

But when he approaches Neville and Luna, he knows that they will react
with a calm detachment. They will also react with a calm, quiet wisdom
that he is not likely to get from Ron and Hermione.

In fact, this calm detactment that Harry will display to Ron and
Hermione will definitely not go unnoticed by them. I suspect the once
they sense that something is wrong, the will continue to bug Harry
about it, and that is exactly the wrong thing to do. By 'fussing'
about it, they are more likely to drive Harry away, which in turn will
 only make them pursue the matter more, which in turn will only
irritate Harry more.

Some one mentioned that we predicted the exact same reaction of
detachment from Harry at the end of GoF, but GoG did not end the same
way as OoP. We see clear examples at the end of OoP of Harry feeling
very detached and isolated. When is is with people he wants to be
alone; when he is alone he wants to be with people. When he is with
people, they are irritating, they want to comfort him and talk about
'feeling' which is not what Harry wants to do with people who are
going to interject a great deal of their own feelings. When he looks
out over the other students on the grounds, he feels like a complete
outside, completely separate from them. Amoung them, but not one of
them. The are very strong hints of this sense of isolation at the end
of OoP. 

So Harry will only be able to find comfort in people who understand
his feelings without having to talk about them. He may still be social
friends with Ron and Hermione, but he will only feel comfortable with
his own emotional landscape when he is around Neville and Luna. No
matter what he tells them, he can count on true understanding
accompanied by a calm detachment from emotions.

Of course, that just one man's opinions.

bboy_mn






From silmariel at telefonica.net  Mon Sep  8 21:19:17 2003
From: silmariel at telefonica.net (Carolina)
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2003 23:19:17 +0200
Subject: Percy's letter
Message-ID: <200309082319.17186.silmariel@telefonica.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 80213



Or "How to write for the MoM, Hermione, and Ron" - long post
warning.

This post comes a bit late...

See Den's "Percy (yes, again :-)" #69029. One of the basic ideas of
that post is that the letter was edited by Umbridge, that Percy
wouldn't write that. I think he would.

The letter (266-268 UK Bloomsbury version) is a huge amount of
condensed canon, at which I'd like to take a closer look.  I'll 
quote something by Den:

"He says he's sending the owl at night so Ron can read it on his
own. How thick would he have to be to believe that ? <snip> Sounds
to me like Percy is trying to protect his OWN privacy, not Ron's !
Something like : I have to send this letter at night so hopefully
it won't be intercepted, I don't trust neither the Ministry nor the
school post anymore."

I agree with this, with other approach: I think the letter was not 
edited by Umbridge but rather, was written to be read by at least 
three people: Ron, Hermione and Umbridge (the MoM). Percy knew it 
was going to be/could be intercepted, he might have even said to 
Fudge that he was going to write his brother after being told about 
Ron's badge (what would be more natural?).

I start with the assumption that Percy is not stupid and knows Ron 
well enough to anger him on purpose by being a git.  I'll call that 
m!Ron, short for manipulated Ron.

(1) Number are for paragraphs.

Umbridge-->Fudge-->Him.

1: The MoM is interfering, and look how close to the top Umbridge 
is. This is directed at Hermione.
2: Percy and the MoM are a bunch of happy people with nothing to 
hide, this one is to be read by the MoM, that's clear.
3: The very mention of Umbridge is going to upset Ron.


(2)

..."what we might call the F&G route, rather than following my
footsteps"...  Ron would hang himself rather than follow the Percy
route.  With this single line, Ron's bound to do the opposite of 
whatever
Percy advises in the letter.

(3)

Percy sends the owl by night to make sure the trio is going to read 
it, and adds the excuse line to assure that Ron hands to them.  It 
also provides an excuse if the MoM intercepts it.  Notice that the 
word "advice" is used first, this is a cue for m!Ron to do the 
opposite.

(4)

"From something the minister let slip when telling me you are now a
prefect, I gather that you are still seeing a lot of Harry
Potter"...

This line is quite interesting, and ties with (1). Not only does it 
prod m!Ron, but gives an excuse for the letter to be written. 
H/R/H's friendship is there for Umbridge to notice in the first 
week.  It is very likely that she asked Fudge to use his influence 
on Percy to 'spam' Ron with propaganda, and the prefect's badge is 
a perfect excuse. Or Fudge just wanted to interfere with Harry, and 
he had Percy working for him. 

More babble directed at m!Ron and the MoM... "continued 
fraternization with that boy" serves both then "DD may not be in 
charge at Hogwarts much longer and the people who count..." yikes, 
this is directed at Hermione, and reveals that DD's fall is so 
generally assumed that it is far from a secret, then more lines for 
m!Ron /MoM "a different - and probably more accurate - view of 
potter's behavior".

"The Daily Prophet tomorrow" - for Hermione. He wants to make sure 
that the one who can think about something to counterattack the MoM 
with will pay close attention.  I think Hermione's SPEW is 
well-known enough in the Weasley family.

(5)

A lot more to goad m!Ron:  "you do not want to be tarred with the 
same brush as Potter"... and then "He got off on a mere 
technicality", a clear throwaway line for the MoM's benefit.

(6)

The same, with the strange/notorious Umbridge line:

"...Dolores Umbridge, a truly delightful woman who I know will be
only too happy to advise you." --> sounds like the music of the
Wonderful Wizard of Oz to me. Strikes me as propaganda, MoM 
approved, the same as Harry being violent.

In regards to this, I must say (and I hope not to be killed), that
Umbridge *can* be a truly 'delightful woman', if you are on the same
side as her, and fulfilling you role instead of opposing her. I see
her as a fanatic (and sadist, that's granted), but I'm sure she has
been truly delightful to Draco Malfoy at some time (I suspect more
than once) during OoP, and I don't think he is the only student she
has favored.

(7)

Repetition of DD's  fall and Daily Prophet for Hermione, more to 
annoy the hell out of Ron and allow Percy to position himself 
firmly with the MoM.

(8)

Brings more "we are a happy bunch of people and they are evil"
propaganda.

"If you are writing to mother, tell her that a certain Sturgis 
Podmore, who is a great friend of DD...'," : Here Percy states he 
is aware that she knows DD and DD knows Podmore, but it is also 
written in a way that Percy can be appearing to explain who he is, 
as if she didn't already know that... just in case the MoM reads 
the letter.

As a good MoM boy "It pains me to criticize our parents"... , and 
ends with: "I sincerely hope that, in time, they will realize how 
mistaken they were and I shall, of course, be ready to accept a 
full apology when that day comes" - do you hear the Disney music? 
the Oz music?  Choose one.

The letter ends here.  Let's look at how the reaction is narrated.

Ron's is as expected, he hands the letter to H/H, after that
Ron/Harry talk, Ron claims his brother is a git, and the 
conversation digress to schoolwork.

We are not given a first reaction shot of Hermione, we have
to wait a while to just obtain "H was looking at Ron with an odd
expression on her face" followed by a change of theme. This drives 
away the reader's focus, but Hermione is really quick catching MoM 
interference, as she has demonstrated so far, and I know she has 
read the letter another way.

In conclusion, Percy has written what can be read as a petulant
multi-tasking letter, designed to:

Get Ron and Hermione very close to Harry.
Advise Hermione about the future.
Try to manipulate Ron.
Be proofread against possible MoM filters.

silmariel




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 21:13:09 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 21:13:09 -0000
Subject: English slang
In-Reply-To: <bjig9e+ntje@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjird5+k7n3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80214

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sylviablundell2001" 
<sylviablundell at a...> wrote:
> Berk is Cockney rhyming slang for an extremely rude name i.e. 
> Berkshire Hunt.  Most people have forgotten the original meaning or 
> they wouldn't use it so readily!  Git I think comes from misbegot, 
> i.e. a bastard.  Again, the original meaning has vanished.  Where 
> pillock comes from, I haven't a clue.  Should be glad to know 
though.
> Sylvia (not usually this pedantic)


Laura (blushing):

Yikes...I think I'll change the subject now.  I'm not sure I want to 
know that last derivation...*smiles*




From sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 21:24:32 2003
From: sevenhundredandthirteen at yahoo.com (sevenhundredandthirteen)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 21:24:32 -0000
Subject: Time, Repetition and the Uber-Dimension
In-Reply-To: <bjgr9j+ehv2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjis2g+9fv4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80215

Talisman wrote:
> Obviously, my theory DOES include the lengthy time-travel 
discussion 
> that followed.

Indeed it does, but your theory actually works with *every* version 
of time-travel so far theorised. It works with the 'it-happened-once' 
it works with the multi-dimensional, it works with the memory-modify 
version, it works with your own version of time-travel. Rather than 
exclude other versions of time-travel by saying that your own is 
superior, this theory can work with *any* version.

The theories usually go as follows:

1. Time happens only once. You can't change Time.
(Harry was always there. He did save himself)

[But if we include your Snape theory it would go 'Harry was always 
there, but *never* saved himself- He just *thought* that he did]


2. Time happens only once. You can change Time, except we haven't 
seen it happen yet.
(Harry was always there. He did save himself)

[But if we include your Snape theory it would go 'Harry was always 
there, but *never* saved himself- He just *thought* that he did]


3. Time happens only once. You can change Time and we have seen it 
happen.
(Harry was always there but he didn't always save himself. Someone 
else did, then he changed this.)


4. Time happens more than once. You can change Time and we've seen it 
happen.
(Harry wasn't always there. Someone else saved him, then he changed 
this.)
	Time works in parallel dimensions.

You see? What I was trying to say wasn't 'this has *nothing* to do 
with time-travel' What I was trying to say was 'this works with *any* 
and *every* version of time-travel.' Anyone can support this theory 
without having to change their view on time-travel.

~<(Laurasia)>~





From constancevigilance at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 21:35:50 2003
From: constancevigilance at yahoo.com (Susan Miller)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 21:35:50 -0000
Subject: FILK: And the Room Spun 'Round
Message-ID: <bjisnm+bnbq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80216

The story thus far:

Our heroes have convinced Harry to let them come with him to the MoM 
on a Sirius rescue mission (The Department of Mysteries, message 
80179).

The rescue team astride Thestrals fly to the Ministry in a mighty 
mood of revenge (Look Out, MOM!, message 80193).

Having arrived at the MoM and gone down the elevator, they arrive at 
a strange room ...

And the Room Spun 'Round

(To the tune of And the Band Played On)

http://www.niehs.nih.gov/kids/lyrics/strawberry.htm

A black circular room
With blue candles of doom,
And the room spun 'round.
We ran 'cross the floor,
And pulled open a door.
Snuffles gagged and bound? 
But our spirits soon sunk
It was brains in some gunk.
Not happy with what we just found, 
We went right back through
To try door number two,
And the room spun 'round.

But this time a rail
with a tattered old veil,
And the room spun 'round.
The next door was blocked
With a spell tightly locked,
And the room spun 'round.
The next room was littered
Will bell jars that glittered,
This was the room that we sought.
The door softly locks
As run past the clocks.
And the room spun 'round.


~ Constance Vigilance








From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 22:03:19 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 22:03:19 -0000
Subject: Prank
In-Reply-To: <bjipqu+iuli@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjiub7+f19e@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80217

> Kirstini wrote:   
> > No, Pip didn't say that. She said:
> > >>>Snape continually snipes at Sirius in OOP, for staying safely 
> > at home, leading to the final comment of `why yes, I suppose I 
am' 
> > when Sirius finally says `Are you calling me a coward?' This 
> > suggests that quite possibly Sirius previously used a taunt of `
> > coward' on him.<snip>
> > Also, a public taunt of `coward' would mean that Snape would not 
> > expect a snipe hunt. Half the school would be laughing at him if 
> > he *didn't* go in.>>> 
> > 
> Kirstini:
> >  - Pip's getting inside Snape's head here (gaah. Hope she's 
> > feeling alright), 
> 
> It's OK, I'm a professional. But don't try this at home. ;-)
> 
now Laura:

Okay, this makes sense.  Pip, I hope you have a quick recovery from 
your recent excursion into Snape's twisted psyche.  :-)

<snip> 
> There is some evidence that Sirius did tell at least one other 
> person about the Prank - James was not *told* by Sirius what he'd 
> done. Lupin describes it as James 'who'd *heard* what Sirius had 
> done' [Ch. 18, p.261, PoA]. This implies James heard from a third 
> party.
> 
> It may have been Peter. Sirius would have been safe announcing 
> loudly to Peter that Snivellus was too cowardly to go into the 
> tunnel against school rules. Peter already knows the secret. 

now Laura:

Sure, that makes sense.  What doesn't make sense to me is that Peter 
would tell James.  He was such a gutless wonder that it would be 
drastically out of character for him to risk the wrath of any one of 
the other Marauders.  He wanted to belong at all costs.  However, 
canon does imply that someone other than Sirius told James, and I 
don't know who else that could have been.

> Kirstini:
> Laura argues that calling Snape courageous assumes that Snape knew 
something dangerous was waiting for him, and we don't know that to be 
the case. Canon doesn't take a position on what Snape knew the night 
of the prank.
> 

Pip:
> Laura could be right. The Prank could *almost* be a comedy of 
> errors. Sirius thinks Snape knows or strongly suspects Lupin is a 
> werewolf [he saw Lupin with Madame Pomfrey, he's very good at 
DADA], so thinks he wouldn't dare go down the tunnel. A lovely chance 
to humiliate dear Snivellus. Almost as good as taking his pants 
off. ;-)
> 
> Snape thinks werewolves would never be allowed at Hogwarts [see 
> Lupin explaining that it was only by very special permission that 
he could attend Hogwarts], so doesn't actually suspect the truth.  
> Sirius thinks Snape would never dare; Snape thinks it's the 
ordinary kind of dare and he can probably deal with whatever is at 
the other end. A lot better than he can deal with Sirius announcing 
loudly  that Snivellus won't go into a dark tunnel on his own. 
> 
> And then when all hell breaks loose, Snape thinks Sirius *knew* 
that Snape had no idea what was at the other end of that tunnel.
> 
> Kirstini writes:
> > Which is kind of cowardly in itself, actually. 
> > I'm sticking with nosiness as primary motivation.
<snip> 

> Laura writes:
> >>
> It's a good assumption that Sirius did underestimate werewolf!
> Remus's dangerousness, because that creature (who wasn't Remus, 
imo) was never a threat to Padfoot and Company.
> >>
>Pip: 
> Yup. Padfoot and Prongs were big enough to control Lupin. You'd 
> think it would have occurred to Sirius that someone without the 
> ability to turn into a large, hairy animal might have a few 
> problems, though ;-)
> 
now Laura (boy, this would be easier with different fonts!);

I think James and Sirius already thought of Snape as a large hairy 
animal.  :-)  Seriouisly, though, they may have had enough respect 
for his command of the Dark Arts to figure he could take care of 
himself.  

<snip> The problem with the 'the werewolf isn't really Remus' idea is 
that 
> it is not supported by canon. Sirius's attitude is much more 
> understandable if he thinks the werewolf *is* Remus, and Remus 
> wouldn't hurt anyone. Remus himself remarks that his mind is less 
wolfish while he is with the Marauders [PoA Ch. 18 p. 260]. Further, 
he can remember everything he does while he's a werewolf.
> Unfortunately, his memory seems to fail him when it comes to taking 
> his medication [evil grin - see 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/39146 and 
thread 
> following for 'Lupin the werewolf-in-denial' ]

now Laura:

I don't think Sirius's attitude toward werewolf!Remus is conclusive-
we already know that Padfoot is in no danger from him and that Sirius 
wasn't the clearest thinker at age 15.  The question for me is how 
much control *does* Remus have over the werewolf?  We know that up 
until relatively recently there was nothing he could do to stop the 
transformation.  We know that he became "less wolfish"  when he was 
with the other Marauders, but that he was still dangerous.  The idea 
I get is that the Remus part of him knows what's going on when it's 
full moon but has no power to stop it.  And remembering what he did 
at that time would only make it worse for him, since he's a decent, 
if imperfect man.    So in that sense, it's not Remus who is in 
action during the full moon-he's just an unwilling witness, along the 
lines of a multiple personality situation.    
I accept that there may be some denial in Remus, but do we have any 
other instances in canon of Remus forgetting to take his potion? 
Under extremis, many of us who take important medications can forget. 






From jones.r.h.j at worldnet.att.net  Mon Sep  8 22:08:10 2003
From: jones.r.h.j at worldnet.att.net (Robert Jones)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 22:08:10 -0000
Subject: Is JKR having fun with names?
Message-ID: <bjiuka+ji2c@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80218

JKR may have gotten some names from history or myth and used some 
just because she likes them (she has said that "Harry" is her 
favorite boy's name), but are some of the names slightly disguised 
versions of characteristics?  I'm thinking of the following:

Grammauld Place -- a "grim old" place

Ludo Bagman -- a "bag man" for money (gambling, etc.)

Cornelius Fudge -- he "fudges" everything. We can't tell if he is a 
DE or just looking out for his own best interests.  He ends 
up "performing clumsily, perfunctorily, or dishonestly" to quote the 
American College Dictionary.

Sirius Black -- he was a little too "serious."

Others might be Lucius ("Loser") Malfoy or Luna ("Looney")Lovegood.  
I hope none of the Weasleys end up on the list (unless you want to 
call Percy a weasel already).

Boris the Bewildered





From gbannister10 at aol.com  Mon Sep  8 22:17:12 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 22:17:12 -0000
Subject: Is JKR having fun with names?
In-Reply-To: <bjiuka+ji2c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjiv58+eefs@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80219

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Robert Jones" 
<jones.r.h.j at w...> wrote:
> JKR may have gotten some names from history or myth and used some 
> just because she likes them (she has said that "Harry" is her 
> favorite boy's name), but are some of the names slightly disguised 
> versions of characteristics?  I'm thinking of the following:
> 
>
> 
> Sirius Black -- he was a little too "serious."
> 
> 

Geoff:
I have been reminded in one article I read that Sirius is of course, 
the "Dog Star" and we all know what Sirius transforms into as a n 
Animagus....




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 22:34:32 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 22:34:32 -0000
Subject: A Eulogy, as Inaugural Flight of (the) Fancy; Sirius's Death-Journal; 
Message-ID: <bjj05o+kbt0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80220

Sirius Black, death-journal entry dated deathday plus one:

At first I didn't know where I was, or how I'd gotten here.  Now that 
I have realized, I want so much to go find James and Lily; but how 
can I face them now that I have lost my ability to do anything at all 
for their son?  I have added my own death to his burdens.  Why didn't 
Harry use the mirror I gave him?  (But that's the "it's not my fault" 
me.)  Why didn't I make its purpose clearer to him?  (And that's 
the "it's all my fault" me.)  I'm beginning to see that the truth 
about everything that happened is so complex that blame is not 
something one can dump like a chamberpot on any single person, 
however handy. All of us wove that tapestry, together.

Not the least of whom was Bellatrix.  If only I'd been just a bit 
faster!  She went so wrong, being so right in the family's eyes.  
Aside from that, though, it just occurred to me that she is one who 
would understand the dementor years.  Of course, she was mad already, 
so perhaps not.

At least I've escaped that house and Mum's portrait.  But the 
original is here somewhere, what a ghastly thought.  I can hardly be 
a blood traitor now, though, seeing as I no longer have any.  All of 
that is gone.  Can one scream here?  <tries, fails>  That's a relief.

Thoughts run through my mind that, yesterday, would have been 
accompanied by a gasp, by a thumping in my chest, by a rush of 
jangling energy; now they're just thoughts.  I wish I had been 
cleared of those charges.  I had no idea being back in that house 
would so completely force me back into the person I was when I lived 
there.  I really was getting better at dealing with it; for a while, 
I did see James when I looked at Harry, then the present made itself 
known.

Ah, James.  The things we got up to.  There was so much to overcome, 
to distract ourselves from, to reframe into something we could 
contain and still live with.  Just as Harry is having to do now.  And 
we often did it so badly.  Harry, learn from our mistakes!  Remus and 
the others will look after him <concentrating on sending thought back 
through the veil>: "Look after him, Remus!"

I am having trouble concentrating.  Perhaps I will try to think more, 
whatever passes here for tomorrow.

S.B.

[I hope this isn't inappropriate; now that I'm off moderated status, 
those nice, helpful Elves aren't there with their net to catch me if 
I've fallen right off my imaginary airship onto my head.]

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley" who is afraid the mirror will show she is 
unintentionally writing fanfic, carefully not looking at her 
Animagination's reflection.




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 22:40:16 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 22:40:16 -0000
Subject: OoP - GUILTY Dumbledore (was Dumbledore's true sorrow motives)
In-Reply-To: <bjifhj+bl93@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjj0gg+gj0r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80221


> Nicholas:
> > I think Sirius would have helped Harry into the fight with Big V. 
> > Sirius' idea of happiness would have been to have Harry become a 
> > member of the OoP and Harry would have gone along with that. 
> 
> 
> Kneasy
> Sirius' idea of happiness would be for Harry to become as rash and 
> unthinking as himself or James. Make the big gesture Harry!
> 
> Laura:

Well, now, that's just not supported by canon.  The two of them are 
constantly telling each other to be careful, and I think they mean 
it.  When Sirius expressed disappointment with Harry early in OoP, it 
wasn't because Harry wouldn't take chances but because he wouldn't 
let Sirius take one.

> Nicholas;
> >  Sirius (correctly?)  realised that Harry was old and mature 
enough to know things sooner than DD; and had Sirius been allowed to 
fully answer Harry's questions, Harry would have had his eyes opened 
sooner. Harry is  Harry and he will go after Big V, *whatever he 
knows*, until one of them dies.
> >
> 
>  Kneasy:
> DD doesn't want Harry to have his eyes open until DD is ready and he
> thinks Harry is ready. Does Harry even know enough to ask the 
*right* 
> questions as opposed to the ones that occur to  him at the moment?
> How about "How are we going to win?" "What's my function?" "When 
> in your judgement, will I be ready?" "Do I have the necessary skills
> for what I must do?"

Laura:

When Harry asks DD questions that have to do with the overall 
picture, DD shuts him down (starting in SS/PS, when he could very 
well have begun to tell him *something*).  So expecting Harry to be 
able to think strategically about a situation he doesn't understand 
is not very realistic, imo.

> Kneasy:
> There is a general acceptance that Sirius knows Harry well. He 
doesn't. Up to the scenes in the Grimmaud Place house, Sirius has 
spent less than 3 hours with Harry and none of it face to face with 
no-one else present. They  are sympathetic strangers full of  
misconceptions. Inside Grimmaud little advance on this is made: a big 
crowd, lots of bickering. Harry learns a bit about the Black family, 
nothing else. They are still strangers.

Laura:

Don't you think, though (well, maybe *you* don't, cynic that you are 
<g>)that it's possible to have an intuitive understanding of someone 
soon after you've met them, and the details get filled in later?  
I've certainly had that experience.  Also, remember that Sirius has 
been keeping track of Harry since he got out of Azkaban, and after 
PoA, he communicates with DD, so there's some information sharing 
there as well.  And Sirius didn't need to know Harry in intimate 
detail to form accurate surmises as to what Harry would do and how he 
would react in a given situation-and he tends to be right.  He knows 
what it's like to be an impulsive, emotional teenager.  I don't 
perceive a lot of misconceptions; I see instead a lack of knowledge 
that comes from a lack of time spent together.  That would have been 
remedied had Sirius lived.  But I don't think Harry and Sirius were 
bad for each other.  The harm that came to them in OoP I lay directly 
at the feet of DD-I'm with you there, Kneasy!
> 
Which brings me to a question-why didn't DD just get rid of the globe 
the way he got rid of the stone when it got to be a liability?   DD 
knew that (1) LV was after it, (2) what it said and (3) whether or 
not the prophecy was destroyed, LV would still be going after Harry 
and Harry would still have to deal with him sooner or later.  The 
globe could only cause trouble-as it did.  DD could have found a way 
to get Harry into the DoM and destroyed it.  Why didn't he?  




From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Mon Sep  8 22:39:10 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 22:39:10 -0000
Subject: Vernon Dursley
In-Reply-To: <bjimbj+fv1g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjj0ee+ct7d@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80222

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "entropymail" 
<entropymail at y...> wrote:
> It seems to me that just leaving Uncle Vernon dangling there with no
> real "come-uppance" would be wrong, wrong, wrong.  Like Professor
> Umbridge, Vernon finds far too much pleasure in torturing Harry, 
and I
> think JKR will surely have to give Vernon a comical, humiliating
> ending (similar to Umbridge's). I don't think Harry will be involved
> in it, however. He's far too nice of a person to do such a thing.  

I have a theory tied to 10 year old Mark Evans. I don't believe
it's a co-incidence that the only child that JKR mentions
by name (other than Harry) who
was a target of Dudley's gang, happens to have the same last name
as Harry's mother. I think we'll see Mark at Hogwarts next year
(he'll be 11). This of course will blow up the Dursleys' cover
story and reveal to their neighbors what they worked so hard to
hide... I think this is a fitting punishment, but it will also
result in the breakup between Harry and the Dursleys when he comes
back for his last summer (beginning of book 7).

Salit





From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 22:47:03 2003
From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 22:47:03 -0000
Subject: Prank
In-Reply-To: <20030907220756.77421.qmail@web20003.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjj0t7+t3fc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80223

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Rebecca Stephens 
<rsteph1981 at y...> wrote:
<snip>
> Not to be a brat, but there is a difference between
> the things you are describing and what the Marauders
> did.  What you describe put chiefly you and your
> friends, the people who chose to do these things, in
> danger.  Not others.  There's a world of difference.
> 
> 
> Rebecca

... to which I (Richard) say ...

Let's just say that we DID occasionally put others at risk, but I'm 
keeping my mouth shut.  Nobody died, but I'm not sure that the odd 
parent or two might not have me hunted down and my legs broken if 
they knew some of the things we did to their precious scions.  We 
didn't INTEND to risks others lives, or even to seriously harm them, 
let alone without their knowledge, but then we were kids, and didn't 
quite understand the potential consequences of some of those actions.

And think about that dart in the back of my head.  This wasn't your 
your timid little dart-board dart, but a rather heavy, very sharp 
blowgun dart, the likes of which we actually killed some small furry 
beasts with so we could cook and eat them.  We made them ourselves, 
and they were remarkably lethal ... and accurate.  The reason I had 
that dart in the back of my head was because one of the others 
thought he'd like to see me jump a bit, and wasn't quite as accurate 
as he thought he'd be.  I was shot without warning, and it took a bit 
of effort to dislodge that thing.  Had I turned when he shot, I could 
easily have lost an eye.

That friend of mine just didn't think about what might happen if he 
DID hit me.  He didn't intend it, and was profusely apologetic, but 
that doesn't change the fact that it was a complete surprise, hurt a 
good deal, and could well have come off much worse.  I know it was 
stupid now, but not just because I matured into understanding it was 
stupid.  Rather, I had a dart sticking out of my head to make the 
point extra memorable.

Somehow, I think Sirius might well have thought that the worst that 
might happen would be that Snape would soil himself, and get away 
after using a few of those curses he was famous for.  He might well 
have been disappointed that James short-circuited the prank, but 
still a bit pleased that Snape still had a bit of a scare.  Had it 
gone much worse, I'm sure he would have felt badly about it, despite 
Snape being the victim.  But I doubt he INTENDED to KILL Snape, even 
if it was much easier for Dumbledore and Snape to see it that way.


Richard





From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com  Mon Sep  8 22:45:23 2003
From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (Irene Mikhlin)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 23:45:23 +0100
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Legilimency, Occlumency, Snape, Harry
In-Reply-To: <bjget2+j1s9@eGroups.com>
References: <bjget2+j1s9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F5D0683.1020005@btopenworld.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80224



Steve wrote:

> 
> Legilimency takes two forms in the book. One is the gift or skill of
> Legilimency and the other is the Legilimens charm.
> 

<Detailed theory skipped>

If the two forms are not connected, it seems rather useless to teach 
Harry the defence against the charm, because Voldemort isn't going to 
count to three indeed.

I think we need to accept that Snape, for all his problems, is a 
competent teacher. You can't teach someone to resist a force that's 
impossible to feel. So for the first step Snape uses the charm that
gives Harry some feedback for how successful his defence is.
If Harry was able to progress farther, Snape would move to a less
intrusive technique gradually.
Sort of like training to navigate through laser beams, using cords
and bells, you know, in "Entrapment". Only Harry was less determined 
than Catherine Zeta-Jones. :-)

Irene


> bboy_mn
> 






From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 23:01:45 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 23:01:45 -0000
Subject: Percy's letter
In-Reply-To: <200309082319.17186.silmariel@telefonica.net>
Message-ID: <bjj1op+ph5a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80225

Responding to silmariel, post 80213:


(snip)
"See Del's "Percy (yes, again :-)" #69029. One of the basic ideas of
> that post is that the letter was edited by Umbridge, that Percy
> wouldn't write that. I think he would...
I think the letter was not edited by Umbridge but rather, was written 
to be read by at least three people: Ron, Hermione and Umbridge (the 
MoM). > 
> I start with the assumption that Percy is not stupid and knows Ron 
> well enough to anger him on purpose by being a git...  

..."what we might call the F&G route, rather than following my
> footsteps"...  Ron would hang himself rather than follow the Percy
> route.  With this single line, Ron's bound to do the opposite of 
> whatever Percy advises in the letter...
> 
> "The Daily Prophet tomorrow" - for Hermione. He wants to make sure 
> that the one who can think about something to counterattack the MoM 
> with will pay close attention.  I think Hermione's SPEW is 
> well-known enough in the Weasley family.
> 
>> "If you are writing to mother, tell her that a certain Sturgis 
> Podmore, who is a great friend of DD...'," : Here Percy states he 
> is aware that she knows DD and DD knows Podmore, but it is also 
> written in a way that Percy can be appearing to explain who he is, 
> as if she didn't already know that... just in case the MoM reads 
> the letter...

> We are not given a first reaction shot of Hermione, we have
> to wait a while to just obtain "H was looking at Ron with an odd
> expression on her face" followed by a change of theme. This drives 
> away the reader's focus, but Hermione is really quick catching MoM 
> interference, as she has demonstrated so far, and I know she has 
> read the letter another way.
> 
> In conclusion, Percy has written what can be read as a petulant
> multi-tasking letter, designed to:
> 
> Get Ron and Hermione very close to Harry.
> Advise Hermione about the future.
> Try to manipulate Ron.
> Be proofread against possible MoM filters.
> 
> silmariel


Coupled with Del's post (69029) this is very plausible to me.  What 
makes it is the reference to Podmore.  As Del pointed out, unless he 
were associated with the Order, he wouldn't know about Podmore's 
involvement in it, or his parents' involvement for that matter.  
Percy (supposedly?) severed ties with his family before the 
reinstatement of the Order.  
Del wondered if Percy might be a really good actor.  Which leads me 
to wonder if Molly and Arthur aren't really good actors, too; if 
Percy were "undercover" in some way, shape or form, they could likely 
be in on it.
I've felt all along since reading OoP that Percy wasn't acting like 
himself.  I've wondered if he had been replaced, which seems like an 
unpopular theory around here.  I've wondered if he was undercover, 
too.  Ultimately, the Percy in OoP doesn't match the Percy of the 
previous four books.  I have never seen him as one dimensional, until 
now, perhaps, after reading book 5.  His behavior is way over the 
top, as far as Percy's standards go.  His letter from book 4 is 
nothing like the letter in book 5.

GoF, page 549, American hardback ("Percy's letter was short and 
irritated"):
"As I am constantly telling the Daily Prophet, Mr. Crouch is taking a 
well-deserved break.  He is sending in regular owls with 
instructions.  No, I haven't actually seen him, but I think I can be 
trusted to know my own superior's handwriting.  I have quite enough 
to do at the moment without trying to quash these ridiculous rumors.  
Please don't bother me again unless it's something important.  Happy 
Easter."
There is no reaction to the letter in the text following.  But it's 
either not the same letter writer, or there are two very dissimilar 
agendas attached to each letter.

I've wondered if, after getting H/R/H's owl and writing back this 
terse reply, maybe Percy did start wondering if something was up, and 
actually went to Mr. Crouch's house.  What might he have found?

My only problem with assuming that Percy and his parents are good 
actors (or even that Percy himself is) and that there's an undercover 
Percy here, is that: if he's so deep undercover, why try to reveal it 
to H/R/H in a coded message?  Were the stakes high enough at that 
point to attempt to reveal it to the trio?  Was he worried about his 
parents and their involvement in the Order?  Was he trying 
say "Constant Vigilance"?

I cannot assume, nor have I ever, that Percy is simply a huge git.  

hg.




From annemehr at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  8 23:24:20 2003
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 23:24:20 -0000
Subject: OoP - GUILTY Dumbledore (was Dumbledore's true sorrow motives)
In-Reply-To: <bjifhj+bl93@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjj334+ic28@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80226

> Nicholas:
>> In conclusion, I just won't believe that those "twinkling" blue 
>>eyes and half-moon spectacles are hiding anything but love for 
>>Harry and  hope for the Wizarding World.<snip>
> 
> Kneasy
> I'm sorry, but given the situation this 'love'  is not a positive 
>thing, it's a pair of handcuffs.  Hope is no  good either; <snip>If 
>Harry has to go so that V  is defeated, then Harry will go. He'll 
>probably suscribe to the fund for
> the statue, but he'll have done his job. 
> 
>   
> Nicholas:
> > DD loves Harry! 
> > " 'I cared about you too much. I cared more for your happiness 
than your knowing the truth, more for your peace of mind than my 
plan, more for your life than the lives that might be lost if the 
plan failed. In other words, I acted exactly as Voldemort expects we 
> > fools who love to act. 
> 
> 
> Kneasy:
> Impassioned and interesting.
> In essence it states that Harry comes first in everything; above 
the truth, the plan (note that there *is* a plan),  above any other 
lives. This is either patronising bulls***t or a calculated 
lie.<snip>

Annemehr:
Not necessarily!

Under Talisman's complete (and compelling) Guilty!Dumbledore theory 
in which DD succeeded in steering everything including Sirius' 
death, yes, this is a lie to further the plan.

On the other hand, it could be perfectly true.  Maybe DD *did* care 
too much for Harry's immediate happiness, with the consequence that 
the night's events ended in the unintended death of Sirius.  But 
notice that this is in the *past tense* -- if DD did allow his love 
for Harry to get in the way of the plan, he's learned his lesson.

The plan's back on, if it was ever off.

By the way, one of the things that makes Talisman's reading so 
compelling is DD's neglect to explain *any* part of this plan except 
the "blood protection at Privet Drive" part to Harry (and I'm 
eagerly awaiting Talisman's promised contradiction of that).  What 
would they all have been doing all year if Harry had been told of 
the prophecy at age 11, or 14?  Harry still would not have learned 
Occlumency from Snape, so Voldemort would have been able to read the 
prophecy inside Harry's own head (doubtful) or trick him into going 
to the MoM.  What does Dumbledore have planned for the defeat of 
Voldemort?  The *only* inkling we have is "the power that the Dark 
Lord knows not" -- Harry himself is still completely in the dark, is 
so traumatised that he can't even think about this yet, and 
meanwhile time grows short.  This suggests that the plan *depends* 
upon keeping Harry ignorant, which supports Talisman's thesis.


<snip>
> Nicholas:
> > Harry's needs and preferences are to play the hero, to go after 
Big V. I see nothing sinister or "cold-hearted" (and neither does 
Harry going by the same quote from SS pg. 302 you use above) with DD 
> > helping Harry to be Harry whether it's Weapon!Harry or Chosen!
Harry. 
> 
> Kneasy:
> Nothing sinister in allowing, encouraging an 11 year old untrained
> student wizard to face the Voldy monster!?[...]You don't allow 
someone you love to  take risks of that magnitude, a level of risk 
that Harry can't really comprehend - unless there is a plan that 
requires it.

Annemehr:
But you forget (it seems), the Voldy monster is *after* Harry.  Plan 
or no plan, this boy had better be on a fast track to learning how 
to face Voldemort, because he's going to.  Even if DD thought he 
could find a way to defeat LV without Harry, he'd still train up 
Harry to face his would-be murderer, for his own sake as well as for 
the chance of him helping the cause, because that confrontation is 
inevitable.


>  Kneasy:
> DD doesn't want Harry to have his eyes open until DD is ready and 
he thinks Harry is ready. Does Harry even know enough to ask the 
*right* questions as opposed to the ones that occur to  him at the 
moment? How about "How are we going to win?" "What's my 
function?" "When in your judgement, will I be ready?" "Do I have the 
necessary skills for what I must do?"


Annemehr:
Exactly.  It's part of what makes me lean toward the Guilty!
Dumbledore interpretation.

If, very near the beginning of book six, Dumbledore tells 
Harry, "Now that you have had a chance to begin to come to terms 
with the prophecy, I am going to tell you what you must do," *then* 
I will be able to believe the face-value reading of the end of OoP.  
However, if Harry is left to puzzle out and react to events on his 
own as usual, I am with Talisman 100%.  (Remember, in GoF, what did 
Dumbledore do to help Harry through the tournament?  He left it all 
to "Moody" except when Harry sought him out!  Dumbledore does a very 
good job of hiding this love of his.) Meanwhile, I am pretty much 
with Talisman anyway, and agreeing mostly with Kneasy here even 
though a month ago I never thought I would!

Annemehr
ever increasingly a fan of OoP





From grannybat at hotmail.com  Mon Sep  8 23:43:43 2003
From: grannybat at hotmail.com (grannybat84112)
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 23:43:43 -0000
Subject: English slang (semi- sorta on topic)
In-Reply-To: <bjig9e+ntje@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjj47f+gmn6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80227

Sylviablundell wrote:
> Berk is Cockney rhyming slang for an extremely rude name i.e. 
> Berkshire Hunt.  Most people have forgotten the original meaning or 
> they wouldn't use it so readily!  

Speaking as a clueless Yank...why is the (regional?) name of an 
animal chase considered so rude?

Dawn
 




From princessmelabela at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 00:32:23 2003
From: princessmelabela at yahoo.com (Melanie Black)
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2003 17:32:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Percy's letter
In-Reply-To: <200309082319.17186.silmariel@telefonica.net>
Message-ID: <20030909003223.26553.qmail@web20706.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80228

Golly wrote: I'm not saying you are wrong or it isn't a good guess...  But this is 
exactly what so many thought would happen in OOTP.  It seemed a 
reasonable reaction for the secretive and noble Harry. Having failed 
to protect Cedric he would shy away from his friends and believe 
himself a danger.  

My reply:  Cedric was not anywhere near as close to Harry as Sirius was.  Sirius was his "father" for all practical purposes.  And Harry feels directly responsible for Sirius' death, had he not been at the MOM that night Sirius would not have come.  Yes, Cedric's death was partially Harry's fault, but not as direct as the death of Sirius.  Harry was more a witness to Cedric's death.  

 

Golly again:  He didn't blame himself for Cedric's death.  He didn't 
behave anything like most thought he would. He wanted desperately to 
be taken away again and wouldn't dream of sacrificing his own 
pleasures to protect others. (I can't think of anyone who would have 
considered temper tantrums and Harry suddenly developing a heaping 
amount of arrogance.)  Of course it is up to every reader to decide 
whether they think this unique turn is for good or ill, but I think 
remembering our past is important.

My reply:  I apologize ahead of time for getting very child development orientated here but it is my feild of study and it is what I know the best so I will use it as a frame of reference.  I believe that Harry's reaction is a very normal reaction for children his own age.  Child researcher, Piaget, claims that with adolescence comes egocentricism.  Basically, egocetricism means that the teenager is concerned primarily with his own thoughts and desires, and in addition to this, he believes everyone else is primarily concerned with him also.  The world revolves around the teenager.  In chapter one of OOP we see very clearly that Harry is upset that they are "having fun" without him.  He is even more upset that they refuse to tell him what is going on.  I

t is during this chapter that we see the first hint at an arrogant Harry come to life:  "Hadn't he, proved himself xcapable of handling more than they?  Had they all forgotten what he had done? Hadn't it been he who had entered the graveyard and watched Cedric murdered then tied to that tombstone and nearly killed?"  (OOP, US, pg. 8).  

 

Your right, we have not seen Harry arrogant before this point.  I personally do not believe this is true arrogance I believe this is hurt, pain, he wants to know why they are doing this to HIM.  Harry is primarily concerned for Harry!  Yes, this is sad we do not want to see Harry go through this, but this is normal.  Many teens do this, it's not that they do not care about anyone else they just are very concerned about themselves and what is going to happen to them.  Piaget has a name for this type of arrogance that is seen in teens its' called the Personal Fable.  It is the belief that everyone happening to the adolescent is unique.  True, Harry, has had a very unique life and noone else has ever had to go through this.  But Harry wants to be acknowledged for what he has accomplished, he wants recognition.  

Would I have predicted this at the end of GOF, no, not really.  I would not have predicted that Harry would become arrogant and angry, however, at the end of GOF I assumed that Harry would have a normal summer for him.  He would have stayed at the Dursley's until he was picked up by the Weasley's after his birthday and go on to spend the rest of the summer with Ron and Hermione.  However, this did not happen.  Harry spent most of his summer at Privet Drive, only recieving a few owls from his friends and Sirius.  He was not told anything about what was going on, and even worst than that, he knew that Ron and Hermione were together.  I would be angry too if I thought all my friends were involved in some plot against Voldemort that I was not allowed to participate in.  Just my thoughts.  However, I think this summer Harry will only vaguley Owl the order to tell them that he is okay and basically not really have much contact with the wizarding world.  Why?  Because Harry knows that he
 will not get much information by way of letters so it's not really that useful to inquire is it?

Golly again: So I'm not sure of anything...  What I do know is that Rowling likes 
to feel she's in control.  She enjoys knowing more than we do. It 
seems like a game for her and us.  I feel we are almost in a sort of 
tug of war where she wants us to be passive readers and let her tell 
the story and we want to pull the story out of her.


My reply:  This is true, but there are some predictable eliments to each story.  Is this the one?  I'm not sure, but I do think that what she has done is perfectly natural.  I still believe that this next year is going to be a tough one for Harry.  I just pray that it isn't too horrible to read.

~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!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From princessmelabela at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 00:33:09 2003
From: princessmelabela at yahoo.com (Melanie Black)
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2003 17:33:09 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry's Temper Was Re: Feelings on OoP
In-Reply-To: <bjhi89+gsb4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030909003309.47517.qmail@web20702.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80229

So I'm not sure of anything...  What I do know is that Rowling likes 
to feel she's in control.  She enjoys knowing more than we do. It 
seems like a game for her and us.  I feel we are almost in a sort of 
tug of war where she wants us to be passive readers and let her tell 
the story and we want to pull the story out of her.

Golly



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!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Tue Sep  9 00:41:34 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2003 01:41:34 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: English slang (semi- sorta on topic)
References: <bjj47f+gmn6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F5D21BE.000001.63463@monica>

No: HPFGUIDX 80230

 
Dawn
 
Speaking as a clueless Yank...why is the (regional?) name of an 
animal chase considered so rude?
 

Me (K)

There's no way I can fully answer that onlist :) But it's rhyming slang - as
in Berkshire Hunt is a phrase used to represent a much shorter and far more
impolite slang word for part of the anatomy ......

And if you *still* don't know then please e-mail me offlist and I'll explain


K
*giggling like mad over your post - but not in a mean way*



From greatraven at hotmail.com  Tue Sep  9 02:58:28 2003
From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 02:58:28 -0000
Subject: Harry's Temper Was Re: Feelings on OoP
In-Reply-To: <20030909003309.47517.qmail@web20702.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjjfkk+c80i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80231

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Melanie Black 
<princessmelabela at y...> wrote:
> So I'm not sure of anything...  What I do know is that Rowling 
likes 
> to feel she's in control.  She enjoys knowing more than we do. It 
> seems like a game for her and us.  I feel we are almost in a sort 
of 
> tug of war where she wants us to be passive readers and let her 
tell 
> the story and we want to pull the story out of her.
> 
> Golly
> 
> 
Actually, I think she just wants us to have fun guessing - and it 
*is* fun! I read an interview with her where she was asked for some 
information, I forget about what, and said it would spoil the fun 
people were having on the fan sites. She added that while some 
guesses were close, nobody had come up with the right answers.

Sue B> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From angellslin at yahoo.com.hk  Tue Sep  9 03:04:45 2003
From: angellslin at yahoo.com.hk (angellslin)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 03:04:45 -0000
Subject: Vernon Dursley
In-Reply-To: <bjimbj+fv1g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjjg0d+t205@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80232

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "entropymail" 
<entropymail at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "n_longbottom01" 
> > I am not sure if this is the form it will take, but my best guess 
is 
> > that Vernon will receive his just deserts in the end.
> > 
> > n_longbottom01
> 
> I've never given Vernon much thought, but now that you've brought 
it up...
> 
> It seems to me that just leaving Uncle Vernon dangling there with no
> real "come-uppance" would be wrong, wrong, wrong.  Like Professor
> Umbridge, Vernon finds far too much pleasure in torturing Harry, 
and I
> think JKR will surely have to give Vernon a comical, humiliating
> ending (similar to Umbridge's). I don't think Harry will be involved
> in it, however. He's far too nice of a person to do such a thing.  
But
> fate, or karma, or whatever will intervene in the end, and Vernon 
will
> surely get what's coming to him!
> 
> Entropy


The greatest punishment to Vernon should be something happens to his 
dearly son, Dudley. Spoilt as Dudley, he is a bully and appears to be 
a juvenile delinquent in the summer of Book 5. How about he ends up 
being arrested by police and put into prison? We will then see a 
heartbroken Petunia and a frustrated Vernon. They get what they 
deserve. 

Angel




From greatraven at hotmail.com  Tue Sep  9 03:55:07 2003
From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 03:55:07 -0000
Subject: Is JKR having fun with names?
In-Reply-To: <bjiv58+eefs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjjiur+l4o5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80233

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" 
<gbannister10 at a...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Robert Jones" 
> <jones.r.h.j at w...> wrote:
> > JKR may have gotten some names from history or myth and used 
some 
> > just because she likes them (she has said that "Harry" is her 
> > favorite boy's name), but are some of the names slightly 
disguised 
> > versions of characteristics?  I'm thinking of the following:
> > 
> >
> > 
> > Sirius Black -- he was a little too "serious."
> > 
> > 
> 
> Geoff:
> I have been reminded in one article I read that Sirius is of 
course, 
> the "Dog Star" and we all know what Sirius transforms into as a n 
> Animagus....

Correct. And there's Remus Lupin (as in Romulus and Remus, brought 
up by a wolf and Lupine, wolflike), and "Umbridge" (as in "taking 
umbrage") and "Malfoy", bad faith, etc. There's is something almost 
Dickensian about her use of names.

Sue B




From carmenharms at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 03:57:44 2003
From: carmenharms at yahoo.com (snazzzybird)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 03:57:44 -0000
Subject: English slang (semi- sorta on topic)
In-Reply-To: <bjj47f+gmn6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjjj3o+j3sr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80234

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "grannybat84112" 
<grannybat at h...> wrote:
> Sylviablundell wrote:
> > Berk is Cockney rhyming slang for an extremely rude name i.e. 
> > Berkshire Hunt.  Most people have forgotten the original meaning 
> > or they wouldn't use it so readily!  
> 
> Speaking as a clueless Yank...why is the (regional?) name of an 
> animal chase considered so rude?
> 
> Dawn

snazzzybird sez --

I'm a Yank too, mostly clueless, but I am familiar with Cockney 
rhyming slang.  The idea is that they first associate with the word a 
phrase that rhymes with it, then substitute the first syllable of the 
phrase for the word.  Here's an example:

The word "head" would first be associated with "loaf of bread".  
Then "loaf" would be Cockney rhyming slang for "head".  Someone might 
tell you to "Use your loaf."

Loaf of bread...  head.
Berkshire Hunt... [a one-syllable body part that rhymes with "hunt"].

That word was all over OoP, which I find a bit surprising now that I 
know the derivation.

--snazzzybird, who finds anything to do with words and wordplay 
fascinating.




From catlady at wicca.net  Tue Sep  9 04:39:10 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 04:39:10 -0000
Subject: OoP - GUILTY Dumbledore (was Dumbledore's true sorrow motives)
In-Reply-To: <bjifhj+bl93@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjjlhe+liel@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80235

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" Kneasy wrote:

> Nothing sinister in allowing, encouraging an 11 year old untrained
> student wizard to face the Voldy monster!? A creature so powerful
> and evil that the rest of the WW won't even say his name?

Nitpick: I am under the impression that Dumbledore (who is the only 
wizard that Voldy fears) was observing from some hiding place, ready 
to rescue Harry from Voldy if necessary. (PS/SS climactic battle, in 
case it isn't obvious what I'm talking about.) 

> DD know - Sirius. Sirius is the only thing that would get Harry out
> of safety into danger. 

I can't believe that Harry, even as bad-tempered as he was in OoP, 
wouldn't have hastened to rescue Ron or Hermione or Ginny if he 
thought they were being tortured by Voldemort. In fact, I think he 
would have hastened to rescue any female or younger fellow student 
from any of the three 'good' Houses.

> So Sirius is to stay at Grimmaud where Harry knows he's safe. 
> Meanwhile Harry is to develop protection. He doesn't. So he's
> fooled into  believing the one thing DD doesn't want him to
> believe. Sirius is in danger. Off he goes, knee-jerk reaction. 

The above theory of yours is in direct contradiction of Talisman's 
theory in which Dumbledore *wanted* Harry to fail to develop 
Occulumency because he *wanted* Harry to be fooled into rushing into 
danger because he *wanted* Sirius to rush to rescue Harry, all so 
that Sirius could be killed in the presence of Harry, DD, and LV. My 
own feeling is that yours is more in accordance with Occam's Razor, 
but what the hell do I know? I believe in surface readings.




From eowynn_24 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 04:49:18 2003
From: eowynn_24 at yahoo.com (eowynn_24)
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2003 21:49:18 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry's Temper Was Re: Feelings on OoP
In-Reply-To: <bjjfkk+c80i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030909044918.42781.qmail@web60205.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80236



sbursztynski <greatraven at hotmail.com> wrote:
--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Melanie Black 
<princessmelabela at y...> wrote:
> So I'm not sure of anything...<snip>  I feel we are almost in a sort 
of 
> tug of war where she wants us to be passive readers and let her 
tell 
> the story and we want to pull the story out of her.
> 
> Golly
> 
> 
>>Actually, I think she just wants us to have fun >>guessing - and it 
>>*is* fun! I read an interview with her where she was >>asked for some 
>>information, I forget about what, and said it would >>spoil the fun 
>>people were having on the fan sites. <snip>
>>Sue B> 


Eowynn:

I would tend to side with you both. I feel that the whole 'tug-a-war' adds a lot of fun into her writing the books. She knows what is coming, and to feel the anticipation from the fans is fun for her. Imagine you are telling a story to some one, the are totally enthralled with it, and every time you pause (dramatically of course) they push you forward through the story. It makes it more fun to tell the story, it also adds a bit of anticipation on the story tellers side. You are leading up to this ending, and they are sold on the story now, but... will the ending fulfill all this anticipation run through them, will they be pleased with it or will it end as a total let down. As for us guessing, I can't think of how I will feel in a few years when the series is done, I will have all the answers to all my many questions (ESE Lupin?!) and my anticipation will end. I will still enjoy reading the books, but I will miss tracking down all the clues and finding all the red herrings. Most of
 all I will miss the conversations I have with my friends and all of you on HP4GU. Anticipation is the key to a good story. And I believe that JKR has got our full attention, so bring on the fun!

Eowynn






---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From a_williams1 at uop.edu  Tue Sep  9 04:49:33 2003
From: a_williams1 at uop.edu (Aesha Williams)
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2003 21:49:33 -0700
Subject: Vernon Dursley
References: <1063045789.12625.4757.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <013501c3768d$c3a76660$d8430a0a@bre.uop.edu>

No: HPFGUIDX 80237

>From Mryth, aka tomatogrower:

> That leaves Uncle Vernon. I can't come to any ideas of what he and Harry's relationship will be in book 7. I do 
>  not think it will be good or postive in any way. Could any one share thoughts on this?  Mryth        

    I think there's something up with Petunia. For a long time I thought perhaps it was Dudley that would be the one who's magic shows up "later in life", then after reading OoP I'm more convinced it's Petunia. Then again, that would seem obvious, so it makes me think that wouldn't happen. (after all, I *never* in a million years saw the fact that Mrs. Figg was a squib coming!)
    I wondered also how the relationship between the Dursleys and Harry would change. Especially now that he has saved Dudley's life, and obviously Petunia understands what Harry saved Dudley from. She sees that he will do the right thing, and when he could have let harm come to Dudley he did everything he could to stop it. 
    But when I read your post, a thought hit me and I thought it was original, but perhaps someone else has mentioned it and that's why it hit me so hard. What if Vernon is the one that is more welcoming to Harry as the series progresses (I think they will all at least be more of a "family" at the end, rather than a family and a near-stranger living with them), and Petunia is the one who needs more convincing? I mean, in SS/PS I recall Vernon trying to figure out a way to bring up the subject of what Harry's name is without upsetting Petunia. Also, something else happens that makes me think perhaps it's Petunia that is the one who is *most* obsessed with being normal. I wish I had my book, but I couldn't find it before I moved. So anyway- I'm not sure if I believe it myself, but I think it's at least a possibility that Vernon will be "easy" to accept Harry, because it seems a lot of the time he's protecting Petunia (who desperately wants to be "normal") and Dud.

Aesha

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com  Tue Sep  9 04:56:39 2003
From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 04:56:39 -0000
Subject: Is JKR having fun with names?
In-Reply-To: <bjiuka+ji2c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjjmi7+eh80@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80238

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Robert Jones" 
<jones.r.h.j at w...> wrote:
> JKR may have gotten some names from history or myth and used some 
> just because she likes them (she has said that "Harry" is her 
> favorite boy's name), but are some of the names slightly disguised 
> versions of characteristics?  I'm thinking of the following:

> Sirius Black -- he was a little too "serious."

No - dog star - he was a canine Animagi 

> 
> Others might be Lucius ("Loser") Malfoy 

Lucius is a name associated with light, a name bearing Biblical 
affinities with Lucifer, "How you have fallen from heaven.." (Isaiah 
Chapter 14). The sophisticated and urbane Lucius Malfoy represents 
everything that the worldly have always associated with the 
perogatives of privilege and power, so the Lucius/loser link 
seems "forced".


  - CMC (noting, furthermore, that Draco confessed himself unable to 
come up with rhymes for "useless loser," rhyming dictionaries being 
obviously beyond the scope of magical prowess)




From hlynn at kconline.com  Tue Sep  9 04:44:36 2003
From: hlynn at kconline.com (shwanalynn)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 04:44:36 -0000
Subject: Red herrings
Message-ID: <bjjlrk+egvr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80239

I keep hearing about JKR's use of red herrings, and I'm wondering if 
anyone would be willing to tell me if she's actually admitted 
outright to using them, or if we've just deduced their existence over 
the years?  I'd be really interested to read any interview that 
refers to her use of red herrings if there are any out there.  I have 
tried searching for clues in the posts on this website, as well as on 
the Quick Quotes site, and the HP Lexicon site, but haven't found 
anything, really.  Is this because I'm looking for something that 
doesn't necessarily exist?

Thanks to anyone that can help!
~shwanalynn





From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Tue Sep  9 08:19:07 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 08:19:07 -0000
Subject: Prank AND the subversive point of view
In-Reply-To: <bji729+jqra@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjk2dr+hgg8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80240

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bluesqueak" <pipdowns at e...> wrote:
> Laura:
>> 
> [Grin]. They're about the same: berk and pillock both mean a stupid 
> person. But I'd rather be a berk than a pillock ? `berk' is often 
> said as `a bit of a berk', whereas `pillock' is often said as `a 
> complete pillock'. Both are fairly mild, btw, and often quite 
> affectionate.
>
Oh Pip!
*Much* better to  be called a pillock. You've  forgotten your
Cockney slang.

Berk is short for Berkshire Hunt.

Kneasy




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Tue Sep  9 09:04:54 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 09:04:54 -0000
Subject: Idioms and slang (was: English slang (semi- sorta on topic))
In-Reply-To: <bjjj3o+j3sr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjk53m+smlu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80241

The topic of slang, idioms and pejorative language is interesting 
when you look at the levels on which it operates and at JKR's use of 
it ? or non-use - in Harry Potter.

A recent poster was not quite accurate in saying that the rhyming 
element in Cockney slang is omitted; this is not always the case. I 
lived in London from 1949-94 and obviously knew how both "true" 
Cockneys and "ordinary" Londoners spoke. The example of "use your 
loaf" (loaf = loaf of bread = head) was cited. Two others which come 
immediately to mind are "take a butcher's" (butcher's = butcher's 
hook = look) and "barnet" (barnet = Barnet Fair = hair). However, 
some do not get curtailed in this way. "Apples and pears", rhyming 
slang for stairs and "trouble and strife" for wife are still used in 
full ? although they tend to be used by older folk nowadays. One I 
also recall hearing once in my teens was "box of toys" for noise.

I was interested to learn that "berk" is from rhyming slang. I think 
its origin is lost to many in that the pronunciation is different to 
the original. "Berkshire" is one of those words where the "e" is 
pronounced as an "a", i.e. pronounced "Barkshire". Other examples 
include "clerk" pronounced "clark" and "Derby" pronounced "Darby".  
Berk is pronounced as it is spelt. (As an aside, the reasons for this 
as for many other quirks of English spelling and pronunciation are 
well-documented in Bill Bryson's excellent "Mother Tongue").

Berk is one of those words which is used as a mild reproof despite 
its "4-letter-word-which-may-not-be-named" origin. I would use it 
jokingly in response to a friend saying  or doing something 
daft. "Git" or "prat" are stronger expressing a greater 
dissatisfaction whereas the "Fs" and "Bs" etc. of this world 
expressive very strong dissatisfaction. JKR seems to hold to these 
rules in her writing as well. Obviously, as a children's book, the 
language needs to be controlled. One of the things which has 
surprised me in the films is that Ron, in particular, is a little bit 
free and easy with some mild swearing which might still offend 
listeners when coming from a child and which does not echo what is 
said in the books.





From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Tue Sep  9 09:29:11 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 09:29:11 -0000
Subject: OoP - GUILTY Dumbledore (was Dumbledore's true sorrow motives)
In-Reply-To: <bjjlhe+liel@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjk6h7+kn0a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80242

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" 
<catlady at w...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" Kneasy wrote:
> 
>> 
> Nitpick: I am under the impression that Dumbledore (who is the only 
> wizard that Voldy fears) was observing from some hiding place, ready 
> to rescue Harry from Voldy if necessary. (PS/SS climactic battle, in 
> case it isn't obvious what I'm talking about.) 
>
Kneasy:
It's possible, but IMO highly unlikely. If Quirrell had acted as one
would expect a wizard to, he would have got the Stone. 

On that occasion, just for once, Harry is of secondary importance
so far as Voldy is concerned. He wants the Stone. Full stop.
But Quirrell is too eager to please his Master.
For some peculiar reason he tries to grab Harry. But a wave of
his wand and "Accio stone!' , 'Imperio!', even 'Stupify!' and he could 
walk off whistling. No, the  risk was too  great  for DD not  to
interfere if he was around.
 
> 
> I can't believe that Harry, even as bad-tempered as he was in OoP, 
> wouldn't have hastened to rescue Ron or Hermione or Ginny if he 
> thought they were being tortured by Voldemort.

Kneasy:
Yes, he would be concerned. But  would he have rushed off without
consulting anyone else? Note that his reaction was quite different
when  Arthur Weasley was attacked. Then he is at great pains to
convince  Ron, McGonagall and DD that something must be done.
He leaves it to  them to make the decisions. This time it is different.
I doubt he would even have listened to DD had he been available, or
believe DD if he had said that Harry was being manipulated. He would
still have attempted a rescue, not trusting DD to 'understand'.


> 
> The above theory of yours is in direct contradiction of Talisman's 
> theory in which Dumbledore *wanted* Harry to fail to develop 
> Occulumency because he *wanted* Harry to be fooled into rushing 
> into danger because he *wanted* Sirius to rush to rescue Harry, 
> all so that Sirius could be killed in the presence of Harry, DD, and LV. 
> My own feeling is that yours is more in accordance with Occam's Razor, 
> but what the hell do I know? I believe in surface readings.

Kneasy:
Vive la differance!
I'm a great believer in conspiracies, but I also accept that sometimes
the  Cock-up Theory  comes into contention.
DD had carefully crafted a safety net. It was rendered useless by Harry
refusing to do something obviously to his benefit. No one could plan
for that. For  Talisman's theory to  work Snape must also be in on it and
'make sure' Harry rejects the  lessons. 
It fits with Harry's  bloody-mindedness throughout the book. A JKR parable,
Look, children. See what  can happen if  you don't listen!




From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Tue Sep  9 09:40:29 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 09:40:29 -0000
Subject: Prank/On posting.
In-Reply-To: <bjj0t7+t3fc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjk76d+ldue@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80243

Richard:
>>But I doubt he INTENDED to KILL Snape, even if it was much easier 
for Dumbledore and Snape to see it that way.>>

You know, I don't think Dumbledore has ever seen it that way. If he 
had really deduced from the Prank that Sirius was "capable of 
murder", would he have left the boy at school? Relatively unpunished? 
Yes, Snape's life was in danger, yes, he could have died. But 
Dumbledore did not condemn Sirius as an intentional killer.
 There was a thread on this topic recently, discussing Snape's 
reaction to the Prank, and one possibility mooted was that Snape 
joining the DEs evolved as part of a reaction to the injustice he 
felt at what he saw as Sirius' insufficient punishment.

Which leads me nicely on to something else that has bothered me.The 
post that I am replying to isn't guilty of this. The post above the 
one I am replying to, however, said "Vernon Dursley" in the subject 
line. It wasn't really about Vernon Dursley. It was about Mark Evans. 
And it contained the same Mark Evans theorising that every single 
thread on Mark Evans has ever had with no new variations whatsoever. 
This was discussed last week. In exactly the same formulation.
 Please, people. Please use the Search engine, and stop posting and 
reposting the same things over and over again. Just typing "Mark 
Evans" in to the Search tab would have pulled up last week's 
discussion, which you could then perhaps build on as inspiration 
struck you. And alter the subject line to reflect your content. ANd 
then the world will be a much happier place.

Kirstini. Not a MEG, just a little bit bothered. 




From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Tue Sep  9 11:10:46 2003
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 11:10:46 -0000
Subject: Percy's letter
In-Reply-To: <bjj1op+ph5a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjkcfm+9uaj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80244

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hermionegallo" 
<hermionegallo at y...> wrote:
  
> Del wondered if Percy might be a really good actor.  Which leads me 
> to wonder if Molly and Arthur aren't really good actors, too; if 
> Percy were "undercover" in some way, shape or form, they could 
likely 
> be in on it.

Undercover! Percy is a possibility. I thought about it, too. If he 
really is a spy for the Order, than at least Arthur knows this. There 
is no doubt about it, because it was Arthur who started the fight, 
not Percy (of course Arthur was mostly right, but nonetheless it 
wasn't Percy who started the discussion). But if Arthur and Percy 
just pretended to fight, and didn't tell Molly the truth (and I have 
a hard time thinking that Molly is able to play all these emotions), 
they both deserve to be slapped silly. But maybe Molly knows the 
truth, and is really sad, because she isn't able to speak to her son 
for a long time.

> I've felt all along since reading OoP that Percy wasn't acting like 
> himself.  

During the first read through, I thought the same. But on the other 
hand, there wasn't much Percy in canon. And when he was there, he 
remained mostly silent. The only time I remember him saying anything 
was, when he laughed about Fudges stupid jokes. So because he didn't 
appear as much as in the other books, it is somehow logical, that he 
was more one-dimensional.

>I've wondered if he had been replaced, which seems like an 
> unpopular theory around here.  

I don't think he was replaced. But I wouldn't rule out the Imperius 
curse.

<snip>
 
> My only problem with assuming that Percy and his parents are good 
> actors (or even that Percy himself is) and that there's an 
undercover 
> Percy here, is that: if he's so deep undercover, why try to reveal 
it 
> to H/R/H in a coded message?  

If he really is a spy, I don't think he tried to reveal anything. He 
just wanted to make sure Ron hates him enough, to do exactly the 
opposite, that he is saying.
 
Hickengruendler




From mkeller01 at alltel.net  Tue Sep  9 11:16:03 2003
From: mkeller01 at alltel.net (jksunflower2002)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 11:16:03 -0000
Subject: Red herrings
In-Reply-To: <bjjlrk+egvr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjkcpj+ge09@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80245

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "shwanalynn" <hlynn at k...> 
wrote:
> I keep hearing about JKR's use of red herrings, and I'm wondering 
if 
> anyone would be willing to tell me if she's actually admitted 
> outright to using them, or if we've just deduced their existence 
over 
> the years?  I'd be really interested to read any interview that 
> refers to her use of red herrings if there are any out there.  I 
have 
> tried searching for clues in the posts on this website, as well as 
on 
> the Quick Quotes site, and the HP Lexicon site, but haven't found 
> anything, really.  Is this because I'm looking for something that 
> doesn't necessarily exist?
> 
> Thanks to anyone that can help!
> ~shwanalynn


June 2003

"JEREMY PAXMAN: But do you find the whole secrecy issue, the need 
for secrecy, a bit ridiculous? 
JK ROWLING: No. 
JEREMY PAXMAN: Why not? 
JK ROWLING: No not at all. Well, a lot of it comes from me. 
JEREMY PAXMAN: Really? 
JK ROWLING: Yeah definitely. I mean, of course one could be cynical, 
and I'm sure you would be disposed to be so and say it was a 
marketing ploy, but I don't want the kids to know what's coming. 
Because that's part of the excitement of the story, and having - you 
know - sweated blood to create all my red herrings and lay all my 
clues.... to me it's not a ...this is my ....this is my....I was 
going to say this is my life, it's not my life, but it is a very 
important part of my life."

I found this interview on a BBC site.  There used to be a link on 
the Leaky (quotes), but it isn't working right now. 

Anyway, thar ya be.

Toad





From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 11:56:57 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 11:56:57 -0000
Subject: Harry's Temper Was Re: Feelings on OoP
In-Reply-To: <20030909044918.42781.qmail@web60205.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjkf69+4rgm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80246


> sbursztynski <greatraven at h...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Melanie Black 
> <princessmelabela at y...> wrote:
> > So I'm not sure of anything...<snip>  I feel we are almost in a 
sort 
> of 
> > tug of war where she wants us to be passive readers and let her 
> tell 
> > the story and we want to pull the story out of her.

> > > >>Sue B> 
> >>Actually, I think she just wants us to have fun >>guessing - and 
it 
> >>*is* fun! I read an interview with her where she was >>asked for 
some 
> >>information, I forget about what, and said it would >>spoil the 
fun 
> >>people were having on the fan sites. <snip>

> Eowynn:
> 
> I would tend to side with you both. I feel that the whole 'tug-a-
war' adds a lot of fun into her writing the books. <snip>As for us 
guessing, I can't think of how I will feel in a few years when the 
series is done, I will have all the answers to all my many questions 
(ESE Lupin?!) and my anticipation will end. I will still enjoy 
reading the books, but I will miss tracking down all the clues and 
finding all the red herrings. Most of
>  all I will miss the conversations I have with my friends and all 
of you on HP4GU. Anticipation is the key to a good story. And I 
believe that JKR has got our full attention, so bring on the fun!

> Laura:

Well, they *are* her books, so who would have a better right to be 
manipulative?  Reading and thinking about fiction necessitates 
accepting the author's rules, don't you think?  That's why the 
posters on this list are so careful to cite canon-otherwise all bets 
are off.  But that's the fun, isn't it-thinking within boundaries and 
seeing how those boundaries can stretch?

As for the discussion ending when the books end, don't worry about 
that, Eowynn! There's still a healthy industry in Sherlock Holmes 
analysis and pastiche over a hundred years after the stories first 
began to appear, and in addition to the Baker Street Irregulars, 
there are active scion societies all over the world.  Maybe I'll 
start a Marauders society in my home town...:-)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 12:08:36 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 12:08:36 -0000
Subject: Prank/On posting.
In-Reply-To: <bjk76d+ldue@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjkfs4+hihu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80247

> Richard:
> >>But I doubt he INTENDED to KILL Snape, even if it was much easier 
> for Dumbledore and Snape to see it that way.>>

> Kirstini
> You know, I don't think Dumbledore has ever seen it that way. If he 
> had really deduced from the Prank that Sirius was "capable of 
> murder", would he have left the boy at school? Relatively 
unpunished? 
> Yes, Snape's life was in danger, yes, he could have died. But 
> Dumbledore did not condemn Sirius as an intentional killer.
>  There was a thread on this topic recently, discussing Snape's 
> reaction to the Prank, and one possibility mooted was that Snape 
> joining the DEs evolved as part of a reaction to the injustice he 
> felt at what he saw as Sirius' insufficient punishment.
>

Laura:

This leads me to ask a question I've been wondering about for a 
while.  Although I'm not a conspiracy theorist (I think Kneasy has 
cornered that market <g>), I do have to wonder about DD and what he 
knew about the Marauders.  He says in PoA that they managed to keep 
their transformations a secret from him.  I find that very hard to 
believe.   Three boys, 2 of whom were the best and coolest students 
in the school, left their dormitories 3 nights a month and stayed out 
all night, and this went on for the better part of 3 years, and DD 
didn't know about it?  (I'm excluding Remus here since obviously DD 
did know about his full-moon activities.)  And how did James, Sirius 
and Peter get through their classes after one of their all-night 
adventures?  Even a 16 year old boy is going to feel the effects of 3 
nights of no sleep.  DD knows everything that goes on of any 
significance at Hogwarts-how could he not have known about this?  

Pip!Squeak's post 39146 offers a very convincing theory...even though 
I hope it's not true...




From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Tue Sep  9 12:15:51 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 12:15:51 -0000
Subject: Something for fans of GUILTY, or even morally ambiguous DD.
Message-ID: <bjkg9n+2f02@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80248

The two longest running threads at the moment, "Prank" and the 
recently revived "GUILTY Dumbledore" got me thinking about my very 
favourite post ever. Read this, read the ensuing discussion, because 
I think it's really rather relevant to what we've all been talking 
about recently. Just read it anyway, even if you aren't at all 
interested in Dumbledore. It's a brilliant post.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/45198

Kirstini, grovelling at the temple of Pip.




From mpjdekker at hotmail.com  Tue Sep  9 12:41:16 2003
From: mpjdekker at hotmail.com (mightymaus75)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 12:41:16 -0000
Subject: OoP - GUILTY Dumbledore (was Dumbledore's true sorrow motives)
In-Reply-To: <bjjlhe+liel@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjkhpc+h93j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80249

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" 
<catlady at w...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" Kneasy wrote:
> > So Sirius is to stay at Grimmaud where Harry knows he's safe. 
> > Meanwhile Harry is to develop protection. He doesn't. So he's
> > fooled into  believing the one thing DD doesn't want him to
> > believe. Sirius is in danger. Off he goes, knee-jerk reaction. 
> 
> The above theory of yours is in direct contradiction of Talisman's 
> theory in which Dumbledore *wanted* Harry to fail to develop 
> Occulumency because he *wanted* Harry to be fooled into rushing
> into danger because he *wanted* Sirius to rush to rescue Harry, all
> so that Sirius could be killed in the presence of Harry, DD, and
> LV. My own feeling is that yours is more in accordance with Occam's
> Razor, but what the hell do I know? I believe in surface readings.


I don't know if Occam's Razor is really applicable to JKR's work. 
What's on the surface seldom turns out to be correct. In PS obviously 
Snape is trying to steal the Philosopher's Stone. Determined not to 
be fooled twice, in CoS we trust no one: Percy, Lockhart, Draco. But 
of course no one suspects sweet innocent Ginny. And then in PoA the 
bad guy turns out to be a pet rat who was there from the very first 
book. By the time we read GoF we are as paranoid as Mad eye Moody. 
And with good reason. And of course most frustratingly of all, the 
clues were always right there. 

So you'll understand if I'm not so ready to dismiss outlandish 
interpretations. In fact the more outlandish the better. Well... as 
long as there is canon to support it of course. 

-Maus


Constant vigilance!





From liliana at worldonline.nl  Tue Sep  9 12:45:54 2003
From: liliana at worldonline.nl (laylalast)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 12:45:54 -0000
Subject: Legilimency, Occlumency, Snape, Harry
In-Reply-To: <bjifj5+it1s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjki22+2gfc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80250

Annemehr wrote:
<snip>
The times when Voldemort, Dumbledore, and Snape seem to be able 
to "read minds" are when they are being secretive about it. True, 
Voldemort says something like "Don't lie. Voldemort always knows," 
but even he isn't saying how. And Harry has had several moments of 
thinking that DD or Snape were reading his mind when he was looking 
into their eyes. I believe these are examples of using legilimency 
in a very gentle, subtle way just to glean a sense of either 
truthfulness or deceit, or maybe courage or fear -- whatever is on 
the "surface" of the subject's mind, without making it obvious 
what's happening. It is also, perhaps, partly limited in its 
efficacy by being done without a wand.

Lilian here:

Legilimency is presented to us in OOtP as the WW equivalent of a RW 
lie detector. It is used to detect whether you lie by discovering the 
memory/emotion that comes with it. I don't have the books here, but I 
believe it was described as "the memory that belies the answer" or 
something similar.
LV/DD/Snape only use it when they want to find out if Peter/Harry-
Kreacher/Harry is lying to them. From the way legilimency is first 
described by Snape and later by DD, when reciting his interrogation 
of Kreacher, I get the impression that it is a rather accurate means 
of lie detecting (as opposed to the RW lie detector).

>Annemehr again:

On the other hand, in the lessons Snape was putting Harry through, 
he was giving the spell full power. He used his full force; he used 
his wand; the concentration was evident on his face and he was 
muttering. This took Snape beyond Harry's immediate thoughts and 
feelings and allowed him to rifle through his memories. Such a use 
of legilimency is, of course, completely obvious to the subject. 
<snip>

Lilian:

Maybe Snape needed to give the spell full power because Harry was not 
doing anything, so Snape needed more power to penetrate Harry's mind. 
In addition to making Harry clearly aware that his mind was being 
penetrated.

>Annemehr again:
I don't think this "full powered" legilimency is pointless. I don't 
think it only brings up jumbled images. Snape seems to have been 
bringing up memories that were painful, yes, even the one of kissing 
Cho because she was crying so much. I think that is at least a hint 
that Snape was able to control the spell; he was trying to give 
Harry an incentive to succeed at Occlumency. After all, if these 
were truly random images, we would have seen Harry doing things like 
riding the Hogwarts Express, vegetating in History of Magic, eating 
lunch, catching the Snitch, whatever.
<snip> 

Lilian:

I think that the painful memories were in fact brought up by Harry's 
continual angry/angst status. 
To use an example: if I go to bed in an annoyed mood, I may have 
difficulties in falling asleep, because memories of other things, 
completely unrelated, that have annoyed me will crop up. Just because 
I'm in that mood, not because I'm willing those memories to come (I'd 
rather not). In fact, I have to work very hard sometimes to get out 
of this negative spiral, by forcing my mood and memories to more 
happy events. I think we all have experiences like that.
In Harry's case, it is, IMO, therefore likely that the negative 
memories are caused by his negative mood. If he had been in a 
pleasant mood (not really easy in a one-to-one situation with Snape) 
more pleasant memories would have come. 

And that is what Occlumency is in fact about, thinking of memories 
and experiencing the emotions that come with it, that belie the 
actual emotional situation you're in.

Then Salit remarked:
> I would go further than that. I think Snape had control over what
> images came in. They all had the common theme of Harry in a 
helpless,
> scary, embarassing or humiliating situations. Notice that we never
> see Voldemort in these sessions. Snape avoids memories that can
> hurt or affect himself, but I think he pulled especially memories
> of schoolmate type humiliation, perhaps subconsciously, perhaps not.
> I think he took some pleasure in these, and that is partly why he
> was so incensed that Harry saw his memories - he probably assumed
> that Harry takes the same pleasure at seeing Snape humiliated as
> he did at seeing Harry in a similar situation.
> 
> Salit

Lilian:

Like I said above, I think that it's Harry's emotional status that 
brings those memories on. And perhaps Snape has pleasure that the 
same happened to Harry as to him, but I doubt it. On the contrary, I 
think that seeing (flashes of) memories that deal with abuse and 
bullying, forces Snape relive his own memories and emotions of abuse 
and bullying. To quote Harry on this: that's no pack of laughs!

Just imagine: you have to teach a branch of magic which almost 
entirely depends on the pupil's aptitude for it. You have to teach to 
a pupil you don't like (whether the dislike is valid or not is 
irrelevant here), in your spare time but you grudgingly do so. As a 
bonus you are confronted with that pupil's memories which bring out 
memories and emotions of yourself that you really would rather 
forget. I'm not so much surprised that things go wrong here 
eventually between Snape and Harry. Snape cannot become lenient with 
Harry because of their similar experiences. For Snape, 'things' come 
to close to the surface for that. 
It's like trying to listen to someone telling about his/her traumatic 
experience while you have been in the same situation. At some point 
your own memories and emotions will come to the surface in a more 
painful way than you would like.

Lilian




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Tue Sep  9 12:49:13 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 12:49:13 -0000
Subject: OoP - GUILTY Dumbledore (was Dumbledore's true sorrow motives)
In-Reply-To: <bjj0gg+gj0r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjki89+4hkf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80251

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Kneasy
> > Sirius' idea of happiness would be for Harry to become as rash and 
> > unthinking as himself or James. Make the big gesture Harry!
> > 
> > Laura:
> 
> Well, now, that's just not supported by canon.  The two of them are 
> constantly telling each other to be careful, and I think they mean 
> it.  When Sirius expressed disappointment with Harry early in OoP, it 
> wasn't because Harry wouldn't take chances but because he wouldn't 
> let Sirius take one.
>
Hum. Whenever Sirius tells Harry to be careful, always in the back-
ground, spoken or  unspoken is "But  James wouldn't." Sirius
claims to care for Harry, but really I wonder if he wants Harry to
be his proxy; "I wish I could do it, but they're stopping me. Such
a pity you can't do it instead." Emotional manipulation.
 
Harry does care, or thinks he cares, for Sirius. (Just how much 
experience in caring does Harry have? Ans = 0) He wants Sirius'
approval. A dangerous position to be in, knowing Sirius.
 
> 
> Laura:
> 
> When Harry asks DD questions that have to do with the overall 
> picture, DD shuts him down (starting in SS/PS, when he could very 
> well have begun to tell him *something*).  So expecting Harry to be 
> able to think strategically about a situation he doesn't understand 
> is not very realistic, imo.

Kneasy:
Exactly. It is not Harry's job to think strategically. He is not ready. 
He is not trained. He has to learn to progress step by step. The
prophecy does not say that Harry will defeat Voldy, it says  one 
or the other will win. Just now, Harry stands no chance against
him (witness fight in MoM). He is totally  outclassed. He has to  
learn much, much more.  Posters  keep harping on the idea that
the conflict of wands means V can't get Harry. It also means Harry
can't get Voldy. It's a two way street. DD has a plan, we're told.
Why can't Harry accept that?


> Laura:
> 
> Don't you think, though (well, maybe *you* don't, cynic that you are 
> <g>)that it's possible to have an intuitive understanding of someone 
> soon after you've met them, and the details get filled in later?  
> I've certainly had that experience. 

Kneasy
Ah! Romance! That all-pervading rosy glow that reduces reason to
a whimpering irrelevence.
Being a cynic (and proud of it), I've had enough unfortunate experiences
to be aware that the details are what matter. "What a wonderful person,"
you think, so sympathetic. Then you find they eat pickled onions in bed, 
are a stranger to the concept of truth and insist that I must become a 
Vegan to cleanse myself of my maleness. Help!
First impressions are good - at first. They require confirmation asap.

Laura:
> And Sirius didn't need to know Harry in intimate 
> detail to form accurate surmises as to what Harry would do and how he 
> would react in a given situation-and he tends to be right.  He knows 
> what it's like to be an impulsive, emotional teenager.

Kneasy:
Too  true. He's never stopped being one himself. Sirius is emotional,
he  is impulsive, hence the 'showdown' with Peter. He'd  never change.
I've stated before that I think Sirius is suffering from a form of
survivors syndrome. He feels guilty that James and Lily died and he 
didn't;  he's looking for absolution, for forgiveness, for restitution.
But being the person he is, he thinks only in terms of action. By
sitting in Grimmaud Place moaning about doing nothing, he is
inducing a mind-set in Harry - the only true response is to act.
Very dangerous in an impressionable, admiring teenager.

Laura:
> Which brings me to a question-why didn't DD just get rid of the globe 
> the way he got rid of the stone when it got to be a liability?   

Kneasy:
No firm opinions  on this one. Could be that he knew it was of little
use to  Voldy, but if it kept him occupied and out of mischief, or
even induce him to make a mistake, then it's useful.
Are you 100%  certain he got rid of the Stone? I'm not.





From quigonginger at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 13:21:42 2003
From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 13:21:42 -0000
Subject: another filk in the saga
In-Reply-To: <bjisnm+bnbq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjkk56+mbbk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80252

> The story thus far:
> 
> Our heroes have convinced Harry to let them come with him to the 
MoM 
> on a Sirius rescue mission (The Department of Mysteries, message 
> 80179).
> 
> The rescue team astride Thestrals fly to the Ministry in a mighty 
> mood of revenge (Look Out, MOM!, message 80193).
> 
> Having arrived at the MoM and gone down the elevator, they arrive 
at 
> a strange room ...
> 
> And the Room Spun 'Round (message 80216)

Thank to Constance Vigilange for pointing out that this is a 
continuing saga.

I now continue with a filk based on RESPECT by Aretha Franklin.  I 
call it "A little old Globe", although if soemone comes up with 
something better, let me know.

Harry has just removed the prophesy from the shelf.


Lucius Malfoy (backed up by the DE's) sings:

(oo) What you got
(oo) Harry, we want it
(oo) What we need
(oo) We know you got it
(oo) All we're askin' 
(oo) Is for that little old globe for our Dark Lord (just a little 
globe) Hey Harry (just a little globe) Potter (just a little globe)

I ain't gonna kill your friends til you're gone
Ain't gonna kill your friends (oo) unless I wanna* (oo)
All I'm askin' (oo)
Is for a little old globe for my Dark Lord (just a little globe)
Harry (just a little globe) for my Dark Lord (just a little globe)
Yeah (just a little globe)

I'm about to tell you 'bout your Godfather
And all I'm asking for my bother
Is to give me the prophet
For my Dark Lord (just a, just a, just a, just a)
Yeah, Harry (just a, just a, just a, just a)
For my Dark Lord (just a little globe)
Yeah (just a little globe)


Ooh, we're 'tracted (oo)
Like flies to honey (oo)
This one thing (oo)
Can't buy with money (oo)
All I want you to give (oo) to me
Is give prophecy for my Dark Lord (please, please, please, please)
Yeah, Harry (please, please, please, please)
Give it to me (that globe, just a little globe)
For my Dark Lord, now (just a little globe)

P-R-O-P-H-E-T
By the name of Trelawny
P-R-O-P-H-E-T
That's her, SPT

Oh, (chuck it to me, chuck it to me, chuck it to me, chuck it to me)
A little old globe (chuck it to me, chuck it to me, chuck it to me, 
chuck it to me)
Whoa, Harry (just a little globe)
A little old globe (just a little globe)

I'm impatient (just a little globe)
So is Bella (just a little globe)
We're gonna accio ya (just a little globe)
I'm here to tell ya (just a little globe)
(tre, tre, tre, tre) lawn'

Give it here now (tre, tre, tre, tre)
Just hand it over (tre-lawn', just a little globe)
We'll let you all go* (just a little globe)
I got to have (just a little globe)
A little old globe (just a little globe) 
*wink to the DE's

Anyone care to continue the saga?
Ginger





From sylviablundell at aol.com  Tue Sep  9 13:49:28 2003
From: sylviablundell at aol.com (sylviablundell2001)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 13:49:28 -0000
Subject: Correct forecasts
Message-ID: <bjklp8+gjt3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80253

I was flipping at random through past posts and came across one 
posted in November 2001 by Marianne (29398) in which she 
prophesied "Harry will have to come to terms with the fact that his 
father and godfather held some pretty unsavoury ideas, at least when 
they were kids".  Talk about spot on! Can anyone else claim to have 
made an equally accurate forecast way before publication? Most of my 
own guesses have proved spectacularly wrong.
Sylvia (who has got other things to do, but is just not getting round 
to them).




From rsteph1981 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 14:35:00 2003
From: rsteph1981 at yahoo.com (Rebecca Stephens)
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2003 07:35:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Prank
In-Reply-To: <bjj0t7+t3fc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030909143500.19936.qmail@web20010.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80254


--- Richard <darkmatter30 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> 
> Somehow, I think Sirius might well have thought that
> the worst that 
> might happen would be that Snape would soil himself,
> and get away 
> after using a few of those curses he was famous for.
>  He might well 
> have been disappointed that James short-circuited
> the prank, but 
> still a bit pleased that Snape still had a bit of a
> scare.  Had it 
> gone much worse, I'm sure he would have felt badly
> about it, despite 
> Snape being the victim.  But I doubt he INTENDED to
> KILL Snape, even 
> if it was much easier for Dumbledore and Snape to
> see it that way.
> 
> 
> Richard


All I can say is that all these years later, when
Sirius should be both older and wiser, he still
doesn't care.  He is not sorry.  That's horrible.  

Fact is, I'd have supported prosecution of Sirius at
that point.  I don't tolerate "boys will be boys" when
the only logical conclusion that can be made is that
the victim (or "target" if you prefer) will be injured
or killed.  Believing anything else when sending
someone unprepared to face a wereworlf is willful
ignorance.


Rebecca


=====
http://wychlaran.tripod.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk  Tue Sep  9 14:58:32 2003
From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 14:58:32 -0000
Subject: Is JKR having fun with names?
In-Reply-To: <bjiv58+eefs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjkpqo+g48h@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80255

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" 
> Geoff:
> I have been reminded in one article I read that Sirius is of course, 
> the "Dog Star" and we all know what Sirius transforms into as a n 
> Animagus....

Sirius is also Greek for 'scorching', which is rather fitting for a
hothead (who also happens to be hot in the sense of Dead Sexy). Not
quite sure where the Ancient Egyptians' worship of the star as goddess
of the Nile and mother of all Egypt(since its rising in the morning
preceded the flooding of the Nile, and incidentally, the start of the
"dog days") enters the picture. Maybe Sirius the bloke has a feminine,
nurturing side after all.

(I've always liked the Dog Star, it has to be one of the most
beautiful stars there is. Look for yourselves:)
http://www.astropix.com/HTML/B_WINTER/CA_MAJ.HTM

Alshain Star-gazer




From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk  Tue Sep  9 15:23:25 2003
From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 15:23:25 -0000
Subject: Death Eaters: Etymology
Message-ID: <bjkr9d+fpcf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80256

Apologies if this has been discussed before, I'm not enough of a HP
nut to wade through all that has ever been written on the subject.
Likewise, apologies if this is trivial (but seeing as other names have
been discussed about ten times recently, I'll give it a shot)

The term "Death Eaters" have always puzzled me a bit, JKR isn't one to
take names lightly, and on the other hand, it doesn't really make
sense (whaddayamean, eating death?) So, here's a hypothesis (not quite
a full-fledged theory yet):

'Death Eater' could be a pun on 'necromancer', the word itself coming
of Greek 'nekros' (corpse) and 'manteia' (divination); the art of
divination by communicating with the spirits of the dead. Also, via
folk etymology, known as the Black Art (Lat. 'niger'). In general, a
sorcerer, someone who practises the Dark Arts.

Next part of the joke: Italian 'mangiare' and French 'manger' (to
eat). My Latin's a bit shaky, unfortunately, so I can't trace this
further.

In Tolkien's "The Hobbit", by the way, Sauron goes by the name of The
Necromancer (IIRC).

Plus, it's something that'd fit in the general style of JKR's writing,
a reference to Antique myths with a witty, whimsical twist.

What do you think, bull's eye or just plain bull? :-)

Alshain  




From annemehr at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 15:42:47 2003
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 15:42:47 -0000
Subject: Legilimency, Occlumency, Snape, Harry
In-Reply-To: <bjki22+2gfc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjksdn+9ip7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80257

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "laylalast" <liliana at w...> 
wrote:
> Annemehr wrote (previously):
> <snip>
> The times when Voldemort, Dumbledore, and Snape seem to be able 
> to "read minds" are when they are being secretive about it.[...] I 
believe these are examples of using legilimency 
> in a very gentle, subtle way just to glean a sense of either 
> truthfulness or deceit, or maybe courage or fear -- whatever is on 
> the "surface" of the subject's mind, without making it obvious 
> what's happening.[...]
> 
> Lilian here:
> 
> Legilimency is presented to us in OOtP as the WW equivalent of a 
>RW lie detector. It is used to detect whether you lie by 
>discovering the memory/emotion that comes with it.

Annemehr:

The best description I was able to find is in ch. 24, "Occlumency," 
Snape speaking:

"It is true, however, that those who have mastered Legilimency are 
able, under certain conditions, to delve into the minds of their 
victims and to interpret their findings correctly.  The Dark Lord, 
for instance, almost always knows when somebody is lying to him.  
Only those skilled at Occlumency are able to shut down those 
feelings and memories that contradict the lie, and so utter 
falsehoods in his presence without detection."

Snape only speaks of detecting lies in particular when he is using 
the particular example of Voldemort.

On the other hand, there is this passage in GoF, ch. 30, "The 
Pensieve:"

'"Professor," Harry said at last, "do you think he's getting 
stronger?"

"Voldemort?" said Dumbledore, looking at Harry over the Pensieve.  
It was the characteristic, piercing look Dumbledore had given him on 
other occasions, and always made Harry feel as though Dumbledore 
were seeing right through him in a way that even Moody's magical eye 
could not. ...'

Now, Dumbledore cannot be looking for truth or lies here, as Harry 
has only asked him a question.  My best guess is that he's trying to 
decide just how much to tell Harry and is trolling Harry's head for 
any clues that might help him.  That's why I don't think the subtle 
form of legilimency is only good for detecting lies.


> Lilian:
> 
> I think that the painful memories were in fact brought up by 
>Harry's continual angry/angst status. 

Annemehr:
We'll have to agree to disagree on this one, I guess; I still think 
Snape was able to guide Harry's mind into painful memories.  I do 
take your point though -- Harry's angst may very well have made it 
very easy for Snape.

A new question -- what do you think of this?

"The usual rules do not seem to apply with you, Potter.  The curse 
that failed to kill you seems to have forged some kind of connection 
between you and the Dark lord.  The evidence suggests that at times, 
when your mind is most relaxed and vulnerable -- when you are 
asleep, for instance -- you are sharing the Dark Lord's thoughts and 
emotions. [...]  OoP ch. 24, Snape speaking.

But then, just after Harry's first attempt at resisting Snape's 
legilimens spell, Snape says "Clear your mind, Potter. Let go of all 
emotion."

Does this seem like a bit of a contradiction?  A clear mind and a 
relaxed mind do not seem like opposites to me.  Perhaps clearing 
your mind is the normal way to begin Occlumency, but the usual rules 
do not seem to apply to Harry and Voldemort.  Time and distance and 
eye contact are nothing in their case, so why not a clear mind 
also?  Harry is not a legilimens, yet Voldemort's emotions and 
sometimes the scenery connected with them come to him unbidden, so 
can it even be said that Voldemort is even using his own legilimency 
powers on Harry?

The scar connection seems to be a completely different thing than 
legilimency, so why hope to block it with Occlumency?  Did 
Dumbledore only *hope* it was worth a try or did he actually know it 
would be successful in blocking Voldemort if Harry could learn it?  
Did he substitute legilimency for "scar-o-vision" in the Occlumency 
lessons in the same way that Lupin substituted a boggart for a 
dementor in Patronus lessons?

This whole legilimency episode is confusing and full of 
contradictions. It's not quite the same as the scar connection it's 
meant to fight.  It seems to make things worse (but maybe only 
before they would have gotten better?).  Snape contradicts 
Dumbledore in telling Harry not to call the Dark Lord "Voldemort."  
There is a breakthrough vision of the MoM door, uncalled for by 
Snape (which genuinely seems to surprise him and serves as a further 
hint that he *is* causing Harry's mind to be more open to 
Voldemort).  The fact that Harry never practiced emptying his mind 
is frustrating because we'd like to have seen what would have 
happened if he had -- after all, he seemed to have been having some 
genuine success during the actual lessons.

And yet, in the end, it mattered not that Harry could not close his 
mind.  It was his heart that saved him.

So then, what of Occlumency and Legilimency?

Annemehr




From EnsTren at aol.com  Tue Sep  9 15:54:36 2003
From: EnsTren at aol.com (EnsTren at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 11:54:36 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Correct forecasts
Message-ID: <7E5062F4.3FD8C3CE.00170183@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80258

In a message dated 9/9/2003 9:49:28 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sylviablundell writes:

> Can anyone else claim to have 
> made an equally accurate forecast way before publication? Most of my 
> own guesses have proved spectacularly wrong.
> Sylvia (who has got other things to do, but is just not 
> getting round 
> to them).

I haven't been analysing Harry Potter long enough to do so, I'm sorry to say.  But I can say that within an hour of Reading OoTP I was confident that Sirius was going to be the one to kick the bucket (JKR was just focusing waaay to much on him.)

I have, however, in the past for other genres, made spot on predictions about plot points years a head of schedual and everone blew me off.  I had a good laugh when I was proven right.  Anyways, so I /know/ my logic and reasoning abilities are up to snuff, hopefully I can predict somethign for the next book!

--Nemi



From eggplant107 at hotmail.com  Tue Sep  9 15:47:15 2003
From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 15:47:15 -0000
Subject: Percy's letter
In-Reply-To: <20030909003223.26553.qmail@web20706.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjksm3+fqt1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80259

Melanie Black 

>during this chapter that we see the first hint
>at an arrogant Harry come to life: 
>"Hadn't he, proved himself capable of handling
>more than they?
 
That's not arrogance that's reality, Harry can handle more than his 
friends, more than just about anybody. As for his anger in book 5 
that didn't surprise me at all, being tied to a tombstone and 
tortured would put anyone in a bad mood. I understood completely at 
the end when Harry was smashing up Dumbledore's office, I wanted to 
punch him too. The man is really not that wise, he says exactly the 
wrong thing at the wrong time. Just minutes after his death is not 
the time to criticize Serious for anything, Dumbledore should have 
known it would make Harry furious. 

Eggplant   






From pentzouli at hotmail.com  Tue Sep  9 17:08:05 2003
From: pentzouli at hotmail.com (holly_phoenix_11)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 17:08:05 -0000
Subject: The Greek tragedy of the Weasley family - Remember the letter...
In-Reply-To: <bjd8r0+mb3t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjl1dl+iboc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80260

Dear Alshain, 
I would like to answer your request of comments and thoughts by 
commenting on your words, if you don't mind. Quoting just makes it 
more comprehensible, IMO.

You say:
Percy's views of right and wrong has something of legal positivism in
> them (IMO), the law must be obeyed because it is the law. You can't
> disobey it just because you think it's wrong. You can't go against 
the Ministry of Magic and undermine its authority just because you 
think Voldemort is back. His position would be the one of Kreon, 
while the rest of the Weasleys would side with Antigone and the right 
to rebel against unjust laws and rulers.

Me, holly :
 Remember the letter Percy sent ot Ron? Although it was depicted as a 
letter full of concern of a big brother towards the younger brother, 
I find it hard to imagine that a person who grew up with those 
people, Arthur and Molly, considers it right to tell them off to Ron, 
simply because he is all grown up now and has an opinion. He does not 
try to convince Ron that their parents are wrong or that the MOM is 
right because it represents the law, he just tries to convince him 
that he should set aside family and friends, because they do not have 
the power they used to do. His concern is that Ron should not be 
associated with people that lose their powers (DD) or with people 
that will not help him to a quest of more power (Harry and Arthur). 
He does not even try to show the slightest respect to the people that 
brought him up, as he talks about his parents in what I feel is an 
air of contempt for the "mess" they are involved in. He is trying to 
persuade Ron by showing contempt for his parents and for a person 
that he himself respected, when he thought he held a great deal of 
power.


You say:

> And the tragedy is that both parties' values are right. Breaking the
> law creates chaos, blind obedience to it is the stuff that
> totalitarian regimes are made of. Right or Wrong is easier to 
resolve
> than Right or Right. 


Me, holly :
Judging from my own experience of this ancient drama (I am greek and 
was taught this drama at school), Kreon's point of view is 
characterised through the ages as the ultimate suppression to the 
natural law. Not to want to bury someone in ancient Greece was at 
least characterised as heresy, no matter what he/she did in life. 
Kreon was not at all right, and Antigone's effort can be translated 
as the struggle to obey laws (even if they are moral) while under the 
threat of death. Kreon was the dictator above the laws, and Antigone 
was the voice of right and lawful to the eyes of the gods, whose laws 
were aboce all others.

As for dear Percy, I wouldn't be against this kind of behaviour if it 
was triggered by his urge for the truth or the law. But Percy's 
attitude during the whole book is that of a man thirsty for power, 
who despises the people deprived from it. Why send back the sweater, 
knitted by the hands of your mother? Even if she is wrong, she is 
still your mother. There is no reason for that kind of actions, 
unless you don't want to be associated with people of this sort. And 
that is what Percy said (maybe not with those exact words). 

Thank you for your attention
holly_phoenix_11




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 17:38:34 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 17:38:34 -0000
Subject: FF:  Flight of (the) Fancy 2; Sirius's Death-Journal cont'd
In-Reply-To: <bjj05o+kbt0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjl36q+ickt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80261

Sirius Black, death-journal entry dated deathday plus two:

Regulus is here.  I felt him near me a moment ago, as I was beginning 
to think again, as I was thinking...I was thinking of Bella again, 
and Mum, and how easy it was for Voldemort to take that pureblood 
passion that said the old families were better than the rest and turn 
it into a justification for ordering everyone else who wasn't.  
Voldemort appealed first to their vanity, only to hold them with a 
whip in one hand, as he toyed with that golden snitch, immortality, 
with the other.

Death Eaters.  I could tell them:  Death is not a thing to be eaten; 
it is a process which regurgitates you here after digesting most of 
what you thought you were.  But they'll find out; singly or in 
bunches, they will arrive here as I did and see themselves in the 
mirror.  Not their faces; instead it reflects your fears, as well as 
what you know to be true.  Of course, it isn't really a mirror; it 
isn't seeing with your eyes.  They're gone.  But the sense is there, 
that all of the trappings, the tricks, you used to use to hide from 
yourself have fallen away.

Ought I to have clung and remained behind, like Nearly Headless 
Nick?  For Harry, if nothing else?  I sense them out there, the 
ghosts, Moaning Myrtle and Nick and the Fat Friar and the Grey Lady 
and, wait, no, is that the Bloody Baron?  I don't think I even 
thought about it.  I was dying; I was surprised, my god, even 
embarrassed, but I wasn't afraid.  Curious, perhaps...

It's happening again.  I will have to take this up later when I can 
hold the thoughts together.

S.B.

[Sandy, aka msbeadsley]




From editor at texas.net  Tue Sep  9 18:03:00 2003
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 18:03:00 -0000
Subject: Death Eaters: Etymology--& Dark Mark & Snape
In-Reply-To: <bjkr9d+fpcf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjl4kk+d6gj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80262

We can never have too much etymological hairsplitting, Alshain.

> The term "Death Eaters" have always puzzled me a bit, JKR isn't one 
to
> take names lightly, and on the other hand, it doesn't really make
> sense (whaddayamean, eating death?) So, here's a hypothesis (not 
quite
> a full-fledged theory yet):
> 
> 'Death Eater' could be a pun on 'necromancer', the word itself 
coming
> of Greek 'nekros' (corpse) and 'manteia' (divination); the art of
> divination by communicating with the spirits of the dead. Also, via
> folk etymology, known as the Black Art (Lat. 'niger'). In general, a
> sorcerer, someone who practises the Dark Arts.
> 
> Next part of the joke: Italian 'mangiare' and French 'manger' (to
> eat). My Latin's a bit shaky, unfortunately, so I can't trace this
> further.
> 
> In Tolkien's "The Hobbit", by the way, Sauron goes by the name of 
The
> Necromancer (IIRC).
> 
> Plus, it's something that'd fit in the general style of JKR's 
writing,
> a reference to Antique myths with a witty, whimsical twist.

Good thoughts. It is part of JKR's genius that she can pull names and 
terms from the collective unconscious that "fit" so very well with 
the ambience, atmosphere, and "feel" of their targets. They plug so 
well in with so many related ripples and echoes, only some of which 
she is aware of.

I will add to these tidbits, that my husband mentioned an old Welsh 
folk practice called "Sin Eaters," who took the sins of someone 
(usually someone dying) onto themselves, freeing the other person, 
and doing the confession and penance for them.

I had projected, on this basis, a sinister interpretation of Death 
Eaters, as each taking a bit of Voldemort's death onto themselves, 
and freeing him from it.

Which had also brought me to my Dark Mark thoughts--I think the mark 
is much more than a membership tattoo; I think it is the external 
symbol of an unbreakable bond. I think the Death Eaters are somehow 
instrumental in Voldemort's near-immortality (i.e., if he had not had 
them bound to him, he *would* have died when the spell rebounded off 
Harry). 

All this doesn't need to be true for my other belief about the Mark 
to work, but it does feed nicely into it--I think the Mark is a bond 
to death. I think that not only would the Death Eaters "share" the 
burden of Voldemort's death so that he need not suffer it, I think if 
Voldemort *was* killed somehow, the Death Eaters would share that 
fate.

This has always added a dimension, for me, to Voldemort's fury that 
nobody went looking for him. They would have known some part of him 
survived, because they weren't themselves dead. And they chose to 
leave him there in whatever limbo he was in, knowing he was out there 
to be found.

And it has added a dimension, for me, to Snape's task and choices. He 
has chosen to side with the good. But if the side he has chosen wins, 
and my theory is true, his choice leads directly to his death. Which 
has always made me think that some deep emotional epiphany must have 
happened for him, to keep him on such a course (or to make him not 
care if he's on such a course).

Okay, enough of my lunch break on this. Off to find sustenance.

~Amanda





From innermurk at catlover.com  Tue Sep  9 18:07:18 2003
From: innermurk at catlover.com (innermurk)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 18:07:18 -0000
Subject: Harry's anger (WAS: Percy's letter)
In-Reply-To: <20030909003223.26553.qmail@web20706.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjl4sn+tfks@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80263

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Melanie Black 
<princessmelabela at y...> wrote:
I apologize ahead of time for getting very child development 
orientated here but it is my feild of study and it is what I know the 
best so I will use it as a frame of reference.  I believe that 
Harry's reaction is a very normal reaction for children his own age.  
Child researcher, Piaget, claims that with adolescence comes 
egocentricism.  Basically, egocetricism means that the teenager is 
concerned primarily with his own thoughts and desires, and in 
addition to this, he believes everyone else is primarily concerned 
with him also.  The world revolves around the teenager.  In chapter 
one of OOP we see very clearly that Harry is upset that they 
are "having fun" without him.  He is even more upset that they refuse 
to tell him what is going on.  I
> 
> t is during this chapter that we see the first hint at an arrogant 
Harry come to life:  "Hadn't he, proved himself xcapable of handling 
more than they?  Had they all forgotten what he had done? Hadn't it 
been he who had entered the graveyard and watched Cedric murdered 
then tied to that tombstone and nearly killed?"  (OOP, US, pg. 8).  
> 
>  


I Innermurk add:
I do not believe now, nor ever that Harry has acted arrogantly.

While egocentrism might be coming into play as well, I believe that 
Harry is showing all the classic signs of PTSD (post traumatic stress 
disorder) understandable considering everything he went through at 
the end of his fourth year and before.

In fact Rowling herself seems to tell us this, albeit in her usual 
roundabout way:
"I've said all along that I want Harry to grow up in a realistic way, 
which means hormonal impulses, and it means a whole bunch of 
adolescent angst and anger, actually. Harry's a lot more angry in 
Book 5, which I think is entirely right, given what he's been 
through. It's about time he got angry about how life has dealt him."
http://stacks.msnbc.com/news/928867.asp


But even with classical symptoms of PTSD we have to take into account 
Harry's emotional neglect and development before due to his abuse.

In OoP for maybe the first time in the series, we see Harry getting 
angry. There were times when he lost his temper, and when he felt 
hurt and mad, such as at Malfoy's consistent jibes, Snape's unfair 
treatment, and that unfortunate incident in POA with Aunt Marge, but 
these are all more subconscious reactions rather than an overt 
outburst of any kind from Harry.

What we see in OOP is strong anger at what has happened to him 
followed by, irritability, quick temper, intense hatred, and all the 
negative emotions and connotations that go along with it. Some have 
berated Harry for being arrogant and short tempered, throwing 
tantrums, whining, bullying his friends, and drastically changing, or 
being out of character. 

Actually if you consider Harry's past, along with what just happened 
to him, he is acting in a perfectly normal way. 

First we need to understand why Harry never showed his anger before. 
Harry grew up in an abusive environment. He was physically, mentally, 
and emotionally abused from the very tender age of one. He lived in 
an environment of bullying, neglect and shame. Shame forced on him by 
the Dursleys. He was and is made to feel shameful of his parents, 
especially his father. He is made to feel shameful of himself. No 
value is placed on him as a person. He is made to sleep in a 
cupboard, and wear old hand-me-down clothing that does not, nor ever 
will fit. He will never have a birthday, or a real present, or get 
anything he wants, or that might give him pleasure. He will never 
receive something that can be his, and therefore find some intrinsic 
value. He only receives the minimum of bare essentials to stay alive.

These early years are very important in our social development. This 
is when we begin to form our perceptions of the world around us, and 
our place in it. Harry is taught to be shameful of his very being, 
that he is worthless, and inferior, and that there is something 
basically wrong and uncorrectable about him.

There are two basic patterns that people fall into when they are 
shamed. In the shame-shame cycle, the individual feels shame, then 
are ashamed of that shame, and so forth. They internalize this shame 
and it feeds off itself until the individual develops a self-hate and 
extreme introversion.

Then there is the shame-anger cycle, where the individual feels anger 
about the shame, and shame about the anger. This too feeds on itself 
building up until it terminates in an outburst and anti-social acts.

In the first four books, Harry falls into the first cycle, and 
internalizes everything that happens to him. The Dursleys encourage 
this by punishing him severely every time he acts out, asks 
questions, or tries to participate in their family in any way. 
Reiterating with every year and every lie to hide what they call his 
abnormality that what he is, is unacceptable, shameful, and 
despicable.

We see the evidence of his cyclic tendencies in the first four books. 
Harry wonders that anyone would think him anything other than a boy 
when Hagrid tells him he's a wizard. He is very surprised to hear 
that he is famous and extremely embarrassed by the positive attention 
he receives. He feels that he is unworthy of it. He worries that the 
Sorting hat is going to tell him that it has all been a mistake and 
he must leave. He worries that Snape hates him before he has any 
evidence of the sort. He worries that he will make a fool of himself 
on the broomstick in front of Malfoy. He worries that everything that 
happens around him is his fault.

This is not arrogance, nor a proof that Harry thinks the world 
revolves around him. It is a very normal reaction to his internalized 
feeling of inadequacy in the world. In his mind, everything that 
happens that's wrong, he has somehow brought about, because he is 
fundamentally wrong. Things that happen that are positive are someone 
else's doing since he is unworthy to help the world, despite his 
efforts to try, and he is on his own in anything he does as he is 
unworthy to receive help from any source. He does not believe he 
deserves the fame and admiration that he is receiving.

Harry voices his fears of insufficiency when he gives the following 
reply to Hermione's praise at the end of Book one.

"Harry ? you're a great wizard, you know"
"I'm not as good as you," said Harry, very embarrassed, as she let go 
of him. (US hb ed pg 287)

He is never able to take a compliment and internalize it in the same 
way as a negative comment. He always has to fight that instinct that 
has been drilled into him since he was young, that he is wrong, 
deviant, unworthy.

This explains Harry's anxiety to prove himself, not to the wizarding 
world so much as himself, which is an infinitely more difficult task. 
Harry has to tame his demons every single time he faces a new task. 
This is not arrogance, nor fameseeking, but a terrible product of his 
abuse that he is trying to overcome.

When Harry wins his first Quidditch match he feels as though he 
finally did something to deserve the attention he was receiving. But 
that feeling is short lived. Even in his sanctuary, the wizarding 
world, there are those that force that same abuse onto him. 

Snape is a major contributor as he does everything in his power to 
force those old feelings of inadequacy on him during his classes, and 
whenever they interact. Book two sets him back again emotionally, 
when Lockhart instills a deep shame into Harry for his fame, the one 
thing he had that was his. All his inferences that Harry had done 
nothing to deserve it only deepened his feelings of unworthiness. 
When the school suspects someone of wrong doing, Harry immediately 
feels targeted as the culprit, though in most cases the students did 
target him; he is fundamentally wrong, and therefore must be in the 
wrong.

Book three helps to restate to Harry that he is inadequate, as he was 
unable to save Sirius. He is so nervous about himself that he is 
unable to perform the spell that he had the ability to do. When Harry 
realizes he is the one who conjures the patronus, and gains the 
confidence he needs, he does so spectacularly producing a strong and 
effective protection for himself and his friends. 

Book four shows us Harry is still exceedingly embarrassed with 
publicity, and still maintains the shame about his fame. Rita helps 
to deepen that shame by excluding Cedric and bringing about the 
taunting he receives from a lot of the school. He cannot fight this 
any more than he could fight the Dursleys when he was a child, and he 
must internalize the continued abuse to add to his cycle of shame and 
despair.

Everything culminates when Cedric dies, and Harry goes through 
another heightened form of abuse and terror.

Before this event, Harry's reaction to any anger that he might feel 
was to stifle it. To accept that it was, and never try to better 
things or resolve these issues, because he deserved this treatment. 
Even when he's protesting to himself, and his close friends, about 
the treatment he receives, he will never try to amend it on his own. 
He rarely speaks out about his feelings, whatever they are, and his 
outward reactions to things that happen around him, are almost non-
existent.

There are occasions that Harry does show what he's feeling, his 
passion to save the wizarding world, his euphoria at Quidditch, his 
concern for his friends, his fear at the occurrences of evil around 
him, but most of his life is spent locked behind a very stiff poker 
face, giving away nothing of his internal feelings, and asking 
nothing from those around him. In fact, the only emotion that 
consistently brings a reaction from Harry is when he is feeling 
frustrated and unable to do what he knows needs to be done.

Book one illustrates this the night he decides to go for the Stone. 
He totally ignores the comments from both Ron and Hermione as he's 
explaining things to both them and himself. He's pacing, agitated, 
and resolving to go and retrieve the Stone himself. Book three 
illustrates this same point when he is trying to save Sirius, and 
talking to Fudge and later Dumbledore. Book four is when he's most 
vociferous about things, though only to Hermione, when he is faced 
with the tournament, and Ron's abandonment.

All these times, Harry is feeling more frustration than anger. He 
speaks out to Hermione and Ron, sometimes raising his voice, but 
never actually yelling at them. Rather, he yells to them, about the 
things that are bothering him. When he does get angry, such as the 
Firebolt incident, he remains quiet.

The night Voldemort is reborn was the most traumatic one Harry had to 
date. He witnessed the cold blooded murder of his classmate, was 
physically harmed, and almost murdered himself, after a night of more 
mental torture. When he came back to Hogwarts, he was in a 
dissociative state of numb denial, and shock. He never really started 
to deal with these emotions until the summer in book five.

When we first are reacquainted with our hero, he seems immediately 
different. He shows all signs of (PTSD) Post Traumatic Stress 
Disorder. PTSD occurs when individuals experience extreme trauma, 
whether psychological or physical. The disorder interferes with 
trust, emotional closeness, communication, responsible assertiveness, 
and effective problem solving. It causes the person to feel 
irritable, on-guard, easily startled, worried, or anxious; unable to 
relax, socialize, or be intimate without being tense or demanding. 

They could have difficulty falling asleep or staying asleep, have 
trouble with nightmares, trauma memories, flashbacks, and experience 
feelings of threat and vague danger. This brings about difficulty 
concentrating, listening, making cooperative decisions, and struggles 
with fear and anger.

Having been victimized and exposed to rage and violence, survivors 
often struggle with intense anger and impulses that usually are 
suppressed by avoiding closeness or by adopting an attitude of 
criticism or dissatisfaction with loved ones and friends. Intimate 
relationships may have episodes of verbal or physical abuse.

In the first weeks and months following the traumatic event, 
survivors often feel an unexpected sense of anger, detachment, or 
anxiety in intimate, family, and friendship relationships.

I've outlined the PTSD symptoms in great detail, because I believe it 
shows why Harry's behavior seemed so out of character, or different 
from what we are used to. His emotions are released outwardly more 
often than inwardly, and for the first time, we see him crying, 
yelling, protesting his treatment, and standing up to his bullies.

He shows all the symptoms having nightmares that encompass both what 
happened this year, and in his past, including his parent's murder. 
He has problems with the flashbacks, and guilt, feeling that he's 
responsible for Cedric's murder. He shows all the symptoms, quite 
honestly, and I'll only detail two more.

The anger, and irritability, disables Harry this year not allowing 
him to think rationally or cooperate with his peers. He shows this 
anger and rashness consistently throughout the year. The trauma and 
stress of the situation he went through jolted him out of the shame 
shame cycle he'd been stuck in and forced him into the anger shame 
cycle. This causes him to go over and over in his mind all those 
things he is made to feel shameful of before, and brings up 
everything in the past for him to feel angry at. All the things he 
went through his first four years at Hogwarts whirled through his 
mind, and he finally was able to feel the anger at these incidents. 
He tells us himself that he mulled over everything the last month 
when he first arrives at Grimmauld Place. His anger toggles between 
being angry at himself and his shame, to being angry with others, 
lashing out at his loved ones, and those closest to him, causing 
difficulties in all his relationships.

To avoid these relationship problems, the survivor needs a strong 
personal support network to cope with PTSD while maintaining or 
rebuilding family and friend relationships with dedication, 
perseverance, hard work and commitment. The participants must share 
their feelings honestly and openly with respect and compassion, while 
infusing playfulness, spontaneity, relaxation, and mutual enjoyment. 
The survivor needs this relationship to serve as an antidote to the 
feelings of isolation, depression, and feelings of guilt, failure and 
alienation.

Harry cannot retaliate against his abusers, and his anger will not 
stay inside him any more. Relationships suffer, and the closest ones 
suffer the most. He therefore lashes out at those closest to him. 
This happens to fall mostly on Hermione. She is the one who is by his 
side, and helping him through. She is, or seems to be, the sole 
pillar of strength, willing to help him during this time. Ron doesn't 
seem to know how to handle Harry's new outbursts, and starts avoiding 
him, remaining uncharacteristically silent during his fights with 
Hermione. Ginny is likewise busy with her dating and hanging out with 
her family, and though she doesn't actively avoid him, she doesn't 
seek him out to spend time with him either. This is not new, as she 
has never been included in his close circle of friends before anyway. 
The Weasleys are all occupied with the Order and their family. Sirius 
is occupied with his own personal demons. Dumbledore is occupied with 
Harry's physical safety and the Order. Everyone else seems to be too 
occupied with Voldemort's return and the problems at Hogwarts to help 
him. And the majority of the school, even some of his dorm mates and 
teachers insinuate that he's lying about his experiences. This drives 
home the shame anger cycle, as if it were Harry's fault all this is 
happening, and that he deserves it.

Even worse, they isolate him, and he is forced to try and deal with 
all these feelings, this guilt, this depression, and this anger on 
his own, with no support system whatsoever. Only in Harry's case, the 
threat and danger are not over, and are very real. This was a very 
dangerous position to put him in. Anger and hatred are Voldemort's 
tools, and Voldemort uses them against Harry and the Order while 
Harry is left fighting this battle against himself trying desperately 
to reach out to others for their belief and trust in order to help 
him believe in his worth.

When Harry finally gets reunited with the only support system he's 
ever known, they treat him as a deviant, suspecting him of 
wrongdoing, telling him he is unaccomplished and unworthy to be 
there. This is done by his further isolation, disregarding his past 
acknowledged accomplishments, disbelief in his statements, locking 
him away with remonstrations for defending himself, and threatening 
alienation from the wizarding world and further isolation. This is 
almost worse than the Dursleys' treatment of him. Just when he needs 
their strength and love the most, they deny it him, albeit 
unintentionally. It doesn't surprise me then, that he reacts with 
anger, and indignation. I'm only surprised it wasn't worse.

Though Dumbledore shows his understanding at the end of OoP for 
Harry's behavior, he absents himself from helping and supporting 
Harry through the immediate need, causing it to seem as if Hermione 
alone understands Harry's need to yell, to fear, to cry, to be 
believed. She responds to him as she has always done. She supports 
him through everything, enduring his yelling and anger, his 
irrationality, and rash behaviors, with little to no protest. 

She understands that he needs her, and her confidence in him to get 
through, and she instills in him that confidence at every chance she 
gets: at the first when she tells him she understands that he's angry 
and that he has a right to be; when she constantly reassures him that 
she believes him, and he's in the right; when he feels the need to 
rebel against Umbridge and her restrictions; when he makes irrational 
and dangerous plans to help others; and when he feels inadequate with 
Cho.

He is free to follow these outbursts and yells when things go wrong 
in his life. He yells about no one recognizing his accomplishments, 
his feelings of isolation, his frustration at not being able to do 
anything, no one believing him, and everything going wrong. He yells 
more to release these deep seated fears of others being right, that 
he is the one in the wrong, and the one causing and deserving all the 
problems, than because he's angry with someone. 

About half of all PTSD cases will go within six months of the events, 
while others can drag on for years and can dominate the sufferer's 
life, sometimes deepening into depressions and mania.

Harry has proven he is strong. He faces a man's burden, and does it 
with honor, every time he faces Voldemort. But he faces more 
difficult things within himself everyday. 

He has now suffered yet another traumatic event with Sirius' death. 
His feelings of failure and guilt will be triple what they were last 
year. He desperately needs that network of support now. Let's hope 
that Dumbledore will understand and give it to him. 

Innermurk




From jferer at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 18:25:45 2003
From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 18:25:45 -0000
Subject: Correct forecasts (long)
In-Reply-To: <bjklp8+gjt3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjl5v9+e9ec@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80264

Sylvia:"I was flipping at random through past posts and came across one 
posted in November 2001 by Marianne (29398) in which she 
prophesied "Harry will have to come to terms with the fact that his 
father and godfather held some pretty unsavoury ideas, at least when 
they were kids". Talk about spot on! Can anyone else claim to have 
made an equally accurate forecast way before publication? Most of my 
own guesses have proved spectacularly wrong."

I think the approach to predicting future events has a lot to do with
the accuracy of predictions.

WHY MARIANNE WAS RIGHT

In my opinion, Marianne was dead on because she approached her
analysis in terms of the characters as humans.  Marianne probably knew
kids like James and Sirius, knew that kids like them generally are
"arrogant little berks," until the grow up, anyway, and so made her
prediction on her experience with human nature.  We all have
skeletons, so why would Prongs and Padfoot be any different?

This is the theory of analysis I subscribe to.  What would you do if
you were handed the same problem?  What have psychopaths like
Voldemort in history done in the past?  What are the parallels between
a real-life situation and the Potterverse?  They may be wizards, but
they're very human, and that's part of the appeal.

The "what would you do" test is useful.  I once wrote a fic designed
to answer a question: how do you get Muggle parents to accept the
existence of the wizarding world after their kid gets a Hogwarts
letter?  What I did was send the Muggle parents of other Hogwarts
students already at school to visit the new family and help them cope
with having their reality turned on its head.  I don't know if that's
how the wizard world does it, but it's at least believable.  We'll
probably never know the right answer.

HISTORY AND THE WIZARD WORLD

I like history in general and military history in particular, and my
best prediction came about from viewing the earliest stages of the
Second Voldemort War in that light.  I predicted that Voldemort would
spend the early stages of the War in 1, gathering strength, 2,
encouraging the wizard world and the MoM that the threat didn't exist,
3, trying to deprive the forces of good of their base, Hogwarts, and
4, trying to discredit and neutralize his main enemies, Dumbledore and
Harry.  That's what happened, but where I was surprised was how
Voldemort was revealed as early as he was.  I never expected him to be
outed so soon.

HINTS AND CLUES

A lot of people spend a lot of time combing the text for hints and
clues, some of which are tiny indeed, and construct all new models of
the Potterverse future based on them.  One small, observed fact is
parent to a speculation which in turn is used as the launching point
for another speculation, and another, and another, until there's a
whole new world cantilevered out there ? and it doesn't take much for
the whole thing to come crashing down.
Are hints and clues meaningless? No, but they have to be treated with
care, filed away and brought out or discarded as new facts turn up. 
When JKR says something twice, take notice.  When somebody is
interrupted as they're about to make a revelation, remember it.
(Thanks to the authors of _The Unofficial Guide to the Mysteries of
Harry Potter_ for that one).

OCCAM'S RAZOR

William of Occam, a British Franciscan monk and philosopher of the
14th century, is responsible for a principle of logic that is the
foundation of all scientific modeling and theory building.  Occam's
Razor admonishes a reasoner to `choose from a set of otherwise
equivalent models of a given phenomenon the simplest one.'  Occam's
razor helps us to "shave off" those concepts, variables or constructs
that are not really needed to explain a phenomenon. 

This principle is cheerfully trashed on a regular basis in the Harry
Potter world.  That's OK for fun, but probably not if you want to make
predictions that actually turn out.

BIG THEORY/BIG PROOF

If you want to suggest that Luna is starting to like Harry, go ahead,
make your points and your arguments, and we'll have fun discussing it.
 It's not a ridiculous notion.  If you want to suggest that Professor
McGonagall is really a Death Eater near the center of Voldemort's
conspiracy, you better have something really, really good to back up
that notion.  It seems reasonable that anybody with a radical,
earthshaking theory should have a much higher wall to climb for
acceptance than someone with a more modest suggestion.

Never forget that JKR, who always plays fair, is also Knight Grand
Commander of the Order of the Red Herring. Many of the little hints
and clues are tiny little pills of foolery and double meaning; but if
you watch the characters you'll do all right.

Jim Ferer




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Tue Sep  9 18:44:10 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (B Arrowsmith)
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2003 19:44:10 +0100
Subject: CoS scene.
Message-ID: <99A8B6E4-E2F5-11D7-8C3C-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80265

Sitting  gazing vacantly at the ceiling as usual when I remembered an 
anomaly.

There was speculation a few weeks ago as posters tried to figure out 
which episode in CoS  had been retained in the CoS film at the 
insistence of JKR.

In the book, we have the meeting between Harry and Dumbledore in DD's 
office after the petrification of Justin Finch-Fletchley and Nearly 
Headless Nick. Hagrid  bursts in carrying a couple of dead roosters, 
proclaiming Harry is innocent. Now we know about Ginny killing the 
roosters and why she has done it. But this is not explained in the film.

So why does Hagrid still barge in carrying two dead (apparently 
irrelevant) roosters?

Can anyone think of a plot line for the future books that needs Hagrid 
and two dead chickens?
Or perhaps just the chickens. Haruspicy? A  magical stock-pot? 
Son-of-Trevor? Fowl play?

Any ideas out there?

Kneasy 
  




From jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 18:54:03 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 18:54:03 -0000
Subject: another filk in the saga
In-Reply-To: <bjkk56+mbbk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjl7kb+sghb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80266

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "quigonginger"
<quigonginger at y...> wrote:
.
> 
> I now continue with a filk based on RESPECT by Aretha Franklin.  I 
> call it "A little old Globe", although if soemone comes up with 
> something better, let me know.
> 
> Harry has just removed the prophesy from the shelf.
> I would not presume to rewrite your filk if you had not thrown it
open to suggestions, but a fix occurred to me as I was thinking that
your filk is about the prophecy itself, rather than about Sybill
Trelawney.  (Note: pedantic comment to follow.  Be prepared.  The act
of predicting the future is to "prophesy" with an "s", pronounced
PROF-a-SIGH.  The inormation that someone prophesies is a "prophecy",
with a "c", pronounced PROF-a-SEE.)

So instead of:
>
> P-R-O-P-H-E-T
> By the name of Trelawny
> P-R-O-P-H-E-T
> That's her, SPT
> 
write:
P-R-O-P-H-E-Cy
By the hand of Trelawney
P-R-O-P-H-E-CY
That's her specialty.

And you have now a natural title parodying the original song:
"P-R-O-P-H-E-CY"


> 
> Anyone care to continue the saga?
> Ginger

I find it incredible, but wonderful, that four lovely filks about the
same point in the HP saga have been written independently using such
different original music.

Haggridd




From tcyhunt at earthlink.net  Tue Sep  9 19:24:48 2003
From: tcyhunt at earthlink.net (tcyhunt)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 19:24:48 -0000
Subject: Oh, what a night (filk)
Message-ID: <bjl9e0+knfm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80267

>From "Oh, What a Night (December, 1963)" by Frankie Valley and the 
Four Seasons

you can find a pretty good midi here:
http://users.ev1.net/~origbear/midi_n-o.htm

dedicated to CMC, Haggrid, Gail B., Wendy St. John, and all the rest 
of the wonderful filkers who make it look so easy - thank you for 
inspiring me!

Oh, What a Night (October, 1981)

I pictured Harry strolling along the beach (perhaps of the Tbay?).  
Feeling retrospective, he looks back on the night his parents were 
murdered and sings...

Oh, what a night
Late October back in eighty-one
What a very nasty thing to've done
As I remember what a night.

Oh, what a night
You know I didn't even know your name
But I was never going to be the same
What a wizard
What a night.

Oh, I got a funny feelin' when he walked in the room
Oh my, as I recall it ended oh so soon

Oh, what a night
Castin' curses, AK-blastin' me
He was evil, killing all 'round me
Sacrifices!
What a night.

I saw a flash, like green lightnin' -- but a blunder
Spinnin' my head around then knockin' me out from under
Oh, what a night!

Oh, what a night!
Oh, what a night!

Oh, I got a funny feelin' when he walked in the room
Oh my, as I recall it ended oh so soon

Oh what a night
Why'd it take so long end that night?
What went wrong?
And how am I alright?
I remember
What a night.

I saw a flash, like green lightnin' -- but a blunder
Spinnin' my head around then knockin' me out from under
Oh, what a night!

Oh, what a night!
Oh, what a night.
Oh, what a night.

(music fades as Harry walks off toward the sunset - too sappy?  nah, 
I didn't think so, either ;-)

Tcy





From liliana at worldonline.nl  Tue Sep  9 19:31:02 2003
From: liliana at worldonline.nl (laylalast)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 19:31:02 -0000
Subject: CoS scene.
In-Reply-To: <99A8B6E4-E2F5-11D7-8C3C-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bjl9pm+40dm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80268

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> Sitting  gazing vacantly at the ceiling as usual when I remembered 
an 
> anomaly.
> 
> There was speculation a few weeks ago as posters tried to figure 
out 
> which episode in CoS  had been retained in the CoS film at the 
> insistence of JKR.
> 
> In the book, we have the meeting between Harry and Dumbledore in 
DD's 
> office after the petrification of Justin Finch-Fletchley and Nearly 
> Headless Nick. Hagrid  bursts in carrying a couple of dead 
roosters, 
> proclaiming Harry is innocent. Now we know about Ginny killing the 
> roosters and why she has done it. But this is not explained in the 
film.
> 
> So why does Hagrid still barge in carrying two dead (apparently 
> irrelevant) roosters?
> 
> Can anyone think of a plot line for the future books that needs 
Hagrid 
> and two dead chickens?
> Or perhaps just the chickens. Haruspicy? A  magical stock-pot? 
> Son-of-Trevor? Fowl play?
> 
> Any ideas out there?
> 
> Kneasy

Lilian here:

The scene with the roosters (it is only one rooster actually, Hagrid 
says that is the second one recently dead) is not  in the movie 
itself but is in the additional scenes on the DVD. People who have 
only seen the movie, do not get to see Hagrid with the roosters. To 
me that is the reason why the dead rooster-scene need not be 
explained in the movie, because it never made the movie at all.




From kozmoz47 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 17:15:31 2003
From: kozmoz47 at yahoo.com (Zeynep Oner)
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2003 10:15:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Hint in Cos
In-Reply-To: <1063113715.10256.52104.m18@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030909171531.67808.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80269


You might have heard that JK Rowling said that she had given a lot of clues in the second book. Ever since I heard that I have been reading the CoS, and I came up with a few mind boggling questions. Sorry if they have been discussed before;

1. In one of Lochard's books he says that he saved a town from monthly werewolf attacks. He even demonstrated it on class using Harry as the werewolf. Why can this spell be used on Lupin and change his life?

2. When Harry sees the Malfoys on the shop in Knockturn Alley, Lucuis MAlfoy says that Draco is right to hate Harry Potter especially when the wizarding community sees him as the hero who brought Voldemort to his downfall. Does this mean that there was another wizard involved, like DD for example, who caused Voldemort to loose his powers. DD might have setup some signaling spell, arrive to the scene upon signal, realise what is going on, does some fast thinking and causes some of Voldemort's powers to be transferred to be passed upon Harry so that, as the prophecy said, Harry may kill Voldemort in the future. After all in the SS, DD does let Harry to have a go at Voldemort even though he could have stopped him in the beginning. 

Also you might have noticed Voldemort would not be able to get the stone like Harry did even if he had worked out what the mirror does, because of the nature of the mirror. So Harry didn't really save the stone, and DD could have stopped him. (Thus, it's official: DD is the coolest.)

Any takers?


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From melclaros at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 19:49:31 2003
From: melclaros at yahoo.com (melclaros)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 19:49:31 -0000
Subject: CoS scene.
In-Reply-To: <99A8B6E4-E2F5-11D7-8C3C-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bjlasb+gju6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80270

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
>> 
> There was speculation a few weeks ago as posters tried to figure 
out 
> which episode in CoS  had been retained in the CoS film at the 
> insistence of JKR.
> 
>

Me:
I'm leaning towards the scene in which, for no apparent reason Hagrid 
anwers the door with a cocked crossbow. HUH? With the developments in 
OoP now all I'm wondering is was he expecting Centaurs or Gawp?

Melpomene




From severusbook4 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 20:19:15 2003
From: severusbook4 at yahoo.com (severusbook4)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 20:19:15 -0000
Subject: CoS scene.
In-Reply-To: <99A8B6E4-E2F5-11D7-8C3C-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bjlck3+fl54@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80271

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> Sitting  gazing vacantly at the ceiling as usual when I remembered 
> an anomaly.
> 
> There was speculation a few weeks ago as posters tried to figure 
out 
> which episode in CoS  had been retained in the CoS film at the 
> insistence of JKR.
> 
> Kneasy

>snipped<

Severus here:

I seem to remember the JKR insisted on the Knockturn Alley scene, 
with Harry in the store, being left in the film.  I also think it 
has something to do with Harry's hands, the hand of Glory grabbed 
him in this scene, and there was not any other reason to have this 
in the film.  The conversation between Malfoy and the store keep 
didn't happen, but the hand scene did.  Also, I brought this up 
before, Harry seemed to have a hand fixation in the film and in the 
book.  Did anyone else catch this?  Harry touched the hand of Glory, 
he touched the hand of the petrified boy (can't remember his name), 
and he touched Hermone's hand when she was in the hospital (that's 
how he found her note, in the book).  Kind of strange to keep the 
first hand scene when it had nothing to do with the plot whats so 
ever.  JMHO though. Feel free to destroy it.

Sevvie  




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 20:52:22 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 20:52:22 -0000
Subject: OoP - GUILTY Dumbledore (was Dumbledore's true sorrow motives)
In-Reply-To: <bjki89+4hkf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjlei6+jnto@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80272


> > > Kneasy
> >
> Hum. Whenever Sirius tells Harry to be careful, always in the back-
> ground, spoken or  unspoken is "But  James wouldn't." Sirius
> claims to care for Harry, but really I wonder if he wants Harry to
> be his proxy; "I wish I could do it, but they're stopping me. Such
> a pity you can't do it instead." Emotional manipulation.

Laura:

I don't hear that voice at all.  Sirius isn't subtle about his 
feelings of frustration at GP, but I don't think he ever confuses 
Harry with James or encourages Harry to act carelessly.  If Lupin had 
said something to that effect, I'd wonder.  But Molly has her own 
agenda and Hermione...well, she's just wrong.

Kneasy:
> Harry does care, or thinks he cares, for Sirius. (Just how much 
> experience in caring does Harry have? Ans = 0) He wants Sirius'
> approval. A dangerous position to be in, knowing Sirius.

>> > Laura:

I agree that in the beginning of the series, Harry has not had a 
chance to experience a healthy, loving relationship with anyone since 
his parents died.  But he has the capacity to do so.  We see it 
growing throughout the books-he clearly cares for Hagrid and his 
friends. He worries about them, exerts effort to help them out of 
difficulties when he can and supports them (when he's speaking to 
them-he is still a kid, after all).  If he couldn't care for people, 
he wouldn't be giving LV such a hard time.  The gift of Lily's love 
would come to nothing if Harry didn't have the ability to feel it for 
and give it to others.

<snip>
> Kneasy:
DD has a plan, we're told. Why can't Harry accept that?

Laura:

Because he's never given enough information at the right time.  
Getting the story in bits and pieces as DD sees fit to feed it to him 
isn't convincing to him-can you blame him?
> 
<snip>
> Kneasy
> Ah! Romance! That all-pervading rosy glow that reduces reason to
> a whimpering irrelevence.
> Being a cynic (and proud of it), I've had enough unfortunate 
experiences
> to be aware that the details are what matter. <snip> First 
impressions are good - at first. They require confirmation asap.

Laura:

Actually I wasn't talking about romance at all, just regular 
friendship.  :-)  But sure, the details make a relationship work.  
Sirius and Harry never got the chance to find out those things about 
each other, but they did seem to have an instant (well, once Harry 
figured out that Sirius hadn't killed his parents) rapport.  

> Laura:
 <snip> He [Sirius] knows what it's like to be an impulsive, 
emotional teenager.
> 
> Kneasy:
> Too  true. He's never stopped being one himself. Sirius is 
emotional,
> he  is impulsive, hence the 'showdown' with Peter. He'd  never 
change.
> I've stated before that I think Sirius is suffering from a form of
> survivors syndrome. He feels guilty that James and Lily died and he 
> didn't;  he's looking for absolution, for forgiveness, for 
restitution.
> But being the person he is, he thinks only in terms of action. By
> sitting in Grimmaud Place moaning about doing nothing, he is
> inducing a mind-set in Harry - the only true response is to act.
> Very dangerous in an impressionable, admiring teenager.

Laura:

You can't have it both ways-either Sirius is impulsive or he's 
monomaniacal about Peter.  He either acts precipitously in the Shack 
or he's been plotting this for years.  Which one is it?

Yeah, I think you're right about the survivor syndrome.  But I also 
think Harry can see clearly why Sirius says the things he does, and I 
don't see any text that indicates that it was Sirius who influenced 
him to act as he did in OoP.  That "saving-people-thing" is a long-
standing behavior.
> 
> Laura (from before):
> > Which brings me to a question-why didn't DD just get rid of the 
globe 
> > the way he got rid of the stone when it got to be a liability?   
> 
> Kneasy:
> No firm opinions  on this one. Could be that he knew it was of 
little
> use to  Voldy, but if it kept him occupied and out of mischief, or
> even induce him to make a mistake, then it's useful.
> Are you 100%  certain he got rid of the Stone? I'm not.

Laura:

Oh, no!  Another fact in doubt?  I may need to double my 
medications...:-)




From eowynn_24 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 20:55:13 2003
From: eowynn_24 at yahoo.com (eowynn_24)
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2003 13:55:13 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry's Temper Was Re: Feelings on OoP
In-Reply-To: <bjkf69+4rgm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030909205513.40197.qmail@web60203.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80273



jwcpgh <jwcpgh at yahoo.com> wrote:

> sbursztynski <greatraven at h...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Melanie Black 
> <princessmelabela at y...> wrote:
> <snip> 

>>Sue B wrote: <snip>


 Eowynn:

<snip>
  Most of all I will miss the conversations I have with my friends and all 
of you on HP4GU. Anticipation is the key to a good story. And I 
believe that JKR has got our full attention, so bring on the fun!

> Laura:
<snip>
> But that's the fun, isn't it-thinking within boundaries and 
>seeing how those boundaries can stretch?

Eowynn: yes, exactly. I love to challenge my imagination, by trying to stay inside the boundaries I am "limited" in how far out in right field I am. I love to read peoples thoughts on different topics, finding the canon they quote and finding my own thoughts on the topic.

>As for the discussion ending when the books end, don't worry about 
>that, Eowynn! There's still a healthy industry in Sherlock Holmes 
>analysis and pastiche over a hundred years after the stories first 
>began to appear, and in addition to the Baker Street Irregulars, 
>there are active scion societies all over the world.  Maybe I'll 
>start a Marauders society in my home town...:-)
> 
> 
eowynn:

The Marauders society, sounds like it would be a lot of fun, I may have to branch out from the original and start one in my town (lots of HP fans around here.)Plus we will still have Nimbus. Right?

Eowynn ( Who is feeling ever so much better, thanks) 
> ---------------------------------







---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From manawydan at ntlworld.com  Tue Sep  9 20:58:04 2003
From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan)
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2003 21:58:04 +0100
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Percy's letter
References: <1063064682.6268.76452.m19@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <000601c37715$10a0d460$3f4d6551@f3b7j4>

No: HPFGUIDX 80274

Silmariel wrote:
> In regards to this, I must say (and I hope not to be killed), that
> Umbridge *can* be a truly 'delightful woman', if you are on the same
> side as her, and fulfilling you role instead of opposing her. I see
> her as a fanatic (and sadist, that's granted), but I'm sure she has
> been truly delightful to Draco Malfoy at some time (I suspect more
> than once) during OoP, and I don't think he is the only student she
> has favored.

But I wonder what Percy's relations with Dolores were _before_ he started
working for Fudge. Percy, after all, spent almost a year working in Crouch's
department. He would have learned what her reputation was. Not a nice one, I
suspect, among the MoM rank and file. Then of course Percy himself was
"investigated" over his possible part in Crouch's disappearance. Did Dolores
do the interrogation? If so, she could well have put Percy through a
considerable period of extreme misery. Someone suggested that she _might_
even have placed him under Imperio (given her ease at the possibility of
using Unforgivables).

Maybe Percy's letter to Ron was the equivalent of the messages from Crouch
to Percy while he was a prisoner of Crouch Jr - I've surmised that they, by
virtue of the fact that they were completely against procedure, were
Crouch's only means of trying to warn Percy that something was up - Percy of
course totally failed to notice the subtext. Sadly, so does Ron.

> As a good MoM boy "It pains me to criticize our parents"... , and
> ends with: "I sincerely hope that, in time, they will realize how
> mistaken they were and I shall, of course, be ready to accept a
> full apology when that day comes" - do you hear the Disney music?
> the Oz music?  Choose one.

I suspect it doesn't pain him at all, except insofar as he sees it as part
of his dignity that he "should" have normal relations with the folks.
Possibly the culture within the MoM is such that lineage is seen as worthy
of respect. But Percy's dignity is also constantly offended by Arthur's
perceived eccentricities and love of Muggles. I'm sure Percy took a lot of
stick because of his father, especially since the break - Fudge has whipped
it up and Percy has copped for it.

Cheers
Ffred

O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon
Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion
Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri





From entropymail at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 21:19:34 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 21:19:34 -0000
Subject: CoS scene.
In-Reply-To: <99A8B6E4-E2F5-11D7-8C3C-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bjlg56+4ugh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80275

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith <arrowsmithbt at b...>
wrote:
<snip>
> There was speculation a few weeks ago as posters tried to figure out 
> which episode in CoS  had been retained in the CoS film at the 
> insistence of JKR.
> 
> In the book, we have the meeting between Harry and Dumbledore in DD's 
> office after the petrification of Justin Finch-Fletchley and Nearly 
> Headless Nick. Hagrid  bursts in carrying a couple of dead roosters, 
> proclaiming Harry is innocent. Now we know about Ginny killing the 
> roosters and why she has done it. But this is not explained in the film.
> 
> So why does Hagrid still barge in carrying two dead (apparently 
> irrelevant) roosters?
<snip>

I just watched CoS last week with my boys (okay, for the millionth
time!) and this scene just struck me as odd. I couldn't quite figure
out why Hagrid had those damn roosters.

Similarly, I also had the same feeling during the Knockturn Alley
scene; or, that is, directly following the Knockturn Alley scene,
where Hagrid finds Harry and warns him about being there. When Harry
questions this, and asks Hagrid what *he's* doing down there, Hagrid
says he was looking for some flesh-eating slug repellant. I haven't
read the book in a while. Is there anything to back this up, or is
Hagrid really doing something suspicious?

Entropy






From istareth at yahoo.es  Tue Sep  9 12:55:22 2003
From: istareth at yahoo.es (=?iso-8859-1?q?duran=20garcia?=)
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2003 14:55:22 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: OoP - GUILTY Dumbledore (was Dumbledore's true sorrow motives)
In-Reply-To: <bjgpka+9r9u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030909125522.16946.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80276

Hi! I just wanna say that if you go to http://www.cbc.aca/programs/sites/hottype_rowlingcomplete.html , you?ll see Rowling saying that DD is the epitome of goodness, so I understand that he is doing everything to help Harry.
(Sorry if my English is not good at all.)


"duran garcia" 




From entropymail at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 21:28:16 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 21:28:16 -0000
Subject: Death Eaters: Etymology--& Dark Mark & Snape
In-Reply-To: <bjl4kk+d6gj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjlglg+n85k@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80277

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Amanda" <editor at t...> wrote:
<snip>
> > The term "Death Eaters" have always puzzled me a bit, JKR isn't one 
> to
> > take names lightly, and on the other hand, it doesn't really make
> > sense (whaddayamean, eating death?) So, here's a hypothesis (not 
> quite
> > a full-fledged theory yet):
> 
> Good thoughts. It is part of JKR's genius that she can pull names and 
> terms from the collective unconscious that "fit" so very well with 
> the ambience, atmosphere, and "feel" of their targets. They plug so 
> well in with so many related ripples and echoes, only some of which 
> she is aware of.

Also noticed that one of Trelawney's many bogus prophecies (I believe
in GoF) mentions something about seeing the "vultures circling", which
seems to bring to mind the image of the Death Eaters' circle that
forms later in that book (in the graveyard).  And, of course, those
carrion eating vultures can literally be seen as "death-eaters".

Just a thought,
Entropy




From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Tue Sep  9 21:42:24 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 21:42:24 -0000
Subject: Cool is as Cool Does (was: Hint in Cos)
In-Reply-To: <20030909171531.67808.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjlhg0+jr2m@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80278

> Zeynep Oner said:
> (Thus, it's official: DD is the coolest.) <


This got me thinking--always a dangerous proposition. Who does JKR 
present as "cool"? And why? What IS the meaning of life?

OK, scratch that last. But this could be a fun thread!

My pick as the coolest living cats in the Potterverse are...

5. Dumbledore. Yes, he's cool. A right powerful bloke. Not too worried 
about what others think. Obvious, but not the coolest.
4. Harry. Absolutely cooler in the books than DD. He is, after all, 
the main hero, capable of stopping a speeding DE in a single spell as 
a teenager. Able to leap tall Voldies in a single Priori. Yep, he's 
occasionally moody and a winner. But not the coolest.
3. Shacklebolt. Just another stud auror who plays it cool, wiping 
small memories in a heartbeat and dropping DEs by the score. Sure, we 
know almost nothing about him, but that's because he speaks only when 
he wants to be heard. But not the coolest.
2. Lupin. By day a man with animal magnetism. By night (occasionally) 
a wild animal who plays by no one's rules. But not the coolest. Which 
brings us to the winners...
1. Fred & George Weasley! Yep, these so-bad-they're-good boys are 
pranksters who march to their own drummer. If school doesn't suit 
them, then they're out (with a bang). Clearly the coolest cats in 
school, they've taken their act to a whole new audience for book 6. 
Let's give them a hand!

What does it mean that JKR makes them the coolest? I guess she's 
trying to say that good guys can have fun, or that sometimes rules 
were made to be broken, or that she's very attracted to redheads on 
brooms. Who knows?

As for you Snape-, Tonks- and Draco-lovers, you're trying too hard. I 
could maybe be convinced of Lucius, but it doesn't look too cool to 
lose, does it?

Let the coolest win!

-Remnant




From m.bockermann at t-online.de  Tue Sep  9 21:39:31 2003
From: m.bockermann at t-online.de (m.bockermann at t-online.de)
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2003 23:39:31 +0200
Subject: Death Eaters: Etymology
References: <1063131724.11640.89690.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <003d01c3771a$fdcc8540$1d269d3e@j4j3e3>

No: HPFGUIDX 80279

Alshain wrote:
> The term "Death Eaters" have always puzzled me a bit, JKR isn't one
to
> take names lightly, and on the other hand, it doesn't really make
> sense (whaddayamean, eating death?) So, here's a hypothesis (not
quite
> a full-fledged theory yet):
>
> 'Death Eater' could be a pun on 'necromancer', the word itself
coming
> of Greek 'nekros' (corpse) and 'manteia' (divination); the art of
> divination by communicating with the spirits of the dead. Also, via
> folk etymology, known as the Black Art (Lat. 'niger'). In general, a
> sorcerer, someone who practises the Dark Arts.
>
> Next part of the joke: Italian 'mangiare' and French 'manger' (to
> eat). My Latin's a bit shaky, unfortunately, so I can't trace this
> further.


Now me (Ethanol):
If this was not (supposed to be?) a childrens' book, I'd say "Death eater"
would meant *exactly* what is says: someone eating death. "Dead eater" would
express that a little bit clearer, but then people could think that the
eater is dead, not eating something dead.

There have been several examples of ritual cannibalism in history and that
would be the ultimate dark magic. I can imagine a group of evil wizards
doing that to gain eternal life - defeating death, so to speak.

The only thing that stops me from believing this is that this is a
childrens' book. Even if that is the way JKR intended it (which I doubt),
that would never get published.

And yet... there are things that fit worse... And think of the graveyard
scene in GoF - that was pretty evil as well. I can remember a discussion
linking it - either symbolically or realistically to a rape. And if you
think about it, there are quite a lot of so called fairy tales that threaten
with cannibalism. "Haensel and Gretel" from Grimm's fairy tales comes to my
mind.

So what do you think? Is it possible that JKR is going in that direction?

Greetings,
Ethanol





From shokoono at gmx.de  Tue Sep  9 16:37:23 2003
From: shokoono at gmx.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Carolin_M=F6nkemeyer?=)
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2003 18:37:23 +0200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Red herrings
References: <bjkcpj+ge09@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000b01c3771b$f119d450$76f3a986@caro>

No: HPFGUIDX 80280

> > I keep hearing about JKR's use of red herrings, and I'm wondering
> if
> > anyone would be willing to tell me if she's actually admitted
> > outright to using them, or if we've just deduced their existence
> over
> > the years?  I'd be really interested to read any interview that
> > refers to her use of red herrings if there are any out there.  I
> have
> > tried searching for clues in the posts on this website, as well as
> on
> > the Quick Quotes site, and the HP Lexicon site, but haven't found
> > anything, really.  Is this because I'm looking for something that
> > doesn't necessarily exist?
> >
> > Thanks to anyone that can help!
> > ~shwanalynn
>
>
> June 2003
>
> "JEREMY PAXMAN: But do you find the whole secrecy issue, the need
> for secrecy, a bit ridiculous?
> JK ROWLING: No.
> JEREMY PAXMAN: Why not?
> JK ROWLING: No not at all. Well, a lot of it comes from me.
> JEREMY PAXMAN: Really?
> JK ROWLING: Yeah definitely. I mean, of course one could be cynical,
> and I'm sure you would be disposed to be so and say it was a
> marketing ploy, but I don't want the kids to know what's coming.
> Because that's part of the excitement of the story, and having - you
> know - sweated blood to create all my red herrings and lay all my
> clues.... to me it's not a ...this is my ....this is my....I was
> going to say this is my life, it's not my life, but it is a very
> important part of my life."
>
> I found this interview on a BBC site.  There used to be a link on
> the Leaky (quotes), but it isn't working right now.
>
> Anyway, thar ya be.
>
> Toad
>
Me:
I would even go so far to say that the first red herring (if I understand
their meaning right...) was given in the first chaper of book one when
Hagrid mentions Sirius (motorbike!)... why would he meet him at the
destroyed house of the Potters if not to see if he can do something ... and
if not he was a close mate of them...

Yours Finchen




From malinia13 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 19:23:21 2003
From: malinia13 at yahoo.com (malinia13)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 19:23:21 -0000
Subject: CoS scene.
In-Reply-To: <99A8B6E4-E2F5-11D7-8C3C-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bjl9b9+juk0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80282

I had always thought that Fawkes and Harry shared a special bond, you
know, like ducklings imprint upon the first thing they see? Well, in
the movie, the exact same thing happened.
But I am stumped about the roosters....
:)

"malinia13"




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 22:13:05 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 22:13:05 -0000
Subject: Prediction/Verisimilitude   Was: Correct forecasts (long)
In-Reply-To: <bjl5v9+e9ec@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjlj9h+nqv2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80283

Jim Ferer wrote:
> I think the approach to predicting future events has a lot to do 
> with the accuracy of predictions.

Great post!
  
> In my opinion, Marianne was dead on because she approached her 
> analysis in terms of the characters as humans. Marianne probably 
> knew kids like James and Sirius, knew that kids like them generally 
> are "arrogant little berks," until the grow up, anyway, and so made 
> her prediction on her experience with human nature. We all have 
> skeletons, so why would Prongs and Padfoot be any different? <snip>

To predict effectively, go back to the characters whose behavior you 
have experience with, and think of what they are likely to do next; 
to the degree that events are driven by that character's behavior, 
and to the extent that your analysis of the character is correct, 
allowing for a little Chaos theory (and History), you will probably 
predict correctly.  I am just sort of rephrasing here, I think.

> The "what would you do" test is useful. I once wrote a fic designed 
> to answer a question: how do you get Muggle parents to accept the 
> existence of the wizarding world after their kid gets a Hogwarts 
> letter?

I think the "what would *you* do" test (emphasis added) was useful 
for the Muggle parents' behavior because the "you" being inquired of 
was (I assume) a Muggle.  I cannot predict Snape, for instance, based 
on what I think I would do in his place; for fanfic *or* prediction, 
I would have to "put on" his character and operate it like a hand 
puppet, causing it to speak and behave based on what I (think I) know 
of him.

<snip> I predicted that Voldemort would spend the early stages of the 
War in 1, gathering strength, 2, encouraging the wizard world and the 
MoM that the threat didn't exist, 3, trying to deprive the forces of 
good of their base, Hogwarts, and 4, trying to discredit and 
neutralize his main enemies, Dumbledore and Harry. That's what 
happened <snip>

Very likely JKR used the same historical model you did; so did you 
predict, or did you parallel? <g--kidding!>

<snip> One small, observed fact is parent to a speculation which in 
turn is used as the launching point for another speculation, and 
another, and another, until there's a whole new world cantilevered 
out there ? and it doesn't take much for the whole thing to come 
crashing down. <snip>

Inexperienced writers will sometimes get reader (friends, writers' 
groups) reactions of "This doesn't work for me; I don't believe this 
would happen," and respond with, "But this happened to my cousin 
Sid!"  Doesn't matter.  They have built a structure on a wobbly 
base.  Whether you're using what happened to your cousin Sid or a 
speculation on a part of the Potterverse, if it isn't consistent, if 
it doesn't fit, with what we already believe, you have to change our 
beliefs first or risk losing our attention.  (Otherwise known as 
writing with verisimilitude.)

> Occam's Razor admonishes a reasoner to `choose from a set of 
> otherwise equivalent models of a given phenomenon the simplest 
> one.' Occam's razor helps us to "shave off" those concepts, 
> variables or constructs that are not really needed to explain a 
> phenomenon. 

People use Occam's Razor (great name for a barbershop quartet, no?) 
all the time without even thinking about it.  Switch on lamp; no 
light:  bulb has probably gone bad.  Thoughts of fuse/circuit 
breaker, unpaid electric bill, or power outage come only after the 
bulb is replaced.  *Unless* you notice other appliances down, 
remember that unpaid bill, or see that the whole block is dark, in 
which case "otherwise eqivalent" has changed.

> If you want to suggest that Luna is starting to like Harry, go 
> ahead, make your points and your arguments, and we'll have fun 
> discussing it. It's not a ridiculous notion. <snip> It seems 
> reasonable that anybody with a radical, earthshaking theory should 
> have a much higher wall to climb for acceptance than someone with a 
> more modest suggestion.

What anyone who posts a prediction here is doing is virtual 
continuation of the story; a hint of fanfic in our heads.  Can we 
imagine the story playing out thus?

You cannot fly in the face of your audience's existing expectations.  
They will not go there.  If you really want them to, you have to (at 
least temporarily) change their assumptions.  JKR sprang fake!Moody 
on us and it worked, but she *retroactively* changed our assumptions; 
after we thought back, we saw the clues.  (And Moody was never 
someone we (Harry) really let our (his) guard down with (gonna trust 
someone called "Mad Eye," right!) anyway, so we (he) didn't feel too 
devastated by the betrayal.)

> Never forget that JKR, who always plays fair, is also Knight Grand 
> Commander of the Order of the Red Herring. Many of the little hints 
> and clues are tiny little pills of foolery and double meaning; but 
> if you watch the characters you'll do all right.

I see JKR like a magician (this is about magic, isn't it?); there's 
some prestidigitation going on, some misdirection:  I'm gonna flutter 
this hand right here by my face and you're gonna look at it, that's a 
natural reaction to what I'm doing, and while you're looking here, 
I'm gonna be moving this rabbit from where it's stowed over *there* 
(where you're not looking) so I can pull it out of my hat in a 
minute.  You wanted to "Ooh!" and "Aah!" didn't you?  Note:  the 
magician's intent is to entertain you, not distract you while picking 
your pocket.

Some of the theories like Evil!Dumbledore make me a little crazy; JKR 
spent considerable time and effort grooming our suspension of 
disbelief; I don't see her (or any writer who wants people to pick up 
their next book) blowing that up quite so spectacularly, because what 
it says is:  Hey, you trusted me, and I made you look like an idiot 
(picked your pocket), isn't that funny?  Yes, I see her as playing 
fair (and that goes back to *my* expectations and assumptions).  She 
has so far.

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley"





From elizabeth1603 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 22:18:16 2003
From: elizabeth1603 at yahoo.com (elizabeth1603)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 22:18:16 -0000
Subject: CoS scene.
In-Reply-To: <99A8B6E4-E2F5-11D7-8C3C-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bjljj8+bdk6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80284

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith <arrowsmithbt at b...> 
wrote:

> So why does Hagrid still barge in carrying two dead (apparently 
> irrelevant) roosters?
> 
I don't think anyone's answered this question yet, so I will. The roosters are a 
clue to the monster in the Chamber. The rooster's cry is fatal to basilisks, so 
Tom Riddle had Ginny kill all the roosters so the basilisk wouldn't be killed 
when it roamed around the school at night.

I agree with the person who said the crossbow scene was intriguing. Just 
what was Hagrid expecting? I thought maybe dementors, but a crossbow 
woudn't hurt them, would it?




From elizabeth1603 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 22:18:11 2003
From: elizabeth1603 at yahoo.com (elizabeth1603)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 22:18:11 -0000
Subject: CoS scene.
In-Reply-To: <99A8B6E4-E2F5-11D7-8C3C-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bjljj3+gpc4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80285

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith <arrowsmithbt at b...> 
wrote:

> So why does Hagrid still barge in carrying two dead (apparently 
> irrelevant) roosters?
> 
I don't think anyone's answered this question yet, so I will. The roosters are a 
clue to the monster in the Chamber. The rooster's cry is fatal to basilisks, so 
Tom Riddle had Ginny kill all the roosters so the basilisk wouldn't be killed 
when it roamed around the school at night.

I agree with the person who said the crossbow scene was intriguing. Just 
what was Hagrid expecting? I thought maybe dementors, but a crossbow 
woudn't hurt them, would it?




From elizabeth1603 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 23:20:35 2003
From: elizabeth1603 at yahoo.com (elizabeth1603)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 23:20:35 -0000
Subject: Wizen recessive gene/Petunia
In-Reply-To: <003001c374f2$04e91e40$79092244@parkvl01.md.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <bjln83+647j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80286

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Deirdre F Woodward" <
dwoodward at t...> wrote:
> Hi all:
> snip<
> I've been reading posts that indicate that people seem to believe there is a
> recessive wizen gene.  (Wizen being the plural, non-gender form of wizard 
or
> witch, which I just made up, I think.  Is there a plural form of the noun?).
> 
> I don't buy a recessive gene.  I mean, we are talking about *magic* here.
> Why on earth would magic be born of a logical and mappable explanation?  
retty clear that Lily was the only witch in the family.
> snip<
> Deirdre

I just noticed a line in COS that made me think of this post. On pg.116 of the 
U.S. edition, Ron says, 'if we hadn't married muggles, we'd've died out.' This 
made me think that there must be something genetic (or the wizard 
equivelant) about magic because it sounds like magic people have to 
procreate and pass the magic on.

Elli




From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk  Tue Sep  9 23:46:48 2003
From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 23:46:48 -0000
Subject: The Greek tragedy of the Weasley family - Remember the letter...
In-Reply-To: <bjl1dl+iboc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjlop8+qgqb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80287


Holly,
good points. I'm beginning to get a feeling that Percy is being set up
to become either one of the most complicated figures in the future
books or the Prat of Prats. Loads of JKR's leading characters work
like kaleidoscopes -- twist them and a new pattern emerges (which is
why we like wrangling over them so much, I suppose). Unfortunately it
makes it difficult to put them inside little boxes and expect for them
to stay there (I *loved* what she was doing to Sirius and Snape in OOP
*evil grin*)      

> Me, holly :
>  Remember the letter Percy sent ot Ron? Although it was depicted as a 
> letter full of concern of a big brother towards the younger brother, 
> I find it hard to imagine that a person who grew up with those 
> people, Arthur and Molly, considers it right to tell them off to Ron, 
> simply because he is all grown up now and has an opinion. He does not 
> try to convince Ron that their parents are wrong or that the MOM is 
> right because it represents the law, he just tries to convince him 
> that he should set aside family and friends, because they do not have 
> the power they used to do. His concern is that Ron should not be 
> associated with people that lose their powers (DD) or with people 
> that will not help him to a quest of more power (Harry and Arthur). 
> He does not even try to show the slightest respect to the people that 
> brought him up, as he talks about his parents in what I feel is an 
> air of contempt for the "mess" they are involved in. He is trying to 
> persuade Ron by showing contempt for his parents and for a person 
> that he himself respected, when he thought he held a great deal of 
> power.
> 
<Al> The tragedies about Percy (IMO) are how he always manages to get
hold of the wrong end of the stick while convinced that he's acting
for the best, and how he manages to combine opportunism and moralism
so easily. He's a bit like Barty Crouch sr. in that aspect, if your
right hand offends you, cut it off, let the dead bury their dead etc.
If his family won't listen to him, on their own heads be it. 

He's actually being the perfect bureaucrat here, not letting his
personal emotions or family ties influence him, showing loyalty to
institutions not to people (who, after all, are interchangeable). 
The only thing I can't get to fit into my theory is his sucking up to
Fudge (unlike Perce's former hero Crouch sr., there's no backbone
anywhere in Fudge's body) 

> Me, holly :
> Judging from my own experience of this ancient drama (I am greek and 
> was taught this drama at school), Kreon's point of view is 
> characterised through the ages as the ultimate suppression to the 
> natural law. Not to want to bury someone in ancient Greece was at 
> least characterised as heresy, no matter what he/she did in life. 
> Kreon was not at all right, and Antigone's effort can be translated 
> as the struggle to obey laws (even if they are moral) while under the 
> threat of death. Kreon was the dictator above the laws, and Antigone 
> was the voice of right and lawful to the eyes of the gods, whose laws 
> were aboce all others.

<Al> We seem to be going into legal philosophy here, and I totally
agree with you about the point of Sophocles' play (must have been
great to be able to read the classical dramas in school). To me,
without the cultural background, it's interesting because it describes
the moral dilemmas we humans get into when two sets of guidelines
conflict with each other, whether we believe in higher powers or no.
One of the largest themes in HP are that rules must sometimes be
broken, but that some rules are higher than others. Percy doesn't
recognise which ones are important.

holly: <I think?>
But Percy's 
> attitude during the whole book is that of a man thirsty for power, 
> who despises the people deprived from it. Why send back the sweater, 
> knitted by the hands of your mother? Even if she is wrong, she is 
> still your mother.
 
<Al> I'm not saying he's making the right decisions nor that he
doesn't want power (nor that he isn't a git). I'd just like him to be
a little bit more interesting (read: tragic) than that, even if it's
just to become the next Barty Crouch sr. :-)

Alshain the apologetic




From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 00:40:08 2003
From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 00:40:08 -0000
Subject: Wizen recessive gene/Petunia
In-Reply-To: <bjln83+647j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjlrt8+gfgp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80288

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "elizabeth1603" 
<elizabeth1603 at y...> wrote:
> I just noticed a line in COS that made me think of this post. On 
pg.116 of the 
> U.S. edition, Ron says, 'if we hadn't married muggles, we'd've died 
out.' This 
> made me think that there must be something genetic (or the wizard 
> equivelant) about magic because it sounds like magic people have to 
> procreate and pass the magic on.
> 
> Elli

Richard here, saying ...

I think you misinterpreted that quote.  What I think it says is that 
if wizards and witches hadn't intermarried, their low rate of 
procreation would have caused them to die out.  This is not much 
different from what you find in zoology.  If a species or sub-species 
becomes too rare, it tends to die out.  There are a number of reasons 
for this, including a decreasing probability of meeting a suitable 
mate.

In the WW, exclusive intra-marriage would have eventually lead to 
serious inbreeding, with all the negative health effects attendant to 
that problem.  Over time, the problem would tend to accelerate the 
demise of the community; as the number of viable mates declines, 
inbreeding becomes more difficult to avoid, until it is unavoidable, 
and the population would then likely collapse in just a few 
generations.


Richard





From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 01:06:23 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 01:06:23 -0000
Subject: CoS scene.
In-Reply-To: <bjljj3+gpc4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjltef+9rjj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80289

elizabeth1603 at y...> wrote:
> I agree with the person who said the crossbow scene was intriguing. 
> Just what was Hagrid expecting? I thought maybe dementors, but a 
> crossbow wouldn't hurt them, would it?

Dementors?  Dementors don't show up until PoA.  Oh, wait, you mean 
Hagrid already knew about them even if we didn't?  Yeah, that works.  
Sort of.  I think Hagrid was just expecting the law:

"Oh," he said, lowering the weapon and staring at them.  "What're you 
two doin' here?"

"What's that for?" asked Harry, pointing at the crossbow as they 
stepped inside.

"Nothin'--nothin'" -- Hagrid muttered. "I've been expectin'--doesn' 
matter --Sit down -- I'll make tea--"

When I read it, because Fudge shows up almost immediately (and only  
incidentally with Dumbledore), with the intent of essentially 
arresting Hagrid, I assumed Hagrid had been expecting the authorities 
to show up and drag him off to Azkaban.  The way Hagrid stared when 
he saw Harry and Ron standing in his doorway and then thought to make 
tea, I thought he was hurriedly ramping down the plan he'd formed 
earlier that involved the crossbow: "They'll never take me alive!"  
(Can't have a shootout with children present.)  Maybe Dumbledore had 
sent him an owl saying, "Get out of there, Hagrid, the posse's 
coming!"
Sandy, aka "msbeadsley"





From jferer at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 01:07:17 2003
From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 01:07:17 -0000
Subject: Prediction/Verisimilitude   Was: Correct forecasts (long)
In-Reply-To: <bjlj9h+nqv2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjltg5+ed4m@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80290

Sandy:" I think the "what would *you* do" test (emphasis added) was
useful  for the Muggle parents' behavior because the "you" being
inquired of was (I assume) a Muggle. I cannot predict Snape, for
instance, based on what I think I would do in his place; for fanfic
*or* prediction, I would have to "put on" his character and operate it
like a hand puppet, causing it to speak and behave based on what I
(think I) know of him."

Good point, and I should have said it more broadly.  In many cases you
have to look for other parallels than your own experience, from people
you've known, met, or read about, or even look into the parts of
yourself hidden in the background.  

Take Snape. It wasn't until OOP that I felt I had the handle on him. 
He was an isolated, socially phobic, picked on kid.  He started out
filled with negative energy over his home life and filled himself with
rage over his treatment at Hogwarts.  Every couple holding hands is a
taunt aimed directly at him, every set of friends is an affront, and
every visible manifestation of love in any form is a knife in the
heart to a guy whose heart was starved until it died.  Cruise on over
to alt.support.loneliness or alt.support.shyness and you'll get an
eyeful of more rage than you can imagine. Snape probably posts there.

Sandy:" Very likely JKR used the same historical model you did; so did
you predict, or did you parallel? <g--kidding!"

Interesting hair to split. <g> To catch a fish, though, you have to
think like the fish, or to win a battle, think like your opponent.

Sandy:" What anyone who posts a prediction here is doing is virtual 
continuation of the story; a hint of fanfic in our heads. Can we 
imagine the story playing out thus?"

There's other kinds. The little pieces I wrote were intended to be as
believable as I could make them, imagining events that could happen or
explaining things as "accurately" as possible.  Other kinds of fics do
something very different, imagining Harry/Hermione/Ron/Ginny/Draco as
very different people than the ones walking around in canon; in other
words, an alternative universe to JKR's alternative universe.  Some
are so far out it's like some doppelganger took over the characters'
bodies.

It sounds like I have definite opinions about the quality of some of
the predictions and theories I see on this list, and I do.  In the
interest of list harmony, I'll keep them to myself.  The speculation I
*don't* mind is the one that says, "I know I can' back his up, but
wouldn't it be cool if..." We all know we're just having fun then.

Sandy:" Some of the theories like Evil!Dumbledore make me a little
crazy; JKR spent considerable time and effort grooming our suspension
of disbelief; I don't see her (or any writer who wants people to pick
up their next book) blowing that up quite so spectacularly, because
what it says is: Hey, you trusted me, and I made you look like an idiot 
(picked your pocket), isn't that funny? Yes, I see her as playing 
fair (and that goes back to *my* expectations and assumptions). She 
has so far."

This theory in particular actually offends me, makes me angry and a
little sad.  We've been conditioned by stupid movies and clich?d plot
devices to expect the Ultimate Betrayal, where your best friend in the
Army turns out to be the guy helping the drug dealers. Bah.  If JKR
did that, it would be the worst betrayal of young readers ever, and I
could never forgive her for it, because the message to young readers
would be

1.	The world is no damn good.
2.	Love, friendship, and loyalty aren't real.  Nobody else matters,
because they'll betray you sooner or later anyway.
3.	Don't trust anyone.

I don't believe for a minute JKR's doing it. She's been the opposite
of all those loathsome qualities.

Jim Ferer





From lziner at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 01:07:51 2003
From: lziner at yahoo.com (lziner)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 01:07:51 -0000
Subject: CoS scene hagrid crossbow
In-Reply-To: <bjljj3+gpc4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjlth7+r7e5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80291

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "elizabeth1603" 
<elizabeth1603 at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> 
> wrote:
> 
> > So why does Hagrid still barge in carrying two dead (apparently 
> > irrelevant) roosters?
> > 
> I don't think anyone's answered this question yet, so I will. The 
roosters are a 
> clue to the monster in the Chamber. The rooster's cry is fatal to 
basilisks, so 
> Tom Riddle had Ginny kill all the roosters so the basilisk wouldn't 
be killed 
> when it roamed around the school at night.
> 
> I agree with the person who said the crossbow scene was intriguing. 
Just 
> what was Hagrid expecting? I thought maybe dementors, but a 
crossbow 
> woudn't hurt them, would it?

I thought -given he was framed by Riddle - he had the crossbow in 
case the MOM arrived to take him to Azkaban.  Hagrid took the blame 
last time the Basilisk was loose (aragog).  Just my thought.

Lziner (who would never follow a spider)
  




From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 01:10:57 2003
From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 01:10:57 -0000
Subject: Prank
In-Reply-To: <20030909143500.19936.qmail@web20010.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjltn1+hore@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80292

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Rebecca Stephens 
<rsteph1981 at y...> wrote:
> 
> --- Richard <darkmatter30 at y...> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Somehow, I think Sirius might well have thought that
> > the worst that 
> > might happen would be that Snape would soil himself,
> > and get away 
> > after using a few of those curses he was famous for.
> >  He might well 
> > have been disappointed that James short-circuited
> > the prank, but 
> > still a bit pleased that Snape still had a bit of a
> > scare.  Had it 
> > gone much worse, I'm sure he would have felt badly
> > about it, despite 
> > Snape being the victim.  But I doubt he INTENDED to
> > KILL Snape, even 
> > if it was much easier for Dumbledore and Snape to
> > see it that way.
> > 
> > 
> > Richard
> 
> 
> All I can say is that all these years later, when
> Sirius should be both older and wiser, he still
> doesn't care.  He is not sorry.  That's horrible.  
> 
> Fact is, I'd have supported prosecution of Sirius at
> that point.  I don't tolerate "boys will be boys" when
> the only logical conclusion that can be made is that
> the victim (or "target" if you prefer) will be injured
> or killed.  Believing anything else when sending
> someone unprepared to face a wereworlf is willful
> ignorance.
> 
> 
> Rebecca

I don't see Sirius as necessarily "wiser," after all these years.  
Though many people think time makes you wiser, in reality it just 
makes you older.  It is what you do with that time that decides 
whether you become wiser or not.

But, that's not really my point here.  As the "prank" in fact never 
came off, I can see Sirius taking an attitude like, "Well, get over 
it, Snape!  No harm, no foul, you know ..."  Sirius has had more 
traumatic things to deal with during most of the intervening years 
than Snape's grudge over something that was not only a couple of 
decades ago, but which did Snape no real harm in any case.  There is 
something to be said for such an attitude.  However, taking it before 
one has internalized the fact that it was a very bad idea, and then 
apologizing very sincerely to the almost-victim, seems a bit of a 
character flaw to me.  But, again, Sirius has had other things on his 
mind.  Years spent in grief and contemplating revenge aren't likely 
to have left him with much desire to rethink and resolve things with 
regard to Snape, and Snape sniping at him surely didn't help put 
Sirius in a mood for such reconsideration, remorse and apology.

As for willful ignorance, I think that almost a definition of what it 
means to be a teen, even if it doesn't quite apply in this case.  To 
be a teen also often means that one is rather devoid of the knowledge 
and experience that leads one to the habit of forethought.  So, I can 
see Sirius at the time of the prank just not thinking about the 
possibility that Snape might be killed.  And, Snape was not 
exactly "unprepared," being armed with a wand and a substantial 
repetoire of curses, jinxes and other spells with which to face a 
werewolf.  I can't see Snape ... or anyone, for that matter ... 
walking blythely into the lair of a ravening werewolf without being a 
little cautious.  The Shrieking Shack earned its reputation from that 
werewolf's loud behavior, after all, and Snape would have been able 
to hear such growls, crashings, etc., while still in the tunnel, 
presumably with wand out for a Lumos to light the way, well before he 
reached the Shrieking Shack.


Richard





From sollecks970 at aol.com  Wed Sep 10 01:20:20 2003
From: sollecks970 at aol.com (fawkes970)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 01:20:20 -0000
Subject: the dementor: alive or dead?
Message-ID: <bjlu8k+s9vh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80293

When i think of a dementor, it is hard to picture one of them dying. 
And then it hit me: do they ever actually die. Could it be like a 
phooenix and just re-appear when it gets too old. do they even get 
old or were they just created and none will ever become more or 
less, they will just stay the number of them there are. They are 
techinically alive, because they are abble to move(glide) and act
(kiss, tuck hand into sleeve, etc.)- they are not immortal because 
they too have weaknesses(lack of senses, patronus): but do they ever 
die. do they reproduce? just throwing things out there that i 
thought were thought-worthy. I looked up some information on the 
dementor on Lexicon(aka my life), and they had this to say about 
them: http://www.hp-lexicon.org/dementors.html (id print it out now 
but they dont let u copy out what they printed in lexicon. however 
ill just say some things about them. Lupin said. "they are amongst 
the foulest creatures on the face of the planet.."(so they are a 
creature, not some immortal mirage-like projection). then later 
on "a dementor's breath is cold and rattling, as if it was trying to 
suck more then air out of the room"(which is saying that they 
breathe, correct): im just letting everybody know about this, see 
what has to be said. thanks for your time. 
	~as always, fawkes(pat)




From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 01:29:20 2003
From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 01:29:20 -0000
Subject: Prank
In-Reply-To: <bjgavc+24ed@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjlupg+o4k4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80294

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sylviablundell2001" 
<sylviablundell at a...> wrote:
> Richard wrote:
> It is perhaps wiser to be calm at a more distant time, even if the 
> events call for thunder and lightening at the time they happen.
> 
> Now me (Sylvia)
> That is just my point.  There doesn't seemto have been any thunder 
> and lightening at the time the "prank" happened.  All very well for 
> DD to take a calm and forgiving attitude many years after in 
talking 
> to Harry, but what sort of a punishment did he hand out at the time?
> I acknowledge that children can get up to really dangerous things. 
My 
> own certainly have and I have myself, but it never involved 
> deliberately putting someone at risk of death or serious injury.
> And now I'm starting to worry about why Snape's father never did 
> anything about it.  It all sounds like a really nasty cover-up with 
> the golden boys getting off scot-free and poor bloody Snape feeling 
> more alone than ever.  
> Sylvia (who is sorry to get so mad, but bullying makes me more 
angry 
> than anything in the world)

me (Richard) thinks ...

We don't know that they WEREN'T punished at the time.  All we are 
ever told about the incident is that it happened, Sirius starting it, 
James short-circuiting it, and Snape holding a grudge ever since.  
Snape, as the intended victim of the prank, might well think Sirius 
essentially unpunished if the punishment didn't include an extended 
stay at Azkhaban.  We also have no clue as to what Snape's parents 
may or may not have done.  So, to conclude that Sirius was NOT 
punished would be to impute material into the story that isn't 
there.  Further, we do not know whether Dumbledore even knew of this 
happening AT THE TIME.  He may well have learned of this well AFTER 
the fact, when "the statute of limitations" had expired ... meaning 
Sirius was no-longer a student whom Dumbledore COULD punish.

I've always had problems with bullying myself.  The first fight I 
ever had was when I was five.  A neighbor of the same age told a 
female friend (also of the same age) that he would beat her up if she 
didn't say she liked him.  She wouldn't, he tried, and I beat the 
c*** out of him on the spot.  (It was the start of a long-strong 
friendship between the girl and myself.)  In fact, every fight I've 
ever had has been protecting someone from a bully.  But, I don't see 
this as bullying.  Why?  Well, we don't have a whole lot of evidence 
either way, apart from a few stray comments and the Pensieve 
episode.  We DO know that Snape routinely tried to jinx James (and 
presumably Sirius), just as James returned the favor.  Two or more 
people with a serious antipathy towards each other, and who keeping 
acting upon that antipathy, is a slightly different matter, even if 
it is still horribly immature, reprehensible, etc.

So, the point?  I think you are condemning Sirius based upon 
inferences not wholly supported by canon.


Richard





From meltowne at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 01:36:28 2003
From: meltowne at yahoo.com (meltowne)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 01:36:28 -0000
Subject: Prank
In-Reply-To: <bjltn1+hore@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjlv6s+c9ga@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80295

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Richard" <darkmatter30 at y...> 
wrote:

Snape was not 
> exactly "unprepared," being armed with a wand and a substantial 
> repetoire of curses, jinxes and other spells with which to face a 
> werewolf.  I can't see Snape ... or anyone, for that matter ... 
> walking blythely into the lair of a ravening werewolf without being 
a 
> little cautious.  The Shrieking Shack earned its reputation from 
that 
> werewolf's loud behavior, after all, and Snape would have been able 
> to hear such growls, crashings, etc., while still in the tunnel, 
> presumably with wand out for a Lumos to light the way, well before 
he 
> reached the Shrieking Shack.

Exactly.  Snape was not unprepared.  What was the part of the exam 
they were discussing in the Pensieve scene?  The question of how to 
identify a werewolf!  Which means any student who expected to score 
an OWL on that exqam probably should know the 5 ways to identify a 
werewolf... meaning Snape probably had a good idea what was going on.

Melinda




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 01:55:06 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 01:55:06 -0000
Subject: Prediction/Verisimilitude   Was: Correct forecasts (long)
In-Reply-To: <bjltg5+ed4m@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjm09q+t7ff@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80296

> Take Snape.

Iieeeee!! No, thanks! <g>

> It wasn't until OOP that I felt I had the handle on him. He was an 
> isolated, socially phobic, picked on kid.  He started out filled 
> with negative energy over his home life and filled himself with
> rage over his treatment at Hogwarts.  Every couple holding hands is 
> a taunt aimed directly at him, every set of friends is an affront, 
> and every visible manifestation of love in any form is a knife in 
> the heart to a guy whose heart was starved until it died.  Cruise 
> on over to alt.support.loneliness or alt.support.shyness and you'll 
> get an eyeful of more rage than you can imagine. Snape probably 
> posts there.

Yes!  I especially like how you said "filled himself with rage"--that 
pain-(or fear-) to anger alchemy (Harry in OoP, anyone?) is something 
one can do with little or no training at all.  And here we have 
another facet of why Snape hated Harry right off:  Harry showed up, 
first week of school, with a good buddy in tow, Ron.  Snape must have 
taken that as one more example of life spitting in his eye.  And 
Snape had probably observed Harry even earlier, in the Great Hall, 
happily surrounded by many chattering fellow students with whom he 
seemed to have achieved an instant rapport.  "Our new--*celebrity*."  
Nope, just a kid who showed up openhearted and hoping for the best.

> > Sandy:" What anyone who posts a prediction here is doing is 
> > virtual continuation of the story; a hint of fanfic in our heads. 
> > Can we imagine the story playing out thus?"
 
> There's other kinds. The little pieces I wrote were intended to be 
> as believable as I could make them, imagining events that could 
> happen or explaining things as "accurately" as possible.  Other 
> kinds of fics do something very different, imagining Harry/Hermione/
> Ron/Ginny/Draco as very different people than the ones walking 
> around in canon; in other words, an alternative universe to JKR's 
> alternative universe.  Some are so far out it's like some 
> doppelganger took over the characters' bodies.

I was referring to predictions *themselves* as (at least implied) 
prophetic fanfic; even saying, "Harry will end up paired off with 
Moaning Myrtle" inspires a scenario in the reader's imagination akin 
to a snippet of fanfic. <gak! not a genuine prediction!>

I don't read fanfic; I'm afraid to, because I'm too easily confused 
(to read the stuff which follows canon without confusing it later 
*with* canon.  A couple months after Book 7 hits, I will voraciously 
consume it *all*!)  As for the alternate universe versions, I just, 
well, think my philosophy as someone who has done some writing is, ah 
<hiding *under* soapbox and peering out cautiously>, go whittle your 
own wood.  No, no, that's not right--do what you want; just don't cry 
over my empty seat in the theater.  Yeah, that's closer.  My posts 
about Sirius's "Death-Journal" are grief therapy, and while not 
opposed to canon, unlikely, IMO, to have any bearing on what will 
follow, so I'm safe (and completely at the mercy of my Animagination).

> <snip a bunch of true wisdom> If JKR did that, it would be the 
> worst betrayal of young readers ever, and I could never forgive her 
> for it <snip>
> I don't believe for a minute JKR's doing it. She's been the opposite
> of all those loathsome qualities.

Just young readers?  When I open a Harry Potter book, I *am* a child 
(again).  And furthermore, hear, hear!

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley"





From tuck668 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 02:05:11 2003
From: tuck668 at yahoo.com (tuck668)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 02:05:11 -0000
Subject: CoS scene hagrid crossbow
In-Reply-To: <bjlth7+r7e5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjm0sn+jad9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80297

> > I agree with the person who said the crossbow scene was 
intriguing. 
> Just 
> > what was Hagrid expecting? I thought maybe dementors, but a 
> crossbow 
> > woudn't hurt them, would it?
> 
> I thought -given he was framed by Riddle - he had the crossbow in 
> case the MOM arrived to take him to Azkaban.  Hagrid took the 
blame 
> last time the Basilisk was loose (aragog).  Just my thought.
> 
> Lziner (who would never follow a spider)

I'm not trying to tear down your post, but do you really think that 
Hagrid would shoot at the MoM if they came to take him to Azkaban? I 
mean, Hagrid can be a little, um, rash (?) at times, but to keep a 
crossbow handy in case the MoM comes seems to be a little much..

-Anna





From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Wed Sep 10 02:08:40 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 02:08:40 -0000
Subject: CoS scene.
In-Reply-To: <bjlck3+fl54@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjm138+dqh6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80298

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "severusbook4" 
<severusbook4 at y...> wrote:
> 
> I seem to remember the JKR insisted on the Knockturn Alley scene, 
> with Harry in the store, being left in the film.  I also think it 
> has something to do with Harry's hands, the hand of Glory grabbed 
> him in this scene, and there was not any other reason to have this 
> in the film.  The conversation between Malfoy and the store keep 
> didn't happen, but the hand scene did.  


Jen:

I ran across this quote from JKR in a 2000 interview with Larry King:

"But there's a small percentage of the stuff in books that is my 
modification of what people used to believe was true. For example, 
there is an object in the second book, which is the Hand of Glory. 
This is very macabre, but people used to believe in Europe that, if 
you cut off the hand of a hanged man, it would make a perpetual torch 
that gave light only to the holder, which is a creepy, you know -- 
but a wonderful idea. So I used that. That's a very ancient idea. I 
didn't invent the Hand of Glory."

My theory is the Hand of Glory will play again and that the Knockturn 
Alley scene was the one JKR insisted on keeping in. My first thought 
when reading that quote was *Wormtail*! 

Who better to be the "hanged man"? Maybe not literally yet, but as 
Sirius said, Pettigrew has nowhere to go. His old friends and the 
Order won't take him back, and Voldemort may have no use for him now 
that he's back to full power. 

 I think JKR's use of the myth won't be exactly as the one above. 
Rather than Pettigrew's cut-off hand, he will use his "silvery" new 
hand in an act of mercy towards Harry, or in some way to impede 
Voldemort. (That's not a new theory around here, but the above 
interview seems to give it some weight).






From silverdragon at ezweb.com.au  Wed Sep 10 23:08:08 2003
From: silverdragon at ezweb.com.au (silverdragon at ezweb.com.au)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 09:08:08 +1000
Subject: OT: Thankyou
References: <bjkg9n+2f02@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000201c37809$a08f98f0$69984cca@Monteith>

No: HPFGUIDX 80299


> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/45198
>
> Kirstini, grovelling at the temple of Pip.

As a relative newbie here, I would just like to take this opportunity to say
Thankyou to all the people who include something such as the above snip in
the their posts. Directing people to relevant and interesting past posts
along the current threads is so very helpful, especially to those who don't
have great access to computors or who have limited hours usage. It saves so
much time on searches and I thank those who make the effort to do this.

Nox




From lawtrainer at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  9 19:51:51 2003
From: lawtrainer at yahoo.com (Jana Fisher)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 19:51:51 -0000
Subject: Book Six Titles
In-Reply-To: <bijdg9+ig08@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjlb0n+a0f6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80300

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jim Ferer" <jferer at y...> wrote:
> Phlux:" Phlux:"On July 24th a company by the name of "Seabottom
> Productions Limited" registered two trademarks by the names 
of "Harry
> Potter and the Mudblood Revolt" and "Harry Potter and the Quest of 
the
> Centaur". This company must be related to WB, since the HP 
trademark 
> is now their property."
> 

Here is my theory: could Sea derive from Seamus and bottom from 
Neville Longbottom?  A fictional company setup to keep us wondering 
about book six titles?

Jana





From AllieS426 at aol.com  Tue Sep  9 21:13:42 2003
From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 21:13:42 -0000
Subject: CoS scene.
In-Reply-To: <bjlck3+fl54@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjlfq6+qch9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80301

Severus here:
> 
> I seem to remember the JKR insisted on the Knockturn Alley scene, 
> with Harry in the store, being left in the film.  I also think it 
> has something to do with Harry's hands, the hand of Glory grabbed 
> him in this scene, and there was not any other reason to have this 
> in the film.  The conversation between Malfoy and the store keep 
> didn't happen, but the hand scene did.  Also, I brought this up 
> before, Harry seemed to have a hand fixation in the film and in the 
> book.  

Rereading CoS now- the Hand of Glory does not grab Harry in the book. 
He doesn't touch it.

Allie





From hulahulagirl205 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 01:03:32 2003
From: hulahulagirl205 at yahoo.com (Nadia Kennedy)
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2003 18:03:32 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Ginny: 7 of 7?     was Re: Charlie Weasley's age 
In-Reply-To: <bjg2mc+a1n9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030910010332.57566.qmail@web60106.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80302


scoutmom21113 wrote (post 76434):


(snip)...if Arthur was also a seventh son, the seventh son of a 
seventh son is supposed to be a seer or have other magic powers... 
(snip)  Is Arthur a 7th son?  Or is Molly a 7th?  And does it apply 
to a 7th child, not just a son?  I'm thinking about Ginny of course.


hg replying:
I noticed that in their replies to this post, no one addressed this 
tidbit about Ginny, possibly because the thread was a speculation 
about Charlie's age.  But it's an interesting idea that I have 
wondered about also.  I don't know what canon there would be to 
defend such an idea, but I wonder if anyone else has considered it.

hg.

Hello!

I was wondering about Ginny being the seventh child of a seventh child myself. I tried to do some research on it, but the information I got on it was sketchy at best. I don't know if one has to be be the seventh son of the seventh son in order to have special powers or if you can be the seventh daughter of the seventh daughter. (Ahh, all this alliteration!!!) Everyone seems to agree that the seventh child has the power to heal and has second sight. What is interesting is that it is said that the seventh of seven is supposed to expose the evil and corruption of the world, but is marked by those same forces to destroy him/her. I sure feel sorry for Ginny now...

Of course, all this is depending on whether Arthur or Molly is the seventh child. Prove me right, book 6!





From m-kostelnik at earthlink.net  Wed Sep 10 03:16:56 2003
From: m-kostelnik at earthlink.net (maryja_kostelnik)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 03:16:56 -0000
Subject: Hint in Cos
In-Reply-To: <20030909171531.67808.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjm538+q4r8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80303

Hi, I'm Maryja; I'm new to the forum. Please excuse any faux pas...

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Zeynep Oner <kozmoz47 at y...>
wrote: 
> 1. In one of Lochard's books he says that he saved a town from
monthly werewolf attacks. He even demonstrated it on class using Harry
as the werewolf. Why can this spell be used on Lupin and change his
life?<

It's always possible Lockhart was being excessively creative in his
interpretation of the research.  Or maybe the spell was just to
physically subdue, not transform the werewolf.
 
> 2. When Harry sees the Malfoys on the shop in Knockturn Alley,
Lucuis MAlfoy says that Draco is right to hate Harry Potter especially
when the wizarding community sees him as the hero who brought
Voldemort to his downfall...

I thought Lucius Malfoy told Draco he was being imprudent in being
hostile to Harry because of Harry's hero reputation.





From greatraven at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 10 03:58:27 2003
From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 03:58:27 -0000
Subject: The Hogwarts librarian
Message-ID: <bjm7h3+e90f@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80305

Is it only me who is just a bit irritated by the cliched presentation 
of Madam Pince the librarian? Really, who'd want her job? The poor 
woman seems to have no asistance whatsoever, and she is on duty 
virtually 365 days a year, from morning till night (in one of the 
novels she closed at 8.00 p.m.). The only time I can recall the 
library being closed to students she was dusting the shelves just 
before Christmas (and if she's at the table on Christmas Day, JKR 
doesn't mention it). She has to put up with students in Invisibility 
Cloaks raiding the Restricted Shelves (restricted for good reason and 
not by her)and leaving smashed lamps around, the terribly good 
Hermione Granger tearing pages out of books and heaven knows what 
else. And still JKR describes her as "thin, vulture-like" (the 
cliched library dragon, it would serve them right if DD hired a real 
dragon for the job) and chasing kids who eat in the library (myself, 
I just ask them to finish their snacks outside, please). I wouldn't 
blame her for leaving for one of those Muggle schools where they have 
the Internet and automated catalogues and you can be involved in 
teaching research skills instead of having popular novelists making 
fun of you! : - )

Sue B




From dunknegg at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 04:09:16 2003
From: dunknegg at yahoo.com (Rania Melhem)
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2003 21:09:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Hogwarts librarian
In-Reply-To: <bjm7h3+e90f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030910040916.99010.qmail@web20502.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80306

As a librarian, I totally agree with you. I am very irritated by Madam Pince's description by JKR. I dont know why she is depicted so horribly. And she never seems to help any of the Hogwarts students find information. 
Rania

sbursztynski <greatraven at hotmail.com> wrote:
Is it only me who is just a bit irritated by the cliched presentation 
of Madam Pince the librarian? Really, who'd want her job? The poor 
woman seems to have no asistance whatsoever, and she is on duty 
virtually 365 days a year, from morning till night (in one of the 
novels she closed at 8.00 p.m.). The only time I can recall the 
library being closed to students she was dusting the shelves just 
before Christmas (and if she's at the table on Christmas Day, JKR 
doesn't mention it). She has to put up with students in Invisibility 
Cloaks raiding the Restricted Shelves (restricted for good reason and 
not by her)and leaving smashed lamps around, the terribly good 
Hermione Granger tearing pages out of books and heaven knows what 
else. And still JKR describes her as "thin, vulture-like" (the 
cliched library dragon, it would serve them right if DD hired a real 
dragon for the job) and chasing kids who eat in the library (myself, 
I just ask them to finish their snacks outside, please). I wouldn't 
blame her for leaving for one of those Muggle schools where they have 
the Internet and automated catalogues and you can be involved in 
teaching research skills instead of having popular novelists making 
fun of you! : - )

Sue B


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
________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!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From mpjdekker at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 10 04:14:30 2003
From: mpjdekker at hotmail.com (mightymaus75)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 04:14:30 -0000
Subject: Hagrid's odd behavior (was: CoS scene)
In-Reply-To: <bjlasb+gju6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjm8f6+gclp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80307

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "melclaros" <melclaros at y...> 
wrote:
> Me:
> I'm leaning towards the scene in which, for no apparent reason
> Hagrid anwers the door with a cocked crossbow. HUH? With the
> developments in OoP now all I'm wondering is was he expecting
> Centaurs or Gawp?
> 
> Melpomene


Good question, why does Hagrid answer the door with a cross-bow?! 
Surely it wasn't meant for Dumbledore and Fudge. 

And as Entropy so nicely pointed out, Hagrid did also turn up in 
Knockturn alley in the beginning of the book. Hagrid tells Harry he 
was there to buy some Flesh-Eating Slug Repellent to protect the 
school cabbages. But when Ron almost burps up slugs over his precious 
pumpkins, he quickly pulls Ron back. If he'd bought slug repellent 
wouldn't he have used it to protect his pumpkins? Pumpkins he put so 
much effort in, and was so proud of. Suddenly Hagrid is starting to 
look very suspicious. 

Then there is also the business with Lockhart. According to Hagrid, 
Lockhart had been giving him advice on getting kelpies out of a well. 
Ok, first of all, why would there be a well on the Hogwards grounds? 
The castle is right next to a natural lake. And secondly, aren't 
kelpies creatures roughly the size of a horse? Perhaps someone who 
has a copy of MCWTFT could shine some light on this. But from what I 
gather on the Internet, kelpies would often take the form of a tame 
horse standing in shallow water. When mounted by a weary traveler 
they would then drag the rider down by rushing headlong into the 
deepest part of the water. They are also known to take the form of a 
hairy manlike beast with the head of a horse. Wouldn't a well be a 
little small for a whole bunch of these things?  

If Lockhart wasn't giving advice on kelpies, what was he doing at 
Hagrid's cabin? It does seems that he was trying to help him with 
something: '"It's a simple matter if you know what you're doing!" 
Lockhart was saying loudly to Hagrid. "If you need help, you know 
where I am! I'll let you have a copy of my book. I'm surprised you 
haven't already got one - I'll sign one tonight and send it over. 
Well, good-bye!" And he strode away toward the castle.' Besides his 
Guide to Household Pests, Lockhart has written the following books: 
Break with a Banshee, Gadding with Ghouls, Holidays with Hags, 
Travels with Trolls, Voyages with Vampires, Wanderings with 
Werewolves, and Year with the Yeti. Could Hagrid perhaps be meddling 
with one of those creatures? 

-Maus





From jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 04:43:34 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 04:43:34 -0000
Subject: Gettin' Out of School (a filk)
Message-ID: <bjma5m+5mvm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80308

This is a filk of the song "Gettin' Out of Town" from the musical
"Forty-Second Street."


I dedicate this filk to Ginger.

                   Gettin' Out of School
(SCENE:  Fred and George Weasley realize that they have learned all
they are going to learn at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry,
and want to leave in style.)

FRED::
We're grabbin' our hats and cloaks.

GEORGE:
We're leavin' this place for jokes.

BOTH:
But not without one last hoax.
Gettin' out of school.

FRED:
We'll make a big hullabaloo
Before we bid fond *adieu*,
Just ask that git Montague.
Gettin' out of school.

GEORGE:
Fiery dragons of green and gold;
Pink Catherine Wheels behold;
Down the corridors they rolled.
Filch and Umbridge were aghast.
Weasleys' Wildfire Whiz-Bangs last! 
Gettin' out of school.

BOTH:
Peeves flies by. He's sayin' bye, bye,
And we're shoutin', *"Accio!"*
Brooms coming while we wreck the plumbing.
Let's go! Let's go! Let's go! 

FRED:
As we left this prison camp
We made a Portable Swamp.
School corridor sure was damp. 
Gettin' out of school.

 
 

BOTH:
Peeves flies by. He's sayin' bye, bye,
And we're shoutin', *"Accio!"*
Brooms coming while we wreck the plumbing.
Let's go! Let's go! Let's go!
Let's go! Let's go! Let's go!

A new kind of company,
We're goona be *bourgeoisie*.
We're footloose and fancy free.
Gettin' out of school.


-Haggridd




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 05:19:00 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 05:19:00 -0000
Subject: CoS scene.
In-Reply-To: <bjl9b9+juk0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjmc84+pei1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80309

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "malinia13" <malinia13 at y...> wrote:
> I had always thought that Fawkes and Harry shared a special bond, you
> know, like ducklings imprint upon the first thing they see? Well, in
> the movie, the exact same thing happened.
> But I am stumped about the roosters....
> :)
> 
> "malinia13"

bboy_mn:

This should perhaps be in the HP4GU-Movie group, but I will answer anyway.

There is clearly at least one scene if not more in the Book that sets
up the roosters and establish them as a clue to the Basilisk. In the
movie, the scene where Harry meets Hagrid with the dead rooster in the
hallway was film and is in the additional scene on the DVD. But in the
anally obssessive desire to get the movie down to 2.5hrs running time,
Warner Brothers cut that scene out.

Many of the scenes that establish character motivation, and make the
movie make sense were cut from the movie, and can be found on the DVD
extras.

It would seem logical, if the setup scene was cut then Hagrid in
Dumbledore's office with the rooster would also be cut. Why it wasn't,
I don't know. Maybe it was there just so Dumbledore could respond and
say that he didn't think Harry was causing the problem.

As far as whether or not this is the mystery scene that had to be in
the movie because it comes back later in the story, I don't think the
rooter scene is it. I think the whole purposes of the rooters were a
clue for the Basilisk.

Just a thought.
bboy_mn




From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au  Wed Sep 10 05:33:18 2003
From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 05:33:18 -0000
Subject: Hagrid's odd behavior (was: CoS scene)
In-Reply-To: <bjm8f6+gclp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjmd2u+qpg9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80310

--- "mightymaus75" wrote: 
> Good question, why does Hagrid answer the door with a cross-bow?! 
> Surely it wasn't meant for Dumbledore and Fudge. 
> 
> Hagrid did also turn up in Knockturn alley in the beginning 
> of the book. Hagrid tells Harry he was there to buy some 
> Flesh-Eating Slug Repellent to protect the school cabbages. 
> But when Ron almost burps up slugs over his precious pumpkins, 
> he quickly pulls Ron back. If he'd bought slug repellent wouldn't 
> he have used it to protect his pumpkins? Pumpkins he put so 
> much effort in, and was so proud of. Suddenly Hagrid is starting to 
> look very suspicious. 
> 
> Then there is also the business with Lockhart. According to Hagrid, 
> Lockhart had been giving him advice on getting kelpies out of a 
> well. Why would there be a well on the Hogwards grounds? The castle 
> is right next to a natural lake. And secondly, aren't kelpies 
> creatures roughly the size of a horse? Perhaps someone who has a 
> copy of MCWTFT could shine some light on this. 
> 
> If Lockhart wasn't giving advice on kelpies, what was he doing at 
> Hagrid's cabin? It does seems that he was trying to help him with 
> something: '"It's a simple matter if you know what you're doing!" 
> Lockhart was saying loudly to Hagrid. "If you need help, you know 
> where I am! I'll let you have a copy of my book. I'm surprised you 
> haven't already got one - I'll sign one tonight and send it over. 
> Well, good-bye!" And he strode away toward the castle.' Besides his 
> Guide to Household Pests, Lockhart has written the following books: 
> Break with a Banshee, Gadding with Ghouls, Holidays with Hags, 
> Travels with Trolls, Voyages with Vampires, Wanderings with 
> Werewolves, and Year with the Yeti. Could Hagrid perhaps be 
> meddling with one of those creatures? 

Hagrid is one of my favourites (I dreaded that he would be the one to 
die in OotP). 

Opening the COS was what Hagrid was (wrongly) expelled for - and 
because he was never re-instated, a lot of people would accuse him of 
opening it again this time. I wouldn't blame him opening the door 
with a crossbow while Fang was barking.

It seems that Lockhart visited Hagrid, not that Hagrid invited him. 
Hagrid said he knew how to handle the kelpies without Lockhart's 
advice. Lockhart may have been asking about Harry, since he mentioned 
the help with signing photos. The book Lockhart spoke of was the 
Banshees (not a magical creature Hagrid could have as a pet).

As for the pumpkins, they were due to be used for Halloween soon. Not 
the best time to introduce them to slugs nor repellant.

aussie




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 05:35:55 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 05:35:55 -0000
Subject: CoS scene hagrid crossbow
In-Reply-To: <bjm0sn+jad9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjmd7r+ujup@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80311

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tuck668" <tuck668 at y...> wrote:

> > 
> > I thought -given he was framed by Riddle - he had the crossbow in 
> > case the MOM arrived to take him to Azkaban. 
> > 
> > Lziner


> 
> I'm not trying to tear down your post, but do you really think that 
> Hagrid would shoot at the MoM if they came to take him to Azkaban? I 
> mean, Hagrid can be a little, um, rash (?) at times, but to keep a 
> crossbow handy in case the MoM comes seems to be a little much..
> 
> -Anna

bboy_mn:

It would seem to be common knowledge that Hagrid was expelled, and one
would assume that at least the general circumstances of that expulsion
was known.

So, if I was Hagrid I would be worried too. If news of the attacks was
getting out, it's possible and angry mob with pitchforks and torches
might show up at his door. As we saw when it was revealed that Hagrid
was half giant, there are a lot of people who would seize any excute
to have a reason to attack a giant. 

It's possible that a team of Auror's or officers from Magical Law
Enforcement might show up, and equally, they may not have been as
diplomatic or friendly as the Minster of Magic was. Plus, I doubt that
Hagrid expected the Minister of Magic to handle this situation
personally. So, Hagrid may not have found the idea of being taken by
force (a la Umbridge) as his preferred option. 

I think the only reason Hagrid came peacefully is that Dumbledore was
there, and he wouldn't want to make a scene or cause trouble in a way
that would disappoint Dumbledore whom he idolizes.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn




From greatraven at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 10 05:39:03 2003
From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 05:39:03 -0000
Subject: Wizen recessive gene/Petunia
In-Reply-To: <bjlrt8+gfgp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjmddn+ciut@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80312

---> 
> In the WW, exclusive intra-marriage would have eventually lead to 
> serious inbreeding, with all the negative health effects attendant 
to 
> that problem.  Over time, the problem would tend to accelerate the 
> demise of the community; as the number of viable mates declines, 
> inbreeding becomes more difficult to avoid, until it is 
unavoidable, 
> and the population would then likely collapse in just a few 
> generations.
> 
> 
> Richard

It seems to me that there *was* a serious case of inbreeding among 
the "pureblood" families (perhaps why there seem to be so many 
nutters among them?). The way I see it is, there were a lot of 
wizards who went "underground" to avoid persecution and married out. 
And then, generations later, the recessive gene springs up (my 
biology is only high school, but I think this would work). This is 
why magical kids turn up in otherwise Muggle families.

Just an idea.

Sue B




From Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com  Wed Sep 10 06:12:58 2003
From: Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com (arcum42)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 06:12:58 -0000
Subject: Cool is as Cool Does (was: Hint in Cos)
In-Reply-To: <bjlhg0+jr2m@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjmfda+rnmv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80313

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "boyd_smythe"
<boyd.t.smythe at f...> wrote:
> > Zeynep Oner said:
> > (Thus, it's official: DD is the coolest.) <
> 
> 
> This got me thinking--always a dangerous proposition. Who does JKR 
> present as "cool"? And why? What IS the meaning of life?
> 
> OK, scratch that last. But this could be a fun thread!
> 
> My pick as the coolest living cats in the Potterverse are...
> 
> 5. Dumbledore. Yes, he's cool. A right powerful bloke. Not too
worried 
> about what others think. Obvious, but not the coolest.
> 4. Harry. Absolutely cooler in the books than DD. He is, after all, 
> the main hero, capable of stopping a speeding DE in a single spell
as 
> a teenager. Able to leap tall Voldies in a single Priori. Yep, he's 
> occasionally moody and a winner. But not the coolest.
> 3. Shacklebolt. Just another stud auror who plays it cool, wiping 
> small memories in a heartbeat and dropping DEs by the score. Sure,
we 
> know almost nothing about him, but that's because he speaks only
when 
> he wants to be heard. But not the coolest.
> 2. Lupin. By day a man with animal magnetism. By night
(occasionally) 
> a wild animal who plays by no one's rules. But not the coolest.
Which 
> brings us to the winners...
> 1. Fred & George Weasley! Yep, these so-bad-they're-good boys are 
> pranksters who march to their own drummer. If school doesn't suit 
> them, then they're out (with a bang). Clearly the coolest cats in 
> school, they've taken their act to a whole new audience for book 6. 
> Let's give them a hand!
> 

How can you possibly talk about the coolest characters in HP without
Bill Weasley? He works as a curse-breaker in Egypt, has a fang
earring, dragon-hide boots, and a ponytail, and is dating *Fleur
Delacour* after all. We even have cannon: "However, Bill was - there
was no other word for it - *cool*." 

Lupin, Fred, and George are high up there, though (And Fred & George
do have those dragon-hide jackets now)...
--Arcum




From a_williams1 at uop.edu  Wed Sep 10 07:16:09 2003
From: a_williams1 at uop.edu (Aesha)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 07:16:09 -0000
Subject: CoS scene.
In-Reply-To: <bjlg56+4ugh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjmj3p+ppnf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80314

> Similarly, I also had the same feeling during the Knockturn Alley
> scene; or, that is, directly following the Knockturn Alley scene,
> where Hagrid finds Harry and warns him about being there. When Harry
> questions this, and asks Hagrid what *he's* doing down there, Hagrid
> says he was looking for some flesh-eating slug repellant. I haven't
> read the book in a while. Is there anything to back this up, or is
> Hagrid really doing something suspicious?
> 
> Entropy

Hi Entropy!
  I've looked through the messages and couldn't find a reply to your 
message. It doesn't say in the book that Hagrid was doing anything 
suspicious- it doesn't tell us at all what he was doing. However, in 
the book, his manner toward Harry when Harry asks him what he was 
doing down Knockturn Alley is the same as in the movie- as though 
he's trying to hide something, and trying to come up with a good 
cover quick.

Aesha




From prof_uloth at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 10 07:40:13 2003
From: prof_uloth at hotmail.com (Fred Uloth)
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 23:40:13 -0800
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Vernon Dursley
In-Reply-To: <bjiegd+j482@eGroups.com>
References: <bji7np+51ru@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20030909132306.00ae8eb0@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 80315

So are Petunia and I the only ones that like Vernon? As we have the Draco 
|| Dudley parallel, i see a Snape || Vernon parallel. Now all of you Snape 
lovers don't bash me until you've heard me out. I'm not saying that Vernon 
has all the redeeming qualities attributed to Snape...nor is he as complex. 
However, they both torment Harry because of their feelings towards his 
parents. While they grow to dislike Harry for himself, one is left to 
wonder if they would have disliked him in the beginning had it not been for 
the "sins" of the parents.

Vernon also strikes me as someone who is whooped by his wife. Think back to 
the Boy Who Lived in PS/SS. Vernon is afraid to bring up the topic of the 
Potters because he fears his wife's reaction and submits to her will quite 
often. He is a man that aspires to be powerful, but is thwarted 
constantly...the owl posts, Hagrid, the "perfect" dinner, the punishment 
(escape by flying car), the St Brutus's Secure Center lie (why wasn't 
Vernon's memory altered), the reception of wizards into his home (ended in 
duddiekins' engorged tongue), and his attempt to kick Harry out of the 
house for good.

Vernon is the kind of neighbor that I would be friendly towards just on the 
basis of his entertainment value. He's so pompous & opinionated , not to 
mention his constant pupping on airs..he'd provide me with hours of 
amusement. I guess he's not as much of a character as he is a caricature.

I guess Vernon could be a "red shirt" (as in the original Star Trek's 
doomed crew member), but I hope not as he provides much comic relief!.

Fred, who loves Jim Dale's Uncle Vernon voice




From psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 03:21:10 2003
From: psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com (psychobirdgirl)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 03:21:10 -0000
Subject: A Sirius clue
Message-ID: <bjm5b6+kcir@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80316

Did anyone else everythink, after reading OotP, that it was a little 
too obvious that Sirius would be the one who would die, especially 
considering the commonality of the saying "Dead Serious."



psychobirdgirl





From wildfire_517 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 04:18:33 2003
From: wildfire_517 at yahoo.com (wildfire_517)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 04:18:33 -0000
Subject: Prank/On posting.
In-Reply-To: <bjkfs4+hihu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjm8mp+drk3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80317


> Laura:
> 
> This leads me to ask a question I've been wondering about for a 
> while.  Although I'm not a conspiracy theorist (I think Kneasy has 
> cornered that market <g>), I do have to wonder about DD and what he 
> knew about the Marauders.  He says in PoA that they managed to keep 
> their transformations a secret from him.  I find that very hard to 
> believe.   Three boys, 2 of whom were the best and coolest students 
> in the school, left their dormitories 3 nights a month and stayed 
out 
> all night, and this went on for the better part of 3 years, and DD 
> didn't know about it?  (I'm excluding Remus here since obviously DD 
> did know about his full-moon activities.)  And how did James, 
Sirius 
> and Peter get through their classes after one of their all-night 
> adventures?  Even a 16 year old boy is going to feel the effects of 
3 
> nights of no sleep.  DD knows everything that goes on of any 
> significance at Hogwarts-how could he not have known about this?  

My turn:

  I believe, and always did, that DD knew what was happening.  He had 
to know.  DD knows everything that happens in Hogwarts.  He knows 
when Harry visits the Mirror of Erised in SS.  He knows when Harry 
and Ron are hiding under the cloak in Hagrid's during CoS.  I really 
don't want to search for tons of canon, but I think you can get my 
point.  DD just seems to know all the "secret" stuff at Hogwarts.  
Now, this could be just a perk of being headmaster, but I highly 
doubt it.  My theory has always been that DD knew that the Marauders 
had managed to learn to be Animagi to roam the grounds with Remus, 
but he let it go on for two reasons.  One, allowing Remus to have 
such close friends, friends who worked out how to do something only 7 
people in a century could do, probably was good for him both in terms 
of keeping the werewolf in check and keeping him more human than he 
normally would be.  Two, by allowing them to work in "secret," they 
achieved something great, but DD could have stepped in at anytime had 
they overstepped their limits.  Heck, it wouldn't even surprise me if 
he slyly dropped them a couple hints to help their work!  He just 
seems like that kind of a guy to me.
   Of course, I'm one of those DD lovers who swears that he will 
never, ever die, regardless of the possible foreshadowing and all the 
Star Wars conspiracy theories.  Take my ramblings with a grain of 
salt.

   Wyld





From caseys_mom at comcast.net  Wed Sep 10 04:31:55 2003
From: caseys_mom at comcast.net (yukonpup)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 04:31:55 -0000
Subject: Kelpies ( was Hagrid's odd behavior )
In-Reply-To: <bjm8f6+gclp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjm9fr+sjan@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80318


> The castle is right next to a natural lake. And secondly, aren't 
> kelpies creatures roughly the size of a horse? Perhaps someone who 
> has a copy of MCWTFT could shine some light on this.  
> 
> -Maus

>From Fantastic Beasts...  "Kelpie  MOM Classsification XXXX  This 
British and Irish water demon can take various shapes, though it 
most oftem appears as a horse with bulrushes for a mane.  Having 
lured the unwary on to its back, it will dive straight the the 
bottom of its river or lake and devour the rider, letting the 
enttrails float to the surface.  The correct means to overcome a 
kelpie is to get a bridle over its head with a placement charm, 
which renders it docile and unthreatening..."

Shouldn't Hagrid know this and why's he asking Lockhart?

Laurie





From tkj_etal at bellsouth.net  Wed Sep 10 04:40:53 2003
From: tkj_etal at bellsouth.net (Tim Johnson Family)
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2003 23:40:53 -0500
Subject: CoS Scene
Message-ID: <002301c37756$3933e160$9877d6d1@oldcomputer>

No: HPFGUIDX 80319

The rooster scene was originally included in the screenplay, but cut out--as far as I can tell. Watch the deleted scenes in the DVD carefully. It seems that originally Harry meets Hagrid in the hall--Hagrid explains the roosters have been dying. Hagrid later comes bursting into the office, swinging a dead rooster, claiming Harry must be innocent, because Hagrid saw him just before the attack. And Tom Riddle accuses Ginny of strangling roosters.
If that's true, the only reason they kept the rooster was because Hagrid was impossible to edit out of that scene. 

My pick for the clue is the Penelope/Percy relationship (shown briefly, but there). --RTJ



Admin team note:

Please can we be careful to keep this thread on topic, as it is beginning to stray into movie list territory.

Reference to the movies in order to throw light on the books is permissable, (eg, is this the scene that JKR insisted on keeping and if so, why?)but any further discussion of cinematic reasons for the inclusion of this or other scenes should be moved to the Movie List. Thank you.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From AllieS426 at aol.com  Wed Sep 10 05:07:48 2003
From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 05:07:48 -0000
Subject: Hint in Cos
In-Reply-To: <20030909171531.67808.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjmbj4+atpb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80320

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Zeynep Oner <kozmoz47 at y...> 
wrote:
> 
> You might have heard that JK Rowling said that she had given a lot 
of clues in the second book. Ever since I heard that I have been 
reading the CoS, and I came up with a few mind boggling questions. 
Sorry if they have been discussed before;
> 

I have a question.  Any possible idea what this could mean?
"Harry couldn't explain, even to himself, why he didn't just throw 
Riddle's diary away...And while Harry was sure he had never heard the 
name T.M. Riddle before, it still seemed to mean something to him, 
almost as though Riddle was a friend he'd had when he was very small, 
and had half-forgotten. But this was absurd. He'd never had friends 
before Hogwarts, Dudley had made sure of that."  CoS 234

(Is quoting against the rules?)  Anyway, just ran across that. 
Another sort of vague statement, the kind JKR throws out a lot, that 
I think might be important.  Why would the name mean ANYTHING to him, 
did he hear it in his babyhood or something? Was the diary just 
ensnaring him so that he couldn't throw it away?

Allie





From silmariel at telefonica.net  Wed Sep 10 08:33:34 2003
From: silmariel at telefonica.net (Carolina)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 10:33:34 +0200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Wizen recessive gene/Petunia
In-Reply-To: <bjmddn+ciut@eGroups.com>
References: <bjmddn+ciut@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <200309101033.34199.silmariel@telefonica.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 80321

> Sue B:
> The way I see it is, there were a lot of
> wizards who went "underground" to avoid persecution and married
> out. And then, generations later, the recessive gene springs up
> (my biology is only high school, but I think this would work).
> This is why magical kids turn up in otherwise Muggle families.

I don't think it would work with a simple recesive gene, the last 
time this was discussed, Peg posted this interesting one: 76090, 
playing with this factors:

W=Wizarding gene (magical powers)
w=Nonwizarding gene (no magical powers)
M=Muggle proneness (weakens the expression of the W gene)
m=non-Muggle proneness (no effect on expression of the W gene)
P=Wizarding power (strengthens the expression of the W gene)
p=non-Wizarding power (no effect on the expression of the W gene)

Hope it helps, 
silmariel



From martiyoung at msn.com  Wed Sep 10 05:16:55 2003
From: martiyoung at msn.com (chicofan12000)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 05:16:55 -0000
Subject: What is Hermione afraid of?
Message-ID: <bjmc47+j790@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80322

Just a thought I had before and again recently while reading PoA:  
After the boggart scene Lupin tells Harry he didn't allow him to try 
the spell because he thought the boggart would become Voldemort.  But 
somehow Hermione doesn't try the spell either...





From dfran at sbcglobal.net  Wed Sep 10 05:37:54 2003
From: dfran at sbcglobal.net (deedeee88)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 05:37:54 -0000
Subject: CoS scene.
In-Reply-To: <bjlck3+fl54@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjmdbi+oj3i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80323


Harry seemed to have a hand fixation in the film and in the 
> book.  Did anyone else catch this?  Harry touched the hand of 
Glory, 
> he touched the hand of the petrified boy (can't remember his name), 
> and he touched Hermone's hand when she was in the hospital (that's 
> how he found her note, in the book).  Kind of strange to keep the 
> first hand scene when it had nothing to do with the plot whats so 
> ever.  JMHO though. Feel free to destroy it.
> 
> Sevvie

If you read all the books closely, hands are mentioned all the time...

and then with the final prophecy and the "hand" comment in it.. I 
felt I always had to pay attention to the hands...

hands, hands, hands...green eyes and hands(feeling like Dr. Suess---
'Green Eggs and Ham' after reading the books for the umpteenth time 
and becoming irritated at the descriptions of everyones eyes and 
hands)--but the entire green eyes is a whole 'nother post...

Then there's pettigrew's sacrificing his hand (wouldn't an ear have 
done?) and his "new hand"...and Pettigrew being beholding to Harry 
because Harry saved his life...this is what led me on the hand 
chase...

DeeDee





From silmariel at telefonica.net  Wed Sep 10 09:02:29 2003
From: silmariel at telefonica.net (Carolina)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 11:02:29 +0200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: CoS Scene
In-Reply-To: <002301c37756$3933e160$9877d6d1@oldcomputer>
References: <002301c37756$3933e160$9877d6d1@oldcomputer>
Message-ID: <200309101102.29681.silmariel@telefonica.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 80324

Cos DVD spoiler --- if you haven't seen the last scene, after the 
credits, you might want to skip this post.

> Admin team note:
> Reference to the movies in order to throw light on the books is
> permissable, (eg, is this the scene that JKR insisted on keeping
> and if so, why?)...

I don't know if this is the scene, but it is an interesting clue. 
Gilderoy Lockhart writes a book called 'Who am I?', that can 
perfectly be a bio of his experiences in St. Mungo. I bet Neville's 
parents are there, he has been 3 years near them, so, could he have 
the clue about Gumwrappers (or whatever) after, or if,  he regains 
his memory?

silmariel
 
  




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Wed Sep 10 09:26:36 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 09:26:36 -0000
Subject: OoP - GUILTY Dumbledore (was Dumbledore's true sorrow motives)
In-Reply-To: <bjlei6+jnto@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjmqoc+rf0g@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80325

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
> 
> Laura:
> 
> You can't have it both ways-either Sirius is impulsive or he's 
> monomaniacal about Peter.  He either acts precipitously in the Shack 
> or he's been plotting this for years.  Which one is it?
> 
>
Kneasy:
Crossed lines here, I think.
The showdown I was referring to was the 'first' one that ended with
multiple murder and Sirius getting the blame. Not exactly a master-
piece of planning or restraint. A definite case of 'if only'.

Obsession and rash impulsiveness aren't mutually exclusive IMHO.
See : slashing of Fat Lady, breaking Ron's leg, hands around Harry's
throat. 

It all  depends on personality. 
Compare  with Snape's actions in the Shrieking Shack. He's obsessed 
with getting Sirius, he shouts a lot but his actions are logical and
fairly  restrained, given the situation. He believes revenge is a dish
best eaten cold. Sirius is the opposite.







From eloiseherisson at aol.com  Wed Sep 10 09:31:08 2003
From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloiseherisson at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 05:31:08 EDT
Subject: Hagrid's odd behavior (was: CoS scene) 
Message-ID: <c6.21f9ef47.2c90495c@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80326

Maus:

>Good question, why does Hagrid answer the door with a cross-bow?! 
>Surely it wasn't meant for Dumbledore and Fudge. 


Eloise:
No. Obviously not Dumbledore (I hope).

But Hagrid was a frightened man at this point. He must have known that he 
would be under suspicion. I don't think that he'd go out of his way to threaten 
the Minister with a crossbow (would he have expected to have been arrested 
personally by Fudge, anyway?), but he might well have been expecting arrest and 
been prepared to resist. I don't think he was surprised that he was being sent 
to Azkaban (horrified and hoping against hope that it might not be so, but he 
knew immediately where he was being taken). I suspect he thought he had little 
to lose.

Maus:
>And as Entropy so nicely pointed out, Hagrid did also turn up in 
>Knockturn alley in the beginning of the book. Hagrid tells Harry he 
>was there to buy some Flesh-Eating Slug Repellent to protect the 
>school cabbages. But when Ron almost burps up slugs over his precious 
>pumpkins, he quickly pulls Ron back. If he'd bought slug repellent 
>wouldn't he have used it to protect his pumpkins? Pumpkins he put so 
>much effort in, and was so proud of. Suddenly Hagrid is starting to 
>look very suspicious. 

Eloise:
Previous discussion in this group has focussed on exactly what Flesh-Eating 
Slug Repellent *is*. Is it repellent for *flesh-eating slugs*, and if so, whose 
(or what's) flesh are they eating? Would they, in fact attack *pumpkins*? Or 
cabbages? Or is it just a good name and a little inconsistency has crept in 
here?


Maus:
>Then there is also the business with Lockhart. According to Hagrid, 
>Lockhart had been giving him advice on getting kelpies out of a well. 
<snip>
>If Lockhart wasn't giving advice on kelpies, what was he doing at 
>Hagrid's cabin? It does seems that he was trying to help him with 
>something: '"It's a simple matter if you know what you're doing!" 
>Lockhart was saying loudly to Hagrid. <snip>


Eloise: 
Lockhart is, IMHO, simply being Lockhart. And JKR is simply inserting a 
little vignette to illustrate further his character. He's showing off. Being his 
usual insufferable self, bolstering his own ego and reputation by proffering 
unasked for and unwanted advice.
And a little later we are shown that Hagrid isn't taken in for one minute 
when he independently proffers the same opinion as Ron that what he says in his 
books is untrue.

I think that JKR is using the Knockturn Alley incident as a little bit of 
misdirection. She's hinting that yes, there *might* be something a bit dodgy 
about Hagrid (as if we didn't know that already, buying an illegal dragon egg for 
a start). Even Harry and Ron think that he released the Monster of Slytherin 
at one stage. She's inserting some doubt into our minds right there at the 
start of the book. Perhaps the fact that she has him say that *flesh-eating* slugs 
are ruining the *cabbages* is deliberately there to make it sound like he's 
covering for himself.

We know (or we trust) that Hagrid isn't into the Dark Arts. But he *does* 
regard as harmless pets what the rest of the wizarding world regards as monsters. 
He *isn't* averse to raising illegal creatures, or, apparently, with the 
Screwts, experimenting with the illegal crossing of creatures. I think it's quite 
in character that he might have been in Knockturn Alley "just looking" or with 
an eye out to acquiring some other exotic "pet" that wouldn't be available 
through more mainstream magical suppliers. Of course he had to make up an excuse 
for being there. But if Flesh-Eating Slugs are normal magical creatures, then 
surely the repellent would be available from the apothecary, or some other 
shop in Diagon Alley?

Perhaps the Flesh-Eating Slugs themselves are some "pets" of his that he's 
having problems with and being unpleasant sounding things, perhaps they 
themselves were acquired from Knockturn Alley.

~Eloise


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Wed Sep 10 09:42:27 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 09:42:27 -0000
Subject: The Hogwarts librarian
In-Reply-To: <20030910040916.99010.qmail@web20502.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjmrm3+jfum@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80327

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Rania Melhem <dunknegg at y...> wrote:
> As a librarian, I totally agree with you. I am very irritated by Madam Pince's 
description by JKR. I dont know why she is depicted so horribly. And she never seems 
to help any of the Hogwarts students find information. 
> Rania
> 

Perhaps JKR has set her character in our minds and is getting 
her ready for a major role in a future volume.

Conan the Librarian, maybe.

Kneasy 




From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Wed Sep 10 09:46:33 2003
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 09:46:33 -0000
Subject: Vernon Dursley
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20030909132306.00ae8eb0@localhost>
Message-ID: <bjmrtp+ov0h@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80328

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Fred Uloth <prof_uloth at h...> 
wrote:
> So are Petunia and I the only ones that like Vernon? As we have the 
Draco 
> || Dudley parallel, i see a Snape || Vernon parallel. 

< snip >
> However, they both torment Harry because of their feelings towards 
his 
> parents. While they grow to dislike Harry for himself, one is left 
to 
> wonder if they would have disliked him in the beginning had it not 
been for 
> the "sins" of the parents.

I always saw this comparison between Snape and Petunia, not 
necessarily Vernon. It is Petunia, who really has bitter feelings 
towards Harry's mother. Vernon, IMO, has just a major dislike for 
everyone, who is somehow "different". And both, Snape and Petunia, 
try to protect Harry, despite the fact, that they are bitter people 
who dislike him.

Hickengruendler
 




From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Sep 10 09:58:58 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 09:58:58 -0000
Subject: What is Hermione afraid of?
In-Reply-To: <bjmc47+j790@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjmsl2+rgf0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80329

Chicofan:
>> After the boggart scene Lupin tells Harry he didn't allow him to 
try the spell because he thought the boggart would become Voldemort.  
But somehow Hermione doesn't try the spell either...>>

Hermione doesn't try the Boggart because JKR is saving her worst fear 
up for the humourous bit in the DADA exam at the end of the book: 
Hermione's worst fear is McGonagall (someone she respects) telling 
her she's failed her exams (which she wanted to suceed in). Actually, 
this is interesting, as this exam comes up again in OoP, and Hermione 
makes a point here about how Harry got better marks in this exam than 
she did. I wonder if this re-emphasising of Hermione's hubris means 
it may turn out to be significant later on?
Kirstini




From jferer at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 10:10:22 2003
From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 10:10:22 -0000
Subject: CoS scene.
In-Reply-To: <bjm138+dqh6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjmtae+2nsd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80330

Severus:"I seem to remember the JKR insisted on the Knockturn Alley
scene, with Harry in the store, being left in the film. I also think it 
has something to do with Harry's hands, the hand of Glory grabbed him
in this scene, and there was not any other reason to have this in the
film. The conversation between Malfoy and the store keep didn't
happen, but the hand scene did."

Jen:" My theory is the Hand of Glory will play again and that the
Knockturn Alley scene was the one JKR insisted on keeping in. My first
thought when reading that quote was *Wormtail*! "

More movie contamination!  I think there's a good reason we're not
supposed to use stuff from the movies on the main list.  There's a
zillion possible reasons why JKR wanted that scene to stay that are
more probable than some kind of foreshadowing, the most likely of
which is that she thought the scene was good.  It's useful for people
to know that there's a seamy side of town even in the wizarding world. 

In _canon_, the _book_, which the movie is _not_, the Hand of Glory is
not emphasized or given undue attention. The focus of the scene in the
book was Lucius coming in to sell off stuff that was getting too hot
to keep at home, which also told us he had a lot of Dark Arts stuff. 
It was an insight into Lucius's, ah, "character."  We learn later that
he kept a few, shall we say, mementos, one of which became important
to the story. 

When JKR is giving a clue she means for us to remember, she usually
repeats it or echoes it in some way later on.  I think that's the time
to take notice.

I think constructing a theory based on which scenes are left in the
movies is, no offense, the road to folly.  Canon trumps the movies
each and every time; that's why the posting guidelines say movie stuff
is out.

Jim Ferer





From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Wed Sep 10 10:24:40 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (B Arrowsmith)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 11:24:40 +0100
Subject: CoS scene.
Message-ID: <FC7FC832-E378-11D7-A41E-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80331

Such a pity. I had my imagination working overtime on chickens, but it 
can't  be significant if, as posters have reported, the scene is part 
of the main feature in some instances (video?), but an extra scene in 
the DVD. Or  is it the country of release that makes the difference? 
But that's probably a subject for the film site.

The weight of opinion seems to favour Hagrid as the key figure, with 
Lockhart a close second; Knockturn Alley intrigues a lot of posters, 
too. So much more interesting than Sainsburys!

Don't forget there's also Fawkes' bonfire impersonation, with its 
message of serial rebirth and possibly giving a clue to DD being much 
older than the claims that he is 150 (in this incarnation?).

Back to the books.

Kneasy




From jferer at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 10:25:53 2003
From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 10:25:53 -0000
Subject: What is Hermione afraid of?
In-Reply-To: <bjmsl2+rgf0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjmu7h+lro7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80332

Chicofan: "After the boggart scene Lupin tells Harry he didn't allow
him to try the spell because he thought the boggart would become
Voldemort. But somehow Hermione doesn't try the spell either..."

Kirstini:" Hermione doesn't try the Boggart because JKR is saving her
worst fear up for the humourous bit in the DADA exam at the end of the
book: Hermione's worst fear is McGonagall (someone she respects)
telling her she's failed her exams (which she wanted to succeed in)."

Probably true, but the nagging doubt I have is that for everyone else
the fear is something gut, some primal terror, the stuff of which
phobias are made.  Something abstract can't have the same punch.

Kirstini: "Actually, this is interesting, as this exam comes up again
in OoP, and Hermione makes a point here about how Harry got better
marks in this exam than she did. I wonder if this re-emphasising of
Hermione's hubris means it may turn out to be significant later on?"

The students don't get their scores until July, after the end of the
story, so we don't know yet.  I don't have the book here, but I think
Hermione predicted Harry would do better.

I don't take that scene as an example of Hermione's hubris, because I
don't think she has hubris anymore, certainly not with her Trio-mates.

I would speculate that the boggart-horror she sees is something else ?
Harry dead.  Naturally she would be reluctant to say it to Harry, both
for his sake and because it would be taken as an indicator of her
feelings for him (and no, this isn't a SHIP argument, nobody disagrees
all the Trio care for each other ? the ship argument comes later). I
can't back that up at all, but we may see in the future what
Hermione's boggart really is.

Jim Ferer





From greatraven at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 10 10:48:44 2003
From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 10:48:44 -0000
Subject: The Hogwarts librarian
In-Reply-To: <bjmrm3+jfum@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjmvic+dl27@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80333

> > 
> 
> Perhaps JKR has set her character in our minds and is getting 
> her ready for a major role in a future volume.
> 
> Conan the Librarian, maybe.
> 
> Kneasy

Ooh, I love it! : - ) Actually, I'd like to see Madam Pince introduce 
her successor,an orang-utang from Unseen University in Ankh-Morpork, 
who says "ook", leaves banana skins lying around and turns Malfoy 
upside down and shakes him for calling him a monkey... Poor Draco 
wouldn't stand a chance.

Sue B




From deemarie1a at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 10:52:22 2003
From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 10:52:22 -0000
Subject: CoS scene.
In-Reply-To: <bjmtae+2nsd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjmvp6+rfno@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80334

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jim Ferer" <jferer at y...> > 
More movie contamination!  I think there's a good reason we're not
> supposed to use stuff from the movies on the main list.  There's a
> zillion possible reasons why JKR wanted that scene to stay that are
> more probable than some kind of foreshadowing, the most likely of
> which is that she thought the scene was good.  It's useful for 
people
> to know that there's a seamy side of town even in the wizarding 
world. 
> 
> In _canon_, the _book_, which the movie is _not_, the Hand of Glory 
is
> not emphasized or given undue attention. The focus of the scene in 
the
> book was Lucius coming in to sell off stuff that was getting too hot
> to keep at home, which also told us he had a lot of Dark Arts 
stuff. 
> It was an insight into Lucius's, ah, "character."  We learn later 
that
> he kept a few, shall we say, mementos, one of which became important
> to the story.

I hope everyone remembers that both in the movie and the book, this 
is where Harry emerged from the Floo Network.  I believe the reason 
we see Knockturn Alley, is quite simple.  Aside from introducing 
Lucius Malfoy, it is also juxtaposition to Diagon Alley.  The Yin and 
the Yang so to speak.

D 
> 
> When JKR is giving a clue she means for us to remember, she usually
> repeats it or echoes it in some way later on.  I think that's the 
time
> to take notice.
> 
> I think constructing a theory based on which scenes are left in the
> movies is, no offense, the road to folly.  Canon trumps the movies
> each and every time; that's why the posting guidelines say movie 
stuff
> is out.
> 
> Jim Ferer




From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Sep 10 11:27:57 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 11:27:57 -0000
Subject: What is Hermione afraid of?
In-Reply-To: <bjmu7h+lro7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjn1rt+qqq2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80335

I wrote:
>>>Hermione doesn't try the Boggart because JKR is saving her
worst fear up for the humourous bit in the DADA exam at the end of the
book: Hermione's worst fear is McGonagall (someone she respects)
telling her she's failed her exams (which she wanted to succeed in)>>>

Jim wrote: 
>>Probably true, but the nagging doubt I have is that for everyone 
else the fear is something gut, some primal terror, the stuff of which
phobias are made.  Something abstract can't have the same punch.>>

But this *is* Hermione's fear. They have a practical DADA exam at the 
end of PoA, and Hermione jumps out of the trunk with her face white, 
having seen McGonagall. JKR treats this as a joke in the passage, but 
what I was trying to get at here was whether this might actually lead 
to something more serious. She's afraid of failure, which is far more 
convincing a fear than being scared of - say - a mummy or a Banshee 
if you ask me.

Me again:
>>>this exam comes up again in OoP, and Hermione makes a point here 
about how Harry got better marks in this exam than she did. I wonder 
if this re-emphasising of Hermione's hubris means it may turn out to 
be significant later on?>>>

Jim replied:
>>The students don't get their scores until July, after the end of the
story, so we don't know yet.  I don't have the book here, but I think
Hermione predicted Harry would do better.>>

I was referring to the exam they took in PoA, which Hermione refers 
to when trying to convince Harry to start the DA in OoP, not to their 
DADA OWL, which didn't contain a Boggart examination. The exam they 
took in PoA was the one in which we find out what Hermione's boggart 
is.

Jim again: 
>>I don't take that scene as an example of Hermione's hubris, because 
I don't think she has hubris anymore, certainly not with her Trio-
mates. I would speculate that the boggart-horror she sees is 
something else ? Harry dead.  Naturally she would be reluctant to say 
it to Harry<snip>I can't back that up at all, but we may see in the 
future what Hermione's boggart really is.>>

Which scene - Hermione/Boggart? In the trunk? At the end of PoA? Are 
you suggesting that she lies about Boggat!McGonagall? It's not hugely 
clear to me, but I'm going to proceed as if all these variable are 
true. 
Firstly - I don't believe that Hermione is able to laugh at herself 
to a convincing degree to be able to create this lie, which exploits 
an often sniggered-at facet of her character. Particularly not if she 
has just had a traumatic experience.

Secondly - all the Boggarts we have seen are related to something 
intensely personal to the character. It shows, after all, a 
representation of the most urgent, fear possible for each individual 
to experience. Lupin fears the danger he may put others in at the 
full moon, fears losing his self-control. Ron's fear of spiders goes 
back to Fred having Tranfigured his teddy once (NB - where was the 
Restriction of Underage Sorcery *then*?).
Harry, as we know, fears fear the most, which ties in with 
his "saving people thing." Molly is the only person whose Boggart 
relates to directly to harm done to others, but this is because her 
entire life is devoted to her family. Hermione is more self-absorbed 
than Molly (this isn't a criticism. Everyone except the house-elves 
is more self-absorbed than Molly), and I find her Boggart extremely 
convincing for this reason. Each of the other Boggarts relates to the 
self - even Molly's rests on the grief she'd feel if something 
happened to her family, and guilt that she is unable to prevent it. 
Her Boggart could possibly be (over)analysed as a fear of failure of 
fulfiling the mother-protector role she has elected herself to - 
hence Harry appearing.

Hermione's number one priority is Hermione, not Harry. Again, not a 
criticism. She has to be fairly selfish to sustain the level of focus 
required to gain her high marks. Ambition requires selfishness, and 
Hermione has ambition in droves. As we've seen ("perhaps if I could 
take SPEW further..."), she doesn't intend to use it to do anything 
as obvious as climb a particular career ladder, but she wants to 
employ her talents to the best of her abilities. She's ambitious to 
be true to herself. Yes, she cares very, very deeply about her best 
friends, but I'm not convinced by your theory at all, because there 
is very little canon in Hermione's character to suggest that she saw 
anything other than Boggart!McGonagall. And yes, she does have a 
hubris, and it is fear of failure, just as Harry's is his hero-
complex/fear of fear. I think I'd be disappointed in JKR's powers of 
realistic character description if Hermione turned out to be as 
subconciously capable of self-sacrifice as you think. And I'd like 
and respect them both (Hermione and JKR) a lot less for it.   

Kirstini




From fc26det at aol.com  Wed Sep 10 12:08:40 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 12:08:40 -0000
Subject: CoS scene hagrid crossbow
In-Reply-To: <bjmd7r+ujup@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjn488+pknn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80336

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tuck668" <tuck668 at y...> 
wrote:
> 
> > > 
> > > I thought -given he was framed by Riddle - he had the crossbow 
in 
> > > case the MOM arrived to take him to Azkaban. 
> > > 
> > > Lziner
> 
> 
> > 
> > I'm not trying to tear down your post, but do you really think 
that 
> > Hagrid would shoot at the MoM if they came to take him to 
Azkaban? I 
> > mean, Hagrid can be a little, um, rash (?) at times, but to keep 
a 
> > crossbow handy in case the MoM comes seems to be a little much..
> > 
> > -Anna
> 
> bboy_mn:
> 
> So, if I was Hagrid I would be worried too. If news of the attacks 
was
> getting out, it's possible and angry mob with pitchforks and torches
> might show up at his door. As we saw when it was revealed that 
Hagrid
> was half giant, there are a lot of people who would seize any excute
> to have a reason to attack a giant. 
> 
> It's possible that a team of Auror's or officers from Magical Law
> Enforcement might show up, and equally, they may not have been as
> diplomatic or friendly as the Minster of Magic was. Plus, I doubt 
that
> Hagrid expected the Minister of Magic to handle this situation
> personally. So, Hagrid may not have found the idea of being taken by
> force (a la Umbridge) as his preferred option. 
> 
> I think the only reason Hagrid came peacefully is that Dumbledore 
was
> there, and he wouldn't want to make a scene or cause trouble in a 
way
> that would disappoint Dumbledore whom he idolizes.
> 
> Just a thought.
> 
> bboy_mn

Now Susan:

Hagrid already knows that "summat" is in the forest doing terrible 
things to the unicorns.  He also knows that the chamber has been 
opened and kids have been petrified.  I think he had the crossbow in 
case whatever or whoever is in the forest comes after him.  He is, 
after all, not a pureblood wizard.  And he did go into the 
woods "hunting" whatever is hurting the unicorns.  He was already set 
up once by who or whatever opened the chamber.  I would come to the 
door with a crossbow myself if I was in Hagrid's place.
Susan




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 12:18:57 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 12:18:57 -0000
Subject: Hagrid's odd behavior (was: CoS scene)
In-Reply-To: <c6.21f9ef47.2c90495c@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bjn4rh+r48s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80337

> Maus:
> 
> >Good question, why does Hagrid answer the door with a cross-bow?! 
> >Surely it wasn't meant for Dumbledore and Fudge. 
> 
> 
> Eloise:
> No. Obviously not Dumbledore (I hope).

<snip remainder>

Laura:

I thought it was in anticipation of Lucius, but I could be wrong.  As 
for the flesh-eating slugs, they might be even more effective than 
the Atkins diet-a few minutes on the hips and you look like an 18-
year-old again...<g>
> 





From kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk  Wed Sep 10 12:12:16 2003
From: kcawte at blueyonder.co.uk (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 13:12:16 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Ginny: 7 of 7?     was Re: Charlie Weasley's age
References: <20030910010332.57566.qmail@web60106.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3F5F1520.000001.65097@monica>

No: HPFGUIDX 80338

Nadia
 
I was wondering about Ginny being the seventh child of a seventh child
myself. I tried to do some research on it, but the information I got on it
was sketchy at best. I don't know if one has to be be the seventh son of the
seventh son in order to have special powers or if you can be the seventh
daughter of the seventh daughter. (Ahh, all this alliteration!!!) Everyone
seems to agree that the seventh child has the power to heal and has second
sight. What is interesting is that it is said that the seventh of seven is
supposed to expose the evil and corruption of the world, but is marked by
those same forces to destroy him/her. I sure feel sorry for Ginny now...
 

Me (K)

This may well point towards a greater role for Ginny (her relationship with
Tom in CoS and her development in OoP could point towards this) but there
has also been a fair bit of speculation that there is a 'missing' Weasley
(because there seems to be a larger gap between Charlie and Percy than
between any of the others) - if it's true this would make *Ron* the seventh
son ....

K



From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 12:46:05 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 12:46:05 -0000
Subject: What DD knew about the Prank (was: Re: Prank/On posting)
In-Reply-To: <bjm8mp+drk3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjn6ed+dqpq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80339

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "wildfire_517" 
<wildfire_517 at y...> wrote:
> 
> > Laura:
> > 
> >I do have to wonder about DD and what he knew about the 
Marauders.  He says in PoA that they managed to keep their 
transformations a secret from him.  I find that very hard to 
believe.   

>  Wyld:
> 
>   I believe, and always did, that DD knew what was happening.  He 
had 
> to know.  DD knows everything that happens in Hogwarts. <snip>My 
theory has always been that DD knew that the Marauders had managed to 
learn to be Animagi to roam the grounds with Remus, but he let it go 
on for two reasons.  One, allowing Remus to have such close friends, 
friends who worked out how to do something only 7 people in a century 
could do, probably was good for him both in terms of keeping the 
werewolf in check and keeping him more human than he  normally would 
be.  Two, by allowing them to work in "secret," they achieved 
something great, but DD could have stepped in at anytime had 
> they overstepped their limits.  Heck, it wouldn't even surprise me 
if he slyly dropped them a couple hints to help their work!  He just 
> seems like that kind of a guy to me.<snip>

Laura again:

So the question is why.  Why did DD lie to Harry about not knowing 
that the Marauders could transform?  When did he find out about the 
prank and what did he do about it?  Did he already have plans for the 
Marauders to join the fight against LV?  And how would Snape fit into 
his plans, given his early propensity for the dark arts?  Why did DD 
not deduce that Sirius was getting into the school as Padfoot?  If DD 
has a Plan, how does this fit in with it?  

On a slightly different topic, I recently read an old post (don't 
remember whose, sorry about that) suggesting that one of the reasons 
why Snape hates the Marauders so passionately is that he saw (and 
still sees) DD as a father figure and is jealous of his obvious 
affection for James, Sirius and Remus (I don't know how he felt about 
Peter).  That makes a great deal of sense to me-it would explain why 
being around DD would keep his jealousy alive in him, especially when 
Remus and Sirius reappear after years of being off the scene and DD 
goes to great lengths to protect them.
> 
>   




From entropymail at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 12:50:58 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 12:50:58 -0000
Subject: Hagrid's odd behavior (was: CoS scene)
In-Reply-To: <bjmd2u+qpg9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjn6ni+bk2m@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80340

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Hagrid" <aussie_lol at y...> wrote:
> --- "mightymaus75" wrote: 
> > Hagrid did also turn up in Knockturn alley in the beginning 
> > of the book. Hagrid tells Harry he was there to buy some 
> > Flesh-Eating Slug Repellent to protect the school cabbages. 

Two things come to mind about this. First, why would the Flesh-Eating
Slugs be going after veggies at all? Wouldn't they eat flesh? And, if
Hagrid did need repellant for them, why wouldn't this be something he
could get from Madame Sprout, or some reputable store in Diagon Alley?
Knockturn Alley seems like a strange place to have to go for some
gardening supplies!

Entropy




From entropymail at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 12:59:10 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 12:59:10 -0000
Subject: CoS scene hagrid crossbow
In-Reply-To: <bjn488+pknn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjn76u+2fcc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80341

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Potterfanme" <fc26det at a...> wrote:
> 
> Hagrid already knows that "summat" is in the forest doing terrible 
> things to the unicorns.  He also knows that the chamber has been 
> opened and kids have been petrified.  I think he had the crossbow in 
> case whatever or whoever is in the forest comes after him.  He is, 
> after all, not a pureblood wizard.  And he did go into the 
> woods "hunting" whatever is hurting the unicorns.  He was already set 
> up once by who or whatever opened the chamber.  I would come to the 
> door with a crossbow myself if I was in Hagrid's place.
> Susan

I don't think Hagrid was carrying the crossbow for general protection.
He had something (or someone) specific in mind when he opened the door
with the crossbow in hand:

"What's that for?" said Harry, pointing at the crossbow as they
stepped inside.
"Nothin' -- nothin' -- " Hagrid muttered. "I've been expectin' --
doesn' matter -- Sit down, I'll make tea."

Rather than being surprised by the knock at his door and grabbing a
weapon, he seems to clearly be expecting something/someone other than
Harry and Hermione.




From entropymail at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 13:10:05 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 13:10:05 -0000
Subject: CoS scene.
In-Reply-To: <bjmtae+2nsd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjn7rd+7bjv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80342

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jim Ferer" <jferer at y...> wrote:
> Severus:"I seem to remember the JKR insisted on the Knockturn Alley
> scene, with Harry in the store, being left in the film. I also think it 
> has something to do with Harry's hands, the hand of Glory grabbed him
> in this scene, and there was not any other reason to have this in the
> film. The conversation between Malfoy and the store keep didn't
> happen, but the hand scene did."

I thought I would post the legend which relates to the Hand of Glory,
which varies from region to region, but always deals with a dead,
withered, and detached hand:

"One dark night, when all was shut up, there came a tap at the door of
a lone inn in the middle of a barren moor. The door was opened, and
there stood without, shivering and shaking, a poor beggar, his rags
soaked with rain, and his hand white with cold. He asked piteously for
a lodging, and it was cheerfully granted him; there was not a spare
bed in the house, but he could lie on the mat before the kitchen fire,
and welcome.

So this was settled, and everyone in the house went to bed except the
cook, who from the back kitchen could see into the large room through
a pane of glass let into the door. She watched the beggar, and saw
him, as soon as he was left alone, draw himself up from the floor,
seat himself at the table, extract from his pocket a brown withered
human hand, and set it upright in the candlestick. He then anointed
the fingers, and applying a match to them, they began to flame. Filled
with horror, the cook rushed up the back stairs, and endeavored to
arouse her master and the men of the house. But all was in vain--they
slept a charmed sleep; so in despair she hastened down again, and
placed herself at her post of observation.

She saw the fingers of the hand flaming, but the thumb remained
unlighted, because one inmate of the house was awake. The beggar was
busy collecting the valuables around him into a large sack, and having
taken all he cared for in the large room, he entered another.

On this the woman ran in, and, seizing the light, tried to extinguish
the flames. But this was not so easy. She blew at them, but they burnt
on as before. She poured the dregs of a beer jug over them, but they
blazed up the brighter. As a last resource, she caught up a jug of
milk, and dashed it over the four lambent flames, and they died out at
once. Uttering a loud cry, she rushed to the door of the apartment the
beggar had entered, and locked it. The whole family was aroused, and
the thief easily secured and hanged."




From entropymail at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 13:11:05 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 13:11:05 -0000
Subject: CoS scene.
In-Reply-To: <bjmtae+2nsd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjn7t9+jq59@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80343

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jim Ferer" <jferer at y...> wrote:
> Severus:"I seem to remember the JKR insisted on the Knockturn Alley
> scene, with Harry in the store, being left in the film. I also think it 
> has something to do with Harry's hands, the hand of Glory grabbed him
> in this scene, and there was not any other reason to have this in the
> film. The conversation between Malfoy and the store keep didn't
> happen, but the hand scene did."

I thought I would post the legend which relates to the Hand of Glory,
which varies from region to region, but always deals with a dead,
withered, and detached hand:

"One dark night, when all was shut up, there came a tap at the door of
a lone inn in the middle of a barren moor. The door was opened, and
there stood without, shivering and shaking, a poor beggar, his rags
soaked with rain, and his hand white with cold. He asked piteously for
a lodging, and it was cheerfully granted him; there was not a spare
bed in the house, but he could lie on the mat before the kitchen fire,
and welcome.

So this was settled, and everyone in the house went to bed except the
cook, who from the back kitchen could see into the large room through
a pane of glass let into the door. She watched the beggar, and saw
him, as soon as he was left alone, draw himself up from the floor,
seat himself at the table, extract from his pocket a brown withered
human hand, and set it upright in the candlestick. He then anointed
the fingers, and applying a match to them, they began to flame. Filled
with horror, the cook rushed up the back stairs, and endeavored to
arouse her master and the men of the house. But all was in vain--they
slept a charmed sleep; so in despair she hastened down again, and
placed herself at her post of observation.

She saw the fingers of the hand flaming, but the thumb remained
unlighted, because one inmate of the house was awake. The beggar was
busy collecting the valuables around him into a large sack, and having
taken all he cared for in the large room, he entered another.

On this the woman ran in, and, seizing the light, tried to extinguish
the flames. But this was not so easy. She blew at them, but they burnt
on as before. She poured the dregs of a beer jug over them, but they
blazed up the brighter. As a last resource, she caught up a jug of
milk, and dashed it over the four lambent flames, and they died out at
once. Uttering a loud cry, she rushed to the door of the apartment the
beggar had entered, and locked it. The whole family was aroused, and
the thief easily secured and hanged."

Hopes this helps sort things out, or add to the confusion. Either one
is okay with me!  ;)

:: Entropy ::




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Wed Sep 10 13:40:19 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 13:40:19 -0000
Subject: CoS scene.
In-Reply-To: <bjmtae+2nsd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjn9k3+e5eq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80344

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jim Ferer" <jferer at y...> wrote:
> 
> In _canon_, the _book_, which the movie is _not_, the Hand of Glory 
is
> not emphasized or given undue attention. > 
> 
When JKR is giving a clue she means for us to remember, she usually
> repeats it or echoes it in some way later on.  I think that's the 
time
> to take notice.
> 
> I think constructing a theory based on which scenes are left in the
> movies is, no offense, the road to folly.  Canon trumps the movies
> each and every time; that's why the posting guidelines say 
movie "stuff is out


Jen: Yes, perhaps folly. I was basing my thoughts on the Hand of 
Glory from the book, though, not the movie. The one part of my post 
that you included was simply alluding to an interview that I believe 
is considered canon-- the JKR/Steve Kloves interview:

"I will sometimes ask Jo. I will say, you know, this detail, you just 
seem to have cast just a bit more light on this in this scene than 
the other details. Sometimes I'm wrong, but often she'll say "No, 
that is going to play." There's one thing in Chamber, actually, that 
Jo indicated will play later in the series." 

I agree the scene in the book about the Hand of Glory, taken alone, 
is subtle. But within the context of JKR's constant reference to 
hands throughout the series, just introducing the Hand of Glory makes 
me take notice. And then to have JKR specifically bring it up in an 
interview, the Larry King one I incuded in my previous post on this 
thread...that seemed important to me. 

My theory about why I thought it was important is because I DO think 
this "withered hand" shows up again in a different form--in GOF when 
Wormtail cuts off his hand  and is given the "silvery" replacement 
hand by Voldemort. 

You don't have to agree with any theory posted--who does? It just 
really bothers me to see one small snippet of my post taken out of 
context and lumped in with "movie" contamination when I was making a 
much broader point and not a comparison. No Admin warning was 
attached to my post and in fact the Admin warnings I saw on the 
thread said it was OK to discuss what JKR wanted included in the film.




From przepla at ipartner.com.pl  Wed Sep 10 13:48:19 2003
From: przepla at ipartner.com.pl (Przemyslaw "Pshemekan" Plaskowicki)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 15:48:19 +0200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: What is Hermione afraid of?
In-Reply-To: <bjmsl2+rgf0@eGroups.com>
References: <bjmsl2+rgf0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F5F2BA3.8070307@ipartner.com.pl>

No: HPFGUIDX 80345

Kirstini :

>Hermione doesn't try the Boggart because JKR is saving her worst fear 
>up for the humourous bit in the DADA exam at the end of the book: 
>Hermione's worst fear is McGonagall (someone she respects) telling 
>her she's failed her exams (which she wanted to suceed in). Actually, 
>this is interesting, as this exam comes up again in OoP, and Hermione 
>makes a point here about how Harry got better marks in this exam than 
>she did. I wonder if this re-emphasising of Hermione's hubris means 
>it may turn out to be significant later on?
>Kirstini
>  
>
On the other hand it is entirely possible, that Hermione is left out 
from ridiculing boggart because Lupin was affraid that given Hermione's 
skill at spells said boggart would be destroyed prematurely thus 
spoiling all the fun to other students, and removing the honours of 
final boggart demise from Neville.

Regards,
Pshemekan




From dwoodward at towson.edu  Wed Sep 10 13:50:30 2003
From: dwoodward at towson.edu (Woodward, Deirdre)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 09:50:30 -0400
Subject: Harry heard of Tom Riddle
Message-ID: <CB08EA121F31B94DA58296DEF3668AE12B2179@helium.towson.edu>

No: HPFGUIDX 80346

>Allie writes:
>I have a question.  Any possible idea what this could mean?
>"Harry couldn't explain, even to himself, why he didn't just throw
>Riddle's diary away...And while Harry was sure he had never heard the
>name T.M. Riddle before, it still seemed to mean something to him,
>almost as though Riddle was a friend he'd had when he was very small,
>and had half-forgotten. But this was absurd. He'd never had friends
>before Hogwarts, Dudley had made sure of that."  CoS 234

When I read this, I automatically connected it to Dumbledore's explanation to Harry about how powers have been transferred between Harry and Voldemort.  Harry's "remembering" Tom Riddle because Voldemort knows who Tom Riddle is.  Since Voldemort is still very weak (in book two), Harry only has a weak inkling of Tom Riddle.
 
Deirdre


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From Meliss9900 at aol.com  Wed Sep 10 13:59:31 2003
From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 09:59:31 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] A Sirius clue
Message-ID: <27.47a70725.2c908843@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80347

In a message dated 9/10/2003 3:10:26 AM Central Standard Time, 
psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com writes:

> Did anyone else everythink, after reading OotP, that it was a little 
> too obvious that Sirius would be the one who would die, especially 
> considering the commonality of the saying "Dead Serious."
> 

Actually I thought it was obvious about a quarter of the way through. There 
was a post on Mugglenet listing the "hints and clues" pointing to Sirius. This 
is one of them. Remember the sign for the ward Arthur was in" 

 "Creature induced injuries. "Dangerous" Dai Llewellyn Ward. Serious bites" 

Now read it as "CREATURE induced injuries. DANGEROUS DAI Llewellyn Ward. 
SERIOUS bites."  Kreacher dangerous, Die Sirius.  Coincidence or planned.  And if 
planned I wonder if there are any more such clues in there.

Melissa


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Wed Sep 10 14:02:34 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 14:02:34 -0000
Subject: Cool is as Cool Does (was: Hint in Cos)
In-Reply-To: <bjmfda+rnmv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjnatq+a9n8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80348

> Arcum:
> How can you possibly talk about the coolest characters in HP without
> Bill Weasley? He works as a curse-breaker in Egypt, has a fang
> earring, dragon-hide boots, and a ponytail, and is dating *Fleur
> Delacour* after all. We even have cannon: "However, Bill was - there
> was no other word for it - *cool*." 
> 
> Lupin, Fred, and George are high up there, though (And Fred & George
> do have those dragon-hide jackets now)...
> --Arcum


Aaargh! I knew I'd miss someone, but Bill! He's almost an 
Indiana Jones-type. Speaking of which, I wonder what his future role 
in the books will be?

Since he hasn't played much of a role recently, my first inclination 
is to say he won't be on stage any more. JKR hasn't brought back many 
characters from the dust bin.

But Bill was quite a character, so perhaps he'll have been working to 
recruit some important allies abroad for the potential battle to come.

What lives in Egypt? Egyptian wizards? Sphinx? Heliopaths?

-Remnant




From entropymail at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 14:13:08 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 14:13:08 -0000
Subject: Sorting Out the Death Eaters
Message-ID: <bjnbhk+j1r7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80349

As if I have nothing better to do :), I've decided to list all of the
Death Eaters I could find info on. Most of my info came from GoF
(damn! lent out OoP!).  Please let me know if you have any other
information I could add to the following:

Avery
Crabbe
Barty Crouch, Jr.
Antonin Dolohov (sent to Azkaban)
*Goyle
*Karkaroff ("too cowardly to return")
*Lucius Malfoy
*The Lestranges (sent to Azkaban)
*MacNair (destroying beasts for the MOM)
*Mulciber (specializes in the Imperius curse/sent to Azkaban)
*Nott
*Peter Pettigrew/Wormtail (became Scabbers)
*Augustus Rookwood (may have passed information from MOM to
Voldemort/works in Dept. of Mysteries/friend of Ludo Bagman's dad)
*Evan Rosier (dead)
*Severus Snape ("has left me forever")
*Travers (helped murder the McKinnons/sent to Azkaban)

Relatedly, four Death Eaters were tried (in "The Pensieve" chapter of
GoF) for the torture of Frank Longbottom (note: *not* Mrs.
Longbottom!) with the Cruciatus Curse, "believing him to have
knowledge of the present whereabouts of your exiled master,
He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named..." They were:
1. Barty Crouch, Jr.
2. Beatrix Lestrange
3. A thickset man who stared blankly up at Crouch
4. A thinner and more nervous-looking man

Two questions about this: (1) why wasn't Mrs. Longbottom included in
these charges and, (2) I assume one of the men was Beatrix Lestrange's
husband, but do not know who the fourth man was.


:: Entropy ::





From jesmck at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 14:19:31 2003
From: jesmck at yahoo.com (jesmck)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 14:19:31 -0000
Subject: CoS scene.
In-Reply-To: <bjmvp6+rfno@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjnbtj+p5hq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80350

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Donna" <deemarie1a at y...> wrote:
> I hope everyone remembers that both in the movie and the book, this 
> is where Harry emerged from the Floo Network.  I believe the reason 
> we see Knockturn Alley, is quite simple.  Aside from introducing 
> Lucius Malfoy, it is also juxtaposition to Diagon Alley.  The Yin 
and 
> the Yang so to speak.
> 
> D 


Maybe that is just what's important about the scene: the Floo 
Network.  It becomes important later in the series because the 
Weasleys finally meet Petunia and Vernon (and destroy thier living 
room) when they take the Floo Network to pick up Harry, and the 
network is very important in OoP (Sirius almost gets caught talking 
to Harry, Harry gets caught in Umbridge's office).  It could be that 
that scene has importance as far as furthering the story in other 
books, but not in the resolution of the series.

Jessica




From liliana at worldonline.nl  Wed Sep 10 14:26:07 2003
From: liliana at worldonline.nl (laylalast)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 14:26:07 -0000
Subject: Sorting Out the Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <bjnbhk+j1r7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjnc9v+ccln@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80351

<snip>

Entropy wrote:

 GoF) for the torture of Frank Longbottom (note: *not* Mrs.
> Longbottom!) with the Cruciatus Curse, "believing him to have
> knowledge of the present whereabouts of your exiled master,
> He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named..." They were:
> 1. Barty Crouch, Jr.
> 2. Beatrix Lestrange
> 3. A thickset man who stared blankly up at Crouch
> 4. A thinner and more nervous-looking man
> 
> Two questions about this: (1) why wasn't Mrs. Longbottom included in
> these charges and, (2) I assume one of the men was Beatrix 
Lestrange's
> husband, but do not know who the fourth man was.

Lilian:

Just to answer your last question, DE nr 3 and 4 were the husband of 
Beatrix Lestrange (wasn't his name Rodolphus?) and his younger 
brother, Rabastan. This was confirmed in OOtP.





From liliana at worldonline.nl  Wed Sep 10 14:31:24 2003
From: liliana at worldonline.nl (laylalast)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 14:31:24 -0000
Subject: Sorting Out the Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <bjnbhk+j1r7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjncjs+ru21@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80352

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "entropymail" 
<entropymail at y...> wrote:
> As if I have nothing better to do :), I've decided to list all of 
the
> Death Eaters I could find info on. 

<snips rest>

Lilian:

Sorry, should have checked this before sending my earlier reply to 
your post, but the Lexicon has already listed the DE's together as a 
group. Perhaps something to look at first and save yourself a lot of 
time?




From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Wed Sep 10 14:32:12 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 14:32:12 -0000
Subject: Harry's Temper Was Re: Feelings on OoP
In-Reply-To: <bjhi89+gsb4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjnclc+hbnp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80353

> > Melanie:
> > However, I believe that now Harry will move to a more introverted 
> way of venting.  I think the scariest thing that is going to happen 
> in the next books is that Harry will pull away from his family and 
> friends.  I believe that with my whole heart that he will force 
> himself to stop loving.  He does not want to be the cause of another 
> loved ones death.  I think this is not only the most dangerous 
> outcome that will likely result, but I think that it will quite 
> possibly the most sickening for Harry. 
> > ~Melanie


> Golly:
> (I can't think of anyone who would have considered temper tantrums 
and Harry suddenly developing a heaping amount of arrogance.)  Of 
course it is up to every reader to decide whether they think this 
unique turn is for good or ill, but I think remembering our past is 
important.
> Why believe that will happen now when it didn't happen before?
> Golly


I've been bothered by Harry's feelings now for some time, but have had 
trouble putting my finger on it. Until this thread (thanks!).

Harry has been through some very awful experiences that have been 
well-cited before (parents lost as an infant, lived in the Dursleys' 
closet, multiple near-death experiences, vilified by the news and 
shunned by his peers on more than one occasion, nearly thrown in 
Azkaban for defending himself, singled out for punishment by cruel 
teachers, et al). And much, if not all, of this was caused by 
people.

No one in positions of power ever defended him as much as they could 
have, and authority figures, in general, have been colossal failures 
to Harry: the MoM, aurors, teachers, the OoP, even Dumbledore, who 
coddles him and hides the truth continually. Harry has literally had 
to take care of himself against all of them.

So when will he finally get good and pissy about it? Why not yell at 
Dumbledore, "Tell me everything!" The next time Snape messes with him, 
why not say, "Go hang yourself with your grey underpants"? Why not 
shout from the highest mountain that he doesn't care about any of them 
any more? Why not yell at every wizard he sees for not protecting him 
from the everyday cruelty of the Dursleys?

I'm waiting for him to explode, but he doesn't. Is he really that 
perfect? JKR seems to want us to believe that he's not that different 
in many ways from most kids. As pointed out earlier in the thread, he 
does have tantrums and he lashes out a few times at authority. But he 
mostly just takes it.

And for him to go from just taking it from everyone to standing up to 
LV, the most powerful wizard of a generation, is a *very* big step. 
And JKR has just two books to do it.

My guess is that he will act out more in the first half of book 6 
against at least some of the authority figures. Particularly the 
Dursleys, now that they've been warned. But all of that cleansing, 
self-affirming rage at the cruelty of others must come out.

I think it'll directly precede something truly horrible happening (DD 
betrayal/death is my favorite), after which Harry will blame himself 
(with some reason) and then withdraw as you mention, Melanie.

-Remnant




From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Sep 10 14:56:41 2003
From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?udder=5Fpen=5Fdragon?=)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 15:56:41 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Hogwarts librarian
In-Reply-To: <bjmrm3+jfum@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030910145641.80824.qmail@web60201.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80354



arrowsmithbt <arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com> wrote: 
--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Rania Melhem <dunknegg at y...> wrote:
> As a librarian, I totally agree with you. I am very irritated by Madam Pince's 
description by JKR. I dont know why she is depicted so horribly. And she never seems 
to help any of the Hogwarts students find information. 
> Rania
> 

Perhaps JKR has set her character in our minds and is getting 
her ready for a major role in a future volume.

Conan the Librarian, maybe.

Kneasy 

U_P_D

But so many Librarian's were like her, some still are. I do not particularly like or dislike her, but she is a real life charecter, I bet JKR has copied her from someone she has met.

Udder Pen Dragon



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
________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. 




---------------------------------
Want to chat instantly with your online friends??Get the FREE Yahoo!Messenger

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From mpjdekker at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 10 15:21:41 2003
From: mpjdekker at hotmail.com (mightymaus75)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 15:21:41 -0000
Subject: Hagrid's odd behavior (was: CoS scene)
In-Reply-To: <c6.21f9ef47.2c90495c@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bjnfi5+8qg3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80355

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, eloiseherisson at a... wrote:
> Eloise:
> Previous discussion in this group has focussed on exactly what
> Flesh-Eating Slug Repellent *is*. Is it repellent for *flesh-eating
> slugs*, and if so, whose (or what's) flesh are they eating? Would
> they, in fact attack *pumpkins*? Or cabbages? Or is it just a good
> name and a little inconsistency has crept in here?

Because of the cabbages I kinda assumed Hagrid was talking about 
*flesh-eating repellent*. Which, I know, doesn't make sense either. 
Perhaps the flesh eating is just a side-effect of an extremely potent 
slug repellent, or perhaps it's the brand name of a whole line of 
Flesh-Eating products?   

 
> Eloise: 
> I think that JKR is using the Knockturn Alley incident as a little
> bit of misdirection. She's hinting that yes, there *might* be
> something a bit dodgy about Hagrid (as if we didn't know that
> already, buying an illegal dragon egg for a start). Even Harry and
> Ron think that he released the Monster of Slytherin at one stage.
> She's inserting some doubt into our minds right there at the start
> of the book. Perhaps the fact that she has him say that *flesh-
> eating* slugs are ruining the *cabbages* is deliberately there to
> make it sound like he's covering for himself.
> 
> We know (or we trust) that Hagrid isn't into the Dark Arts. But he
> *does* regard as harmless pets what the rest of the wizarding world
> regards as monsters. He *isn't* averse to raising illegal
> creatures, or, apparently, with the Screwts, experimenting with the
> illegal crossing of creatures. I think it's quite in character that
> he might have been in Knockturn Alley "just looking" or with an eye
> out to acquiring some other exotic "pet" that wouldn't be available
> through more mainstream magical suppliers. Of course he had to make
> up an excuse for being there. But if Flesh-Eating Slugs are normal
> magical creatures, then surely the repellent would be available
> from the apothecary, or some other shop in Diagon Alley?
> 
> Perhaps the Flesh-Eating Slugs themselves are some "pets" of his
> that he's having problems with and being unpleasant sounding
> things, perhaps they themselves were acquired from Knockturn Alley.
> 
> ~Eloise

I'm willing to believe that the whole slug business is a Red Herring 
planted to make us think Hagrid is in fact the one who opened the 
Chamber of Secrets (why is that secrets, *plural*, anyway?). But 
usually JKR clears these sort of things up at the end of the book. 
Like Percy's girlfriend in CoS, Hermione's use of the Time-Turner in 
PoA, Ludo Bagman's gambling debts in GoF, Rita Skeeter's animagius 
ability in GoF. The fact that this wasn't cleared up always kind of 
annoyed me, a bit like a splinter stuck in my brain.

Combined with the cross-bow incident, and his claim that Lockhart was 
giving him advise on how to get water demons the size of a horse out 
of a well, it all seems a bit strange.

-Maus





From peppermintfatty at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 10:38:50 2003
From: peppermintfatty at yahoo.com (James McDaniel)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 10:38:50 -0000
Subject: Dolores Umbridge
Message-ID: <bjmuvr+edma@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80356

In Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix we are introduced to a 
seemingly blind hatred for half breeds and part humans, manifested 
in the person of Professor Dolores Jane Umbridge. Umbridge's disdain 
for all put pure humans is presented as a driving force in her life. 
Her hatred seems to be not only blind, but all encompassing. 
Other examples of extreme hatred, by an individual, of an entire 
race or type of person can be found not only in modern history 
(Hitler) but also presented to us by the pen of J.K. Rowling 
herself. For insight into ones attempt to subjugate an entire 
segment of society, we need look no farther than the very man 
Dolores claims no longer exists. Lord Voldemort.  To truly 
understand Professor Umbridge, we need to take a brief look at the 
motivation behind the Dark Lord's many character flaws. Voldemort, 
in being the series' resident genocidal maniac, has been given quite 
a multi-faceted personality. Yes, the man formerly known as Tom 
Riddle seeks not only immortality, but also, in the grand tradition 
of Salazar Slytherin, the complete annihilation of mud-bloods.
The main point of interest in Voldy's hatred of mud-bloods is the 
fact that he himself is a mud-blood. Having lost his mother soon 
after birth, he became an orphan, as he had been abandoned "in 
utero" by his namesake.  Because of this, young Tom Riddle grew to 
despise his father. As he grew into adulthood, along with 
transferring his hatred for his father not only to muggles but to 
all who had muggle blood, Tom sought to do everything in his power 
to distance himself from his muggle parentage. His hatred soon 
blossomed to the extent that he murdered not only his father, but 
also his grandparents. He changed not only his name, but his entire 
persona. He embraced the anti-mudblood teachings of Slytherin, and 
even formed the Death Eaters with which to wipe mud-bloods from the 
face of the earth. In short, Lord Voldemort's hatred of his father 
drove him to disguise his true identity and heritage while all the 
while leading him to attempt to eradicate a considerable segment of 
the wizarding population.
Now that this motivation has been established we need to take a 
closer look at Professor Umbridge. We find in "Order of the Phoenix" 
that Umbridge has long led a political crusade to strip away the 
rights of many half-breed or part human creatures including, but not 
exclusive to, Werewolves and Merpeople. She mistrusts, ridicules, 
belittles, abuses, and seeks to ostracize, all who are not 
completely human, going so far as to try to prevent some of them 
from  ever earning gainful employ.
In the actions of Professor Umbridge we see a deep seated hatred. 
Delores hates all who are not pure with a reckless abandon, and yet 
we are never given a satisfactory reason why. It could be just to 
establish her as an evil person that readers will automatically 
despise with a universal knee-jerk reaction. This though would be 
quite outside the norm of what we have come to expect from J.K. 
Rowling. In fact it is not like JKR at all. Why would she imbue such 
a central character with such an insidiously pervasive personality 
trait without ever giving us a shred of evidence to support why she 
is this way? I have a great deal of faith that this is not the case. 
JKR has never before introduced a trait which encompasses so much of 
a characters being as this and there not have been a reason why.
Consider for a moment this blind hatred of Umbridge's part. Now look 
closely at her personality. She is underhanded, vengeful, conniving, 
and unscrupulous. It is no secret that Dolores is just an all around 
mean person, and yet she consistently speaks in a blatantly 
falsetto, sugar sweet tone of voice. Her office, like her person, is 
awash in a sea of pink. Pink bows and little kittens do not seem the 
norm for women who carve lines in the hands of students, secretly 
set murderous Dementors on the trail of innocents, and use 
unforgivable curses on children. Her image seems so far removed from 
her personality that it almost certainly must be a not-so-cleverly 
crafted fa?ade.  Some might even call it a gross overcompensation. 
An overcompensation for what though? What is it that she is publicly 
distancing herself from? Why does she seem so intent on presenting 
herself as a stereotypical proper woman when she obviously is 
anything but?
 Though I do not have the book in front of me, I would like to take 
a look at Umbridge's physical and psychological makeup before 
answering the questions already at hand. Her bizarre physical 
appearance is brought up almost as often as she herself is. Anytime 
she is mentioned in the book, it is soon followed with a brief 
passage on how phenomenally short and squat she is. Even her face 
and smile are constantly being compared to that of a toad.
If my memory serves me correctly, only three other wizards in the 
series have been presented, anatomically speaking, as being so 
grossly out of step with the rest of the wizarding world. The first 
is Professor Flitwick. As we know little if anything about his past, 
I fear Flitwick must be disregarded as part of this conversation.  
The other two, Madame Maxime and Hagrid, both turned out to be not 
fully human at all, but instead half-giants. In fact, other than 
these three, we see no indication of wizards ever looking much 
different than normal humans.
Although having already touched on Umbridge's demeanor, I believe 
for this conversation that it deserves another quick look. Despite 
her admittedly (thin though it is) sweet exterior, we have seen that 
at heart Dolores is conniving, insidious, vengeful, power hungry, 
and very untrustworthy.  Gather all of that together, throw in a 
violent rage (M. Edgecombe, Harry) lurking just beneath the surface, 
wrap a pretty pink bow around it and anyone has to admit that we are 
looking at a pretty distinct and pretty fishy package.
After addressing all of these traits, I find myself being led to one 
conclusion. JKR, while providing us with little info, is in fact 
dropping hints at just what it is that motivates Delores Jane 
Umbridge. Maybe, just maybe, the reason that Umbridge works so hard 
to present herself as a proper lady is that therein lies her hatred. 
Maybe she is not a proper lady at all, and like Hagrid and Maxime, 
isn't fully human.  Could it be that Umbridge despises and hates who 
or what she is for reasons not unlike those that motivate Lord 
Voldemort? She works against part humans with nearly the same 
voracity as Voldemort does with mud-bloods. She devotes her every 
waking moment to concealing her true, possibly less human, demeanor 
behind a sugary sweet fa?ade, while physically looking barely human 
at best. 
While I firmly believe that Umbridge is a part human herself, I 
cannot be certain as to what exactly she is. Upon reflection though, 
my guess is that in her veins runs Goblin blood. She is devious, 
scheming, and opportunistic. She is short and stubby (not Boardman), 
with a huge mouth and eyes, and tends to become frighteningly 
aggressive at those times that she loses herself. All of these I 
believe to be Goblin traits. My thoughts though tend to be that she 
appears too human to be half-goblin, and that most likely one of her 
parents was a half-breed, thus leaving her as one quarter Goblin; A 
small enough amount to fool those around her, but just enough that, 
as hard as she may try, she cannot fool herself. This I see greatly 
exacerbating the hatred that she, for whatever reason, misdirects 
towards all part humans.
If Delores is indeed part Goblin, she could be far more important in 
the two upcoming books as Goblins may be a key in the coming war. We 
know that both sides are courting them in book 5, and every time 
they have been brought up in HISTORY OF MAGIC, it has been in 
relation to the great Goblin rebellion when they, for a time, 
overthrew wizarding kind. Whether you agree or disagree, I just feel 
that this is an option we all might want to consider. Thanks for 
reading.


~James
Hufflepuff







From shokoono at gmx.de  Wed Sep 10 14:45:41 2003
From: shokoono at gmx.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Carolin_M=F6nkemeyer?=)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 16:45:41 +0200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] A Sirius clue
References: <bjm5b6+kcir@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003601c377b3$472934c0$b2f3a986@caro>

No: HPFGUIDX 80357

> psychobirdgirl:
> Did anyone else everythink, after reading OotP, that it was a little
> too obvious that Sirius would be the one who would die, especially
> considering the commonality of the saying "Dead Serious."
>
Me:
I don't know about that, but JKR is really a bit cynical in OoP. She almoust
strikes him with a knife (when having first dinner in GP) and other things
like that (sorry for no better quoting, I have no copy of the book at hand).
It seem she is always like this (this might be one kind of her red
herrings)!

Yours Finchen




From lfreeman at mbc.edu  Wed Sep 10 13:53:52 2003
From: lfreeman at mbc.edu (Freeman, Louise Margaret)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 09:53:52 -0400
Subject: Weasley twins
Message-ID: <WorldClient-F200309100953.AA53520740@mbc.edu>

No: HPFGUIDX 80358

>>This may well point towards a greater role for Ginny (her relationship 
with
Tom in CoS and her development in OoP could point towards this) but there
has also been a fair bit of speculation that there is a 'missing' Weasley
(because there seems to be a larger gap between Charlie and Percy than
between any of the others) - if it's true this would make *Ron* the seventh
son ....<<

I am new to the list so I don't know the extent to which this has been 
discussed previously, but I thought I'd add my two cents regarding the 
Weasley children.After reading OotP, I'm speculating that the Weasley twins 
are not true twins, but some sort of single entity magically split in two.  
The 
constant togetherness and the fact that their own mother can't distinguish 
between 
them is one thing, but they even appear together dead in her 
boggart-induced vision.  Mothers of twins would be expected to see their 
sons as individuals, even if most others don't. 

But what clinched it for me was when both of them were banned from Quidditch 

even though only one attacked Malfoy.  No one, the twins included, seemed 
outraged or shocked at the injustice of this, (Ginny mentions it later, but 
almost as an afterthought). Not even McGonagall, well known for both her 
strict-but-fair discipline policies and her staunch support of the 
Gryffindor Quidditch team. Does she know something we don't about them?  
Maybe they have to function as a unit, rather than simply choosing to do so.

My second speculation is a bit wilder, that they aren't real Weasleys.  
When teasing Mrs. Weasley about not being able to tell them apart in their 
first appearance on the Hogwarts Express (SS/PS) they joke, "Honestly, 
woman, you 
call yourself our mother?"  OK, maybe that's just a smart-mouth remark.  But 


in OotP, when Ron is made a prefect, Mrs. Weasley exclaims "...I don't 
believe it! Oh, Ron, how wonderful! A prefect! That's everyone in the 
family!" to which George replies, "What are Fred and I, next-door 
neighbors?"  It's hard to believe *Mrs. Weasley* would make a statement like 

that without there being something to it. And I've learned to take Wealsey 
boy jokes seriously.

When Dumbledore was fiddling with his mysterious silver instrument that gave 

him two smoke snakes and muttered, "Naturally, naturally, but in essence 
divided?" the first thought that came to me was the twins.  I'm still rather 

puzzled by that scene (as I'm sure JKR intends us to be) but here's my 
thinking...  we see a snake divided (the essence of Slytherin?)...  what if 
there is some sort of "essence of Gryffindor" divided between George and 
Fred?  They are, after all, probably more Gryffindor-suited than any other 
character. Harry "would have done well" in Slytherin while the Sorting Hat 
considered placing Hermoinine in Ravenclaw.  (It wouldn't surprise me to 
learn, eventually, that it considered Hufflepuff for Ron...  he has the 
loyalty/hard worker traits in a way that the twins do not.) But the twins 
seem suited only for Gryffindor, they have neither the ambition of Slytherin 

(joke shop career plans), the book-smarts of Ravenclaw (witness their poor 
OWL results) or the work-ethic of Hufflepuff). 

How this would match up with Harry being the presumed heir of Gryffindor, 
I'm not sure. But it has me thinking.  

Louise





From jsummerill at summerillj.freeserve.co.uk  Wed Sep 10 14:31:58 2003
From: jsummerill at summerillj.freeserve.co.uk (Joanne Summerill)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 15:31:58 +0100
Subject: Snape on probation
Message-ID: <000101c377ab$9e8f24c0$2210883e@oemcomputer>

No: HPFGUIDX 80359

Why was Snape put on probation by Umbridge?  She seemed satsified with his teaching.  Also she seemed to listen to Malfoy's opinion of him.  I can think of 2 reasons.

1)  She thought Snape was too close to Dumbledore.
2)  She found something out about his background.

What did she find out?  Maybe she discovered that he was accused of being a Death Eater, but cleared.  Or, as she hates half breeds, as she tried to get rid of Hagrid and drafted anti-werewolf legislation, do you think this could be a piece of evidence in the Snape is a vampire or half vampire theory?

JoTwo


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From pinoypartygal at aol.com  Wed Sep 10 14:53:43 2003
From: pinoypartygal at aol.com (Emily)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 14:53:43 -0000
Subject: What is Hermione afraid of?
In-Reply-To: <bjn1rt+qqq2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjndtn+mofv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80360

Both of you make really interesting arguments.

Jim said: 
>I would speculate that the boggart-horror she sees is 
> something else ? Harry dead.  Naturally she would be reluctant
to 
say 
> it to Harry<snip>I can't back that up at all, but we may see in 
the 
> future what Hermione's boggart really is.>>
 
Me now:
I have to say that I agree with Jim. Just as a human being, putting 
yourself in Hermione's shoes do you honestly think that after 
everying single thing that she has been through that she really is 
going to see Professor McGonagall giving her a failing grade? IMHO, 
I think that Hermione has finally learned that there are most 
definitely more important things than getting an A on the test. And 
there has been evidence that she has always thought this way all 
along, just think back to her, "loyalty, friendship..." quote from 
The Sorcerer's Stone.

And yes, she would be reluctant to say she saw him dead to Harry, 
wouldn't she? I imagine it'd be difficult to tell your bestfriend, 
female or male that your worst fear would be seeing them dead, 
because then not only would you fear it, then he or she would start 
to fear it as well.

Kristini said:

> Secondly - all the Boggarts we have seen are related to something 
> intensely personal to the character. 

Me again:

Ah yes, I agree to that as well, and while grades are intensely 
personal to Hermione don't you think that there are a lot of other 
things that are intensely personal to her as well? I could name a 
lot of things. For instance, it might not be Harry dead...it might 
be her parents dead (hey they are prime targets, they're Muggles 
with a a daughter who is a witch), or Ron (no that's not a SHIPping 
point...I'm actually H/Hr...but let's not get into that). It could 
even be Winky drinking herself into oblivion and submission while 
she scrubs the floors of Hogwarts in the late hours of the night (in 
relation to Hermione's zealous efforts for S.P.E.W) All of these 
things are intensely personal to her, I think...and I'd hope that 
Hermione has grown enough (which I think she has) to know that a 
failing grade is nothing but a blip on the radar that is her life. 
But, like many people have said, we'll never REALLY know what 
Hermione's boggart took the form of until JKR chooses to SHOW us.And 
I have a feeling that it's probably very important.

~Emily~





From delwynmarch at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 15:57:48 2003
From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (Doriane)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 15:57:48 -0000
Subject: The magic power of love. Was: BANG! You're dead!
In-Reply-To: <20030907144305.7816.qmail@web21508.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjnhls+phoo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80361

> Hans:
> 
> This Stone is able to bring an unlimited healthy life amongst 
> undreamed of wealth and luxury. It can guarantee absolute and total 
> power, fame, esteem. Money ("gold") can buy all these things. Yet 
> Harry wanted none of these. His divine inner quality was beyond 
> wanting any of that. He was more interested in saving the world - 
> you and me!

Nope. Harry was simply an 11-year-old boy who wanted love and family 
more than anything else. And he knew that money can't buy that, 
because he'd received love and acceptance during a whole year without 
ever having to pay for it. That's why he didn't care about the stone. 
As for wanting to save the world, I don't think he thought as far as 
that. He just didn't want the bad guys to steal something from DD. 
Remember : originally, he didn't come to fight Voldemort, but Snape. 
And even when he gets the stone, he still thinks he's only fighting 
Quirrell.

> This is going to earn me a rap on the knuckles - but do you 
> remember that brilliant scene in the movie where Harry holds the 
> Stone in his hands and Voldemort tempts him? Did you see the 
> longing in his eyes? But nothing stopped him from his determination 
> to stop Voldemort getting the Stone. 
> 
> How many of us can truly say we could pass that test? You never 
> have to see a doctor again, you can buy the best palace in the best 
> spot, you can help your poor grandmother who's dying of cancer by 
> paying for the best doctor in the world, and so on - without limit.

That's movie contamination. In the book, LV just goes on to demanding 
the Stone from Harry, if I remember well.

> By making THAT choice Harry invoked the wrath of Voldemort, and it 
> was only THEN that his mother's love-guard was needed.
> 
> Harry here shows supreme selflessness and courage.

Harry is courageous, I'll give you that. He has to be, or he would 
never have survived the Dursleys' abuse. But as for supreme 
selflessness... To me, he's only showing loyalty to DD, the only 
father figure he ever had : DD is guarding the Stone, LV is trying to 
steal the Stone from him, LV is a baddie, so no he won't get the 
Stone. I personnally think that at that moment, Harry hasn't yet 
realized that LV would go as far as killing him to get the Stone. 
He's just an 11-year-old boy, and kids that age can't imagine that 
someone would kill them. He's survived all the abuse from the 
Dursleys, so it's kind of logical that he's not too afraid of LV.

> Yes Fawkes saved him. But why did Fawkes COME? Because Harry 
> invoked him! How? By showing his loyalty to Dumbledore.

Again, DD was the only father figure Harry had at that time. So what 
he said to Riddle is a bit like : "no, you're not the best. My daddy 
is !!" Especially since he's been told that DD was the only wizard LV 
was ever afraid of, so it's easy for him to 'brag' that way.

> So it's Harry's own action that invoke Fawkes' help. This of course 
> totally leaving aside the fact that Harry was there to save Ginny, 
> whom he didn't even particularly know very well.

Hum, I wouldn't take that as such a good point for Harry : it's a big 
sign of his hero / saving people complex. Basically, Harry thought he 
was big enough to save Ginny (or whoever for that matter) on his own. 
I mean, he *could* have gone and requested help from McGonagall of 
whoever, but he didn't even think of it.

> Harry's superb inner qualities shown here are compassion, loyalty, 
> bravery.

Loyalty, yes. Bravery, hum : his actions border on foolishness to me. 
Basically, he's never run into his limits. He hasn't learned that he 
isn't all-powerful in the magical world (how could he ? He *did* 
defeat LV twice). So he's intimately convinced that he can win over 
anyone in a fight. As for compassion, I don't think so. As I said 
before, he doesn't care much about Ginny, it's more to do with 
playing the hero.

> Oh yes, ONLY compassion. Are we talking about Harry Potter and the 
> Prisoner of Azkaban? In my copy Harry wins the battle against fear. 
> Not just fear of something, but the fear of fear itself (as Lupin 
> says). In my copy Harry summons a patronus that drives off 100 
> dementors! I don't want to get into time travel; let's keep it 
> simple. Harry summons the patronus because of the practice he's had 
> with Lupin. If he hadn't had that practice he wouldn't have been 
> able to do it.

So a) he'd practiced that skill, and b) he knew he would succeed 
because he'd seen himself doing it. What kind of victory is that ? If 
I saw myself doing something I've been training for, it wouldn't take 
me any courage to do it. Harry did *not* win over his fear at this 
moment in my idea.

As for compassion... Well, he did show something towards Peter, but I 
wouldn't call it compassion. He wasn't trying to save Peter, he was 
trying to act noble towards his father's friends. Basically, what he 
said is : Peter is such a lowly character, he's not worthy of your 
becoming murderers. So what he showed towards Peter was disdain, a 
total lack of consideration. Served him well, by the way.

> If you or I or anyone else had faced Voldemort with Harry's wand we 
> would have been cinders in a nanosecond. There was no luck there at 
> all. It was a matter of will-power. 

If I may say so, you don't know how much will-power your fellow list-
members can display. I see no reason why Harry should be the only one 
able to display such will-power. Take Neville for example : he showed 
in OoP that he had tons of will-power too, when he fought so hard to 
better himself in the DA.

> She (JKR) won't say that because Harry didn't push Voldemort out by 
> mental discipline.

Which is lucky, because it would be inconsistent with the will-power 
Harry showed in GoF.

> The whole point of book 5 is that the liberation of the mental
> ego is NOT achieved by mental discipline but by Love.

Maybe. Even though, as I've said time and again, I don't see Harry as 
an especially loving person. He doesn't care about many people, and 
even those he does care about, he doesn't mind hurting, sometimes 
quite badly.

> To sum up Harry's inner qualities:
> Book 1: selflessness, courage.
> Book 2: compassion, loyalty, bravery
> Book 3: (as well as the above things:) victory over fear
> Book 4: a will-power greater than Voldemort's
> Book 5: a Love which is greater than any power one person can have 
> over another (my conclusion)

And how does that make him any more special that a 13-year-old girl 
who's completely lost any hope in life, who doesn't think things will 
ever get better, who suffers horribly every single day of her life, 
but who won't commit suicide only because she doesn't want to "do 
that" to her mom and sister ? Maybe I didn't save the world, but I 
think I displayed pretty much all the qualities you quoted above. But 
I don't think you'd me consider a hero, would you ? In the same way, 
I don't consider Harry a hero : he is he, he's got his own qualities 
and faults, but he's no greater that anyone else. In fact, no one is 
greater that anyone else, because there is no absolute scale to 
measure people.

> Is there just a chance of one in a trillion that you're serious in 
> what you're saying? That you missed those vital few lines in each 
> book?

No. Golly and I just don't interpret them the way you do. And none of 
us (Golly, you and I) is wrong.

Del




From mpjdekker at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 10 16:23:35 2003
From: mpjdekker at hotmail.com (mightymaus75)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 16:23:35 -0000
Subject: Hagrid's odd behavior (was: CoS scene)
In-Reply-To: <bjmd2u+qpg9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjnj67+aamf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80362

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Hagrid" <aussie_lol at y...> 
wrote:
> Opening the COS was what Hagrid was (wrongly) expelled for - and 
> because he was never re-instated, a lot of people would accuse him
> of opening it again this time. I wouldn't blame him opening the
> door with a crossbow while Fang was barking.

I don't blame him, it just seems a bit... odd. Hagrid seemed to be 
expecting something or someone specific.

 
> It seems that Lockhart visited Hagrid, not that Hagrid invited him. 
> Hagrid said he knew how to handle the kelpies without Lockhart's 
> advice. Lockhart may have been asking about Harry, since he
> mentioned the help with signing photos. The book Lockhart spoke of
> was the Banshees (not a magical creature Hagrid could have as a
> pet).

I don't question the fact that Hagrid didn't want Lockhart's help. 
It's more his comment that Lockhart was there to advise him on 
getting kelpies out of a well that seems strange. Was Lockhart 
perhaps advising Hagrid on something completely different?

 
> As for the pumpkins, they were due to be used for Halloween soon.
> Not the best time to introduce them to slugs nor repellant.

But wouldn't Hagrid have introduced the pumpkins to repellent earlier?

-Maus 





From pegruppel at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 16:29:45 2003
From: pegruppel at yahoo.com (Peggy)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 16:29:45 -0000
Subject: The Hogwarts librarian
In-Reply-To: <20030910145641.80824.qmail@web60201.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjnjhp+ghgq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80363

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, udder_pen_dragon <udderpd at y...> 
wrote:
> 
> 
> arrowsmithbt <arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote: 
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Rania Melhem <dunknegg at y...> 
wrote:
> > As a librarian, I totally agree with you. I am very irritated by 
Madam Pince's 
> description by JKR. I dont know why she is depicted so horribly. 
And she never seems 
> to help any of the Hogwarts students find information. 
> > Rania
> > 
> 
> Perhaps JKR has set her character in our minds and is getting 
> her ready for a major role in a future volume.
> 
> Conan the Librarian, maybe.
> 
> Kneasy 
> 
> U_P_D
> 
> But so many Librarian's were like her, some still are. I do not 
particularly like or dislike her, but she is a real life charecter, I 
bet JKR has copied her from someone she has met.
> 
> Udder Pen Dragon
> 
> 
> 

Peg:

I agree with Rania--what on earth does JKR think a librarian 
is/does?  I'm one, too, and so are many of my friends.  We're 
mystified at why someone who can portray so many other characters so 
well opted for such a stereotype?  Especially when public librarians 
are at the forefront of protecting access to her books in the face of 
the "ban the books" crowd.

Yes, yes, some librarians were once dragons (I met a couple as a kid) 
and cared more for their books and the physical library than they did 
for the people who used them.  

JKR has missed an opportunity (as I see it) to show the world how to 
find information with a librarian's help.  I know the Trio isn't 
inclined to ask adults for help (that's part of the story--they solve 
mysteries on their own).  Nevertheless, if they just once asked Madam 
Pince to help them out, they might get a better solution.

Conan the librarian?  I like it, but I don't know how it would fit in 
with the storyline. :)

Ask a librarian, you never know what you might find.

Peg  An electronic librarian--you just can't see the wires.




From greatelderone at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 16:30:56 2003
From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 16:30:56 -0000
Subject: What is Hermione afraid of?
In-Reply-To: <bjn1rt+qqq2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjnjk0+5t3f@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80364

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kirstini" <kirst_inn at y...> 
wrote:
> But this *is* Hermione's fear. They have a practical DADA exam at 
the 
> end of PoA, and Hermione jumps out of the trunk with her face 
white, 
> having seen McGonagall. JKR treats this as a joke in the passage, 
but 
> what I was trying to get at here was whether this might actually 
lead 
> to something more serious. She's afraid of failure, which is far 
more 
> convincing a fear than being scared of - say - a mummy or a Banshee 
> if you ask me.

I think you missed the whole point of the boggart. The boggart brings 
out your most primal and deepest fears in kids. It basically brings 
out the fears that you think is laying under your bed when you are 
asleep at night and what you think is going to kill you and I for one 
certainly don't buy McGonagall telling Hermione that she failed as 
Hermione's biggest fear at that time.  

>  
> Which scene - Hermione/Boggart? In the trunk? At the end of PoA? 
Are 
> you suggesting that she lies about Boggat!McGonagall?

Well Hermione certainly lied by omission about the time turner and 
she is the most mysterious of the trio characterwise since we have a 
window into Harry's thoughts through the books and Ron can be 
generally taken at face valuse while that is not true for Hermione.


> Secondly - all the Boggarts we have seen are related to something 
> intensely personal to the character. It shows, after all, a 
> representation of the most urgent, fear possible for each 
individual 
> to experience. Lupin fears the danger he may put others in at the 
> full moon, fears losing his self-control.

Or he may just fear the full moon since it was on a full moon that he 
encountered a werewolf that scarred him both physically and mentally. 
Or perhaps his boggart isn't a moon at all as others have suggested.

> Molly is the only person whose Boggart 
> relates to directly to harm done to others, but this is because her 
> entire life is devoted to her family. 

Or perhaps Molly is an adult and has a better grasp on her fears 
while the trio and their fellows were kids when they faced the 
boggart and were just afraid of monsters and bogeymen that lurked 
around the corner.
 
> Hermione's number one priority is Hermione, not Harry. Again, not a 
> criticism. She has to be fairly selfish to sustain the level of 
focus 
> required to gain her high marks. 

I certainly disagree. She set aside considerable amounts of time in 
GoF to help Harry in the Tournaments, attacked Snape a teacher in PS, 
mutilated and engaged in dangerous magic all for Harry's sake in CoS. 
Furthermore in Ootp, she went along with Harry into Umbridge's office 
and then proceded to take Umbridge into the forest when she was about 
to put an illegal curse on Harry. Furthermore she also set up the 
whole interview with Rita to try and clear Harry's name.


> Ambition requires selfishness, and Hermione has ambition in droves. 
> As we've seen ("perhaps if I could take SPEW further..."), she     
> doesn't intend to use it to do anything as obvious as climb a       
> particular career ladder, but she wants to employ her talents to    
> the best of her abilities. She's ambitious to 
> be true to herself. 

And how exactly is SPEW selfish? Pushing to free the elves from 
enslavement by the wizards, a very unpopular thing especially with 
the fact that she is a mudblood, is extremely unselfish of her.

> Yes, she cares very, very deeply about her best 
> friends, but I'm not convinced by your theory at all, because there 
> is very little canon in Hermione's character to suggest that she 
saw 
> anything other than Boggart!McGonagall. 

And there is also a lot of canon evidence that Hermione has a habit 
of hiding stuff that bothers her from the rest of the trio. We know 
next to nothing about her parent(in fact we know more about Neville's 
parents) and even more we don't know what her issue with the Imperius 
curse is.




From xmezumiiru at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 16:40:11 2003
From: xmezumiiru at yahoo.com (An'nai Jiriki)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 09:40:11 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape on probation
In-Reply-To: <000101c377ab$9e8f24c0$2210883e@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <20030910164011.44756.qmail@web12208.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80365


--- Joanne Summerill
<jsummerill at summerillj.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> Why was Snape put on probation by Umbridge?  She
> seemed satsified with his teaching.  Also she seemed
> to listen to Malfoy's opinion of him.  I can think
> of 2 reasons.
> 


I took this as Snape was not helping her when she was
in hysterics by not giving her the Veritaserum. 'You
are being deliberately unhelpful' (not a direct quote,
if any one can provide it would be appreciated).

I believe Snape was protecting the children by
withholding the serum so the kids would not tell the
truth or be hurt by an overdose. 

Of course Malfoy would speak highly of him (assuming
he actually is in Malfoy's favor), as Snape would not
deny Voldie (that Malfoy knows of). Snape seemed just
as annoyed by Umbrige as all the rest, but could not
show it as much because of his allegiences.

Chris

=====
"You irritate me. Kill me now." ~Javert, Les Miserables

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 17:09:38 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 17:09:38 -0000
Subject: A Sirius clue
In-Reply-To: <bjm5b6+kcir@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjnlsi+3qga@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80366

<psychobirdgirl at y...> wrote:
> Did anyone else everythink, after reading OotP, that it was a 
> little too obvious that Sirius would be the one who would die, 
> especially considering the commonality of the saying "Dead Serious."

Yes and no.  I think JKR does some things some times that are "a 
little too obvious," but most of the time she doesn't.  Since I am 
basing my expectations not on what seems obvious but on the fact that 
she hardly ever *is*, I am double-faked out.  I hope that makes sense.

And while it could be said that Sirius seemed doomed, I was hoping so 
very hard to be wrong that it surprises me how anti-climactic JKR 
managed to make his death.  I mean, I spent all this time with my 
toes sort of curling, hoping it wouldn't be him (or Ron, or Hermione, 
or Dumbledore, or Hagrid), and on the edge of my seat, that by the 
time Sirius went through the veil (with so very little fuss), I was 
kind of wore out already.

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley"




From alicit at aol.com  Wed Sep 10 17:09:55 2003
From: alicit at aol.com (alicit at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 13:09:55 -0400
Subject: Percy's age
Message-ID: <3B2083C1.14615C4E.00045D72@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80367

*Shakes off the dust*  Ahh, sweet delurk.  anyway, this is a very exciting discovery for me, so please bear with me.  ready?

Percy is one year younger than everyone else in his year. (like Hermione) (or me! yeay!)  

I could have picked up on this before OotP, but the twins made me think.  We know from GoF and OotP that a wizard is "of age" when they are in their seventh year.  The goblet is only open to those who are legal. and you must be of age to take the apparition exam.  However, in GoF, Percy had just taken his apparition exam, and was being showoffy about it :. Therefore, Percy must be born a year before everyone else in his grade.

-Scheherazade, still has faith in the Perce



From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Wed Sep 10 17:13:10 2003
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 17:13:10 -0000
Subject: Dolores Umbridge
In-Reply-To: <bjmuvr+edma@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjnm36+akrn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80368

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "James McDaniel" 
<peppermintfatty at y...> wrote:
(snip long and interesting analysis)
> While I firmly believe that Umbridge is a part human herself, I 
> cannot be certain as to what exactly she is. Upon reflection 
though, my guess is that in her veins runs Goblin blood. 
(snip)
> If Delores is indeed part Goblin, she could be far more important 
in the two upcoming books as Goblins may be a key in the coming war. 
We know that both sides are courting them in book 5, and every time 
they have been brought up in HISTORY OF MAGIC, it has been in 
relation to the great Goblin rebellion when they, for a time, 
overthrew wizarding kind. Whether you agree or disagree, I just feel 
> that this is an option we all might want to consider. Thanks for 
> reading.
> ~James
> Hufflepuff

CW comments:

I think you could well be on to something here, but if she is part-
goblin (and it would certainly help explain her appearance), I can't 
see her as a goblin spy/agit prop under deep cover, who will emerge 
as a negotiator/liaison person later on. Instead, I do think the 
goblin blood might have a more deep rooted psychological effect on 
her actions, because it fundamentally affects the way she views 
herself as a female, and how others view her. 

A while ago, as a contribution to the Umbridge rape debate, I posted 
(78317)that one of the outcomes of whatever happened in the forest 
might be that Umbridge begins a long court case at the MoM, which has 
a splitting and destabilising effect on the WW, just as they start to 
gear up for war with Voldemort.

Like a previous poster, Tamee, I too had doubted that Umbridge had 
really been raped (or that the centaurs had even threatened her with 
any such thing), and that the horror of whatever had happened was 
more a product of her fearful imagination. I said:

'Your post powerfully reminded me of the themes of EM 
Forster's 'Passage to India'. Umbridge could quite easily be seen an 
ageing Miss Quested, a bitter, repressed virgin, who has never had 
any success attracting men (I wonder why..), and whose deepest fears 
include bestial assault. The centaurs' cultural point of view would 
be quite as opaque to her as Aziz's was to the British Raj.

It makes me think she might reappear and agitate for some sort of 
court case, perhaps about 'false imprisonment of a wizard by a half-
breed under decree no XXX', to try and recover her self-esteem. 
Although we would all love to think she was totally discredited, I 
can quite imagine an ongoing sub-plot where certain factions in the 
MoM support her in this (for example, the appalling Percy, other 
wizards with non-PC/pure-blood 'racist' beliefs), their actions 
fomented by DEs wherever possible. It would all be part of a very 
believable chaos as the fight against Voldie gets going, with people 
lining up and having to choose which side they are on. 

In Forster's book there was a very ambiguous ending, and the 
misunderstanding between British and Indian cultures was not 
resolved, although the criminal charge was withdrawn. A court case 
against the Centaurs might take a similar course, and have the effect 
of alienating them for ever as allies.'

If Umbridge is indeed part goblin, I could imagine her extending the 
brief in such a court case, to include goblins, and all non-pureblood 
wizarding creatures, all as part of sublimating who she really was.

Hopefully, JKR will not allow the alienation to take place, and will 
expose her for what she is, perhaps in a way which is part of a great 
reconciliation of magic creatures at the end of book 7.
	




From dwoodward at towson.edu  Wed Sep 10 17:19:10 2003
From: dwoodward at towson.edu (Woodward, Deirdre)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 13:19:10 -0400
Subject: Wizen gene/What is ancient Ancient Magic
Message-ID: <CB08EA121F31B94DA58296DEF3668AE12B2182@helium.towson.edu>

No: HPFGUIDX 80369

Thanks to all who answered regarding the wizen gene.  It makes sense that once the wizen started marrying Muggles, a gene would be introduced into the Muggle population.
 
That explanation, combined with the fact that there are pure-bloods, has got me musing about a theme in the books that has consistently appeared but very quietly -- the "Before Time" when all wizards were pure-blood and practiced another kind of magic -- ancient magic -- whose practice has died away.  Tom Riddle made the mistake of not believing in/studying the ancient magic, Lily protected Harry with a very ancient magic, Dumbledore is well schooled in the arts of the ancient magic.  I don't have my books here to give the exact page and verse, but it's in there.
 
I think that whatever is going to happen will be tied into the use of Ancient Magic.
 
Does anyone have any canon or speculation about what, exactly, Ancient Magic is?
 
Deirdre
 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From siskiou at earthlink.net  Wed Sep 10 17:30:04 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 10:30:04 -0700
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: What is Hermione afraid of?
In-Reply-To: <3F5F2BA3.8070307@ipartner.com.pl>
References: <bjmsl2+rgf0@eGroups.com> <3F5F2BA3.8070307@ipartner.com.pl>
Message-ID: <174178088132.20030910103004@earthlink.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 80370



Hi,

Wednesday, September 10, 2003, 6:48:19 AM, Przemyslaw wrote:

> On the other hand it is entirely possible, that Hermione is left out 
> from ridiculing boggart because Lupin was affraid that given
> Hermione's 
> skill at spells said boggart would be destroyed prematurely thus 
> spoiling all the fun to other students, and removing the honours of 
> final boggart demise from Neville.

Hermione is great at spells, but a boggart (or dementors)
are a bit different than using a spell to transfigure
something, for example.

Their are other things involved, feelings, things that
distract from just saying the spell correctly.

Hermione is just about perfect in magical theory, and great
at unraveling mysteries, or coming up with ideas, but when
it comes to using magic under pressure, she has problems
(just like most people ;) ).

In this case, I don't think Lupin was worried Hermione would
finish the boggart, before anyone else got a chance.

But then, how well did Lupin know the students at that
point? Was this fairly early in the year (I can't remember)?

I thought, since Hermione had already contributed by
answering his question at the start, he wanted to give other
students a chance.

And I do believe fear of failure was her true boggart, in
the form of McGonagall and the grades.
Fears are not usually logical. Fear of failure encompasses
so much more than just grades, but at her age, and with the
importance she puts on schoolwork for herself, I see no
reason to not believe Hermione, when she tells about her
boggart.
Her parents are Muggle, and I'm sure this fact makes her put
even more pressure onto herself. She wants to prove she can
do this, and better than everyone else!

While I'm certain, Hermione would be heartbroken to see Harry,
Ron, her parents, Neville...die, I just don't see
specifically Harry's death as her greatest fear.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net

Visit our two pet bunnies: http://home.earthlink.net/~siskiou/





From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Wed Sep 10 17:37:49 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 17:37:49 -0000
Subject: Percy's age
In-Reply-To: <3B2083C1.14615C4E.00045D72@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bjnnhd+sncp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80371

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, alicit at a... wrote:
> *Shakes off the dust*  Ahh, sweet delurk.  

Welcome, Scheherazade. May this be the beginning of 1001 posts. ;-)

> This is a very exciting discovery for me, so please bear with me.  
> ready?
> 
> Percy is one year younger than everyone else in his year. (like 
Hermione) (or me! yeay!)  

<snip>
you must be of age to take the apparition exam.  However, in GoF, 
Percy had just taken his apparition exam, and was being showoffy 
about it :. Therefore, Percy must be born a year before everyone 
else in his grade.
> 
> -Scheherazade, still has faith in the Perce

It also would make sense if Percy has a birthday *after* the start 
of the autumn term (like Hermione).

That would have meant that, unlike Gred and Forge, he couldn't take 
his Apparition exam in the summer holidays before his seventh year.

If his birthday is somewhere in late September/early October, then 
by the time he legally *could* take the Apparition exam, he would 
have been studying like mad for his NEWTS.

It's possible that apparition isn't a Hogwarts subject. The 
equivalent, Drivers Ed, is *not* taught in most British schools. You 
take private lessons outside school hours. If that's the case, it 
would cut into Percy's NEWTs study time.

Since we know he needed top grades for the career he wanted, he 
might well have decided that he'd rather concentrate on the NEWTs, 
and timetable apparition for the summer holidays after the exam.

So he might well not be a full year younger than the rest of his 
year - a couple of months would do it. He'd be one of the youngest 
in the class, but not an 'advanced placement' student.


Pip!Squeak





From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 17:45:25 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 17:45:25 -0000
Subject: FF:  Flight of (the) Fancy 3; Sirius's Death-Journal cont'd
In-Reply-To: <bjl36q+ickt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjnnvl+af5l@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80372

Sirius Black, death-journal entry dated deathday plus three:

I have never felt so peaceful in my...right...well, that does make 
sense, doesn't it?  There was never much peace in my life.

Looking back, it seems as if I knew.  Part of me did, anyway.  What 
are the chances, that the man who is godfather to the boy the evilest 
man in the world wants dead, is going to survive?  And now that I 
feel whole...well, unembodied, but with no fractures or broken 
parts...I can see how broken I was before.  Even before Azkaban, I 
wasn't *happy*.  Another reason the dementors couldn't suck me dry, I 
suppose.  I was always inclined to just follow my nose, wherever it 
led me.  No impulse control at all.

If I had been cleared of the charges, I'd have spent every second 
with Harry.  With Voldemort back, I'd have made Dumbledore let me sit 
under Harry's desk like one of those service dogs.  I'd have tried, 
anyway.  Though it might have been fun to follow Harry back to the 
Dursleys.  Even if I'd had to be an outside dog and sleep in the 
garden.  I can't imagine it would have been worse than living in a 
cave and eating rats.  Chasing Dudley up a tree would be so very 
satisfying.  (Yes, Sirius, that would have been very useful.)  Of 
course, Harry's protected there already, but he can't stay in the 
house all the time.  I certainly know how that feels.  Poor Harry.  I 
can only hope he'll get some relief, of some kind or other, this 
summer.

This now, it's like the time I spent in the tropics.  Nothing much to 
do, nothing much to worry about.  The scenery was brighter, though.  
Wait, did I see something?  I was imagining one of those brightly 
colored birds down there that I used to send Harry letters and--yes, 
I did see something.  As if my imagination charmed it into being.  A 
flash of color, seen as if through the foliage--there it is again.  I 
will have to keep working on this.  Perhaps there is magic on this 
side of the veil as well; perhaps there are things I can do, here.

I wonder if I could affect events on the other side of the veil.  Is 
there any way to get back?  And now here I go again, coherent thought 
fading...

S.B.

[Sandy, aka msbeadsley]




From siriuskase at earthlink.net  Wed Sep 10 17:56:53 2003
From: siriuskase at earthlink.net (siriuskase)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 17:56:53 -0000
Subject: Albus Dumbledore and the Socks in the Mirror (of Erised)
In-Reply-To: <bjc1l9+m1ka@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjnol5+n2cr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80373

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sbursztynski" <greatraven at h...> wrote:
> --
> > A world in which Dumbledore could expect to receive something as 
> > warm, fuzzy, and prosaic as socks for Christmas would be one which 
> > did not hang in the balance.  It would be a world in which he would 
> > not have to be wary of having his caring for others turned back on 
> > him.  It would be a world in which he would not have to sacrifice 
> > the  happiness (or the very life) of "the boy who lived."
> > 
> > Sandy, aka "msbeadsley"
> 
> What a wonderful post! ....... We can only hope DD survives to enjoy this world and 
be 
> given socks for Christmas in the last scene.
> 
> Sue B

I agree with Sue, great post.  I'd like to comment on the timing of this.  He would no 
longer be able to answer Harry's question this way.  At that time, for all he knew, 
Voldemort wouldn't appear for many years, he had many years to enjoy Harry and 
prepare him for the future which was still out there somewhere in the distance.  I'd 
like to think that at some point, Dumbledore's concerns about Voldemort and Harry 
and the yet to be fulfilled prophecy will be over and someone (Harry?) will give him 
some socks.




From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Sep 10 18:06:35 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 18:06:35 -0000
Subject: What is Hermione afraid of?
In-Reply-To: <bjnjk0+5t3f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjnp7b+vmm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80374

First of all, in response to Emily's post on this thread- Emily, I 
wasn't trying to say that the "deeply personal thing" that Hermione 
cared about was her grades. It's what the grades represent, which is 
failure (and McGonagall representing the subsequent lack of respect 
which she presumes comes with this failure) that I belive is the 
greatest psychological insult we've had into her personality yet. I 
was trying to intiate a discussion into whether or not Hermione's 
desire to achieve, and to achieve highly at everything, will be 
significant later on in the series. What I *wasn't* trying to do  was 
start a flame war on whether or not Hermione cares for Harry/ and or 
is a selfish, conniving cow. So before I enter the one that the Great 
Elder One so obliging started for me anyway, I would like to point 
out that Hermione is my favourite of JKR's characters, and that I 
like JKR's characters because they are on the whole realistically 
depicted. And realistic characters are selfish at times, because 
ultimately, we all are a bit. And this in no way diminishes our 
capacity to care for others. 
Anyway, <sigh> to work.

Great Elder One:
>>I think you missed the whole point of the boggart. The boggart 
brings out your most primal and deepest fears in kids. It basically 
brings out the fears that you think is laying under your bed when you 
are asleep at night and what you think is going to kill you and I for 
one certainly don't buy McGonagall telling Hermione that she failed 
as Hermione's biggest fear at that time.>> 

Really? The Boggart brings out my deepest fear in kids, does it? 
Cripes. And here was me thinking it produced a representation of the 
person (regardless of age)nearest to its greatest fear. I've never 
been near a Boggart, but I really pity those kids I'm displacing onto 
having to suffer an endless sea of misplaced apostrophies. Cripes. I 
did miss the point, didn't I? ;P
Not everyone's most primal fear is something coming to kill them. 
(Although you may be inadvertantly right about the primal instinct 
which drives us to protect the self above the other.) Harry's fear, 
as Lupin tells us, is "fear itself", a far more abstract concept. I 
also take issue with your endy bit "at that time". The time, the 
setting of the Boggart incident is one of the very things that makes 
me trust Hermione's version. She was slap bang in the middle of an 
exam, and shows throughout the series how susceptible she is to exam 
pressure. I would imagine it entirely plausible that her greatest 
fear at that moment is failure, and less so that such a focussed 
character would be worried about Harry dying "at that (very 
particular)time". Oh, god, you're going to tell me that Hermione 
isn't just a ruthless exam machine now, aren't you? Let me just 
preempt you by saying "I know". So, that about concludes the 
argument....oh, bugger, no it doesn't...

GEO:
>>Hermione certainly lied by omission about the time turner and she 
is the most mysterious of the trio characterwise since we have a 
window into Harry's thoughts through the books and Ron can be 
generally taken at face valuse while that is not true for Hermione.>>

Sweeping statement there. I wouldn't be surprised if Ron surprised 
you one of these days. And I would contend the Hermione bit by saying 
that we know enough about *her*


I wrote:
>>>Lupin fears the danger he may put others in at the full moon, 
fears losing his self-control>>>
To which GEO replied: 
>>Or he may just fear the full moon since it was on a full moon that 
he encountered a werewolf that scarred him both physically and 
mentally.>>

Very true, but I think my argument, as a variant, has a great deal 
more subtlety, and gives JKR credit for being a better writer. He 
does *turn into* a werewolf at *every* full moon, you know. And if he 
met someone he *would* kill them. At this point in your reply, I have 
to confess that I began to wonder if you weren't just determined to 
take my post apart in every possible way. 

GEO:
>>Or perhaps his boggart isn't a moon at all as others have 
suggested.>>

Lupin says: "Did you work out that the Boggart turned into a full 
moon when it got to me?" Does this have any relevance to the point 
under discussion?  

GEO:
>> Or perhaps Molly is an adult and has a better grasp on her fears 
while the trio and their fellows were kids when they faced the 
boggart and were just afraid of monsters and bogeymen that lurked 
around the corner.>>

Harry fears FEAR. Not a bogeyman. He picks on the Dementor as a 
representation of fear. Hermione fears either ___dying, as you appear 
to be contending, or failure, as I am arguing. Again, not a bogeyman. 
Ron fears the giant spider that had tried to kill him the year 
before, but his greatest fear has always been spiders because of 
psychological repercussions from a childhood incident. In fact, I 
would say that Ron and Harry, both of whom manage the Riddikulus 
spell, have a better grasp on their fears than Molly, who doesn't, 
and allows the Boggart to affect her emotionally.  

I wrote:
>>>Hermione's number one priority is Hermione, not Harry. Again, not 
a criticism. She has to be fairly selfish to sustain the level of 
focus required to gain her high marks>>>

GEO: 
>>I certainly disagree.>>
You shock me. Go on:
>>She set aside considerable amounts of time in GoF to help Harry in 
the Tournaments, <did lots of stuff> all for Harry's sake in CoS. 
Furthermore in Ootp, she went along with Harry into Umbridge's office 
and then proceded to take Umbridge into the forest when she was about 
to put an illegal curse on Harry. Furthermore she also set up the 
whole interview with Rita to try and clear Harry's name.>>

Please note, that I didn't say "Hermione is a nasty witch who has 
never ever given any time up for any of her friends." I 
said "Hermione's number one priority is Hermione." And it is. 
Hermione is an intelligent, self-aware young woman. She's not another 
sacrificial Lily. Her function in the *narrative* might be to help 
Harry, but as a character she has been developed beyond this. She's 
focussed. She organises her own time and then proceeds to tell 
everyone else how too organise theirs, because ultimately she 
believes that she knows better. (I could go really far out on a limb 
here and say that she helps Harry because it makes her feel useful, 
and validated as a caring person. She's kinky. She gets a kick out of 
it. Is there any such thing as a non-selfish act? Woohoo! Why doesn't 
everyone flame me?) 
Harry's number one priority is Harry, as the irritatingly solipistic 
narrative focalisation in OoP showed us. He might be off saving 
people, but his focus is constantly on himself. And Ron's number one 
priority is Ron, because he can be incredibly selfish at times. And 
Dumbledore's number one priority is...oh, no-one really knows. But 
that's a whole different thread. I'm trying to point out that it is 
perfectly natural for people to be primarily motivated by self-
interest and yet still be good. likeable, sympathetic people (yet 
another reason why I shouldn't have included Dumbledore in there 
then... ;P)
Anyway, back to *my* number one priority...

>>>Ambition requires selfishness, and Hermione has ambition in 
droves. As we've seen ("perhaps if I could take SPEW further..."), 
she doesn't intend to use it to do anything as obvious as climb a    
particular career ladder, but she wants to employ her talents to    
the best of her abilities. She's ambitious to be true to herself.>>>

Oh, hello there, GEO. Have you an opinion on this one too? Why, I 
believe you do.

>>And how exactly is SPEW selfish? Pushing to free the elves from 
enslavement by the wizards, a very unpopular thing especially with 
the fact that she is a mudblood, is extremely unselfish of her.>>

Again, please note my wording. At*no* point does it say "and another 
thing that selfish bitch wants to do is free house elves from a 
lifetime of slavery. How self-centred can you get, eh?" The SPEW 
refernce in the quote above refers to the fact that Hermione's 
ambition doesn't take the traditional form that we are familiar with 
from the traditional stereotype of the ambitious woman. I offered 
that as an example of her push to further herself. Also, perhaps you 
should note that SPEW's unpopularity, and Hermione's unpopularity 
because of her mixed blood are completely unrelated entities, and 
probably shouldn't be put together n the same sentence. She's not 
unpopular with Harry, Ron, the twins, Hagrid, or her various victims 
in the Gryffindor common room -  the people with whom she discusses 
SPEW, because she's Muggle born. She's not unpopular with Draco and 
his Slytherin minions because she wants to free house-elves (although 
I'm sure it wouldn't help her case if they knew about it). But hey. I 
could just be looking for any excuse to pull your post apart on the 
grounds that you had once offended me, and that wouldn't be very in-
keeping with the spirit of this discussion group.

Kirstini, who would still quite like to have that discussion on 
Hermione and hubris if anyone fancies it.




From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Sep 10 18:11:59 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 18:11:59 -0000
Subject: What is Hermione afraid of?
In-Reply-To: <bjnp7b+vmm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjnphf+kam3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80375

I wrote:
>>I believe is the greatest psychological insult we've had into her 
personality yet.>>
Whoops! I meant, of course, to write "insight". Silly me . Must have 
been thinking of something else...
Freudian, innit?
Kirstini 




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 18:12:36 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 18:12:36 -0000
Subject: Points to Ponder; Was: CoS scene hagrid crossbow
In-Reply-To: <bjn76u+2fcc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjnpik+kd04@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80376

Potterfanme wrote:
> > Hagrid already knows that "summat" is in the forest doing 
> > terrible things to the unicorns.  <snip>  And he did go into the 
> > woods "hunting" whatever is hurting the unicorns.

entropymail wrote:
> Rather than being surprised by the knock at his door and grabbing a
> weapon, he seems to clearly be expecting something/someone other 
> than Harry and Hermione.

Okay, *now* I have to jump in.  First, the thing hunting the unicorns 
is in PS/SS, not CoS (which is the book in which Hagrid opens the 
door with his crossbow in hand); presumably, by CoS Hagrid would know 
that Voldemort/Quirrell was what had hurt the unicorns.  Second, it 
is Ron who accompanies Harry to Hagrid's; Hermione is in the hospital 
wing, petrified.

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley" who is simultaneously sure (having checked 
canon which she now keeps at her elbow when posting) she is right 
about this and worried she missed something.




From tallulah_sam at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 10 16:24:57 2003
From: tallulah_sam at hotmail.com (tallulah_sam)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 16:24:57 -0000
Subject: Snape on probation
In-Reply-To: <000101c377ab$9e8f24c0$2210883e@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <bjnj8p+2uvi@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80377

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Joanne Summerill" 
<jsummerill at s...> wrote:
> Why was Snape put on probation by Umbridge?  She seemed satsified 
with his teaching.  Also she seemed to listen to Malfoy's opinion of 
him.  I can think of 2 reasons.
> 
> 1)  She thought Snape was too close to Dumbledore.
> 2)  She found something out about his background.
> <snip>
> JoTwo

I always thought that he was simply put on probation for not 
supplying Umbridge with the Veritaserum and being "deliberately 
unhelpful". She didn't need a better reason- she was the High 
Inquisitor. 
Just my thoughts!

Tallulah






From feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca  Wed Sep 10 17:47:13 2003
From: feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca (feetmadeofclay)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 17:47:13 -0000
Subject: Harry's Temper Was Re: Feelings on OoP
In-Reply-To: <bjnclc+hbnp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjno31+gm51@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80378

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "boyd_smythe" 
<boyd.t.smythe at f...> wrote:

> No one in positions of power ever defended him as much as they 
could have, and authority figures, in general, have been colossal 
failures 
> to Harry: the MoM, aurors, teachers, the OoP, even Dumbledore, who 
> coddles him and hides the truth continually. Harry has literally 
had 
> to take care of himself against all of them.

Well this is in part part of the whole kid genre.  Adults have to be 
taken out of the loop.  Though generally the good ones aren't quite 
so stupid.  

Leaving Harry with Petunia may have protected his body but it was 
also very risky.  He could have come to Hogwarts bitter and hungry 
for a taste of the kind of power he so lacked at Privet Drive.  What 
would DD have done then? The prophecy didn't say who would win....  
It could well have been a battle over power not good v. evil.    


> So when will he finally get good and pissy about it? Why not yell 
at 
> Dumbledore, "Tell me everything!" The next time Snape messes with 
him, 
> why not say, "Go hang yourself with your grey underpants"? Why not 
> shout from the highest mountain that he doesn't care about any of 
them 
> any more? Why not yell at every wizard he sees for not protecting 
him 
> from the everyday cruelty of the Dursleys?

I have no idea.  I really don't. 

 He's angry.  Some say "finally" or "reasonably".  But when he does 
explode he doesn't get what he wants.  He gets the whole order before 
him.  He gets Sirius and Molly to tell him what he says he wants to 
know.  But when all is said and done he never asks them anything 
important.  

Like

1. Am I a weapon? 

2. Why me?  What is so special about me?  

3. Where is Voldemort or do you just not know?  Have any ideas what 
he is planning.  I think I should know since it might very well 
involve a plot to kill me!

4. Have I any hope of seeing an age where I can drink legally?

5. Why is DD avoiding me?  I didn't kill Cedric.  It wasn't my 
fault.  I only told the truth. Why is he mad at me?

Conviently Harry asks none of these sticky questions. It makes no 
sense to me that he's angry and wants desperately to know what is 
going on, but never actually demands the answers to his own internal 
musings and the causes of his explosions.

Golly








From feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca  Wed Sep 10 17:49:13 2003
From: feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca (feetmadeofclay)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 17:49:13 -0000
Subject: Weasley twins
In-Reply-To: <WorldClient-F200309100953.AA53520740@mbc.edu>
Message-ID: <bjno6p+8378@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80379

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Freeman, Louise Margaret" 
<lfreeman at m...> wrote:
I'm speculating that the Weasley twins 
> are not true twins, but some sort of single entity magically split 
in two

Isn't that what an identical twin is.  An entity split from one 
person into two?

Golly





From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Sep 10 18:23:32 2003
From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?udder=5Fpen=5Fdragon?=)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 19:23:32 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Hogwarts librarian
In-Reply-To: <bjnjhp+ghgq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030910182332.15293.qmail@web60210.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80380



Peggy <pegruppel at yahoo.com> wrote:
--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, udder_pen_dragon <udderpd at y...> 
wrote:
> 
> 
> arrowsmithbt <arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote: 
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Rania Melhem <dunknegg at y...> 
wrote:
> > As a librarian, I totally agree with you. I am very irritated by 
Madam Pince's 
> description by JKR. I dont know why she is depicted so horribly. 
And she never seems 
> to help any of the Hogwarts students find information. 
> > Rania
> > 
> 
> Perhaps JKR has set her character in our minds and is getting 
> her ready for a major role in a future volume.
> 
> Conan the Librarian, maybe.
> 
> Kneasy 
> 
> U_P_D
> 
> But so many Librarian's were like her, some still are. I do not 
particularly like or dislike her, but she is a real life charecter, I 
bet JKR has copied her from someone she has met.
> 
> Udder Pen Dragon
> 
> 
> 

Peg:

I agree with Rania--what on earth does JKR think a librarian 
is/does?  I'm one, too, and so are many of my friends.  We're 
mystified at why someone who can portray so many other characters so 
well opted for such a stereotype?  Especially when public librarians 
are at the forefront of protecting access to her books in the face of 
the "ban the books" crowd.

Yes, yes, some librarians were once dragons (I met a couple as a kid) 
and cared more for their books and the physical library than they did 
for the people who used them.  

JKR has missed an opportunity (as I see it) to show the world how to 
find information with a librarian's help.  I know the Trio isn't 
inclined to ask adults for help (that's part of the story--they solve 
mysteries on their own).  Nevertheless, if they just once asked Madam 
Pince to help them out, they might get a better solution.

Conan the librarian?  I like it, but I don't know how it would fit in 
with the storyline. :)

Ask a librarian, you never know what you might find.

Peg  An electronic librarian--you just can't see the wires.

U_P_D again

An all singing all dancing librarian would not suit HG at all now would she?


Udder Pen Dragon

Long live wireless Librarians


Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
var lrec_target="_top"; var lrec_URL = new Array(); lrec_URL[1] = "http://rd.yahoo.com/M=256694.3867555.5111023.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1707544108:HM/A=1750639/R=0/id=flashurl/SIG=11fl5bu29/*http://webevents.yahoo.com/universal/rundown/"; var link="javascript:LRECopenWindow(1)"; var lrec_flashfile = 'http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/un/universal/rundown_300x250.swf?clickTAG='+link+''; var lrec_altURL = "http://rd.yahoo.com/M=256694.3867555.5111023.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1707544108:HM/A=1750639/R=1/id=altimgurl/SIG=11fl5bu29/*http://webevents.yahoo.com/universal/rundown/"; var lrec_altimg = "http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/un/universal/rundown_300x250.jpg"; var lrec_width = 300; var lrec_height = 250; 
________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. 



---------------------------------
Want to chat instantly with your online friends??Get the FREE Yahoo!Messenger

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From sylviablundell at aol.com  Wed Sep 10 18:41:08 2003
From: sylviablundell at aol.com (sylviablundell2001)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 18:41:08 -0000
Subject: Prank
Message-ID: <bjnr84+nlko@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80381

Richard wrote:
I think you are condemning Sirius based upon inferences not wholly 
supported by canon.

Now Sylvia:

You are probably right, as my feelings about the "Prank" are 
influenced by what we see in the second Pensieve scene, which is 
perhaps not entirely fair. When I first read that scene, I would have 
been happy to see Sirius (and James) boiled in oil.  One of my 
children endured a lot of bullying at school, and I am still unable 
to respond calmly and rationally to hearing or reading about it.

Sylvia (who is really glad you beat the crap out of that obnoxious 
boy)




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 18:41:29 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 18:41:29 -0000
Subject: Percy's age/apparating classes/test
In-Reply-To: <bjnnhd+sncp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjnr8p+4gt7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80382

"bluesqueak" wrote:
> It's possible that apparition isn't a Hogwarts subject. The 
> equivalent, Drivers Ed, is *not* taught in most British schools. 
> You take private lessons outside school hours. If that's the case, 
> it would cut into Percy's NEWTs study time.

This had occurred to me as well; we never hear of Apparition as a 
Hogwarts subject.  A very likely why also occurred to me:  you 
*can't* apparate within the Hogwarts grounds; where would you hold 
classes? <g>

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley"




From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Wed Sep 10 18:48:49 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 18:48:49 -0000
Subject: What is Hermione afraid of?
In-Reply-To: <bjmc47+j790@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjnrmh+3vq0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80383

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "chicofan12000" 
<martiyoung at m...> wrote:
> Just a thought I had before and again recently while reading PoA:  
> After the boggart scene Lupin tells Harry he didn't allow him to 
try 
> the spell because he thought the boggart would become Voldemort.  
But 
> somehow Hermione doesn't try the spell either...

She is afraid of failing her classes. We know that because that's
the only part of the DADA final exam that she failed in PoA. The
last part was fighting a boggart and she came out hysterical
saying that McGonagal told her she failed everything...

Of course this may have changed. I assume that as people grow
their boggarts change as well. Mrs. Weasley's boggart is certainly
different than what it must have been before she was married
and had kids.

Salit


Salit




From fredwaldrop at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 19:14:35 2003
From: fredwaldrop at yahoo.com (Fred Waldrop)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 19:14:35 -0000
Subject: Hagrid's odd behavior (was: CoS scene)
In-Reply-To: <bjm8f6+gclp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjnt6r+2epj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80384

"mightymaus75" <mpjdekker at h...> wrote:

And as Entropy so nicely pointed out, Hagrid did also turn up in 
Knockturn alley in the beginning of the book. Hagrid tells Harry he 
was there to buy some Flesh-Eating Slug Repellent to protect the 
school cabbages. But when Ron almost burps up slugs over his precious 
pumpkins, he quickly pulls Ron back. If he'd bought slug repellent 
wouldn't he have used it to protect his pumpkins? Pumpkins he put so 
much effort in, and was so proud of. Suddenly Hagrid is starting to 
look very suspicious. 
______________________________________________________________________

Hello all, Fred Waldrop here;

>From what I have gathered from all five books, the reason Hagrid was 
in Knockturn alley was to follow a known deatheater, Lucious Malfoy. 
After all, both he and DD knew Voldemort was not gone, and both new 
Voldemort was trying to make a come back. So, knowing that one of his 
supporters, a known deatheater to DD anyway, was walking around 
trying to bring him back, bribing his way into the MoM, why not 
follow him. Yes, someone as large as Hagrid seems unlikely for 
stealth, but then again, he sure could see over everyone's head and 
follow Malfoy easily enough.And seeing as how it was Malfoy that did 
try and bring Voldomort back, it seems like a good guess on DD and 
Hagrids behalf.
______________________________________________________________________

"mightymaus75"

Then there is also the business with Lockhart. According to Hagrid, 
Lockhart had been giving him advice on getting kelpies out of a well. 
Ok, first of all, why would there be a well on the Hogwards grounds? 
The castle is right next to a natural lake. And secondly, aren't 
kelpies creatures roughly the size of a horse? Perhaps someone who 
has a copy of MCWTFT could shine some light on this. But from what I 
gather on the Internet, kelpies would often take the form of a tame 
horse standing in shallow water. When mounted by a weary traveler 
they would then drag the rider down by rushing headlong into the 
deepest part of the water. They are also known to take the form of a 
hairy manlike beast with the head of a horse. Wouldn't a well be a 
little small for a whole bunch of these things? 
_____________________________________________________________________

Fred again;
As for there being a well on Hogwarts groung. Would you want to drink 
the water knowing that all the toilets flow into it from the school?
And as for Kelpies being the size of horses, yes, according to 
FBAWTFT,(page 23 & 24), "it most often appears as a horse". But, it 
also says "The British and Irish water demons can take various 
shapes". It goes on to say "the worlds largest kelpie is found in 
Lock Ness, Scotland. Its favourite form is that of a sea serpant. 
International Confederation of Wizard observers realised that they 
were not dealing whith a true serpant when they say it turn into an 
otter an the approach of a team of muggles...". 

Just something to think about though;
Fred




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 19:18:03 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 19:18:03 -0000
Subject: Albus Dumbledore and the Socks in the Mirror (of Erised)
In-Reply-To: <bjnol5+n2cr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjntdb+ac4e@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80385

siriuskase wrote:
> What a wonderful post! ....... We can only hope DD survives to 
> enjoy this world and be given socks for Christmas in the last scene.
> Sue B

sbursztynski wrote:
> I agree with Sue, great post.

Thanks.  As a matter of fact, although I really *wasn't* going to say 
anything:  Steve Vander Ark thought so, too, and my little essay 
(lightly edited) is now at the bottom of the Lexicon's Dumbledore 
page.  My head has just about subsided now (unless I've gone right 
off the mark into delusions of grandeur) from the dramatic swelling 
it did over that (got Steve's email last Saturday).

> I'd like to comment on the timing of this.  He would no longer be 
> able to answer Harry's question this way.  At that time, for all he 
> knew, Voldemort wouldn't appear for many years, he had many years 
> to enjoy Harry and prepare him for the future which was still out 
> there somewhere in the distance.  I'd like to think that at some 
> point, Dumbledore's concerns about Voldemort and Harry and the yet 
> to be fulfilled prophecy will be over and someone (Harry?) will 
> give him some socks.

So, as of OoP, what would Dumbledore be seeing in the Mirror?  
Himself sitting companionably with Harry as a middle-aged father, 
surrounded by a passel of young 'uns, ala Arthur Weasley, and so 
obviously happy and healthy that there could be no doubt he won?  I 
don't know how else a world where Voldemort was nothing more than 
history would be represented.  (And if the passel's mother were 
shown, it would certainly solve some of the shippers' questions--but 
wait, the Mirror doesn't show the future...does it? <g>) [That could 
be an argument for the G/H shippers, by the way, that Harry, who 
never knew his family and saw himself in the Mirror surrounded by a 
big one, would choose the wife more likely to be unfazed at the idea 
of that passel.]

And I'd love to see in the "and they all, the ones who were left, 
lived happily ever after" chapter, that Harry and Dumbledore 
celebrate a tradition where Harry gives DD at least one pair of socks 
for Christmas each year.

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley," eyeballing shelf space appropriate for her 
Hugo, Pulitzer, and Nobel prizes...




From mkeller01 at alltel.net  Wed Sep 10 19:47:10 2003
From: mkeller01 at alltel.net (jksunflower2002)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 19:47:10 -0000
Subject: Albus Dumbledore and the Socks in the Mirror (of Erised)
In-Reply-To: <bjntdb+ac4e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjnv3u+os55@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80386

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> siriuskase wrote:
> > What a wonderful post! ....... We can only hope DD survives to 
> > enjoy this world and be given socks for Christmas in the last 
scene.
> > Sue B
> 
> sbursztynski wrote:
> > I agree with Sue, great post.
> 
> Thanks.  As a matter of fact, although I really *wasn't* going to 
say 
> anything:  Steve Vander Ark thought so, too, and my little essay 
> (lightly edited) is now at the bottom of the Lexicon's Dumbledore 
> page.  My head has just about subsided now (unless I've gone right 
> off the mark into delusions of grandeur) from the dramatic 
swelling 
> it did over that (got Steve's email last Saturday).
> 
> > I'd like to comment on the timing of this.  He would no longer 
be 
> > able to answer Harry's question this way.  At that time, for all 
he 
> > knew, Voldemort wouldn't appear for many years, he had many 
years 
> > to enjoy Harry and prepare him for the future which was still 
out 
> > there somewhere in the distance.  I'd like to think that at some 
> > point, Dumbledore's concerns about Voldemort and Harry and the 
yet 
> > to be fulfilled prophecy will be over and someone (Harry?) will 
> > give him some socks.
> 
> So, as of OoP, what would Dumbledore be seeing in the Mirror?  
> Himself sitting companionably with Harry as a middle-aged father, 
> surrounded by a passel of young 'uns, ala Arthur Weasley, and so 
> obviously happy and healthy that there could be no doubt he won?  
I 
> don't know how else a world where Voldemort was nothing more than 
> history would be represented.  (And if the passel's mother were 
> shown, it would certainly solve some of the shippers' questions--
but 
> wait, the Mirror doesn't show the future...does it? <g>) [That 
could 
> be an argument for the G/H shippers, by the way, that Harry, who 
> never knew his family and saw himself in the Mirror surrounded by 
a 
> big one, would choose the wife more likely to be unfazed at the 
idea 
> of that passel.]
> 
> And I'd love to see in the "and they all, the ones who were left, 
> lived happily ever after" chapter, that Harry and Dumbledore 
> celebrate a tradition where Harry gives DD at least one pair of 
socks 
> for Christmas each year.
> 
> Sandy, aka "msbeadsley," eyeballing shelf space appropriate for 
her 
> Hugo, Pulitzer, and Nobel prizes...


I just couldn't bring myself to snip any of the above posts (loving 
the idea of DD surviving and me being an H/G shipper and all ;-))

I can now clearly picture DD as Harry does in GoF, chapter 2, "He 
amused himself for a moment, picturing Dumbledore, with his long 
silver beard, full-length wizard's robes, and pointed hat, stretched 
out on a beach somewhere, rubbing suntan lotion onto his long 
crooked nose."  

DD enjoying his well earned retirement.  Of course, now I'm 
picturing him wearing nice fuzzy socks, too.

Toad 




From eileenh28 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 13:50:28 2003
From: eileenh28 at yahoo.com (eileenh28)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 13:50:28 -0000
Subject: Death Eaters: Etymology--& Dark Mark & Snape
In-Reply-To: <bjl4kk+d6gj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjna74+esa@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80387

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Amanda" <editor at t...> wrote:
 
 
> All this doesn't need to be true for my other belief about the Mark 
> to work, but it does feed nicely into it--I think the Mark is a 
> bond to death. I think that not only would the Death Eaters "share" the 
> burden of Voldemort's death so that he need not suffer it, I think 
> if Voldemort *was* killed somehow, the Death Eaters would share that 
> fate.
> 

> And it has added a dimension, for me, to Snape's task and choices. 
> He has chosen to side with the good. But if the side he has chosen 
> wins, and my theory is true, his choice leads directly to his death. 
> Which has always made me think that some deep emotional epiphany must 
> have happened for him, to keep him on such a course (or to make him not 
> care if he's on such a course).
> 
> Okay, enough of my lunch break on this. Off to find sustenance.
> 
> ~Amanda

Very good theory.  It also plausible reason for Snape's particularly 
atrocious behavior toward Harry. Actually 2 explanations:

1. Harry kills Voldemort = Snape drops dead. Not exactly a good basis 
for a healthy relationship.

or (I like this one better being a soppy Snape fan and apologist.)

2. Snape *needs* Harry to hate him so he won't hesitate to kill 
Voldemort when he gets the chance.  

I can see the climatic scene now:

Voldemort: If you kill me you kill all Death Eaters, including Snape.

Harry: Really?  That greasy b*stard who's been nasty to me since day 
one?  Cool!  Adavara Kedavra!

The End





From jamess at climax.co.uk  Wed Sep 10 14:05:43 2003
From: jamess at climax.co.uk (James Sharman)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 15:05:43 +0100
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry heard of Tom Riddle
Message-ID: <495A161B83F7544AA943600A98833B530149431F@mimas.fareham.climax.co.uk>

No: HPFGUIDX 80388

>Allie writes: 
>I have a question.  Any possible idea what this could mean? 
>"Harry couldn't explain, even to himself, why he didn't just throw 
>Riddle's diary away...And while Harry was sure he had never heard the 
>name T.M. Riddle before, it still seemed to mean something to him, 
>almost as though Riddle was a friend he'd had when he was very small, 
>and had half-forgotten. But this was absurd. He'd never had friends 
>before Hogwarts, Dudley had made sure of that."  CoS 234 

Deirdre then wrote:
When I read this, I automatically connected it to Dumbledore's explanation
to Harry about how powers have been transferred between Harry and Voldemort.
Harry's "remembering" Tom Riddle because Voldemort knows who Tom Riddle is.
Since Voldemort is still very weak (in book two), Harry only has a weak
inkling of Tom Riddle. 

James:
I interprited this as part of a spell that Tom had cast over the book in
order to make it more aluring to whoever had picked it up. Harry's feelings
about the book are proberbly the same as anyone elses would have been.
Ginny's having similer feelings would explain why she hadn't thrown the book
away (or at least shown it to her parents) as logic would otherwise suggest.

J,





From jsummerill at summerillj.freeserve.co.uk  Wed Sep 10 14:22:13 2003
From: jsummerill at summerillj.freeserve.co.uk (Joanne Summerill)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 15:22:13 +0100
Subject: Lily's friends: the candidates
Message-ID: <000001c377ab$9ce3e5c0$2210883e@oemcomputer>

No: HPFGUIDX 80389

It's been noted that while we've met James' friends, we've never met Lily's.  It was surmised that she was popular and this seems confirmed by the group of girls she was part of in OOP.  So who could they be?

Arabella Figg - before OOP, she was the favourite. However as she's a squib and seems to really be an old woman, she's now ruled out.

Celestina Warbeck - mentioned in canon several times.  However, according to the HP lexicon, based on the HP cards you can collect, she was born in 1917.  So if this is correct, then she's too old.

Doris Crockford - shakes Harry's hand twice in The Leaky Cauldron in PS/SS.  There is no specific description given of her in the text.  However in the film she's an old woman  (does anyone know if it really is an uncredited cameo appearance by the glamourous Joanna Lumley?)  From the books there is nothing to say she isn't a contemporary of Lily, but from the film, if she is then she must have been OD'ing on the ageing potion.  Surely JKR would have told the director if she was supposed to be Lily's age.  Therefore, theoretically possible, but not likely IMHO.

Narcissa Malfoy n?e Black - no evidence either way but very unlikely that a Death Eater (or at least Voldemort sympathiser), probably in Slytherin, would be friends with a mudblood.

Bellatrix Lestrange n?e Black.  Ditto.  Also we know she was part of a Slytherin gang.

Andromeda Tonks - we've never met her.  However as she married a muggle born she can't be prejudiced.  Presumably a similar age to her sisters.   Possible, but no evidence as yet.  But surely Tonks would have mentioned a friendship between their mothers to Harry.

So now we come to my preferred candidate for the role of Lily's friend - drumroll - Gladys Gudgeon.

Gladys is mentioned twice in canon.  In COS she is a fan who writes to Gilderoy Lockheart.  This is a seemingly throwaway reference for comic relief.  However, JKR often mentions characters who become more important later in a casual way.  There was no real reason to use the name again in OOP, so maybe she wanted to remind us for something that happens later.  I think the HP lexicon suggests that Gladys is the mother or wife of Davey Gudgeon, who almost had his eye put out by the Whomping Willow.  But she could just as easily be his sister.  There are numerous examples of siblings at Hogwarts e. g. the Weasleys, Colin and Dennis Creevey, Parvati and Padma Patil.

Anyone else have any comments or suggestions?

JoTwo.


  

Florence (from behind the greenhouse) - we know that she was at school at the same time as Bertha Jorkins, who was a couple of years older than MWPP, Lily and Snape.  So she is about the right age.  Still a possibility.  (Incidentally, I don't think it was Sirius she was kissing.  There would be no point of bringing this up again now that he is dead.)

 






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 20:19:54 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 20:19:54 -0000
Subject: Hermione and hubris (was:Re: What is Hermione afraid of?)
In-Reply-To: <bjnp7b+vmm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjo11a+k5p7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80390

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kirstini" <kirst_inn at y...> 
wrote:
<snip>. I 
> was trying to intiate a discussion into whether or not Hermione's 
> desire to achieve, and to achieve highly at everything, will be 
> significant later on in the series. <snip> Ambition requires 
selfishness, and Hermione has ambition in 
> droves. As we've seen ("perhaps if I could take SPEW further..."), 
> she doesn't intend to use it to do anything as obvious as climb a  
particular career ladder, but she wants to employ her talents to    
> the best of her abilities. She's ambitious to be true to herself.>>>

Laura:

Okay, Kirstini, I'll take the bait. <g>  Not trusting my ability to 
define the word, I looked up "hubris" on my handy-dandy on-line 
dictionary, and here's what it said:

in classical Greek ethical and religious thought, overweening 
presumption suggesting impious disregard of the limits governing 
human action in an orderly universe. It is the sin to which the great 
and gifted are most susceptible, and in Greek tragedy it is usually 
the hero's tragic flaw. (from the Encyclopedia Britannica online)

Merriam-Webster was a bit less emphatic, defining the term 
as "exaggerated pride or self-confidence".

It seems to me that the word "hubris" in regard to Hermione's 
character is an overstatement.  She is generally very confident about 
her academic abilities, and with reason, but she's not cocky about 
it.  She has moments of test anxiety (admittedly, sometimes over 
small matters)  and knows that there are some areas in which others 
do better than she does-DADA, for instance, and broom-handling.  I 
don't think her self-regard is out of proportion to her abilities, 
nor do I think it extends to anything about herself other than her 
school performance.  

Is the SPEW thing an example of hubris? You might say so, since 
Hermione takes it into her head to pursue it without consulting the 
creatures who would be most affected, i.e., the house elves. But I 
don't think that her *beliefs* are wrong or presumptuous.  It's her 
tactics that are questionable.  (Sirius was right when he told her 
she had a lot to learn!)

If you think that hubris is going to be Hermione's fatal (I hope I'm 
speaking metaphorically here) flaw, then you must think that her 
pride in her intelligence will warp her judgement.  As I understand 
it, that's the way hubris works-people think so much of themselves 
that they can't see reason.  But Hermione rarely, if ever, acts 
precipitously, without thinking and thinking again.  She gathers 
facts and solicits advice from those who have information before she 
acts.  That doesn't sound like hubris to me.  Our Hermione is just a 
good old girl geek, and more power to her!







From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 20:20:49 2003
From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 20:20:49 -0000
Subject: Percy's age/apparating classes/test
In-Reply-To: <bjnr8p+4gt7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjo131+375n@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80391

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> "bluesqueak" wrote:
> > It's possible that apparition isn't a Hogwarts subject. The 
> > equivalent, Drivers Ed, is *not* taught in most British schools. 
> > You take private lessons outside school hours. If that's the 
case, 
> > it would cut into Percy's NEWTs study time.
> 
> This had occurred to me as well; we never hear of Apparition as a 
> Hogwarts subject.  A very likely why also occurred to me:  you 
> *can't* apparate within the Hogwarts grounds; where would you hold 
> classes? <g>
> 
> Sandy, aka "msbeadsley"'

There is one additional problem with working on one's Apparation 
skills at Hogwarts, which Hermione would, no doubt, point out with 
some degree of exasperation: You can't apparate or disapparate within 
the grounds of Hogwarts.  So, if Percy came of age during the school 
year, he would have to leave the grounds to practice.  Even if he had 
a birthday PRIOR to the start of term, it is plausible that he simply 
didn't have enough time prior to the start of term within which to 
properly develop and perfect this difficult and dangerous skill.

Richard, who sees problems with the "young Percy" theory.





From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Wed Sep 10 20:25:38 2003
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 20:25:38 -0000
Subject: Lily's friends: the candidates
In-Reply-To: <000001c377ab$9ce3e5c0$2210883e@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <bjo1c2+e9fc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80392

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Joanne Summerill" 
<jsummerill at s...> wrote:
 
<I snipped many pissibilities about Lily's friend>

I agree with you about Florence. I think if Florence really turns out 
to be important, it is possible, that she was Lily's friend. 
Andromeda Tonks, however, has to be older than Lily. Nymphadora is 
22, and if Andromeda had the same age as Lily, she would have been 
about 16, when Nymphadora was born. Of course it is possible, but I 
doubt JKR would put it in her books.

Another possible candidate is IMO Alice Longbottom. I can see Lily 
and Alice being friends. Maybe Harry and Neville will learn it in 
book 6, and it will further deepen her bond.

Hickengruendler 




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 20:31:51 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 20:31:51 -0000
Subject: Harry heard of Tom Riddle
In-Reply-To: <495A161B83F7544AA943600A98833B530149431F@mimas.fareham.climax.co.uk>
Message-ID: <bjo1nn+443u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80393

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, James Sharman <jamess at c...> 
wrote:
> >Allie writes: 
> >I have a question.  Any possible idea what this could mean? 
> >"Harry couldn't explain, even to himself, why he didn't just throw 
> >Riddle's diary away...And while Harry was sure he had never heard 
the 
> >name T.M. Riddle before, it still seemed to mean something to him, 
> >almost as though Riddle was a friend he'd had when he was very 
small, 
> >and had half-forgotten. But this was absurd. He'd never had 
friends 
> >before Hogwarts, Dudley had made sure of that."  CoS 234 
> 
> Deirdre then wrote:
> When I read this, I automatically connected it to Dumbledore's 
explanation
> to Harry about how powers have been transferred between Harry and 
Voldemort.
> Harry's "remembering" Tom Riddle because Voldemort knows who Tom 
Riddle is.
> Since Voldemort is still very weak (in book two), Harry only has a 
weak
> inkling of Tom Riddle. 
> 
> James:
> I interprited this as part of a spell that Tom had cast over the 
book in
> order to make it more aluring to whoever had picked it up. Harry's 
feelings
> about the book are proberbly the same as anyone elses would have 
been.
> Ginny's having similer feelings would explain why she hadn't thrown 
the book
> away (or at least shown it to her parents) as logic would otherwise 
suggest.
> 
Laura:

I wondered if the name "Tom Riddle" resonated in Harry's 
subconscious, reminding him of "Lord Voldemort".  You know how if you 
do anagrams, sometimes you can almost "see" the unscrambled word but 
you can't quite grasp it?  Or is this just me?  




From dunknegg at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 20:36:33 2003
From: dunknegg at yahoo.com (Rania Melhem)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 13:36:33 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lily's friends: the candidates
In-Reply-To: <000001c377ab$9ce3e5c0$2210883e@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <20030910203633.39379.qmail@web20507.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80394

How about Alice Longbottom?
Rania


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!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From dunknegg at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 20:36:40 2003
From: dunknegg at yahoo.com (Rania Melhem)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 13:36:40 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lily's friends: the candidates
In-Reply-To: <000001c377ab$9ce3e5c0$2210883e@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <20030910203640.73174.qmail@web20503.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80395

How about Alice Longbottom?
Rania


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!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From EnsTren at aol.com  Wed Sep 10 20:40:57 2003
From: EnsTren at aol.com (EnsTren at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 16:40:57 -0400
Subject: Needs to Hate (was: Re: Death Eaters: Etymology--& Dark Mark & Snape)
Message-ID: <47C70D60.5782CF01.00170183@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80396

In a message dated 9/10/2003 9:50:28 AM Eastern Daylight Time, eileenh28 at yahoo.com writes:

> 2. Snape *needs* Harry to hate him so he won't hesitate to kill 
> Voldemort when he gets the chance.  
> 
> I can see the climatic scene now:
> 
> Voldemort: If you kill me you kill all Death Eaters, including Snape.
> 
> Harry: Really?  That greasy b*stard who's been nasty to me 
> since day 
> one?  Cool!  Adavara Kedavra!
> 
> The End

*snarks* *snakrs again and goes into a coughing fit and calms down after hacking up a lung*

Anyways, what you said, Snape /Needs/ Harry to Hate him, well, what if it's the other way around?  What if Snape /NEEDS/ to Hate Harry, which is why he doesn't follow up on the opertunity the Occulmency lessons provided to understand him.

One) Snape is good at Occulmency
Two) Voldemort is good at Legimency
Three) Snape is a Spy
Four) Snape uses Occulmency to avoid Voldemort's Legimency
Five) It would be distinctly odd and suspicous if Voldemort was attempting Legimens on Snape and hit a proverbial brick wall.
Six) It would be worse is Voldemort senced compassion or understanding from Snape to Harry
Seven) Snape therefore needs something to "Feed" Voldemort when he's getting mind probed.

Does that make sence?  Is it holding water?


--Nemi



From jdr0918 at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 10 20:44:17 2003
From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 20:44:17 -0000
Subject: Beatle Filk: Harry Potter's Loony Grown-up Fans
Message-ID: <bjo2f1+a69m@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80397

The Sergeant Majorette says

(To the tune of Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band)
*ahem. la la la la, mi mi mi mi...*

We're Harry Potter's loony grownup fans
We really ought to get a life.
We're way too into Harry's psychodrama,
His adolescent mental strife...

Harry Potter's loony,
Goofy, goony, moony
Trippy, dippy adult Potter fans!

We theorize on Harry's sexual life
We have no inkling why we do
We overanalyze each syllable
And still we haven't got a clue!

Harry Potter's loony
Elderly and swoony
Silly willy nilly Potter fans!

Didn't really want to read the book
But we thought we ought to take a look
The kids were getting in too deep
They weren't getting any sleep
So we knew we had to supervise
And make 'em get some exercise
We turned around and there we were--
Harry Potter's Loony Grownup Fans!

--JDR




From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 20:47:40 2003
From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 20:47:40 -0000
Subject: What is Hermione afraid of?
In-Reply-To: <bjmc47+j790@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjo2lc+9g39@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80398

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "chicofan12000" 
<martiyoung at m...> wrote:
> Just a thought I had before and again recently while reading PoA:  
> After the boggart scene Lupin tells Harry he didn't allow him to 
try 
> the spell because he thought the boggart would become Voldemort.  
But 
> somehow Hermione doesn't try the spell either...

To which I (Richard) reply:

I think we have in Hermione's failure to deal with that bogart in the 
DADA final under Lupin a window into both Hermione's and JKR's 
souls.  JKR has, after all, stated that Hermione is in part based 
upon JKR herself, and that she was a bookish, studious, INSECURE 
child.  Hermione is sooooo bookish and diligent in her studies due to 
her personal insecurity.  She is driven by her inner demon of self-
doubt to go the extra TEN miles to things right ... completely, in 
depth and breadth, right, not just "good enough for government work."

She is, I think, exasperated by the casualness of others with regard 
to studies almost precisely because she is driven so, and cannot see 
that others are not, and will not be, so driven.  Thus, I don't see 
her attitude towards the short-comings of others, in the academic 
sense, as hubris (such as others see in her), but as her failure to 
understand the consequences of her insecurity.

She takes so many courses in PoA because she is driven, not because 
she is proud.  She cannot NOT take those additional courses because 
she is convinced that failing to take them will leave her in some 
sense vulnerable, lacking the one bit of information from some 
obscure subject that would be her downfall in some later crisis ... 
whether that "crisis" be an exam or a work task or a duel.  And being 
so personally insecure, this is her greatest fear, as shown by the 
bogart in the DADA final exam.


Richard





From manawydan at ntlworld.com  Wed Sep 10 21:13:11 2003
From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 22:13:11 +0100
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Slug repellent
References: <1063154431.13676.2700.m2@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <000801c377e0$57ef8340$3f4d6551@f3b7j4>

No: HPFGUIDX 80399

Entropy wrote:
>where Hagrid finds Harry and warns him about being there. When Harry
>questions this, and asks Hagrid what *he's* doing down there, Hagrid
>says he was looking for some flesh-eating slug repellant. I haven't
>read the book in a while. Is there anything to back this up, or is
>Hagrid really doing something suspicious?

Possibly not. There's a reference very early on in PS/SS where Harry goes
through Hagrid's pockets and finds that (among other things) they contain
slug pellets.

Though I've always wondered whether the shop in Knockturn sells a repellent
that eats the flesh of slugs, or one that repels slugs that eat flesh...

Possibly a non-English speaking list member could oblige here?

Cheers

Ffred

O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon
Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion
Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri





From manawydan at ntlworld.com  Wed Sep 10 21:21:10 2003
From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 22:21:10 +0100
Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Hogwarts librarian
References: <1063174384.5976.78145.m17@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <001401c377e1$74a938e0$3f4d6551@f3b7j4>

No: HPFGUIDX 80400

Sue B wrote:
>Is it only me who is just a bit irritated by the cliched presentation
>of Madam Pince the librarian? Really, who'd want her job? The poor

No, me too.

And it's not just JKR who doesn't do her justice - we're just as bad! When
was the last time you saw Irma on the list of Hogwarts babes?!

Cheers

Ffred

O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon
Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion
Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri




From silmariel at telefonica.net  Wed Sep 10 21:30:51 2003
From: silmariel at telefonica.net (Carolina)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 23:30:51 +0200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Wizen gene/What is ancient Ancient Magic
In-Reply-To: <CB08EA121F31B94DA58296DEF3668AE12B2182@helium.towson.edu>
References: <CB08EA121F31B94DA58296DEF3668AE12B2182@helium.towson.edu>
Message-ID: <200309102330.51901.silmariel@telefonica.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 80401

Deirdre:
<< has got me musing about a theme in the books that
has consistently appeared but very quietly -- the "Before Time"
when all wizards were pure-blood and practiced another kind of
magic -- ancient magic>>

Please explain that to me, how can you get a starting population of 
pure-blood wizards.

I'm very naive at population genetics, but if magic 'evolved' in 
small changes, you never have a pure-blood population, and if it 
was a mutation, it had to spread, so to mix with muggles first. 
Will you please explain?

Speaking of pureblood and ancient, do you think egyptian wizards had 
already divided the world between pureblood and not?

silmariel



From Meliss9900 at aol.com  Wed Sep 10 21:31:43 2003
From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 17:31:43 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Red herrings
Message-ID: <10f.25b0b259.2c90f23f@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80402

In a message dated 9/9/2003 4:55:54 PM Central Standard Time, shokoono at gmx.de 
writes:

> I would even go so far to say that the first red herring (if I understand
> their meaning right...) was given in the first chapter of book one when
> Hagrid mentions Sirius (motorbike!)... why would he meet him at the
> destroyed house of the Potters if not to see if he can do something ... and
> if not he was a close mate of them...
> 

Red Herring = Something that draws attention away from the central issue.   
    
In that instance our attention wasn't really drawn away from the central 
issue.  I look at Crookshanks behavior towards Scammers as one though.  We are 
supposed to believe that he's behaving that way because that's the way cats 
behave towards rats.  We aren't supposed to suspect that something more might be a 
miss with Scabbers


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 22:05:13 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 22:05:13 -0000
Subject: FILK:  Green-Eyed Lily
Message-ID: <bjo76p+k9pp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80403


Green-Eyed Lily
(to the tune of Sugarloaf's "Green-Eyed Lady")

Pretty small one, green-eyed girl child,
Getting letter long ago
Starting lessons, quick proud witchling, 
Learning every single charm they'd show
Green-eyed Lily, James' fancy
Wise in love, she sees him too clearly
Old-souled Lily sees a James still yet to be
She rebuffs him, then waits so patiently

Green-eyed lady, magic's lady
Knows the spells, the charms, her wand
Heartstrong Lily, James' lady
Makes of magic, one strong bond
Brave young woman, Harry's mother
Armed with love, she lives but so briefly
Green-eyed Lily feels pain we've never seen
Saves her son but leaves him so lonely.

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley"
now guilty of fanfic *and* filk and probably destined for Azkaban and 
in spite of not having found it, unable to believe no one had filked 
this particular song yet




From journalisto at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 10 22:21:58 2003
From: journalisto at hotmail.com (The Journalist)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 15:21:58 -0700
Subject: [HPforGrownups] CoS scene.
References: <99A8B6E4-E2F5-11D7-8C3C-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <BAY9-DAV23lsz08Viei0003f027@hotmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80404

Kneasy:
...Now we know about Ginny killing the 
roosters and why she has done it. But this is not explained in the film.

So why does Hagrid still barge in carrying two dead (apparently 
irrelevant) roosters?

Can anyone think of a plot line for the future books that needs Hagrid 
and two dead chickens?
Or perhaps just the chickens. Haruspicy? A  magical stock-pot? 
Son-of-Trevor? Fowl play?

Dan:
Actually, this is explained in the film. In the hospital, shortly after Pomfrey removes dead flowers from a vase next to Hermione's bed, Harry discovers the note in Hermione's hand and, in a corridor, reads it to Ron. It explains what the monster is (a basilisk), and other interesting facts (that it can kill with its eyes, for example). Also included is that the cry of a rooster is fatal to it; so, there we have it.

For me, I'm leaning towards Hagrid in Knockturn Alley shopping for home care products--it's always struck me as very suspicious, especially as portrayed in the film.

-Dan

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From sollecks970 at aol.com  Wed Sep 10 22:23:23 2003
From: sollecks970 at aol.com (fawkes970)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 22:23:23 -0000
Subject: No subject
Message-ID: <bjo88r+monf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80405

<snip>Which scene - Hermione/Boggart? In the trunk? At the end of 
PoA? Are 
you suggesting that she lies about Boggat!McGonagall? It's not hugely 
clear to me, but I'm going to proceed as if all these variable are 
true. 
Firstly - I don't believe that Hermione is able to laugh at herself 
to a convincing degree to be able to create this lie, which exploits 
an often sniggered-at facet of her character. Particularly not if she 
has just had a traumatic experience.

fawkes:
I think heremoine would definately lie about her boggart. shes lied 
before ever since the first book when she takes the balme and lies 
about what happened with the troll to all of her teachers, so that 
was first year when she was most into shcool, and after that i think 
she realizes things are more important then school and would lie 
about that and because peopel think of her as such a school oriented 
person she would concoct this(weve seen how clever she is as well) 
that her boggart is rrelaed to school




From greatelderone at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 22:25:00 2003
From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 22:25:00 -0000
Subject: Wizen gene/What is ancient Ancient Magic
In-Reply-To: <CB08EA121F31B94DA58296DEF3668AE12B2182@helium.towson.edu>
Message-ID: <bjo8bs+4bta@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80406

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Woodward, Deirdre" 
<dwoodward at t...> wrote:

> That explanation, combined with the fact that there are pure-
bloods, has got me musing about a theme in the books that has 
consistently appeared but very quietly -- the "Before Time" when all 
wizards were pure-blood and practiced another kind of magic -- 
ancient magic 

GEO: There are no purebloods. The purebloods existed as much as 
Hitler's mythical aryan super race. 

>in/studying the ancient magic, Lily protected Harry with a very 
>ancient magic, Dumbledore is well schooled in the arts of the 
>ancient magic.  I don't have my books here to give the exact page 
>and verse, but it's in there.

We don't know if Lily knew her sacrifice would destroy Voldemort. IMO 
it would make more thematic sense that she didn't.

>  
> Does anyone have any canon or speculation about what, exactly, 
Ancient Magic is?
>  
> Deirdre

Love, blood and desire which seems to be the strongest magics in the 
whole HP universe




From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Wed Sep 10 22:25:12 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 22:25:12 -0000
Subject: A Hogwarts Attack? (was: Hagrid's odd behavior)
In-Reply-To: <bjnt6r+2epj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjo8c8+9lj1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80407

> Fred Waldrop wrote:
> As for there being a well on Hogwarts groung. Would you want to 
drink 
> the water knowing that all the toilets flow into it from the school?
> And as for Kelpies being the size of horses, yes, according to 
> FBAWTFT,(page 23 & 24), "it most often appears as a horse". But, it 
> also says "The British and Irish water demons can take various 
> shapes". It goes on to say "the worlds largest kelpie is found in 
> Lock Ness, Scotland. Its favourite form is that of a sea serpant. 
> International Confederation of Wizard observers realised that they 
> were not dealing whith a true serpant when they say it turn into an 
> otter an the approach of a team of muggles...". 
> Fred


My guess is that Hogwarts will come under attack before Harry's done. 
Look at JKR's buildup of potential defenders around Hogwarts so far: 
Grawp, centaurs, unicorns, Aragog/spiders, the Ford Anglia, 
the Whomping Willow, thestrals, Fluffy, Fang, merfolk (?), and maybe 
kelpies and/or whatever else Hagrid has managed to tame somewhat. I'm 
sure there are more things to be found in the forest and/or lake that 
we haven't even seen yet (come on, book 6!), but that's already a good 
start.

Of course, there's also the Hogwarts staff, the ghosts, the students, 
the house-elves, the castle itself (which is capable of rearranging 
itself at the least), Fawkes, Crookshanks and any enchantments placed 
on the area over the years. Plus the room of requirement. Quite a 
fortress!

Let's not forget about our dragon-wrangling Weasley and those 
professional prankster Weasleys, too. Plus maybe a metamorphmagus and 
a werewolf, and I won't mention any hippogriffs or teacher-vampires. 
Oops, I just did!

So will all this really come into play? Well, is Grawp really just 
window-dressing for OoP? Doubtful. JKR doesn't introduce new 
characters/forces without a reason, it seems.

So who's going to attack? With all that firepower at Hogwarts, any 
attacking force would need to be strong and probably multirace. Shhh! 
I hear goblins tunnelling and giant footsteps! And I see dragons in 
the air following those DEs! Ugh, and those cold, cold Dementors. And 
look at all the vampires and snakes and trolls and Grindylows and 
banshees. And there's a boggart. And there's another basilisk! And a 
manticore!

Could get very interesting!

-Remnant




From jferer at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 22:41:52 2003
From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 22:41:52 -0000
Subject: What is Hermione afraid of?
In-Reply-To: <bjndtn+mofv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjo9bg+qdte@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80408

Emily:" I have to say that I agree with Jim. Just as a human being,
putting yourself in Hermione's shoes do you honestly think that after
every single thing that she has been through that she really is going
to see Professor McGonagall giving her a failing grade? IMHO, I think
that Hermione has finally learned that there are most definitely more
important things than getting an A on the test."

She has indeed. Personally, I've always felt the truly amazing story
of personal growth transformation in canon has been Hermione's, not
Harry's.  He's growing and learning, certainly, but he's on a path
he's been on from birth.  Hermione, on the other hand, could easily
have ended up like Percy.  Achievement and respect for order will
always be important to her, but she's the master of those qualities
now, and she is now, and was in PoA, a genuine certified Gryffindor
heroine.

I'm still stuck on the "primal terror" thing. Everybody else's boggart
is that gut-level dread, the kind of thing that would reduce a five
year old to the kind of mindless horror that requires half an hour of
lap time to soothe.  I grew up during the Cold War and still have a
wrenching fear of the nuclear attack sirens they tested every month. 
No anxiety about my job or anything like that could compare; the only
thing that could would be the thought of harm coming to my daughters.

OTOH, I have no evidence whatsoever for this speculation, and
Kirstini's got it there in black and white; but it troubles me.  It
rang false from the first time I read it.  I have a hard time
believing that, by this point in the saga that a bad grade is what
frightens Hermione most.

Now what would it mean if Harry had another encounter with Dementors
and his boggart was now a dead Hermione?

Jim Ferer






From jbenne27 at tampabay.rr.com  Wed Sep 10 15:59:16 2003
From: jbenne27 at tampabay.rr.com (jbenne27 at tampabay.rr.com)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 11:59:16 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape on probation
In-Reply-To: <000101c377ab$9e8f24c0$2210883e@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <000d01c377b4$7cd75010$9beea118@jamesz9ibq8rxr>

No: HPFGUIDX 80409

Joanne Summerill wrote:
Why was Snape put on probation by Umbridge?  She seemed satsified with
his teaching.  Also she seemed to listen to Malfoy's opinion of him.  I
can think of 2 reasons.

1)  She thought Snape was too close to Dumbledore.
2)  She found something out about his background.

What did she find out?  Maybe she discovered that he was accused of
being a Death Eater, but cleared.  Or, as she hates half breeds, as she
tried to get rid of Hagrid and drafted anti-werewolf legislation, do you
think this could be a piece of evidence in the Snape is a vampire or
half vampire theory?

Hello 

He told her that he didn't have any more truth serum; also it would take
over a month to make!! So she got mad at him and put him on probation.

James E. Bennett






From AllieS426 at aol.com  Wed Sep 10 22:06:49 2003
From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 22:06:49 -0000
Subject: another CoS weird Hagrid tidbit
Message-ID: <bjo79p+cti5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80410

Aragog the spider says that he came to Hagrid from a traveler as an 
egg. (It's also in the movie, I know there was some chatter about 
important movie scenes.)  Who is this traveler, wandering around with 
spider-monster eggs in his pocket?  Does anyone else think that could 
be important? It doesn't come up again, in fact we haven't even seen 
Aragog in a long time, but the other creature that came to Hagrid 
from a traveler was the dragon (also as an egg)...  and that turned 
out to be because the traveler was getting info. from him about how 
to get to the sorcerer's stone.

Thoughts?

Allie





From jazmyn at pacificpuma.com  Wed Sep 10 22:02:59 2003
From: jazmyn at pacificpuma.com (jazmyn)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 17:02:59 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape on probation
References: <000101c377ab$9e8f24c0$2210883e@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <3F5F9F93.1000503@pacificpuma.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80411


Joanne Summerill wrote:
> Why was Snape put on probation by Umbridge?  She seemed satsified with 
> his teaching.  Also she seemed to listen to Malfoy's opinion of him.  I 
> can think of 2 reasons.
> 
> 1)  She thought Snape was too close to Dumbledore.
> 2)  She found something out about his background.
> 
> What did she find out?  Maybe she discovered that he was accused of 
> being a Death Eater, but cleared.  Or, as she hates half breeds, as she 
> tried to get rid of Hagrid and drafted anti-werewolf legislation, do you 
> think this could be a piece of evidence in the Snape is a vampire or 
> half vampire theory?
> 

I don't see that at all.  I just see a power mad Umbridge demanding 
something she can't get and punishing Snape for not making it available 
to her right away.  Snape however didn't seem phased by her at all.

Jazmyn






From vam0609 at aol.com  Wed Sep 10 22:09:25 2003
From: vam0609 at aol.com (kuligkutig)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 22:09:25 -0000
Subject: Albus Dumbledore and the Socks in the Mirror (of Erised)
In-Reply-To: <bjbalv+3oda@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjo7el+7bir@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80412

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley" wrote:

> A world in which Dumbledore could expect to receive something as 
> warm, fuzzy, and prosaic as socks for Christmas would be one which 
> did not hang in the balance.  It would be a world in which he would 
> not have to be wary of having his caring for others turned back on 
> him.  It would be a world in which he would not have to sacrifice 
the 
> happiness (or the very life) of "the boy who lived."


This is a really beautiful post Sandy. It gave me a warm feeling and 
a feeling of hope that the characters we learned to love(or at least 
the Trio, The Weasleys and DD) will survive the war. Somebody 
mentioned something about Christmas and Harry giving DD a pair of 
woolen socks. Isn't that a very nice ending to the series which is 
getting darker and darker every book. Knowing JKR's fondness for 
twist, them surviving and sharing a nice Christmas together like one 
big happy family(with H/G and R/H ending up with each other), is one 
unexpected twist since most of us here are anticipating a very sad 
and violent next 2 books. 

Again a very nice post and I enjoyed reading it very much. Thanks for 
sharing this Sandy.

vampire (who is a hopeless romantic)





From jferer at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 23:01:45 2003
From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 23:01:45 -0000
Subject: A Hogwarts Attack? (was: Hagrid's odd behavior)
In-Reply-To: <bjo8c8+9lj1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjoagp+d0mt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80413

Remnant:"My guess is that Hogwarts will come under attack before
Harry's done. Look at JKR's buildup of potential defenders around
Hogwarts so far: Grawp, centaurs, unicorns, Aragog/spiders, the Ford
Anglia, the Whomping Willow, thestrals, Fluffy, Fang, merfolk (?), and
maybe kelpies and/or whatever else Hagrid has managed to tame somewhat."

A direct attack on Hogwarts is very likely, IMO, for a strategic
reason: Voldemort can't allow the Good Guys to have a secure base
(Hogwarts, which always has been the center of resistance to
Voldemort) while he has none.  Voldemort knows he has little hope of
victory while his two main enemies are safe.

We can expect further attempts to undermine the school.  The loss of
Lucius Malfoy as an agent of influence and the humbling (disgrace) of
Fudge will make that much harder, so Voldemort in his megalomania
might see a frontal assault as the only option he has left.

Dumbledore's strategy will be not to wait behind the walls, but to
harass and threaten Voldemort and his followers as much as possible,
never giving him any peace.  Dumbledore's disadvantage is that
everybody knows where he and Harry are, while nobody knows where V. is.

Jim Ferer





From siskiou at earthlink.net  Wed Sep 10 23:02:29 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 16:02:29 -0700
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: What is Hermione afraid of?
In-Reply-To: <bjo9bg+qdte@eGroups.com>
References: <bjo9bg+qdte@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <127198035985.20030910160229@earthlink.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 80414



Hi,

Wednesday, September 10, 2003, 3:41:52 PM, Jim wrote:

> I have a hard time
> believing that, by this point in the saga that a bad grade is what
> frightens Hermione most.

But, as several other people have already explained much
better, it's not  really "a bad grade" or even a whole bunch of bad
grades that Hermione is afraid of.
I, and others, feel Hermione's boggart stands for failure on
a much deeper level.

> Now what would it mean if Harry had another encounter with Dementors
> and his boggart was now a dead Hermione?

It hasn't come up, so I'm not going to speculate ;)

I'm sure at times it would have been a possibility, for
example at the moment he thought she might be dead.
At another time it might have been dead Ron or dead Sirius.

While some people may have the kind of phobia that stays
with them all their lives and overrides any other fear, I
believe many people would have a boggart turn into any
number of things at different times, depending on the
situation.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net

Visit our two pet bunnies: http://home.earthlink.net/~siskiou/





From lhuntley at fandm.edu  Wed Sep 10 23:13:19 2003
From: lhuntley at fandm.edu (Laura Ingalls Huntley)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 19:13:19 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The magic power of love. Was: BANG! You're
 dead!
In-Reply-To: <bjnhls+phoo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5D7DC3F8-E3E4-11D7-AD27-000A95E29F3E@fandm.edu>

No: HPFGUIDX 80415

Del:
> As for wanting to save the world, I don't think he thought as far as
> that. He just didn't want the bad guys to steal something from DD.
> Remember : originally, he didn't come to fight Voldemort, but Snape.
> And even when he gets the stone, he still thinks he's only fighting
> Quirrell.
> <SNIP>
> I personnally think that at that moment, Harry hasn't yet
> realized that LV would go as far as killing him to get the Stone.
> He's just an 11-year-old boy, and kids that age can't imagine that
> someone would kill them. He's survived all the abuse from the
> Dursleys, so it's kind of logical that he's not too afraid of LV.

*sings* WRO-ONG!  ^_^ Let's take a look at SS/PS, American Edition, pg.  
270:

------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
------------------------------------------------
"I'm going out of here tonight and I'm going to try and get to the  
Stone first."

"You're mad!" said Ron.

"You can't!" said Hermione. "After what McGonagall and Snape have said?  
  You'll be expelled!"

"SO WHAT?" Harry shouted. "Don't you understand?  If Snape gets hold of  
the Stone, Voldemort's coming back!  Haven't you heard what is was like  
when he was trying to take over?  There won't be any Hogwarts to get  
expelled from!  He'll flatten it, or turn it into a school for the Dark  
Arts!  Losing points doesn't matter anymore, can't you see?  D'you  
think he'll leave you and your families alone if Gryffindor wins the  
house cup?  If I get caught before I can get to the Stone, well, I'll  
have to go back to the Dursleys and wait for Voldemort to find me  
there, it's only dying a bit later than I would have, because I'm never  
going over to the Dark Side!  I'm going through that trapdoor tonight  
and nothing you two say is going to stop me!  Voldemort killed my  
parents, remember?"
------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
------------------------------------------------

So, from this here very illuminating bit of canon, I'd say not only  
does Harry go after the Stone to prevent *Voldemort* from destroying  
the world (or at least Hogwarts ^_~), but that he is also quite aware  
that Voldemort will kill him even if he *doesn't* try to defend the  
Stone.

And I don't quite understand why you would say that Harry thought he  
was only fighting Quirrell, anyway.  Voldemort had been revealed to him  
at this point -- in fact, when Quirrellmort first starts coming at  
Harry, it's with Voldemort's face to the front.


> Again, DD was the only father figure Harry had at that time. So what
> he said to Riddle is a bit like : "no, you're not the best. My daddy
> is !!"


uh...If you say so.

>> So it's Harry's own action that invoke Fawkes' help. This of course
>> totally leaving aside the fact that Harry was there to save Ginny,
>> whom he didn't even particularly know very well.
>
> Hum, I wouldn't take that as such a good point for Harry : it's a big
> sign of his hero / saving people complex. Basically, Harry thought he
> was big enough to save Ginny (or whoever for that matter) on his own.
> I mean, he *could* have gone and requested help from McGonagall of
> whoever, but he didn't even think of it.

Harry and Ron *tried* to go to Lockhart (who was *supposed* to be  
searching for Ginny) to tell him where to look.  Of course, Lockhart  
wasn't actually going to try to save her -- but neither were (from  
Harry and Ron's perspective) the other teachers.  Anyway, I'm not sure   
  *I*, at least, could expect them, once they'd wrested control from  
Lockhart, to go traipsing around the castle looking for *another*  
teacher to help them.  I'm quite impressed they spared the time to go  
to Lockhart in the first place, honestly.


>
> Loyalty, yes. Bravery, hum : his actions border on foolishness to me.
> Basically, he's never run into his limits. He hasn't learned that he
> isn't all-powerful in the magical world (how could he ? He *did*
> defeat LV twice). So he's intimately convinced that he can win over
> anyone in a fight. As for compassion, I don't think so. As I said
> before, he doesn't care much about Ginny, it's more to do with
> playing the hero.
>

I don't think Harry is *playing* at anything.  He perceives that  
someone is in trouble, and he instinctively tries to help them.  Yes,  
maybe this is indicative of a hero complex, but hardly a bad or  
dishonorable thing.  I mean, even when Hermione brought it up in OOTP,  
I didn't get the impression that she thought Harry's "saving people  
thing" was a negative trait, just that Voldemort might be trying to use  
it against him.


> As for compassion... Well, he did show something towards Peter, but I
> wouldn't call it compassion. He wasn't trying to save Peter, he was
> trying to act noble towards his father's friends. Basically, what he
> said is : Peter is such a lowly character, he's not worthy of your
> becoming murderers. So what he showed towards Peter was disdain, a
> total lack of consideration. Served him well, by the way.


Again, I don't think he was *acting* anything.  I don't think Harry  
makes decisions based on impressing the people around him.  He spared  
Peter because, when it really comes down to it, he's too good of a  
person to murder a defenseless (if despicable) person.


> And how does that make him any more special that a 13-year-old girl
> who's completely lost any hope in life, who doesn't think things will
> ever get better, who suffers horribly every single day of her life,
> but who won't commit suicide only because she doesn't want to "do
> that" to her mom and sister ? Maybe I didn't save the world, but I
> think I displayed pretty much all the qualities you quoted above. But
> I don't think you'd me consider a hero, would you ? In the same way,
> I don't consider Harry a hero : he is he, he's got his own qualities
> and faults, but he's no greater that anyone else. In fact, no one is
> greater that anyone else, because there is no absolute scale to
> measure people.
>

Oh, some people would definitely consider you heroic, in a sense.  ^_~   
I think the idea that Jo is trying to present is that heroes are normal  
people who manage to act extraordinary in the midsts of extraordinary  
events.

And besides....he killed a *basilisk* with a freaking *sword*. ^_^ If  
he doesn't get to be a Hero, does he at least get the  
Knight-In-Shining-Armor distinction?

Laura (who is hoping that this email goes through and is formatted  
alright, as she recently had to switch email addresses and operating  
systems)

P.S.  Um...yeah...here goes the second try.

P.P.S. ...and the third try.




From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 23:35:54 2003
From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 23:35:54 -0000
Subject: What is Hermione afraid of?
In-Reply-To: <bjo9bg+qdte@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjocgq+h9v0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80416

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jim Ferer" <jferer at y...> wrote:
> OTOH, I have no evidence whatsoever for this speculation, and
> Kirstini's got it there in black and white; but it troubles me.  It
> rang false from the first time I read it.  I have a hard time
> believing that, by this point in the saga that a bad grade is what
> frightens Hermione most.

moi (Richard) ...

Remember, we are talking about the Potter-verse as of the closing 
chapters of PoA, here, and it wasn't *A SINGLE* bad grade, but *ALL 
FAILING GRADES*!  Hermione is (at this point in the storyline) still 
more than a little insecure.  It is, after all, her self-doubts and 
internal insecurities that drive her to study harder than any other 
student.  If such insecurities can drive such a child to the lengths 
Hermione's drive her, the idea of such complete and abject failure 
can be believed as a "worst fear."

Jim Ferrer continued:
> Now what would it mean if Harry had another encounter with Dementors
> and his boggart was now a dead Hermione?

me again:

I think you got things a little confused, here.  Harry would have to 
have another encounter with a bogart, and if it presented itself as 
something other than a bogart, or specifically if it presented itself 
as Hermione's corpse, is what you are wondering about.  (A dementor 
is a dementor, and doesn't present itself as a bogart, after all.)  
If THIS happened, we'd know that Hermione occupies a more important 
place in Harry's heart than even Harry hypothetically realizes.

However, I don't think what we would see is such a presentation.  As 
Lupin pointed out, Harry was quite mature in his fear in PoA, since 
what he feared was fear ... or perhaps, more accurately and 
precisely, despair.  I think it likely that Harry would STILL cause a 
bogart to present as a dementor.  However, what Harry fears is 
changing.  He has now repelled real dementors repeatedly, and in non-
trivial numbers.  (A hundred in one case, and two in the other.)  
Dementors might well be so shorn or their terror for Harry that they 
would not be what a bogart would present itself as.  But, what then 
WOULD a bogart present as?

At the close of OotP, Harry isn't AFRAID of his position as LV's bane 
so much as he is rather depressed by the fact that he is truly 
isolated from others by his role, and that he dreads the idea that he 
must either kill (murder, in canon) Voldemort or be killed.

Dread isn't necessarily the same thing as fear, so I'm not even sure 
tha Harry would cause a bogart to present as something related to 
this fate (as Voldemort dead by his hand (admittedly quite 
paradoxical in its concept), or as Voldemort in immediate position to 
kill him).  I can't even say with confidence that isolation is now 
something Harry fears, as he IS isolated, so that has come to pass 
and is no longer a thing to fear.  What I am sure of is that whatever 
a bogart would present as upon encountering Harry would be extremely 
revealing, right now.  A truly bizarre result might be that, with 
Harry stripped of all things to fear, a bogart might become so 
confused as to either be incapable of presenting as anything other 
than itself, or die of the confusion and disorientation of such an 
encounter.

As regards the deaths of others, I also don't think Harry will truly 
fear this by the time we are well into book 6.  After losing Sirius, 
he knows that war means loss, and he likely now understands (or will 
shortly) that those around him are definitionally in danger, and that 
he will lose still more people close to him.  Knowledge of such 
things tends to have the peculiar effect of banishing fear of the 
event ... it becomes an anticipated, even dreaded, certainty, but 
accepted as unavoidable.

So, as I said, what a bogart would present as upon encountering Harry 
would be extremely revealing.  It might well still be a dementor, as 
proxy for the fear of fear, but even that would be terribly revealing 
now.

As for Hermione, I doubt that a bogart would present itself to her as 
McGonagall announcing complete failure in academics, now.  Having now 
faced death even more in earnest than in PoA, and having been 
seriously wounded in the process, AND having had close friends 
injured, *AND* having lost Sirius (who may not have been close, but 
was closer than Cedric, and by her close friendship with Harry an 
indirectly important person to her), her real fears may well be a 
much different form of failure: losing close friends, which she would 
presumably see as in some sense her fault.

I believe a bogart encountering Hermione would now do much the same 
as did the one Molly Weasley tried to banish.  It would present 
itself as someone close to her, or perhaps several people in 
sequence.  Both Ron and Harry are in the running, here, for all the 
reasons present in the SHIP threads.  The real question here may 
be, "Who else?"


Richard





From hieya at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 10 23:51:05 2003
From: hieya at hotmail.com (greatlit2003)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 23:51:05 -0000
Subject: A Sirius clue
In-Reply-To: <bjnlsi+3qga@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjodd9+o1fg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80417

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, 

> <psychobirdgirl at y...> wrote:
> > Did anyone else everythink, after reading OotP, that it was a 
> > little too obvious that Sirius would be the one who would die, 
> > especially considering the commonality of the saying "Dead 
Serious."
> 

When I re-read parts of OOP, I noticed that when Harry first enters 
Grimmauld Place, he feels spooked about the way everyone is talking 
so softly, like they have entered the "house of a dying person" 
(sorry i dont have my book, no page numbers). I felt so weird 
reading that! I had missed such an obvious clue. But I also wonder 
whether Harry has some type of Sight (or Sense) or is it just JKR 
playing with us?

greatlit2003




From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 23:51:47 2003
From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 23:51:47 -0000
Subject: another CoS weird Hagrid tidbit
In-Reply-To: <bjo79p+cti5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjodej+90lu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80418

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "allies426" <AllieS426 at a...> 
wrote:
> Aragog the spider says that he came to Hagrid from a traveler as an 
> egg. (It's also in the movie, I know there was some chatter about 
> important movie scenes.)  Who is this traveler, wandering around 
with 
> spider-monster eggs in his pocket?  Does anyone else think that 
could 
> be important? It doesn't come up again, in fact we haven't even 
seen 
> Aragog in a long time, but the other creature that came to Hagrid 
> from a traveler was the dragon (also as an egg)...  and that turned 
> out to be because the traveler was getting info. from him about how 
> to get to the sorcerer's stone.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Allie

It makes me think what I have thought for some time ... Hagrid is one 
of the people others should fear to attack most.  After all, he has 
two serious monsters (Aragog and Norbert) who see him as something of 
a father/mother figure, and Grawp who are likely to see any attack 
upon Hagrid that they witness in a very poor light.  Sure, Norbert is 
still relatively young, but a dragon is a dragon, and he was already 
large enough to be a serious problem in just the short time Hagrid 
had him.  And yes, Aragog is blind, but think of all those monstrous 
off-spring he sired!  Anyone with the hubris to stand and fight any 
of those three (or Aragog's descendants) could well be making a fatal 
blunder.

More directly to the point of Aragog's arrival, though, here's a 
thought ... Tom Riddle might well have been behind it, as he was 
already styling himself as Lord Voldemort, and quite the bigot.  It 
may have been his plan that he could get Hagrid either expelled (once 
Aragog was large enough to be seen as the danger he would become), or 
killed by such a nasty beasty, once it was large enough and venomous 
enough to handle the job.  Further, this could have been a planned 
scapegoating of Hagrid, brought into action in order to allow Tom to 
stay at Hogwarts over the Summer, rather than to directly clear Tom 
of a possible accusation related to the basillisk attacks.  After 
all, how did Tom KNOW that Hagrid was in possession of a conveniently 
large and dangerous monster?


Richard





From lily_paige_delaney at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 10 23:51:58 2003
From: lily_paige_delaney at yahoo.com (lily_paige_delaney)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 23:51:58 -0000
Subject: Weasley twins
In-Reply-To: <WorldClient-F200309100953.AA53520740@mbc.edu>
Message-ID: <bjodeu+r9u4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80419

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Freeman, Louise Margaret" 
<lfreeman at m...> wrote:

After reading OotP, I'm speculating that the Weasley twins 
> 
> My second speculation is a bit wilder, that they aren't real 
Weasleys.  
---------------------------------------------------------------

Louise, I had the same nagging suspicion which also extended to 
Ginny.  When Ginny argues about her right to go to the Ministry of 
Magic to save Sirius she sets her jaw and Harry observes that her 
resemblance to the twins was noticeable.  However, I really don't 
think it can be possible, mainly because of Charlie.

Bill, Percy and Ron are tall and lanky, while the twins and Charlie 
seem to be shorter & stockier and Ginny is consistently described as 
small.  If Charlie was tall like the others then I'd think it a 
possibility that perhaps the twins and Ginny might have different 
parents but at this stage I don't think so.  But you just never know 
do you!

LPD




From hieya at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 10 23:57:49 2003
From: hieya at hotmail.com (greatlit2003)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 23:57:49 -0000
Subject: Sirius's death, Predictions for next book
Message-ID: <bjodpt+hiu4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80420

Hello.

I initially thought that Sirius's death lacked the emotional impact 
that Cedric's did. For me, reading about Cedric dying was so 
shocking. It felt like I had been there, celebrating with Harry as 
he won the Triwizard tournament, and then suddenly, a boy lay dead. 
I could understand JKR's purpose in Cedric's death: establishing the 
mindless violence of Voldemort and his henchmen.

Sirius's death was different. It was obviously created just so that 
Harry can have a new grieving process, which I thought was 
pointless, because Harry has suffered enough already.

But then I thought, maybe Sirius's death is not meant to put Harry 
into an even deeper pit of misery. Perhaps it will have the opposite 
effect on him: show him what is really important in life, and work 
to preserve those things.

Harry is already changing by the end of OOP. He no longer cares that 
Cho is with someone else. He knows that "fame is a fickle friend" 
(quoting Lockhart :) ) He is more calm. Of course, he might still 
cry and have nightmares, but in general, I don't think he will be 
the angry, frustrated boy we saw in OOP. 
 Here are my predictions for the next book:

1. I think Harry will use the books that Sirius and Lupin gave him 
to teach others, and make Dumbledore's Army into a mini-Order of the 
Phoenix. 

2. It might be important that both Sirius and Lupin gave those books 
to Harry. Perhaps this indicates that Harry will move from Sirius to 
Lupin. It's sad, but Harry might find a sort of replacement for 
Sirius in Lupin. I always thought that Harry had more in common with 
Lupin than either James or Sirius. They're both sensitive, 
outcastes, smart but not arrogant, etc.

3. JKR said that someone unexpected will be teacher at Hogwarts at 
the end of Book 7. I remember reading that somewhere, but I don't 
have the interview. Could this teacher be Harry? Who would be more 
qualified to teach DADA after he kills V-mort?

thanks for reading all my babbling. any thoughts about this?

greatlit2003




From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Thu Sep 11 00:01:17 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 00:01:17 -0000
Subject: Weasley nationality WAS Re: Seamus and the Weasleys
In-Reply-To: <bjdi25+3cm2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjoe0d+orkh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80421

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mochajava13" 
<mochajava13 at y...> wrote:
> Sarah:
> I completely agree with Pip!Squeak on this point.  Plus, I always 
> thought that the red-hair gene is originally Scottish/Old English, 
> and the red-hair in Ireland came from Scots who immigrated to 
> Ireland.  My half-Irish grandmother, and ALL the Irish friends I 
> have, have dark brown hair.  And freckles.  Plus, whenever I think 
> of red hair and the UK or Ireland, I immediately think of the 
> Duchess of York and all those weight-watcher commercials here in 
the 
> US.  Or Queen Elizabeth I.  (She was a red-head, and very, very 
> English.)  I've always assumed that red-hair or white blonde hair 
> was common in England before the Normans with their French brown 
> hair came and invaded.  We've got three pure-blood families that we 
> know of: the Malfoys, the Blacks, and the Weasleys.  The Blacks go 
> back to the Middle Ages, and their family motto is in French, so my 
> guess is that they came to England along with the Normans, or 
> shortly thereafter.  The Malfoys seem to be from the Anglo-Saxon 
> invasion with their extremely light hair.  Well, Anglo-Saxons with 
> Latin first names.  Hm, that doesn't seem to fit very well, does 
> it.  And the Weasleys seem to be one of the original inhabitants of 
> England, which does go along with the Arthurian names that the 
> Weasley children all have.  
> 

  Jeff:

    I can see your points, and the points about the Weasleys being 
true Brits, and their connection to King Arthur. Wouldn't that be a 
hoot if they were distantly related? :)
    I haven't read a lot about the names and what they mean. I did 
recall some post that mentioned that in the book when Percy's full 
name was given he wasn't called Percival, which makes sense. I can 
guess that JKR made an error being in a hurry to finish the book, and 
overlooked it? 
   As to the hair color of the Weasleys, the dark-haired Irish you 
speak of, the Black Irish, as thier known, were from around either 
Belfast or Dublin, iirc. I'm guessing they could be the aboriginal 
peoples from there, which would explain why brown hair is so common 
in the UK. But you also have variants in the redheads as well. I have 
brown eyes, and some of my ancestors were from Donnegal, iirc. It 
seems that green eyes are more common, adn even blue, but I don't see 
many brown eyed redheads at all, other than one cousin. Even my 
grandmother, from whom I inherited the red hair, had blue eyes, as 
does my mother. All I know is that all my life they always seemed to 
type Irish as having red hair, but some Nordic characters also had 
it, but not that often.


> 
> And Jeff-I had my first sip of alcohol at the tender age of about 
> 4.  My dad had a coke and bourbon, and I thought it was just a 
> coke.  I insisted on having some, and spit it right back out.  He's 
> given me alcohol whenever I wanted it since.  (Much to my  mother's 
> chagrin.)  He let me have some of his beer when I was about 12, and 
> my mother started shrieking "Take it away from her!"  At about 13 
or 
> so, I'd have some wine with the family at special occassions.  And 
I 
> live in the US.  
> 
> Sarah

  Jeff:

   I, too, was allowed to sample beer at a young age. Back then my 
family drank it with salt on the rim, and thats why I liked it, 
because it made it taste less nasty. :) I was allowed to drink some 
socially at 12 or so, and did it now and then, but it's never been a 
big deal to me at all. I merely meant that I didnt like the 
implication that Seamus was headed for a drunken life. I dont see the 
wee lad as being that way, nor do I see him as being a gay-slut. ;) 
Gay, ok, but slut isnt. ;)


  Jeff





From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Thu Sep 11 00:20:13 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 00:20:13 -0000
Subject: Idioms and slang (was: English slang (semi- sorta on topic))
In-Reply-To: <bjk53m+smlu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjof3t+926u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80422

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" 
<gbannister10 at a...> wrote:
> The topic of slang, idioms and pejorative language is interesting 
> when you look at the levels on which it operates and at JKR's use 
of 
> it ? or non-use - in Harry Potter.
> 
   <snipped>

>  JKR seems to hold to these 
> rules in her writing as well. Obviously, as a children's book, the 
> language needs to be controlled. One of the things which has 
> surprised me in the films is that Ron, in particular, is a little 
bit 
> free and easy with some mild swearing which might still offend 
> listeners when coming from a child and which does not echo what is 
> said in the books.


  Jeff:

   Indeed. Most people don't know the origin of bloody, which 
should've gotten Ron smacked for saying infront of an adult, 
especially a lady teacher! 
   For those who don't know, Bloody is a contracted form of the 
swear " Blood of Christ" or "by the blood of Christ" iirc, and is a 
very serious swear, which is why its used so much in UK comedies.  
  Blimey, the old cockney swear, is shorted from Gor, blimey, or God 
Blind me! This can also get a kid a swat on the bum if he's not 
careful. :)
   Also, while we're on regions, it should be noted that for years 
the Londoners always considered the Northerers, from Merseyside and 
Liverpool and all Cockney's to be savages. Speaking cockney or 
scouse, was considered to be a sign of lower intelligence, so Ron 
would be considered to be a dolt. However, since the Weasleys are 
from near Devon, iirc, I don't really think they'd speak like that, 
but then again, they use Oi a lot, so maybe they do have a thick 
accent. Comments?

  Jeff




From hpfanmatt at gmx.net  Thu Sep 11 00:25:03 2003
From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 00:25:03 -0000
Subject: The Hogwarts librarian
In-Reply-To: <20030910182332.15293.qmail@web60210.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjofcv+n564@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80423

Peggy wrote:

> I agree with Rania--what on earth does JKR think 
> a librarian is/does?  I'm one, too, and so are many 
> of my friends.  We're mystified at why someone who 
> can portray so many other characters so well opted 
> for such a stereotype?  Especially when public 
> librarians are at the forefront of protecting 
> access to her books in the face of the "ban the 
> books" crowd.

Well, I don't know, I've never thought that Madam Pince was portrayed
as all that horrible, particularly given that we're seeing her through
the eyes of a kid who spends next to no time in the library, and is
usually breaking some rule or other when he *is* there.  Although I
was just the opposite kind of child (along those two parameters), it
is easy for me to see how Harry would be intimidated by Madam Pince.  

As for her hewing to stereotype, the same could be said of many of the
books' more minor characters (I am thinking of Filch, Binns,
Trelawney, Pomfrey, even McGonagall).  Major aspects of Fudge's
character have been left to stereotype as well.  It is a quick,
shorthand way for an author to say little, and let her readers
mentally fill in aspects of a character that the author does not wish
to spend time describing.  JKR could have spent more time fleshing out
a unique character for Pince, but chose to spend her time elsewhere. 
That choice does not seem unreasonable to me. 

By the same token, you're right that JKR *could* be using her stories
to teach the virtues of library research, or respect for librarians,
just as she could be using them to teach about the virtues of
studying, of eating well, of being polite to their elders.  That she
does not focus on all of those themes does not mean that she is
careless, nor, necessarily, that she does not care about those issues.
 She simply has chosen to focus on a different virtue: making moral
choices.  While the stories touch on other virtues, it is moral fiber
that is rewarded above, and almost to the exclusion of, all others.

I guess that I would be disturbed by the portrayal of Madam Pince if I
thought it were a political one (i.e., Madam Pince is eeevilll, just
like all librarians, ha ha ha ha ha ha ha).  I don't read it that way,
just as I don't read the Filch character as a put-down to all
custodians.  The only instance where it seems (to my eye) that JKR is
portraying an entire profession in a negative light is the Ministry of
Magic, where she writes all of the folks who are high enough up to be
political types as officious, corrupt, and driven by the pursuit of
power. 

I'll take Madam Pince anyday! :) 

-- Matt




From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Thu Sep 11 00:30:58 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 00:30:58 -0000
Subject: Ginny: 7 of 7?     was Re: Charlie Weasley's age
In-Reply-To: <3F5F1520.000001.65097@monica>
Message-ID: <bjofo2+jd2v@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80424

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" <kcawte at b...> 
wrote:
> Me (K)
> 
> This may well point towards a greater role for Ginny (her 
relationship with
> Tom in CoS and her development in OoP could point towards this) but 
there
> has also been a fair bit of speculation that there is a 'missing' 
Weasley
> (because there seems to be a larger gap between Charlie and Percy 
than
> between any of the others) - if it's true this would make *Ron* the 
seventh
> son ....
> 
> K

 Jeff:

   This is an intresting point. I was curious about why there was a 
gap in the ages. I'm pasting something I found that might help for 
those who've never seen it.

  
calculating the ages of the Weasley children [paraphrased from a post 
on HPfGU by Michelle] 
In PA it's stated that Gryffindor haven't won the Quidditch cup for 7 
years. It is also stated (in either PA or PS can't remember which) 
that they haven't won a the cup since Charlie was Seeker. In PA, Ron 
has already been at hogwarts for 2 years so 7-2 =5, so that's 5 years 
between Charlie leaving Hogwarts and Ron starting Hogwarts. Add on 
the severn years you spend at Hogwarts 7 +5 =12 so you get 12 years 
between Charlie starting at Hogwarts and Ron starting at Hogwarts. 
That's 12 years between Charlie and Ron. Since we know that Ron was 
born in March 1980, Charlie must have been born in 1968 or 1969. Now 
the twins are two school years above Ron, and Percy is two school 
years above the twins. That's roughly 4 years between Percy and Ron 
and 12- 4 = 8 years between Charlie and Percy (roughly: could be 
nearer 7 or 9 as we're using schools years). 

  

Jeff:

   I hope this helps some, but I know it doesn't explain why there is 
a gap. I guess we'll have to speculate unitl we know for sure. 



  Jeff




From wsherratt3338 at rogers.com  Thu Sep 11 00:32:25 2003
From: wsherratt3338 at rogers.com (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 00:32:25 -0000
Subject: Harry heard of Tom Riddle
In-Reply-To: <bjo1nn+443u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjofqp+1knf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80425

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
> 
> I wondered if the name "Tom Riddle" resonated in Harry's 
> subconscious, reminding him of "Lord Voldemort".  You know how if 
you 
> do anagrams, sometimes you can almost "see" the unscrambled word 
but 
> you can't quite grasp it?  Or is this just me?

I can't see how Harry could be aware of the anagram at this 
stage.  "T.M. Riddle" is all he's got to work with, which is quite 
some distance from "Tom Marvolo Riddle" = "I Am Lord Voldemort".  It 
doesn't even have a "V" in it.  I just think it's strange that he 
would have this feeling of familiarity from the name "T.M. Riddle", 
when he had no sense of recognition at all the first time he heard 
the name "Voldemort".  I doubt that by this point, Voldemort himself 
even thinks of himself using his old name, he seems to have 
discarded that persona completely.

Wanda





From jones.r.h.j at worldnet.att.net  Thu Sep 11 00:56:51 2003
From: jones.r.h.j at worldnet.att.net (Robert Jones)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 00:56:51 -0000
Subject: Albus Dumbledore and the Socks in the Mirror
Message-ID: <bjoh8j+d8ca@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80426

I hate to be a downer, but I think DD will die in Book 7 before the 
final battle.  He has to survive through Book 6 to have his talk at 
the end with Harry, but JKR made him appear older in OOTP.  And 
when the final showdown between Harry and LV occurs, Harry has to go 
up against LV alone (hopefully with Godric Gryffindor's sword, 
because, well, I like swords).  For Harry to be a real hero, he 
can't have DD around as a safety net.

Boris the Bewildered (ducking for cover before the criticism begins)




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 01:07:58 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 01:07:58 -0000
Subject: Harry heard of Tom Riddle
In-Reply-To: <bjofqp+1knf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjohte+2f6n@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80427

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Wanda Sherratt" 
<wsherratt3338 at r...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
> > 
> > I wondered if the name "Tom Riddle" resonated in Harry's 
> > subconscious, reminding him of "Lord Voldemort".  You know how if 
> you 
> > do anagrams, sometimes you can almost "see" the unscrambled word 
> but 
> > you can't quite grasp it?  Or is this just me?
> 
> I can't see how Harry could be aware of the anagram at this 
> stage.  "T.M. Riddle" is all he's got to work with, which is quite 
> some distance from "Tom Marvolo Riddle" = "I Am Lord Voldemort".  
It 
> doesn't even have a "V" in it.  I just think it's strange that he 
> would have this feeling of familiarity from the name "T.M. Riddle", 
> when he had no sense of recognition at all the first time he heard 
> the name "Voldemort".  I doubt that by this point, Voldemort 
himself 
> even thinks of himself using his old name, he seems to have 
> discarded that persona completely.
> 
> Wanda

Laura:

You're probably right-I didn't have my CoS in front of me when I 
posted.  (tsk, tsk!)

I'm sure you noticed, though, that in the MoM scene in OoP DD calls 
LV by the name "Tom".  It was very striking.  DD is playing a mind 
game with LV here, because clearly it's not Tom Riddle people fear, 
it's this self-constructed persona Lord Voldemort.  DD is saying he's 
opting out of the game.  It must have enraged LV-or perhaps we should 
follow DD's lead and call him Tom?




From two4menone4you88 at aol.com  Thu Sep 11 01:29:32 2003
From: two4menone4you88 at aol.com (yairadubin)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 01:29:32 -0000
Subject: weasley's - hypocritical?
Message-ID: <bjoj5s+etom@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80428

I'm starting to think the Weasley's are a little bit hypocritical.  
They're all for befriending muggles and defending them when anyone 
else insults them, but thier family's been pureblood for ages.  Mr. 
Weasley might have a fondness for muggles and thier objects, but all 
the rest of the Weasley's are completely contemptious of him!  The 
only evidence I've seen of one of them having a relationship with 
someone who wasn't fullblood was Fleur Delacour, and I'm not sure if 
that even counts because the part of her that's not wizard is veela, 
which is first of all a good thing (beauty and all), and second of 
all a veela is still a magical entity.  Just my humble opinion and 
all, but what do you guys think?
                           Luv,
                             *Yaira*




From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 01:59:46 2003
From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 01:59:46 -0000
Subject: weasley's - hypocritical?
In-Reply-To: <bjoj5s+etom@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjokuj+1kre@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80429

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "yairadubin" 
<two4menone4you88 at a...> wrote:
> I'm starting to think the Weasley's are a little bit hypocritical.  
> They're all for befriending muggles and defending them when anyone 
> else insults them, but thier family's been pureblood for ages.  Mr. 
> Weasley might have a fondness for muggles and thier objects, but 
all 
> the rest of the Weasley's are completely contemptious of him!  The 
> only evidence I've seen of one of them having a relationship with 
> someone who wasn't fullblood was Fleur Delacour, and I'm not sure 
if 
> that even counts because the part of her that's not wizard is 
veela, 
> which is first of all a good thing (beauty and all), and second of 
> all a veela is still a magical entity.  Just my humble opinion and 
> all, but what do you guys think?
>                            Luv,
>                              *Yaira*

To which I (Richard) reply:

Sorry, but I think you've gone a little off you bean on this one, 
having departed from canon.  Yes, the Weasley's have been pure-blood 
for ages, but that doesn't make them hypocritical.

First off, you tend to fall in love with people you are around.  If 
you were a wizard or witch, and the only folks you were around were 
also magical, odds are that you would fall in love with someone 
magical, and given the presumptive percentages of pure-bloods, there 
would be a fair chance it would be with a pure-blood.

Second, it is difficult to have much of a relationship with someone 
who doesn't share much with you in terms of experience, interests, 
education, etc., so if you are magical, it is unlikely that you will 
have non-magical folks as close friends, or as probably love 
interests.

In both the above, exceptions will happen ... frequently.  But that 
doesn't mean that the "rules" can't and won't be followed by at least 
some percentage of the population.

Third, as for Mr. Weasley's fascination with and love for all things 
Muggle, you have to admit he's a bit excessive in the degree with 
which he expresses it.  His family recognizes this in him, but I 
would hardly call their feelings "contemptuous."  They all love him 
(with the possible exception of Percy), but a little flaky on this 
subject.

I thought my dad was a little flaky when it came to gardening.  He 
never did things in half measures.  One year we had so many pumpkins 
he had to give them away to everyone he knew (and being a minister 
with a large congregation, that's a lot of people), and we still had 
mounds of them in the side-yard.  Another year, it was potatoes, and 
still another year it was green beans.  That doesn't mean I had any 
kind of contempt for him, only that I knew that when it came to 
gardening, he was a frustrated FARMER, who also wanted a big crop.

Fourth, if anything, being of mixed blood where that other blood 
isn't human appears, in some wizarding circles, to be MUCH worse than 
being of mixed HUMAN blood.  The fact that Bill is giving 
Fleur "private English lessons" (and presumably receiving private 
lessons in both French and Frenching), shows that at least HE is not 
overly concerned about non-human blood.  And for that matter, the 
siblings of interest (Gred, Feorge, Ron and Ginny) don't seem the 
least offended by Bill's interest in Fleur.  Rather, as kids, they 
are amused, not offended.

Fifth, the Weasleys of interest (the parents and four youngest 
children) freely and routinely associate with mixed-bloods and muggle-
borns, as well as with other part-humans such as Hagrid.

So, as I said, I think you are off the canonical reservation on 
this.  They associate and marry primarily based upon who they meet, 
and aren't really all that picky, let alone bigoted.


Richard, who thinks JKR would NEVER portray the Weasley family as 
basically hypocritcal





From loonyloopyrjl at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 02:24:19 2003
From: loonyloopyrjl at yahoo.com (loonyloopyrjl)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 02:24:19 -0000
Subject: Slug repellent
In-Reply-To: <000801c377e0$57ef8340$3f4d6551@f3b7j4>
Message-ID: <bjomcj+8m1f@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80430

Ffred "manawydan" <manawydan at n...> wrote:
>>> ... I've always wondered whether the shop in Knockturn sells a 
repellent that eats the flesh of slugs, or one that repels slugs that 
eat flesh...

Possibly a non-English speaking list member could oblige here?<<<


Loony Loopy responds:
In COS, Hagrid said: "I was lookin' fer a Flesh-Eatin' Slug 
Repellent . . . . They're ruinin' the school cabbages."

In POA, Lupin said of a confused boggart: "Which should he become, a 
headless corpse or a flesh-eating slug?"  From this, we see that 
there *are* slugs in the Potterverse that eat flesh, so maybe those 
were the type of slugs that Hagrid wanted to buy repellent for.

(BTW, "redandgoldlion" posted and answered this question in Messages 
47354 and 53005.)

Good idea, though, to have someone translate a non-English edition 
that would provide clarification.

Loony Loopy,
who can, alas, only speak English





From fc26det at aol.com  Thu Sep 11 02:52:22 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 02:52:22 -0000
Subject: Ginny: 7 of 7?     was Re: Charlie Weasley's age
In-Reply-To: <bjofo2+jd2v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjoo16+ikj6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80431

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jeffl1965" <jeffl1965 at h...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" <kcawte at b...> 
> wrote:
> > Me (K)
> > 

> > has also been a fair bit of speculation that there is a 'missing' 
> Weasley
> > (because there seems to be a larger gap between Charlie and Percy 
> than
> > between any of the others)  
> > K
> 
>  Jeff:
> 
>    This is an intresting point. I was curious about why there was a 
> gap in the ages. I'm pasting something I found that might help for 
> those who've never seen it.
> 
>   
> calculating the ages of the Weasley children [paraphrased from a 
post 
> on HPfGU by Michelle] 
> In PA it's stated that Gryffindor haven't won the Quidditch cup for 
7 
> years. It is also stated (in either PA or PS can't remember which) 
> that they haven't won a the cup since Charlie was Seeker. In PA, 
Ron 
> has already been at hogwarts for 2 years so 7-2 =5, so that's 5 
years 
> between Charlie leaving Hogwarts and Ron starting Hogwarts. Add on 
> the severn years you spend at Hogwarts 7 +5 =12 so you get 12 years 
> between Charlie starting at Hogwarts and Ron starting at Hogwarts. 
> That's 12 years between Charlie and Ron. Since we know that Ron was 
> born in March 1980, Charlie must have been born in 1968 or 1969. 
Now 
> the twins are two school years above Ron, and Percy is two school 
> years above the twins. That's roughly 4 years between Percy and Ron 
> and 12- 4 = 8 years between Charlie and Percy (roughly: could be 
> nearer 7 or 9 as we're using schools years). 
> 
>   
> 
> Jeff:
> 
>    I hope this helps some, but I know it doesn't explain why there 
is 
> a gap. I guess we'll have to speculate unitl we know for sure. 
> 
> 
> 
>   Jeff

Now Susan:

I am a bit confused by this....bad day....but could the gap be due to 
the WW being terrorized by LV so the Weasley's decided not to bring 
any more children into such a horrible life?  Then when LV was 
reduced to less than a man, they proceeded with their family?  Just a 
thought.
Susan




From fc26det at aol.com  Thu Sep 11 03:03:36 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 03:03:36 -0000
Subject: Points to Ponder; Was: CoS scene hagrid crossbow
In-Reply-To: <bjnpik+kd04@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjoom8+bcjv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80432

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> Potterfanme wrote:
> > > Hagrid already knows that "summat" is in the forest doing 
> > > terrible things to the unicorns.  <snip>  And he did go into 
the 
> > > woods "hunting" whatever is hurting the unicorns.
> 
> entropymail wrote:
> > Rather than being surprised by the knock at his door and grabbing 
a
> > weapon, he seems to clearly be expecting something/someone other 
> > than Harry and Hermione.
> 
> Okay, *now* I have to jump in.  First, the thing hunting the 
unicorns 
> is in PS/SS, not CoS (which is the book in which Hagrid opens the 
> door with his crossbow in hand); presumably, by CoS Hagrid would 
know 
> that Voldemort/Quirrell was what had hurt the unicorns.  Second, it 
> is Ron who accompanies Harry to Hagrid's; Hermione is in the 
hospital 
> wing, petrified.
> 
> Sandy, aka "msbeadsley" who is simultaneously sure (having checked 
> canon which she now keeps at her elbow when posting) she is right 
> about this and worried she missed something.

Susan:
Whoops!!  My humble appologies.  Just finish PS and started on COS.  
My addled brain combined them.

Susan who would still come to the door with a crossbow if she was 
Hagrid.




From FilkMavenGB at hotmail.com  Thu Sep 11 03:21:16 2003
From: FilkMavenGB at hotmail.com (Gail Bohacek)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 23:21:16 -0400
Subject: (FILK) Cho Said
Message-ID: <BAY9-F24UxqsdwukFSS0000e12f@hotmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80433

Cho Said

(A Filk by Gail Bohacek to the tune of _She Said She Said_ by the Beatles)

Midi is here: http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Studio/7779/beatle12.html

Okay, this Midi cuts off shorter than the original...man, that makes me mad! 
  As the Midi is playing, and it gets 1:21,  if you take the Search Bar 
thingie back to 00:44 and play it again, you can finish the rest of the 
song...did that make sense?.   Just bring out your copy of Revolver and 
listen to the original, okay?

Dedicated to Sergeant Majorette...anybody who filks a Beatle song is a 
friend of mine!


Harry:

Cho said, "I would always come here with Ced."
What I heard I couldn't believe
'Cause this was the last thing I wanted to discuss

I thought, why'd she want to talk about Ced?
Something that always makes her grieve?
Then Cho suddenly acted so furious

Cho said, "I don't know why you asked me out!"
I thought, "What did I do wrong?
Few minutes ago everything was fine, everything was fine."

I told Hermione what happened and
She knew why Cho acted this way
Cho was trying to get me to become jealous

I said, "I don't know what this is about."
She said, "You acted all wrong.
'Cause you are a boy, you don't know her mind, you don't know her mind."

Ron said, "You should write a book about this.
Translating what boys and girls say."
And this whole thing has made me very depressed

Cho said (Cho said)
"I would always come here with Ced" ("I would always come here with Ced)
Now she won't even talk to me (Now she won't even talk to me)


-Gail B...happy to be a Harry Potter Loony Grown-up fan! :)>

_________________________________________________________________
Need more e-mail storage? Get 10MB with Hotmail Extra Storage.   
http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Thu Sep 11 03:52:14 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 03:52:14 -0000
Subject: Arthur's weakness (Re: weasley's - hypocritical?)
In-Reply-To: <bjoj5s+etom@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjorhe+jff0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80434

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "yairadubin" 
<two4menone4you88 at a...> wrote:
> I'm starting to think the Weasley's are a little bit hypocritical.  
> They're all for befriending muggles and defending them when anyone 
> else insults them, but thier family's been pureblood for ages.  Mr. 
> Weasley might have a fondness for muggles and thier objects, but 
all 
> the rest of the Weasley's are completely contemptious of him!  



Jen Reese: I've never thought of the Weasley's as hypocritical. I 
have wondered at times about Mr. Weasley's obssession with Muggles, 
and how he fits into the structure of pure-blood prejudice that 
engulfs the WW.

Unlike Voldemort or Lucius who are very straight-forward about their 
prejudices, Arthur holds subtle biases that are not obvious, but do 
influence his behavior. No matter how nice he is about it, he does 
view Muggles in the "one-down" position: They are so fascinating, so 
clever, so hard-working!

Now, I really like this character--don't get me wrong; Arthur 
valiantly tries to stem the tide of Muggle abuse on a daily basis, 
but he is also able to retreat back into the WW with all his 
Muggle "toys" and the privilege that comes from being a pure-blood 
Wizard. 

He can help pass the Muggle Protection Act, then go back home and 
enchant all sorts of everyday objects that could fall into the wrong 
hands--that's a slippery slope. He spends his days in the city 
helping Muggles out of scrapes, but finds the way they actually live 
to be somewhat backwards and cumbersome. 

Of course, the Weasley's haven't always been protected by their pure-
blood status, as when Ginny was the victim of Voldemort's diary or 
perhaps other events in the first war we don't know about. Arthur's 
heart is gold--no doubt about that--he also has blind spots, as we 
all do.

I'm a hospital social worker in my other life and see this type 
of "nice prejudice" everywhere, including within myself. Taking any 
group, defining them in a certain way that says "other", then putting 
them in nifty little boxes is still a form of prujudice, no matter 
how pretty the wrapping.

But there's hope... I think it comes in the form of Dumbledore's 
forward in "Quidditch through the Ages" and "Fantastic Beasts....," 
where he states these books are to "be made available to Muggles" for 
the first time in the history of the publishing house.  So part of 
Dumbledore's outreach to unify the Wizard World may yet include 
Muggles! Just having a little fun there....Jen




From erikal at magma.ca  Thu Sep 11 04:57:50 2003
From: erikal at magma.ca (Erika L.)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 23:57:50 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: What is Hermione afraid of?
Message-ID: <018201c37821$410052e0$428b1a40@oemcomputer>

No: HPFGUIDX 80435

Susanne:
>But, as several other people have already >explained much
>better, it's not  really "a bad grade" or >even a whole bunch of bad
>grades that Hermione is afraid of.
>I, and others, feel Hermione's boggart >stands for failure on
>a much deeper level.

    I agree with this. Failing all her classes may be part of her fears, but I, too, think it goes much deeper than that. In fact, when Hermione tells Harry and Lupin what her boggart was, she never actually mentions grades:

    "P--P--Professor McGonagall!' Hermione gasped, pointing into the trunk. "Sh--she said I'd failed everything!" (234 UK)

    It says *everything*, not all her classes, not all her exams. Everything. If Harry's boggart represents the fear of fear itself, I think Hermione's represents a fear of failure in its broadest sense. Not a fear of failing in one specific area, but the fear of _being_ a failure, of disappointing those one admires or cares for and of thus losing their respect and love. Failure in its most overwhelming sense, just as Harry's fear of the Dementors is the fear of _fear_ and not of a specific cause of fear.

    That's why I don't think the Dead!Harry boggart is necessary. It would certainly make for a heart-wrenching scene as did the scene with Mrs. Weasley's boggart. But I don't think it's likely because Hermione's fear of failure would include Harry's death. Hermione so often seems to take it upon herself to be Harry's guardian, to look out for his best interests even when he won't, thus the nagging about homework, about taking unnecessary risks, and so on. I think on some level Hermione feels she must protect him, or at the very least help him to stay in one piece through everything. After all, this has been an important part of her role throughout the series. From solving the potions puzzle at the end of PS to helping him train for the Triwizard tasks, to simply preparing the essence of murtlap for his injured hand in OoP, Hermione is always helping Harry. I'm sure that if anything happened to him Hermione would, on some level, see it as a failing on her part. So really, Dead!Harry would just represent failure in its grandest sense.

Just my two knuts
Erika (Wolfraven)




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From zanelupin at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 04:11:01 2003
From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 04:11:01 -0000
Subject: The Gap (was: Ginny: 7 of 7? (was Re: Charlie Weasley's age))
In-Reply-To: <bjoo16+ikj6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjoskl+76ph@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80436

Jeff:

>>I hope this helps some, but I know it doesn't explain why there 
is a gap. I guess we'll have to speculate unitl we know for sure.>> 

Now Susan:
 
>I am a bit confused by this....bad day....but could the gap be due 
to the WW being terrorized by LV so the Weasley's decided not to 
bring any more children into such a horrible life?  Then when LV was 
reduced to less than a man, they proceeded with their family?  Just 
a thought.>


KathyK:

The gap could certainly have something to do with Voldemort's 
activities.  Obviously what, I cannot say for certain.  I don't 
think the Weasley's chose to hold off on having children until after 
Voldemort was gone.

The gap causing the question is the one between Percy and Charlie.  
If Arthur and Molly held off their family, it would stand to reason 
that Percy and the rest would have been born after Voldemort fell.  
However, this is clearly not the case as Harry was a year old when 
it occurred.  Ron, Fred, George, and Percy were all around before 
Harry was born.  And Ginny was only about a year or so after Harry 
arrived.  So Voldemort wasn't gone when Arthur and Molly were busy 
having their children.  

Voldemort's reign could have been a factor in the gap between 
Charlie and Percy, but not a purposeful calculation on the part of 
the Weasleys to wait until it was safe to have more children.  Or 
maybe they tried to put their family on pause, but then oops, 
there's Percy.  Now that we've done that, why not just continue? <g>

I've seen it speculated that Bill and Charlie may be Molly's 
children from a previous marriage.  Or there was another Weasley 
child between Charlie and Percy who died (possibly because of 
Voldemort or his DEs).  These are both possible explanations for the 
gap and neither at this point can be proven by canon, nor can they 
be disproven.  I haven't decided what I think on the matter.

KathyK (meaning to go to bed without responding to any posts or 
emails, so apologizing for the brevity)




From tamliv at worldnet.att.net  Thu Sep 11 04:07:59 2003
From: tamliv at worldnet.att.net (Tamee Livingston)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 20:07:59 -0800
Subject: Needs to Hate (was: Re: Death Eaters: Etymology--& Dark Mark & Snape)
References: <1063231594.76882.5378.m4@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <02fd01c3781a$d99158d0$34c50c0c@computer>

No: HPFGUIDX 80437

Nemi:
>>Anyways, what you said, Snape /Needs/ Harry to Hate him, well, what if
it's he other way around?  What if Snape /NEEDS/ to Hate Harry, which is why
he doesn't follow up on the opertunity the Occulmency lessons provided to
understand him.

>>[snip]>>Four) Snape uses Occulmency to avoid Voldemort's Legimency
>>Five) It would be distinctly odd and suspicous if Voldemort was attempting
Legimens on Snape and hit a proverbial brick wall.
>>Six) It would be worse is Voldemort senced compassion or understanding
from Snape to Harry
>>Seven) Snape therefore needs something to "Feed" Voldemort when he's
getting mind probed.

Does that make sence?  Is it holding water?<<

Tamee (my reply):

Actually this makes perfect sense to me, as recently I've been developing a
theory that the reason Snape hasn't been able to get past his hatred for
James and co. is that he's been using that emotion to maintain his cover.  I
think that a truly successful Occlumens must use some emotions or perhaps
obsessions to cover their deceptions.  It keeps them from having obvious
blank spots and can distract the Legilimancer.  Snape himself says, "Only
those skilled in Occlumency are able to shut down those feelings and
memories that contradict the lie, and so utter falsehoods in [Voldemort's]
presence without detection." (US OOP 531).  So I think when faced with
Voldemort, Snape has always used his hatred and resentment to deflect
attention away from his deeper motives.  It seems a simple enough manuever
for him.  He did hate James and Sirius with a passion; they were openly
siding with Dumbledore;  Dumbledore blatantly favored Gryffindors and MWPP
in school (in Snape's mind); they were responsible for all his misery; why
would he help them in anyway.

I think the distractions used depend on the personality.  Snape is a bitter,
miserable man so he uses that.  He makes his hatred useful to him, and yes,
I think Snape wants Harry to hate him as much as Snape hates James and
Harry, especially, if Snape is doing any kind of spying that leads him close
to Voldemort.

Tamee





From erinellii at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 04:39:43 2003
From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 04:39:43 -0000
Subject: Correct forecasts
In-Reply-To: <bjklp8+gjt3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjouaf+hpua@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80438

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sylviablundell2001" 
<sylviablundell at a...> wrote:
> I was flipping at random through past posts and came across one 
> posted in November 2001 by Marianne (29398) in which she 
> prophesied "Harry will have to come to terms with the fact that his 
> father and godfather held some pretty unsavoury ideas, at least 
when they were kids".  Talk about spot on! Can anyone else claim to 
have 
> made an equally accurate forecast way before publication?


I was reading old posts of Elkins' the other day, and found a TBAY 
(51899) in which she was arguing about whether or not Crouch/Moody 
had TWO invisibility cloaks in GoF and lo and behold, it turns out in 
OoP, the real Moody did end up having two.  I don't know if that was 
a prediction so much as obsessive attention to detail....  But I read 
that post and was just in awe. Actually I am in awe of everything 
Elkins has written. You have to go back to Feb 2003 to find any of 
her posts, she hasn't been on for a while, but it is well worth it.  

Erin  




From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com  Thu Sep 11 04:55:06 2003
From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 04:55:06 -0000
Subject: Euan Abercrombie (filk)
Message-ID: <bjov7a+g5i6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80439

Euan Abercrombie

To the tune of Billy Joe McGuffrey (aka First Aid in the First 
Grade), from Jonah: A Veggie Tales Movie

Dedicated to Ginger

NOTE: Euan Abercrombie is the youth who is first sorted in OOP by the 
Hat after it has prophesied mayhem and division in the immediate 
future. Just as Tom Lehrer selected the name Nicolai Ivanovich 
Lobachevsky for purely prosodic purposes, so I select the name of Mr. 
Abercrombie (I needed six syllables)

(here beginneth the Filk)

Now Euan Abercrombie was a really dorky kid.
On the first day of First Year, I'll tell you what he did.
He's called up by the Sorting Hat, but much to his disgrace
He trips over his brand-new robes and falls flat on his face. 

It was the worst fear for a First Year.
Worst fear for a First Year.
Worst fear for a First Year.
Even You-Know-Who could not be scarier, it's clear!

Oh, Euan Abercrombie was a really dorky kid.
On the second day of Second Year, I'll tell you what he did.
He tried out for the Quidditch team, and for the Snitch he zoomed
Then a Bludger creamed him and he fell off of his broom

It was the worst fear for a Second Year.
Worst fear for a Second Year.
Worst fear for a Second Year.
Even You-Know-Who could not be scarier, it's clear!

Now, Euan Abercrombie was a really dorky kid,
On the third day of Third Year I'll tell you what he did.
He planned a trip to Hogsmeade town that sounded so divine
But then he lost his mother's note and had to stay behind

It was the worst fear for a Third Year.
Worst fear for a Third Year.
Worst fear for a Third Year.
Even You-Know-Who could not be scarier, it's clear!

Now, Euan Abercrombie was a really dorky kid,
On the fourth day of Fourth Year I'll tell you what he did.
He took a stroll beside the lake but on a puddle slid
Fell into the water and went Shipping with the Squid

It was the worst fear for a Fourth Year.
Worst fear for a Fourth Year.
Worst fear for a Fourth Year.
Even You-Know-Who could not be scarier, it's clear!

Now, Euan Abercrombie was a really dorky kid,
On the fifth day of Fifth Year I'll tell you what he did.
He tried to play a trick on Snape but Filch forced a delay
Snape gave him detention and took 50 points away

It was the worst fear for a Fifth Year.
Worst fear for a Fifth Year.
Worst fear for a Fifth Year.
Even You-Know-Who could not be scarier, it's clear!

Oh, Euan Abercrombie was a really dorky kid.
On the sixth day of Sixth Year, I'll tell you what he did.
In the back pocket of his jeans he sticks his magic wand,
Then it started sparking, and now we all know that's he blonde

It was the worst fear for a Sixth Year.
Worst fear for a Sixth Year.
Worst fear for a Sixth Year.
Even You-Know-Who could not be scarier, it's clear!

Now, Euan Abercrombie was a really dorky kid,
On the final week of Seventh Year I'll tell you what he did.
He had to take all of his NEWTS ? so what happened, here's a hint
He has to do the very thing once done by Marcus Flint

It was the worst fear for a Seventh Year.
Worst fear for a Seventh Year.
Worst fear for a Seventh Year.
Even You-Know-Who could not be scarier, it's clear!

   -	CMC

HARRY POTTER FILKS 
http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm 





From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 05:31:07 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 05:31:07 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore Survives!  Was Albus Dumbledore and LONG
In-Reply-To: <bjoh8j+d8ca@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjp1ar+dde3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80440

Robert Jones wrote:
> I hate to be a downer, but I think DD will die in Book 7 before the 
> final battle.  He has to survive through Book 6 to have his talk at 
> the end with Harry, but JKR made him appear older in OOTP.  And 
> when the final showdown between Harry and LV occurs, Harry has to 
> go up against LV alone (hopefully with Godric Gryffindor's sword, 
> because, well, I like swords).  For Harry to be a real hero, he 
> can't have DD around as a safety net.

So, in LOTR, since Gandalf was still around after the defeat of 
Sauron, Frodo wasn't a "real hero"?

(I agree that JKR made Dumbledore seem older in OoP.  But, IIRC, she 
has included at least one mention of his age/tiredness in *every* 
book after PS/SS.)

There are a number of ways I can think of to have both hero!Harry and 
survivor!Dumbledore and I shall enumerate them here, dealing once and 
for all with all the nihilists out there who seem to want a higher 
body count <kidding!>:

Dumbledore is critically injured and not certain to survive when the 
final battle occurs.  Ways this could happen are thus:
--Fawkes will die and we find Dumbledore had a near-vital bond with 
the bird (as Voldemort may have with Nagini), making him helpless as 
he recovers from the loss.
--Dumbledore may be betrayed by someone he trusts and turns his back 
on at the wrong time, making a long stay in St. Mungo's necessary.
--Dumbledore may come so close to death that everyone thinks he is 
dead; he could be saved by Fawke's magic, a one-time use only ability 
which destroy Fawkes (and could make Harry and Voldemort's wands no 
longer effective--nah).  Harry may know only that Dumbledore 
is "killed," not that Fawkes saves him.

Dumbledore knows that the prophesy does not include *him*.  He may 
trade his ability to be available for Harry during the final battle 
if he sees a way to get great earlier gains for it in the overall 
war, as follows:
--Dumbledore may succumb to using an unforgivable curse in battle or 
under some other extreme conditions and allow himself to "come along 
quietly" to Azkaban, where he will remain until after the  final 
battle. (But only if Fudge remains Minister of Magic.)
--Dumbledore may age so very much more (possibly due to treachery) in 
Book 6 that he and Harry both know he can be no more fighting help to 
Harry; or Harry may have to put his foot down in Book 7 and tell 
him, "I can't be worrying about you and conquering Voldemort at the 
same time!  Go warm your feet by the fire and stay out of the way!  
(Aside: Sit on him, Dobby!)  I want to give you socks for Christmas 
and have you say the service at my wedding!" (for all you shippers)
--Dumbledore may trade himself under an agreement of non-resistance 
to the DE for a group of hostages (just where *is* Penelope 
Clearwater these days?) and spend the time until after VM and the DE 
are vanquished as a prisoner/hostage; he could end up like the 
Longbottoms.  (Oh, wait, a higher body count *is* better.)
--Dumbledore may trade himself as hostage for an opportunity for 
Harry to escape certain death.  (Harry may have to make the same 
decision that Dumbledore may have made:  *no one* is indispensable.  
Dumbledore could then escape as/just after Harry brings down 
Voldemort.)
 
Dumbledore is missing and presumed dead, only to return after the 
final battle is over, which could happen thus:
--Aberforth "doubles" for his brother in order to give Albus the 
upper hand via the element of surprise.  Aberforth is killed but 
Albus survives; no one else knows of the switch.  Dumbledore may even 
deliberately let Harry think he is dead if he thinks that is what 
Harry needs to believe.
--Dumbledore leads a force against an opposing force of dark wizards 
we haven't seen yet: Durmstrang parents/graduates, meeting them 
halfway between Durmstrang and Hogwarts, and mops them up only in 
time to join the final post-Voldie-go-boom celebration.

Dumbledore is forced to remain passive because a magic "bomb" has 
been wired to go off under Hogwarts sometime in Harry's final year if 
Dumbledore uses more than a minimum of magic, anyone tampers with it, 
or any significant number of students leave the grounds.  (Filch 
helped the terrorists plant it; he just hasn't been the same since 
the centaurs roughed up his crush, Dolores Jane.)

I could go on.  JKR is nothing if not full of surprises.  If she 
wants Dumbledore to come out of this okay and can write it that way 
without sacrificing (there's that word again) narrative tension and 
integrity, I think she will.  She doesn't seem to me to be nearly as 
bloody-minded as many of her fans.

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley"





From gbannister10 at aol.com  Thu Sep 11 06:52:46 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 06:52:46 -0000
Subject: CoS scene.
In-Reply-To: <BAY9-DAV23lsz08Viei0003f027@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <bjp63u+os5j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80441

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "The Journalist" 
<journalisto at h...> wrote:
> Kneasy:
> ...Now we know about Ginny killing the 
> roosters and why she has done it. But this is not explained in the 
film.
> 
> So why does Hagrid still barge in carrying two dead (apparently 
> irrelevant) roosters?
> 
> Can anyone think of a plot line for the future books that needs 
Hagrid 
> and two dead chickens?
> Or perhaps just the chickens. Haruspicy? A  magical stock-pot? 
> Son-of-Trevor? Fowl play?
>

 
> Dan:
> Actually, this is explained in the film. In the hospital, shortly 
after Pomfrey removes dead flowers from a vase next to Hermione's 
bed, Harry discovers the note in Hermione's hand and, in a corridor, 
reads it to Ron. It explains what the monster is (a basilisk), and 
other interesting facts (that it can kill with its eyes, for 
example). Also included is that the cry of a rooster is fatal to it; 
so, there we have it.
> 
> For me, I'm leaning towards Hagrid in Knockturn Alley shopping for 
home care products--it's always struck me as very suspicious, 
especially as portrayed in the film.
> 


Geoff:
Re the Knockturn Alley scene, something I've often thought about is 
this. Is it sheer coincidence that Hagrid just "happens" to be 
shopping there when Harry is getting himself backed into a corner 
with the aged witch with the tray? Did she have sinister motives?




From snapesmate at hotmail.com  Thu Sep 11 07:00:23 2003
From: snapesmate at hotmail.com (snapesmate)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 07:00:23 -0000
Subject: A Sirius clue
In-Reply-To: <bjm5b6+kcir@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjp6i7+e1vf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80442

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "psychobirdgirl" 
<psychobirdgirl at y...> wrote:
> Did anyone else everythink, after reading OotP, that it was a 
little too obvious that Sirius would be the one who would die, 
especially considering the commonality of the saying "Dead Serious."
>> psychobirdgirl

I was actually hoping one of the students (not the "primary ones, but 
maybe someone such as Seamus, Colin, etc.) would be the one to die.  
I know it is a selfish thought, but I figured Sirius was going to be 
the one to die and I didn't want to be correct.  JKR kept putting 
different characters in dangerous postitions so that I was constantly 
thinking, "this could be the one".  With all the anger Harry was 
experiencing, I just knew Sirius would die, adding more fuel to 
Harry's anger.  I have a question though.  Why, oh why did Sirius 
wait all those years to escape from Azkaban?  I cannot believe he 
never thought to escape before seeing Peter the rat in the Weasley 
photograph.  Especially since it seems the first thing he did after 
getting away was to transform and go see, well, "observe" Harry.  One 
would think he would have escaped a heck of a lot sooner to try 
to "keep an eye" on Harry covertly, since he knew Harry was alive and 
that many of Voldemort's minions were STILL on the loose and looking 
for revenge, etc.




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Thu Sep 11 07:43:11 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 07:43:11 -0000
Subject: Weasley twins
In-Reply-To: <bjodeu+r9u4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjp92f+n0cu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80443

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lily_paige_delaney" 
<lily_paige_delaney at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Freeman, Louise Margaret" 
> <lfreeman at m...> wrote:
> 
> After reading OotP, I'm speculating that the Weasley twins 
> > 
> > My second speculation is a bit wilder, that they aren't real 
> Weasleys.  
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> 


LPD:
> Louise, I had the same nagging suspicion which also extended to 
> Ginny.  When Ginny argues about her right to go to the Ministry of 
> Magic to save Sirius she sets her jaw and Harry observes that her 
> resemblance to the twins was noticeable.  However, I really don't 
> think it can be possible, mainly because of Charlie.
> 
> Bill, Percy and Ron are tall and lanky, while the twins and Charlie 
> seem to be shorter & stockier and Ginny is consistently described 
as 
> small.  If Charlie was tall like the others then I'd think it a 
> possibility that perhaps the twins and Ginny might have different 
> parents but at this stage I don't think so.  But you just never 
know 
> do you!
> 

Geoff:
If you follow up that line of thought re the Weasleys, where does it 
lead? I am the father of three children, two of them twins - 
fraternal twins, a boy and a girl. The twin boy is over 6'0" in 
height and lanky (the lankiness he gets from me), his sister is about 
5'4" taking after her mother. The older boy is very like my father, 
medium height and stockier. They are all different in build and 
height. we often wonder where my younger son gets his height from - 
no one else even in previous generations has been that tall. So what 
do I deduce from that? 




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Thu Sep 11 07:47:03 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 07:47:03 -0000
Subject: Idioms and slang (was: English slang (semi- sorta on topic))
In-Reply-To: <bjof3t+926u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjp99n+bjbs@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80444

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jeffl1965" <jeffl1965 at h...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" 
> <gbannister10 at a...> wrote:
> > The topic of slang, idioms and pejorative language is interesting 
> > when you look at the levels on which it operates and at JKR's use 
> of 
> > it ? or non-use - in Harry Potter.
> > 
>    <snipped>
> 
> >  JKR seems to hold to these 
> > rules in her writing as well. Obviously, as a children's book, 
the 
> > language needs to be controlled. One of the things which has 
> > surprised me in the films is that Ron, in particular, is a little 
> bit 
> > free and easy with some mild swearing which might still offend 
> > listeners when coming from a child and which does not echo what 
is 
> > said in the books.
> 
> 
>   Jeff:
> 
>    Indeed. Most people don't know the origin of bloody, which 
> should've gotten Ron smacked for saying infront of an adult, 
> especially a lady teacher! 
>    For those who don't know, Bloody is a contracted form of the 
> swear " Blood of Christ" or "by the blood of Christ" iirc, and is a 
> very serious swear, which is why its used so much in UK comedies.  
>   Blimey, the old cockney swear, is shorted from Gor, blimey, or 
God 
> Blind me! This can also get a kid a swat on the bum if he's not 
> careful. :)
>    Also, while we're on regions, it should be noted that for years 
> the Londoners always considered the Northerers, from Merseyside and 
> Liverpool and all Cockney's to be savages. Speaking cockney or 
> scouse, was considered to be a sign of lower intelligence, so Ron 
> would be considered to be a dolt. However, since the Weasleys are 
> from near Devon, iirc, I don't really think they'd speak like that, 
> but then again, they use Oi a lot, so maybe they do have a thick 
> accent. Comments?
> 


Geoff (the traditionally spelt one!):
Curiously, I was always under the impression that bloody was a 
corruption of "by Our Lady" - ie in Cathlolic speak, Mary.




From gaspode2002 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 06:34:56 2003
From: gaspode2002 at yahoo.com (gaspode2002)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 06:34:56 -0000
Subject: Prank
Message-ID: <bjp52g+j2u7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80445

The whole prank thing doesnt add up in my opinion. There is something 
we have not been told. Although Snape has many personality flaws, he 
is neither stupid nor cowardly. He is also  very well versed in dark 
arts and a pureblood snob. It is inconceivable to me that he had not 
figured out that Remus was a werewolf. I wouldnt be surprised to find 
out that Snape went to the shrieking shack packing silver and that 
Remus was actually the one who was saved.

Gaspode (named for the famous Gaspode)

PS: Yeah, I know its not canon. For a long time it was canon that 
Scabbers was a fat lazy rat. Canon changes.





From wry1352000 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 05:02:32 2003
From: wry1352000 at yahoo.com (wry1352000)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 05:02:32 -0000
Subject: photo vs. painting in magical world/DD's legilimency & 1st OoP/worse than death 
Message-ID: <bjovl8+ekgf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80446

Hello!

There are some questions that I've been pondering since reading book 
5, and I'd be very interested to know what other people think of it.

I wonder why there should be such a difference between the arts of 
photography and painting in the magical world.  Both people in 
photographs and people in pictures move and get in and out of their 
frames, but people in paintings can also talk and seem to be aware of 
what goes on, while people in photographs don't talk and don't seem 
to be aware of later events (the Potters on the picture Alastor Moody 
showed Harry didn't mind sitting on both sides of Pettigrew).  In a 
way, the paintings' sitters are still alive (like ghosts) and can 
participate in life around them, while photographs' sitters are more 
like images frozen in time.  It seems important to me, for otherwise 
Harry could have communicated with Sirius as well as his parents.

Another idea that struck me sometime after I read OoP was how 
Dumbledore, if he possessed the skill of Legilimency could not know 
who was the traitor in the first Order of the Phoenix.  It appears 
that Snape needed to be skilled in Occlumency to be able to spy on 
Death Eaters, but Pettigrew didn't in order to spy on the first Order 
of the Phoenix.  In fact, in PoA, Professor McGonagall says in the 
Three Broomsticks that before the Potters went into hiding, DD "was 
sure that somebody close to the Potters had been keeping You-Know-Who 
informed of their movements.  Indeed, he had suspected for some time 
that someone on our side had turned traitor and was passing a lot of 
information to You-Know-Who" (PoA, ch. 10, p. 205).  And Sirius tells 
Pettigrew when he confronts him in the Shrieking Shack, "You had been 
passing information to him for a year before Lily and James died" 
(PoA, ch. 19, p. 374), which Pettigrew doesn't deny.  So DD is well 
aware that "somebody close to the Potters" is "passing a lot of 
information to You-Know-Who," but he can't decide who among the three 
people is actually doing it.  This seems rather strange, doesn't it? 

Another matter I have been thinking about can only be speculated on 
at this point, but still I've been wondering what exactly did DD mean 
when Voldemort noticed, surprized, that he didn't try to kill him 
during their duel at the end of OoP, and DD replied that there are 
other ways of destroying a man, that indeed merely taking V's life 
wouldn't satisfy him, and that V's failure to understand that there 
are things much worse than death had always been his greatest 
weakness (OoP, ch. 36, p. 814).  I wonder, could he probably mean 
losing one's soul, as during dementors' attack?  It seems to run 
counter DD's oft-expressed views against the use of dementors, but 
maybe he considered it acceptable in such exceptional case as this, 
or maybe there are some other ways of making a person lose his/her 
soul, or maybe he meant that V was in danger of losing his without 
extra help, the way he was going.  I began thinking of this because 
firstly, V has already almost lost his soul in the conventional 
meaning of the expression (he doesn't/can't feel attachment and has 
traded (even his outward) humanity for more power) and DD tells Harry 
that his humanity is the power he has which V hasn't (and thus not 
realizing the importance of it might be V's greatest weakness).  And 
secondly, we have seen that when V's body was destroyed by a 
backfired curse, his soul survived and eventually he fashioned 
himself another body, so just "separating his body and soul" might 
not be enough.  But if his soul was sucked in by a dememtor or 
destroyed in some other way, that would be final, whether the body 
was still sound or not.

What do you think?

Zinaida.                            





From eloiseherisson at aol.com  Thu Sep 11 09:33:42 2003
From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloiseherisson at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 05:33:42 EDT
Subject: Prank
Message-ID: <141.18c045d3.2c919b76@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80447

Sylvia:

>I'm getting increasingly worried about the use of this word "prank". 
>It has such a light-hearted sound about it. My dictionary defines it 
>as "a sportive trick, a mischievous act". I can see nothing sportive 
>or mischievous about an act that can lead to someone's death. I 
>can't believe DD's casual attitude to it. Ask yourself how you would 
>have reacted if one of your children had confessed to such a "prank".

Agreed. Just to be clear, something which sometimes gets missed is that the 
use of the term "Prank" is a fandom term (I don't know if it's unique to HPfGU 
or how it originated). It is *not* used in canon (waiting for someone to 
contradict that!) and you are not the first to object to  it. It does tend to be 
distinguished by capitalisation, which is an acknowledgement of its 
non-canonicity.

Lupin describes it as  "a trick...which nearly killed him, a trick which 
involved me - "
He is in no doubt as to the seriousness of the incident.

It was not a "prank", it was possibly an attempt at murder, or to get Snape 
bitten by a werewolf (arguably worse than murder), it was Sirius using his 
friend, it was his putting of his own friend at great risk (what would have 
happened to Lupin if serious harm *had* come to Snape?). It is a key reason why many 
of us find it difficult to like Sirius.

Did Dumbledore take it lightly? Well, we don't really know. I think not, but 
what he had to do, for Lupin's sake  was organise a cover-up. Had Sirius been 
publically disciplined for what he had done, then Lupin's secret would have 
been exposed. And of course, Snape *shouldn't* have swallowed the bait and 
followed, just as Malfoy was in the wrong for being out after lights-out during the 
Norbert incident. Sirius, James and Peter shouldn't have been rampaging round 
the country with a werewolf, either, come to that. None of those involved in 
the incident can claim much credit, really, except James.

Snape, of course, wouldn't see it that way and I *do* think that his disgust 
at the lack of justice he perceived  in Dumbledore's treatment of him may have 
been what finally tipped him over into Voldemort's camp. 

I once wrote,

> It's not so much what the Marauders* did that's the problem, as what 
> Dumbledore *didn't* do. I fancy he felt ever so let down by 
> the 'light' side, didn't find justice in the all-wise all-just 
> Dumbledore. . . . What's the point of allying yourself with 
> goodness if evil goes unpunished? Is there any difference between 
> the two sides? Perhaps not.   
    

I'm sure that, just as he disagreed with Dumbledore in his assessment of 
Lupin in PoA, he would have disagreed with his harbouring of such a potentially 
dangerous creature in the school then. To have nearly lost his life and get no 
revenge, but for a werewolf's rights to be favoured over his? Given the climate 
of general wizard opinion and prejudice (and even *Lupin* concedes that he's 
not really safe to be allowed around children), I can rather see his point. 
    
So no, what we know as "The Prank" wasn't a prank at all. It was a serious 
incident with, I think, some pretty far-reaching effects.

~Eloise

* This is also, of course a fandom term, quite inaccurately deriving from 
their use of The Marauder's (singular) Map.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From eloiseherisson at aol.com  Thu Sep 11 09:35:17 2003
From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloiseherisson at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 05:35:17 EDT
Subject: The Gap (was: Ginny: 7 of 7? (was Re: Charlie Weasley's age)) 
Message-ID: <11c.2604830f.2c919bd5@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80448

KathyK:

>I've seen it speculated that Bill and Charlie may be Molly's 
>children from a previous marriage. Or there was another Weasley 
>child between Charlie and Percy who died (possibly because of 
>Voldemort or his DEs). These are both possible explanations for the 
>gap and neither at this point can be proven by canon, nor can they 
>be disproven. I haven't decided what I think on the matter.    

Eloise:
I hadn't seen the first speculation before.

No hard and fast canon, no, but we do know that Arthur and Molly were an 
"item* whilst still at Hogwarts as Molly relates that Arthur still bears the scars 
from when he was caught out of bed after hours by Filch's predecessor after a 
late night stroll with Molly. So for Bill and Charlie to have been from a 
previous marriage would have required them to have split up and got back 
together. Which, I suppose is possible, but not the implication. (I'm sorry, a child 
has removed GoF and I need to do a thorough search of the house to find the 
reference.)

As for the second, some have taken it as significant that Arthur (I think, I 
hate doing this without being able to check) reacts so strongly to the Dark 
Mark, relating how it felt in the days of Voldemort's ascendency to return home 
to find the Dark Mark over one's house, knowing what one would find. This 
*might* indicate such a death in their own family. If so, then evidently the older 
boys have been sworn to secrecy as Ron clearly knows nothing.

~Eloise



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From furkin1712 at aol.com  Wed Sep 10 23:26:56 2003
From: furkin1712 at aol.com (furkin1712 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 19:26:56 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lily's friends: the candidates
Message-ID: <183.2024f788.2c910d40@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80449

Rania:
How about Alice Longbottom?



Maybe, I think possibly but I think we'd be better off going with the witches 
and wizards who are taking the most care of Harry. Personally I think Mrs. 
Weasly was either freinds with Lily or used to go out with James because she's 
so overly fond of Harry. I think that maybe Alice. Possibly some other people 
that we haven't expected, something that would throw us off completley.

Remember, any good author is not going to do what we think she's going to do, 
she's going to throw us a curve ball.
Blue Eyes





From liliana at worldonline.nl  Thu Sep 11 09:58:27 2003
From: liliana at worldonline.nl (laylalast)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 09:58:27 -0000
Subject: Sirius's death, Predictions for next book
In-Reply-To: <bjodpt+hiu4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjph03+gcca@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80450

greatlit2003 wrote:

<snips part of post> 
> 3. JKR said that someone unexpected will be teacher at Hogwarts at 
> the end of Book 7. I remember reading that somewhere, but I don't 
> have the interview. Could this teacher be Harry? Who would be more 
> qualified to teach DADA after he kills V-mort?
> 
> thanks for reading all my babbling. any thoughts about this?

Lilian:

I'm just answering to your last question. JKR in fact said (The 
Connection 12 October 1999):

" Q: 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. 
A: 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 ---
-"

It's in the quick-quill archives at the Leaky Cauldron website.

So, it is definitely not Harry who will become a teacher. It doesn't 
say either that the classmate in question will become a teacher 
before the series is over, which leads me to think that in the 
epilogue that JKR claims that she has already written, it will then 
be revealed who ends up being a teacher. 
But as to whom I'm as much in the dark as you are, although I would 
say at this moment that it's either Neville or Hermione (doing a 
revolt in teaching methods <g> as some of us listees feel that these 
are lacking).




From englishgirl832003 at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Sep 10 21:06:43 2003
From: englishgirl832003 at yahoo.co.uk (englishgirl832003)
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 21:06:43 -0000
Subject: Wizen gene/What is ancient Ancient Magic
In-Reply-To: <CB08EA121F31B94DA58296DEF3668AE12B2182@helium.towson.edu>
Message-ID: <bjo3p3+h0sv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80451

Dumbledore makes references to that which Voldemort can't 
understand, but which Harry has lots of. love.

Therefore, I speculate that ancient magic is somehow tied into the 
emotions - perhaps needing them to work.





From delwynmarch at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 12:01:19 2003
From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (Doriane)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 12:01:19 -0000
Subject: The magic power of love. Was: BANG! You're dead!
In-Reply-To: <5D7DC3F8-E3E4-11D7-AD27-000A95E29F3E@fandm.edu>
Message-ID: <bjpo6f+mamo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80452

> Del:
> > As for wanting to save the world, I don't think he thought as far 
> > as that. 
> > <SNIP>
> > I personnally think that at that moment, Harry hasn't yet
> > realized that LV would go as far as killing him to get the Stone.

Laura :
> *sings* WRO-ONG!  ^_^ Let's take a look at SS/PS, American Edition, 
> pg.  270:
(SNIP very good quote)
> So, from this here very illuminating bit of canon, I'd say not 
> only  does Harry go after the Stone to prevent *Voldemort* from 
> destroying  the world (or at least Hogwarts ^_~), but that he is 
> also quite aware  that Voldemort will kill him even if he *doesn't* 
> try to defend the  Stone.

Okay, okay :-) You're perfectly right, I must admit it. Though if I 
were nasty, I'd say this disproves the selfless hero image...

> And I don't quite understand why you would say that Harry thought 
> he was only fighting Quirrell, anyway.  Voldemort had been revealed 
> to him at this point -- in fact, when Quirrellmort first starts 
> coming at Harry, it's with Voldemort's face to the front.

But had Voldemort revealed himself already when Quirrell demands the 
Stone from Harry before attacking him ? I don't remember too well, 
sorry. What I meant is that when Harry went through the trapdoor, he 
thought he was "only" going to fight Snape, not LV. And when he 
discovers Quirrell, he doesn't realize right away that Quirrell is 
carrying LV around with him.

> Harry and Ron *tried* to go to Lockhart (who was *supposed* to be  
> searching for Ginny) to tell him where to look.  Of course, 
> Lockhart wasn't actually going to try to save her -- but neither 
> were (from Harry and Ron's perspective) the other teachers.  
> Anyway, I'm not sure *I*, at least, could expect them, once they'd 
> wrested control from Lockhart, to go traipsing around the castle 
> looking for *another* teacher to help them.  I'm quite impressed 
> they spared the time to go to Lockhart in the first place, honestly.

Personally, I was very puzzled, the first time I read the book, to 
see Harry and Ron going to Lockhart. I thought they would have known 
that a) he wouldn't even go searching for Ginny, and b) he would be 
useless anyway even if he did. It's only when the Memory Charm 
incident happened that it all made sense to me : "Ah, it's to keep 
Ron back, so Harry has to go and fight alone".
But anyway : why would they think that no other teacher would go 
looking for Ginny ? Even if the teachers "officially" turned that 
task over to Lockhart, it was obvious to me that all the others would 
keep trying to figure out where she was. When a student goes missing, 
*all* the teachers have a duty to look for her.
Moreover, Harry and Ron were the *only* ones in the whole castle who 
knew where to look for Ginny. If they had been killed on their rescue 
mission, nobody would have been able to find any of them. I find it 
at best irresponsible and at worst horribly stupid not to tell any 
teacher what they knew and where they were going. Imagine that your 
kid knew where another kid who was kidnapped is being held captive. 
Wouldn't you expect your kid to tell someone (you, the police, 
whoever) what he knows ? If he went and freed the kid on his own, 
wouldn't you lecture him about how irresponsible and stupid it was to 
go all alone, no matter how good a job he did, how heroic he is ?

> > As for compassion, I don't think so. As I said before, he doesn't 
> > care much about Ginny, it's more to do with playing the hero.
> 
> I don't think Harry is *playing* at anything.

I didn't mean playing as in having fun. I meant playing as in playing 
a role, as in having a distorted vision of reality, as in believing 
that he's the only one who can do things right.

> He perceives that someone is in trouble, and he instinctively tries 
> to help them.

Most of us would also react like that, don't you think ? That's not 
compassion, though. 

> Yes, maybe this is indicative of a hero complex, but hardly a bad 
> or  dishonorable thing.  I mean, even when Hermione brought it up 
> in OOTP, I didn't get the impression that she thought 
> Harry's "saving people  thing" was a negative trait, just that 
> Voldemort might be trying to use  it against him.

It's not a bad trait in itself. But it gets bad when it leads him to 
believe that he's a cut above others and that he can dispense with a 
healthy amount of caution and with listening to others' advice.

> > As for compassion... Well, he did show something towards Peter, 
> > but I wouldn't call it compassion. He wasn't trying to save 
> > Peter, he was trying to act noble towards his father's friends. 
> > Basically, what he said is : Peter is such a lowly character, 
> > he's not worthy of your becoming murderers. So what he showed 
> > towards Peter was disdain, a total lack of consideration. Served 
> > him well, by the way.
> 
> Again, I don't think he was *acting* anything.

Almost everyone I know is acting something, but that's another 
matter :-)

> I don't think Harry makes decisions based on impressing the people 
> around him.

I think he does, unconsciously. He doesn't want people to think he's 
this or that, he won't admit his fears or weaknesses, etc... Neville, 
on the other hand, doesn't care about impressing anyone. Neither does 
Luna. And Harry doesn't hold them in too much esteem, precisely 
because they speak their heart and mind openly and freely.

> He spared Peter because, when it really comes down to it, he's too 
> good of a person to murder a defenseless (if despicable) person.

No, he showed that trait when he couldn't bring himself to kill 
Sirius that same night. But at least he tried, at least he hated 
Sirius, because Sirius was a strong opponent. But Harry felt only 
disgust for Peter, he didn't hate him, because he didn't feel he was 
a worthy opponent.
Moreover, do you realize that once again he showed complete 
disrespect for others' feelings ? Because he, Harry, didn't care 
enough about Peter to kill him, he wouldn't allow Sirius and Remus to 
choose for themselves whether or not they wanted to kill him. What 
right did he have to do that ? Remus and Sirius were at that moment 
feeling one of the worst kinds of betrayal there is : one of their 
intimate friends had pretty much killed another friend. How did Harry 
dare telling them what to do ?

> I think the idea that Jo is trying to present is that heroes are 
> normal people who manage to act extraordinary in the midsts of 
> extraordinary events.

Absolutely !!! That's precisely why I don't agree when people try to 
convince me that Harry is so incredibly wonderful, that he's a cut 
above all others. He's not. He just has good opportunities to make 
use of his talents, a cold head, good wits and reflexes, and a great 
deal of luck. He's good, but he's not exceptional.

> And besides....he killed a *basilisk* with a freaking *sword*. ^_^ 
> If  he doesn't get to be a Hero, does he at least get the  
> Knight-In-Shining-Armor distinction?

Oh ! A Knight-In-Shining-Armor, that he is, for sure :-) A bit too 
much for my taste, even :-) As for being a Hero, he is that too. But 
he's not "better" than anyone else. You know, Malfoy is a Hero too. 
Not for you and I, but if our values were the same as his, we'd 
worship him for his daring attitude, his cunning, his knowledge, his 
perseverance, etc... He's just as much a Hero as Harry, just not to 
the same people.

Del




From quigonginger at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 12:17:18 2003
From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 12:17:18 -0000
Subject: another filk in the saga and a comment on Goyle, Sr.
In-Reply-To: <bjl7kb+sghb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjpp4e+32nm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80453

I (Ginger) had originally written: 
> > Harry has just removed the prophesy from the shelf.

Haggridd, wrote: 
I would not presume to rewrite your filk if you had not thrown it
> open to suggestions, but a fix occurred to me as I was thinking that
> your filk is about the prophecy itself, rather than about Sybill
> Trelawney.  (Note: pedantic comment to follow.  Be prepared.  The 
act
> of predicting the future is to "prophesy" with an "s", pronounced
> PROF-a-SIGH.  The inormation that someone prophesies is 
a "prophecy",
> with a "c", pronounced PROF-a-SEE.)

I now add:
Mea culpa, my friend.  You have pointed that out before.  (Mental 
note to self: Iron hands)

Haggridd continued:
> So instead of:
> >
> > P-R-O-P-H-E-T
> > By the name of Trelawny
> > P-R-O-P-H-E-T
> > That's her, SPT
> > 
> write:
> P-R-O-P-H-E-Cy
> By the hand of Trelawney
> P-R-O-P-H-E-CY
> That's her specialty.
 
> And you have now a natural title parodying the original song:
> "P-R-O-P-H-E-CY"

Now I have a suggestion:  I have noted before, much to my (and, 
apparently, only my) befuddlement, that the elder Goyle was not at 
the MoM that night, but the elder Crabbe was.  As far as I know, this 
is the only time that we have seen a Crabbe without his generational 
counterpart Goyle.  Of course, Goyle could have come in with the 
rest, tripped down the stairs, concussed himself and been thrown in a 
broom closet, but it still leaves another DE unaccounted for!

So my proposition:  let's give the elder Crabbe a solo.  We'll let 
him write it: 
So now we have-

P-R-O-F-E-S-E
Spell it out, the prophecy
P-R-O-F-E-S-E
Give it here, Harry

I never said he had talent.
Ginger 




From sylviablundell at aol.com  Thu Sep 11 12:53:01 2003
From: sylviablundell at aol.com (sylviablundell2001)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 12:53:01 -0000
Subject: Albus Dumbledore and the Socks
Message-ID: <bjpr7d+u7t3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80454

I was quite charmed by Sandy's sweet explanation but wonder if we are 
all looking for something that isn't there.It seemed to me on reading 
this passage that DD simply doesn't want to tell Harry what he sees 
in the Mirror of Erised, and says the first light-hearted thing that 
comes into his head.  It does say at the end of the chapter "It was 
only when he was back in bed that it struck Harry that Dumbledore 
might nothave been quite truthful.  But then, he thought, as he 
shoved Scabbers off his pillow, it had been quite a personal 
question."
The next thing, of course, is to speculate exactly what DD did see in 
the Mirror if it wasn't socks.
Sylvia (who really likes Sandy's theory, after all the ghastly things 
that have been happening in Harry's world and our own)




From serenamoonsilver at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 12:58:11 2003
From: serenamoonsilver at yahoo.com (Serena Moonsilver)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 12:58:11 -0000
Subject: photo vs. painting in magical world/DD's legilimency & 1st OoP/worse than death
In-Reply-To: <bjovl8+ekgf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjprh3+q9k5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80455

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "wry1352000" <wry1352000 at y...> 
wrote:
> Hello!
> 
> 
> Another idea that struck me sometime after I read OoP was how 
> Dumbledore, if he possessed the skill of Legilimency could not know 
> who was the traitor in the first Order of the Phoenix.  It appears 
> that Snape needed to be skilled in Occlumency to be able to spy on 
> Death Eaters, but Pettigrew didn't in order to spy on the first 
Order 
> of the Phoenix.  In fact, in PoA, Professor McGonagall says in the 
> Three Broomsticks that before the Potters went into hiding, DD "was 
> sure that somebody close to the Potters had been keeping You-Know-
Who 
> informed of their movements.  Indeed, he had suspected for some 
time 
> that someone on our side had turned traitor and was passing a lot 
of 
> information to You-Know-Who" (PoA, ch. 10, p. 205).  And Sirius 
tells 
> Pettigrew when he confronts him in the Shrieking Shack, "You had 
been 
> passing information to him for a year before Lily and James died" 
> (PoA, ch. 19, p. 374), which Pettigrew doesn't deny.  So DD is well 
> aware that "somebody close to the Potters" is "passing a lot of 
> information to You-Know-Who," but he can't decide who among the 
three 
> people is actually doing it.  This seems rather strange, doesn't 
it? 
> 
> Zinaida.

It's very possible that Dumbledore did know that Peter was the spy 
and was continuing to let him act in that manner as a way of having 
an in on Voldemort (ie, using Peter to pass along false 
information).  To this end, Dumbledore may not have told anyone who 
the spy was.

Then when the Potters go into hidding, they switch their secret-
keeper at the last minute without informing Dumbledore (as much has 
been said in PoA, Dumbledore testimony put Sirius in Azkaban).  
Dumbledore therefore can't warn the Potters not to use Peter.

Serena




From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Thu Sep 11 13:05:54 2003
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 13:05:54 -0000
Subject: Sirius's death, Predictions for next book
In-Reply-To: <bjph03+gcca@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjprvi+icim@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80456

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "laylalast" <liliana at w...> 
wrote:
> greatlit2003 wrote:
> 
> <snips part of post> 
> > 3. JKR said that someone unexpected will be teacher at Hogwarts 
at 
> > the end of Book 7. I remember reading that somewhere, but I don't 
> > have the interview. Could this teacher be Harry? Who would be 
more 
> > qualified to teach DADA after he kills V-mort?
> > 
> > thanks for reading all my babbling. any thoughts about this?
> 
> Lilian:
> 
> I'm just answering to your last question. JKR in fact said (The 
> Connection 12 October 1999):
> 
> " Q: 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. 
> A: 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 -
--
> -"
> 
> It's in the quick-quill archives at the Leaky Cauldron website.
> 
> So, it is definitely not Harry who will become a teacher. It 
doesn't 
> say either that the classmate in question will become a teacher 
> before the series is over, which leads me to think that in the 
> epilogue that JKR claims that she has already written, it will then 
> be revealed who ends up being a teacher. 
> But as to whom I'm as much in the dark as you are, although I would 
> say at this moment that it's either Neville or Hermione (doing a 
> revolt in teaching methods <g> as some of us listees feel that 
these 
> are lacking).

But there is more in the interview. She also said, that it is not the 
most likely candidate (in other words Hermione), and then she 
asked: "Who do you think it is?" The audience said "Ron", and the 
answer was. "No, it isn't Ron either." Of course it can still be a 
minor character, but currently, I am totally convinced it is Neville, 
either in Herbology or in DADA.

Hickengruendler




From entropymail at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 13:19:35 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 13:19:35 -0000
Subject: photo vs. painting in magical world/DD's legilimency & 1st OoP/worse than de
In-Reply-To: <bjovl8+ekgf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjpsp7+hf86@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80457

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "wry1352000" <wry1352000 at y...>
wrote:
<snip>
> I wonder why there should be such a difference between the arts of 
> photography and painting in the magical world.  Both people in 
> photographs and people in pictures move and get in and out of their 
> frames, but people in paintings can also talk and seem to be aware of 
> what goes on, while people in photographs don't talk and don't seem 
> to be aware of later events (the Potters on the picture Alastor Moody 
> showed Harry didn't mind sitting on both sides of Pettigrew).  In a 
> way, the paintings' sitters are still alive (like ghosts) and can 
> participate in life around them, while photographs' sitters are more 
> like images frozen in time.  <and snip>

It seems to me that the paintings are all of dead people: all of the
paintings in Dumbledore's office are past (dead) headmasters, and all
of the paintings I've noticed elsewhere throughout the castle are of
people dressed in what seem to be very old costume so they are,
presumably, dead. (Side note: I do remember paintings of Gilderoy
Lockhart in his classroom in the film, but haven't been able to find
them described in the book, so maybe those don't count). These
portraits were probably painted after the person in question was
already dead, perhaps as a place where their spirit can reside. Maybe
that's why we've never seen a portrait of Nearly Headless Nick, or The
Bloody Baron, or any of the other "house ghosts"; they're still using
their spirits, and can't be bothered with sitting around in a frame
all day!

The photographs, however, are all done while the people are alive (of
course).

This leads me to wonder whether we'll be seeing Sirius again in Book
6. Is there an empty frame hiding somewhere in the rambling Black
house that we have yet to discover? Or will Dumbledore commission one,
to hang beside the Gryffindor fire? Oh, the possibilities!

:: Entropy ::




From greatraven at hotmail.com  Thu Sep 11 13:25:12 2003
From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 13:25:12 -0000
Subject: Harry heard of Tom Riddle
In-Reply-To: <bjohte+2f6n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjpt3o+o5n3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80458

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Wanda Sherratt" 
> <wsherratt3338 at r...> wrote:
> 
> I'm sure you noticed, though, that in the MoM scene in OoP DD calls 
> LV by the name "Tom".  It was very striking.  DD is playing a mind 
> game with LV here, because clearly it's not Tom Riddle people fear, 
> it's this self-constructed persona Lord Voldemort.  DD is saying 
he's 
> opting out of the game.  

Or is it because this monster was, after all, once just another 
Hogwarts student and DD taught him? He may be You-Know-Who to
everyone else, but for DD, he was just that sneaky kid who turned out 
no good. 
For some reason, this scene reminds me strangely of the scene in the 
original Star Wars where Obi-Wan confronts his former pupil (this was 
before we found out, of course, that Darth Vader was once Anakin 
Skywalker and I don't think even Lucas had worked it out at the
time, so Obi-Wan called him Darth). 
I was almost expecting DD to get killed and come back as part of the 
Force! : - ) Perhaps it may happen yet, who knows? Sue B 




From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Thu Sep 11 13:37:43 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 13:37:43 -0000
Subject: photo vs. painting in magical world/DD's legilimency & 1st OoP/worse than death
In-Reply-To: <bjprh3+q9k5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjptr7+f3ej@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80459

> Serena Moonsilver wrote:
> It's very possible that Dumbledore did know that Peter was the spy 
> and was continuing to let him act in that manner as a way of having 
> an in on Voldemort (ie, using Peter to pass along false 
> information).  To this end, Dumbledore may not have told anyone who 
> the spy was.
> 
> Then when the Potters go into hidding, they switch their secret-
> keeper at the last minute without informing Dumbledore (as much has 
> been said in PoA, Dumbledore testimony put Sirius in Azkaban).  
> Dumbledore therefore can't warn the Potters not to use Peter.
> 
> Serena <


I like to think of DD as JKR's embodiment of goodness. True, he may 
not be perfect in knowledge or skills (particularly when it comes to 
understanding the emotions of a teenaged boy), but he always *means* 
well. And maybe I'm forgetting something, but I can't recall ever 
hearing of DD killing anyone.

If that is the case, then perhaps DD never uses spells that are always 
bad. We know the Unforgivables, of course, but isn't the only use of 
Legilimency to probe another's thoughts, violating their privacy and 
personhood?

That would explain why DD doesn't always know who is lying to him, and 
why he sends Harry to Snape to learn Occlumency. Snape could be 
reasonably good at Legilemency simply because he was a DE.

BTW, this doesn't imply that DD can't do Occlumency; he is clearly 
extremely good at that. Occlumency does not violate another, it simply 
protects oneself.

-Remnant




From delwynmarch at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 13:37:43 2003
From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (Doriane)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 13:37:43 -0000
Subject: Harry's Temper Was Re: Feelings on OoP
In-Reply-To: <bjno31+gm51@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjptr7+b95m@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80460


Golly wrote :

>  He's angry.  Some say "finally" or "reasonably".  But when he does 
> explode he doesn't get what he wants.  He gets the whole order 
> before him.  He gets Sirius and Molly to tell him what he says he 
> wants to know.  But when all is said and done he never asks them 
> anything important.  
> 
> Like
> 
> 1. Am I a weapon? 
> 
> 2. Why me?  What is so special about me?  
> 
> 3. Where is Voldemort or do you just not know?  Have any ideas what 
> he is planning.  I think I should know since it might very well 
> involve a plot to kill me!
> 
> 4. Have I any hope of seeing an age where I can drink legally?
> 
> 5. Why is DD avoiding me?  I didn't kill Cedric.  It wasn't my 
> fault.  I only told the truth. Why is he mad at me?
> 
> Conviently Harry asks none of these sticky questions. It makes no 
> sense to me that he's angry and wants desperately to know what is 
> going on, but never actually demands the answers to his own 
> internal musings and the causes of his explosions.

That's always been the stickiest part for me, right from PS. Harry 
*never* asks the most obvious and necessary questions. He *never* 
asked anyone to tell him about his parents. He still doesn't know for 
sure what they did as a job. He never inquired about his grandparents 
either. He *accidentally* discovered about Sirius, his father's very 
best friend, his parents' best man, during his *third* year at 
Hogwarts !! Etc, etc, etc...

I understand JKR had to withhold information from us, but this never 
made any sense to me, so I'm not bothered anymore that he doesn't ask 
the questions that truly bother him in OoP...

Del





From greatraven at hotmail.com  Thu Sep 11 13:37:50 2003
From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 13:37:50 -0000
Subject: Lily's friends: the candidates
In-Reply-To: <183.2024f788.2c910d40@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bjptre+5pau@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80461

--- Personally I think Mrs. 
> Weasly was either freinds with Lily or used to go out with James 
because she's 
> so overly fond of Harry. 

If this was the case, surely she would have said so? Besides, I think 
she's several years older than Lily and James. Remember, she has a 
couple of sons in their 20s. I don't think James and Lily would have 
been old enough for that if they'd survived.

Sue B




From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Thu Sep 11 13:59:33 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 13:59:33 -0000
Subject: Harry's Temper Was Re: Feelings on OoP
In-Reply-To: <bjptr7+b95m@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjpv45+u97k@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80462

> Del wrote:
> I understand JKR had to withhold information from us, but this 
never made any sense to me, so I'm not bothered anymore that he 
doesn't ask the questions that truly bother him in OoP...
> Del <


I have felt the same way, Del, but now as I think about the last two 
books in the series, I think we may have a different animal.

JKR needs to believably evolve Harry's character from a 
happy-just-to-be-there little boy who wants to help his new friends, 
to the boy-who-understands-and-accepts-his-fate despite what he has 
seen. I would just feel cheated if Harry kills LV without first coming 
to a better understanding of himself. The meaning would be so much 
larger if Harry really *understood* what his actions were going to 
mean. Harry: "I may die, but if I don't try to stop LV, then no one 
can. And even though I've sometimes been treated poorly, there are 
some things that are still worth saving."

Maybe this is a little too Biblical a read of the plot trajectory, but 
I just don't see a simple battle where Harry wins. What a letdown that 
would be.

Another parallel that might shed light is <groan> LOTR. While I don't 
subscribe to the many threads that have posited close ties to LOTR, in 
that great series, as in this one, there was a single small person 
capable of vanquishing the hugely powerful and evil villain. And 
despite the many epic battles in LOTR, it all came down to whether the 
small hero could sacrifice himself for the good of all, knowing full 
well what horrors were likely in store for him. And, in Frodo's case, 
what other desires began lurking in him, as well.

That worked because it made the actions Frodo took *supremely* heroic. 
I'm waiting for a similar change in Harry's character that will make 
his actions more heroic, as well.

-Remnant




From urghiggi at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 14:11:20 2003
From: urghiggi at yahoo.com (urghiggi)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 14:11:20 -0000
Subject: The Gap (was: Ginny: 7 of 7? (was Re: Charlie Weasley's age))
In-Reply-To: <11c.2604830f.2c919bd5@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bjpvq8+uced@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80463

A coupla cold-water notes on the "Gap" discussion (just look on this as a 
little... ummmm... disillusionment charm?)

1. Fact: Children in biological families do not always look alike. This does not 
mean that mom was snogging the milkman.
2. Fact: Secondary infertility (inability to conceive after you've already have 
kids) does exist. Sometimes this is a physiological problem; sometimes it's 
stress-related. Sometimes it's a permanent problem; sometimes it's temporary, 
and after a hiatus, more kids end up being produced. Sometimes the reason 
for it is just plain mysterious and undetectable by medical science. But it 
happens. (Don't ask me how I know....)

So my admittedly dull interp of the whole Weasley Gap is that all the kids are 
the Weasley's bio-children, and that for whatever reason, they did not produce 
their family on a rigid schedule. I fear I'm a hopeless devotee of Occam's 
Razor -- which makes me unqualified for employment in the HPfGU Dept. of 
Wild Speculation :-)

OTOH, still perfectly capable of signing myself as one of ...
Harry Potter's loony grown-up fans

urghiggi, Chgo 




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Thu Sep 11 14:30:59 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 14:30:59 -0000
Subject: The Gap (was: Ginny: 7 of 7? (was Re: Charlie Weasley's age))
In-Reply-To: <bjoskl+76ph@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjq0v3+4ab2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80464

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "KathyK" <zanelupin at y...> wrote:
> Jeff:
> 
> >>I hope this helps some, but I know it doesn't explain why there 
> is a gap. I guess we'll have to speculate unitl we know for sure.>> 
> 
> Now Susan:
>  
> >I am a bit confused by this....bad day....but could the gap be due 
> to the WW being terrorized by LV so the Weasley's decided not to 
> bring any more children into such a horrible life?  Then when LV 
was 
> reduced to less than a man, they proceeded with their family?  Just 
> a thought.>
> 
> 
> KathyK:
> 
> The gap could certainly have something to do with Voldemort's 
> activities.  Obviously what, I cannot say for certain.  I don't 
> think the Weasley's chose to hold off on having children until 
after 
> Voldemort was gone.
> 
> The gap causing the question is the one between Percy and Charlie.  
> If Arthur and Molly held off their family, it would stand to reason 
> that Percy and the rest would have been born after Voldemort fell.  
> However, this is clearly not the case as Harry was a year old when 
> it occurred.  Ron, Fred, George, and Percy were all around before 
> Harry was born.  And Ginny was only about a year or so after Harry 
> arrived.  So Voldemort wasn't gone when Arthur and Molly were busy 
> having their children.  
> 
> Voldemort's reign could have been a factor in the gap between 
> Charlie and Percy, but not a purposeful calculation on the part of 
> the Weasleys to wait until it was safe to have more children.  Or 
> maybe they tried to put their family on pause, but then oops, 
> there's Percy.  Now that we've done that, why not just continue? <g>
> 
> I've seen it speculated that Bill and Charlie may be Molly's 
> children from a previous marriage.  Or there was another Weasley 
> child between Charlie and Percy who died (possibly because of 
> Voldemort or his DEs).  These are both possible explanations for 
the 
> gap and neither at this point can be proven by canon, nor can they 
> be disproven.  I haven't decided what I think on the matter.


Geoff:
Could h=just be that they wanted a break form always having younger 
children around and then had a "second generation". After all, Queen 
Elizabeth II did this -  there is a 10 year gap between Princess Anne 
and Prince Andrew.




From vinnia_chrysshallie at yahoo.co.nz  Thu Sep 11 14:46:01 2003
From: vinnia_chrysshallie at yahoo.co.nz (=?iso-8859-1?q?Vinnia?=)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 02:46:01 +1200 (NZST)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lily's friends: the candidates
In-Reply-To: <000001c377ab$9ce3e5c0$2210883e@oemcomputer>
Message-ID: <20030911144601.54192.qmail@web41211.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80465

JoTwo (jsummerill at summerillj.freeserve.co.uk) wrote: 

It's been noted that while we've met James' friends,
we've never met Lily's.  It was surmised that she was
popular and this seems confirmed by the group of girls
she was part of in OOP.  So who could they be?

Anyone else have any comments or suggestions?

Me <Vinnia>:
1. Emmeline Vance 

2. Hestia Jones

We know nothing about those two, yet Rowling must have
some roles for them in the next two books.

3. Luna's mom.
--Quote--
OoP p760 UK:
"She was a quite extraordinary witch, you know, but
she did like to experiment and one of her spells went
rather badly wrong one day."
--end quote--

I think she used to work for Committee on Experimental
Charms (like Gilbert Wimple, he is mentioned in GoF
p79 UK). Lily's wand is good for charm works, so
perhaps they worked together?

4. Susan Bones mom.
We learn a bit about the Bones (Edgar, Amelia) in OoP,
they may prove to be important later.

5. Mrs Greengrass.
There is a student called Daphne Greengrass. She took
her Charm OWL with Hermione (OoP p628 UK)

My money is on Luna's mom, though.


-Vinnia-

http://search.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Search
- Looking for more? Try the new Yahoo! Search



From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com  Thu Sep 11 14:57:46 2003
From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 14:57:46 -0000
Subject: Many a DE (filk)
Message-ID: <bjq2ha+l44a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80466

Many a DE (GoF, Chap. 30)

The 11th A!Kedavra filk to the tune of Many a New Day from Rodgers 
and Hammerstein's Oklanhoma!

Dedicated to Tracy Hunt

THE SCENE: Toward the end of the year, as MOODY lectures his DADA 
class, HARRY is led to remember what he observed in Dumbledore's 
Pensieve

MOODY: 
Why should you students living free as a song
Worry  `bout the wizards who could lead you astray?
Their hexin an' their cursin' are so very strong
Relax your guard, they'll force you to obey.
Always gonna say that the way I act is the only way that makes sense!
I'll use my Sensors and Sneakoscopes there
My Foe-Glass I'll keep in good repair
I'll fill my flask
And I'll stay aware
Through my constant vigilance!

MOODY & STUDENTS
Many a DE will use these spells,
Many a hex that has been banned
Many a curse to hurt, kill, impel
Getting them sent to Azkaban
Many a DE I've/he's sent to that place, too!

HARRY (to himself)
Many a time now I think back to 
Penetrating the Pensieve.
Many a memory I reviewed,
Courtroom sagas relived. 
Never did Barty use process due, 
Functioning as MOM's stern plaintiff
Many a DE he decked, let me tell you!

(Segue back to Dumbledore' office.  HARRY enters the Pensieve, and 
observes BARTY CROUCH SR. laying out his prosecution strategies.)

CROUCH, SR.:
Many a DE would crucify
Many a cruel curse they're casting
Nevertheless, I am the guy 
Sent here by central casting

Many a DE I'll dock before I'm through!

Never till I questioned Karkaroff
Did he tick off his contacts
Such as Rookwood and Dolohov
Though no mention of Blacks.
Even if Albus just wants to scoff
I am hot on their tracks

Many a DE I'll dock
Many a Dark Mark I'll dim
Many an Auror avenge 
Before I'm through!

CHORUS OF MINISTRY OFFICIALS
Many a DE he shall convict
Many an evil destroyer
Never will he ease his rule so strict:
No one will get a lawyer!
Many a DE he'll dock before he's through!

CROUCH, SR. 
Never did I think my son would be
Traitorously against us
Somebody who would heinously
Make Frank lose his senses. 
Never in this courtroom have we seen
So deserving a life sentence
Many a DE I'll dock

CROUCH, SR. & CHORUS 
Many a Crouch son will set
Many a Junior confine
Before we're through!  

   -	CMC

HARRY POTTER FILKS
http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm 





From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 15:24:38 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 15:24:38 -0000
Subject: A Sockful of Sweets--Was: Re: Albus Dumbledore and the Socks
In-Reply-To: <bjpr7d+u7t3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjq43m+2rlk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80467

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sylviablundell2001" 
<sylviablundell at a...> wrote:
> I was quite charmed by Sandy's sweet explanation but wonder if we 
> are all looking for something that isn't there.It seemed to me on 
> reading this passage that DD simply doesn't want to tell Harry what 
> he sees in the Mirror of Erised, and says the first light-hearted 
> thing that  comes into his head.  It does say at the end of the 
> chapter "It was only when he was back in bed that it struck Harry 
> that Dumbledore might nothave been quite truthful.  But then, he 
> thought, as he shoved Scabbers off his pillow, it had been quite a 
> personal question."

> The next thing, of course, is to speculate exactly what DD did see 
> in the Mirror if it wasn't socks. Sylvia (who really likes Sandy's 
> theory, after all the ghastly things that have been happening in 
> Harry's world and our own)

Good point.  The obvious (Occam's razor again) explanation is, of 
course, that Dumbledore simply put Harry off with a whimsical answer 
(like a teacher of Eastern disciplines using a koan to unstick an 
accolyte's thinking). It's the one Harry is inclined to believe and 
the one suggested to us, the readers, because he thinks so.  If 
that's true, then the "next thing" to me is *still*: why then socks?  
(Rather than going right to speculation about what DD *did* see; we 
don't know that he ever looked into the Mirror at all.)  Did 
Dumbledore say socks just to trivialize Harry's question?  Just 
because socks aren't relevant to much of anything?  Actually, I 
tended to keep digging because I think that Dumbledore is cleverer 
than that.  I think Harry (as I said before) surprised the truth out 
of Dumbledore; and still it was phrased in a way which made it 
impenetrable to Harry.

My interpretation was something that kept surfacing in my mind; parts 
of what I said about it didn't come together until after OoP, but the 
gist of it, that the socks would represent a safer, more 
peaceful, "sweeter" world to Dumbledore, occurred to me a long time 
ago.

IN DEFENSE OF SWEETNESS

The saga *started out* after all with a great deal of sweetness 
(Harry forms a friendship with Ron over Chocolate Frogs) without 
being (an aside:  I've been an Anglophile forever and love all the 
British variants) treacly.  Isn't Dumbledore known for his love of 
confections?  Isn't fighting Voldemort as much about how he takes the 
sweetness out of life and makes it not worth living (think 
Longbottoms, and there's *another* reference to sweets with the 
Droobles) as it is about moral stances?  I wonder how sweet Death is 
to eat?  I'd imagine it's rather bitter.  The places the story has 
become less sweet (as Sylvia says, "the ghastly things that have been 
happening in Harry's world") it has been a result of Voldemort's 
doings; even Harry's first *romance*, with Cho Chang, comes apart 
because his girl can't stop crying about her former boyfriend, the 
one Voldemort murdered (yeah, I know, Peter held the wand); not to 
mention what widened the gap:  Cho's friend ratted out Harry's 
efforts to make people safer--from Voldemort.  What kept Harry at the 
Dursleys, a place where life had almost no sweetness, for his first 
eleven years?  Voldemort.  Think back to LOTR; The Shire represents 
all that is sweet and good and simple in the world, and it is the 
place Gandalf worries for most as Sauron comes back to power.  
Sweetness is what we're fighting for.  If we lose sight of that, if 
we lose the ability to appreciate a good sherbet lemon drop, we've 
given in.  Sauron, or Grindelwald, or Voldemort, or whoever it is, 
wins.  We might as well each hold a house party and invite the 
dementors.

I am poised here on the edge of going on and on ad nauseum; probably 
a good place to stop.  Comments?

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley" stowing soapbox *again*




From dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu  Thu Sep 11 15:49:41 2003
From: dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu (Arya)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 15:49:41 -0000
Subject: Lily's friends: the candidates
In-Reply-To: <20030911144601.54192.qmail@web41211.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjq5il+97s6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80468

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Vinnia 
<vinnia_chrysshallie at y...> wrote:
SNIP
> Me <Vinnia>:
> 1. Emmeline Vance 
> 
> 2. Hestia Jones
> 
> We know nothing about those two, yet Rowling must have
> some roles for them in the next two books.
>snip

Actually, I am inferring that Hestia works for the Ministry.  In OotP 
(don't have book at work), early on while they are at #12, Tonks 
makes a comment saying she is too tired for guard duty (or such-- 
presumably at the DoM) and that she might get Hestia to take her 
shift after Kingsley's (or such).  

So far, that's evidence of Tonks (known MoM employee), Kingsley 
(known MoM employee), Mr. Weasley (known MoM employee), Sturgis 
Podmore(known MoM employee), and now Hestia Jones taking "duty".  


I say she is also a MoM employee.  Maybe Arthur's friend inthe Floo 
Regulation Panel?  

Arya





From annemehr at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 15:57:21 2003
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 15:57:21 -0000
Subject: photo vs. painting in magical world/DD's legilimency & 1st OoP/worse than death
In-Reply-To: <bjprh3+q9k5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjq611+891n@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80469

wry1352000/Zinaida wrote:

> > Another idea that struck me sometime after I read OoP was how 
> > Dumbledore, if he possessed the skill of Legilimency could not 
know 
> > who was the traitor in the first Order of the Phoenix.  It 
appears 
> > that Snape needed to be skilled in Occlumency to be able to spy 
on 
> > Death Eaters, but Pettigrew didn't in order to spy on the first 
> Order 
> > of the Phoenix.<snip>
> > Zinaida.

Serena Moonsilver replied:
> It's very possible that Dumbledore did know that Peter was the spy 
> and was continuing to let him act in that manner as a way of 
having 
> an in on Voldemort (ie, using Peter to pass along false 
> information).  To this end, Dumbledore may not have told anyone 
who 
> the spy was.
> 
> Then when the Potters go into hidding, they switch their secret-
> keeper at the last minute without informing Dumbledore (as much 
has 
> been said in PoA, Dumbledore testimony put Sirius in Azkaban).  
> Dumbledore therefore can't warn the Potters not to use Peter.

Annemehr contributes:

I can't argue with what Serena said, but an alternative possibility 
is that Voldemort may have taught Peter Occlumency early on (bet 
that would make Snape's lessons look like a piece of cake, no?).  Of 
course, I can't imagine Voldemort doing that without leaving himself 
a "back door" into Peter's mind, but I suppose it's possible.  Since 
I am firmly in the "Peter was underestimated by James and Sirius" 
camp, I have no problem believing he may have been able to master 
Occlumency.  Then, if Dumbledore ever tried to probe Peter's mind, 
Voldemort was covered.

So, you can take your pick.

Annemehr




From wsherratt3338 at rogers.com  Thu Sep 11 16:49:27 2003
From: wsherratt3338 at rogers.com (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 16:49:27 -0000
Subject: A Sockful of Sweets--Was: Re: Albus Dumbledore and the Socks
In-Reply-To: <bjq43m+2rlk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjq92n+56dk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80470

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> 
> IN DEFENSE OF SWEETNESS
> 
> The saga *started out* after all with a great deal of sweetness 
> (Harry forms a friendship with Ron over Chocolate Frogs) without 
> being (an aside:  I've been an Anglophile forever and love all the 
> British variants) treacly.  Isn't Dumbledore known for his love of 
> confections?  Isn't fighting Voldemort as much about how he takes 
the 
> sweetness out of life and makes it not worth living (think 
> Longbottoms, and there's *another* reference to sweets with the 
> Droobles) as it is about moral stances?  I wonder how sweet Death 
is 
> to eat?  I'd imagine it's rather bitter.  The places the story has 
> become less sweet (as Sylvia says, "the ghastly things that have 
been 
> happening in Harry's world") it has been a result of Voldemort's 
> doings; even Harry's first *romance*, with Cho Chang, comes apart 
> because his girl can't stop crying about her former boyfriend, the 
> one Voldemort murdered (yeah, I know, Peter held the wand); not to 
> mention what widened the gap:  Cho's friend ratted out Harry's 
> efforts to make people safer--from Voldemort.  What kept Harry at 
the 
> Dursleys, a place where life had almost no sweetness, for his 
first 
> eleven years?  Voldemort.  Think back to LOTR; The Shire 
represents 
> all that is sweet and good and simple in the world, and it is the 
> place Gandalf worries for most as Sauron comes back to power.  
> Sweetness is what we're fighting for.  If we lose sight of that, 
if 
> we lose the ability to appreciate a good sherbet lemon drop, we've 
> given in.  Sauron, or Grindelwald, or Voldemort, or whoever it is, 
> wins.  We might as well each hold a house party and invite the 
> dementors.
> 
I think that idea holds a lot of good sense. When people are hurt or 
suffering in some way, they're given a big piece of chocolate to 
eat - it's almost a kind of restorative.  Ron and Hermione send 
Harry Honeyduke's chocolate for his birthday, which he rejects out 
of bitterness (one of his truly nasty moments).

Wanda





From editor at texas.net  Thu Sep 11 17:37:25 2003
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 17:37:25 -0000
Subject: Needs to Hate (was: Re: Death Eaters: Etymology--& Dark Mark & Snape)
In-Reply-To: <02fd01c3781a$d99158d0$34c50c0c@computer>
Message-ID: <bjqbsl+v83m@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80471

Tamee theorized:

> Actually this makes perfect sense to me, as recently I've been 
developing a
> theory that the reason Snape hasn't been able to get past his 
hatred for
> James and co. is that he's been using that emotion to maintain his 
cover.  I
> think that a truly successful Occlumens must use some emotions or 
perhaps
> obsessions to cover their deceptions.  It keeps them from having 
obvious
> blank spots and can distract the Legilimancer.  Snape himself 
says, "Only
> those skilled in Occlumency are able to shut down those feelings and
> memories that contradict the lie, and so utter falsehoods in 
[Voldemort's]
> presence without detection." (US OOP 531).  So I think when faced 
with
> Voldemort, Snape has always used his hatred and resentment to 
deflect
> attention away from his deeper motives.  It seems a simple enough 
manuever
> for him.  He did hate James and Sirius with a passion; they were 
openly
> siding with Dumbledore;  Dumbledore blatantly favored Gryffindors 
and MWPP
> in school (in Snape's mind); they were responsible for all his 
misery; why
> would he help them in anyway.
> 
> I think the distractions used depend on the personality.  Snape is 
a bitter,
> miserable man so he uses that.  He makes his hatred useful to him, 
and yes,
> I think Snape wants Harry to hate him as much as Snape hates James 
and
> Harry, especially, if Snape is doing any kind of spying that leads 
him close
> to Voldemort.

Amanda responds:

I don't do this often, post a simple amazed agreement. But I've been 
delving into the intricacies of Snape and Snapetheories for long and 
long, and this strikes an immediate resonant chord. This tallies so 
well with his comment to Harry about those who wallow in sad 
emotional memories (or whatever it was precisely; I am at work). 
Snape, deliberately using the negatives associated with James to help 
shut down or oppress the memories which would be "handing Voldemort 
weapons, memories he fears," is an *instant* click. Yes.

It would follow that he would use a hatred of Harry as well, which 
Harry hating him would certainly help foster--especially if he says 
things to Harry like, "Yes, that is my job," knowing that Voldemort 
still has a window to Harry's mind....

Aha--Harry may *need* his hatred of Snape, to help him hide things 
like the above (if he ever *learns* the stupid skill in the first 
place). Snape sees Harry's hatred of him as a potential resource for 
Harry? Hm. It's not Harry's type of tool, it's Snape's, but it would 
fit with Snape doing what he thinks best while not feeling any 
particlar obligation to explain or enlighten (a la Dumbledore, in 
fact).

[And, of course, being who I am, I *personally* think the memories 
that would be "weapons" in the hands of Voldemort are of Lily. But 
that's just me.]

Utterly brilliant. (takes hat off, does sweeping bow).

~Amanda, onetime premier Snapologist







From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Thu Sep 11 17:42:44 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 17:42:44 -0000
Subject: Do Ravenclaw/Hufflepuff have House Beasts?
Message-ID: <bjqc6l+eqi9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80472

We have been led to believe that Fawkes was Godric Gryffindor's 
pet/companion at the founding of Hogwarts. It embodies his 
never-faltering, courageous spirit. And maybe he had a Griffin, too.

And Salazar Slytherin had the dangerous, snake-like basilisk. A good 
representation of his spirit, as well.

What about Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff? True, they've been far less 
important houses to the story thus far, but will that last or are we 
headed for the demystification of both houses and the discovery of 
their "House Beasts"? And what would they be? And if they still exist, 
then could play a part in the last books, particularly if there is an 
attack on Hogwarts?

Well, here's my guesses. Rowena Ravenclaw's Swedish Short-Snouted 
Dragon. And Helga Hufflepuff's graphorn.

OK, even I'm not convinced. Is JKR really going to leave both of those 
houses so undeveloped? Or will they be exposited as all the houses 
finally come together in books 6/7 to fight a common enemy?

-Remnant




From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Thu Sep 11 18:01:58 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 18:01:58 -0000
Subject: Idioms and slang (was: English slang (semi- sorta on topic))
In-Reply-To: <bjp99n+bjbs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjqdam+33pj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80473

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" 
<gbannister10 at a...> wrote:

   <snipped>


> > >   Jeff:
> > 
> >    Indeed. Most people don't know the origin of bloody, which 
> > should've gotten Ron smacked for saying infront of an adult, 
> > especially a lady teacher! 
> >    For those who don't know, Bloody is a contracted form of the 
> > swear " Blood of Christ" or "by the blood of Christ" iirc, and is 
a 
> > very serious swear, which is why its used so much in UK 
comedies.  
> >   Blimey, the old cockney swear, is shorted from Gor, blimey, or 
> God 
> > Blind me! This can also get a kid a swat on the bum if he's not 
> > careful. :)
> >    Also, while we're on regions, it should be noted that for 
years 
> > the Londoners always considered the Northerers, from Merseyside 
and 
> > Liverpool and all Cockney's to be savages. Speaking cockney or 
> > scouse, was considered to be a sign of lower intelligence, so Ron 
> > would be considered to be a dolt. However, since the Weasleys are 
> > from near Devon, iirc, I don't really think they'd speak like 
that, 
> > but then again, they use Oi a lot, so maybe they do have a thick 
> > accent. Comments?
> > 
> 
> 
> Geoff (the traditionally spelt one!):
> Curiously, I was always under the impression that bloody was a 
> corruption of "by Our Lady" - ie in Cathlolic speak, Mary.

   Jeff (the bastardized spelling;) ):

   Well, it could be. I was just stating what I had been told, and 
had read. The traditional retelling of what it means could be 
regional. And we won't even discuss willies or goolies, will we? :)


   Jeff






From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 18:05:31 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 18:05:31 -0000
Subject: Harry a Hero?  Was: The magic power of love.
In-Reply-To: <bjpo6f+mamo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjqdhb+sgt1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80474

I have been following this thread and finally felt compelled to add 
my couple o' knuts worth.  I apologize; the level of quotes of quotes 
got so confusing I gave up on who said what and pasted in stuff 
without attribution.

> > So, from this here very illuminating bit of canon, I'd say not 
> > only does Harry go after the Stone to prevent *Voldemort* from 
> > destroying the world (or at least Hogwarts ^_~), but that he is 
> > also quite aware that Voldemort will kill him even if he 
> > *doesn't* try to defend the Stone.

> Okay, okay :-) You're perfectly right, I must admit it. Though if I 
> were nasty, I'd say this disproves the selfless hero image...

Selfless hero?  No such thing.  Someone who dies to save the world 
dies with (maybe for) a profound sense of satisfaction:  "I did it, I 
saved the world."  Even those who die not knowing if their sacrifice 
succeeded die with satisfaction:  "I did my very best to save the 
world."  (A morally rarefied version of extreme sport?)  The hero is 
trying to have things come out his/her way.  Ultimately, altruism 
doesn't exist, if one follows your logic to its conclusion.

> > Harry and Ron *tried* to go to Lockhart (who was *supposed* to be 
> > searching for Ginny) to tell him where to look. Of course, 
> > Lockhart wasn't actually going to try to save her -- but neither 
> > were (from Harry and Ron's perspective) the other teachers. 
> > Anyway, I'm not sure *I*, at least, could expect them, once 
> > they'd wrested control from Lockhart, to go traipsing around the 
> > castle looking for *another* teacher to help them. I'm quite 
> > impressed they spared the time to go to Lockhart in the first 
> > place, honestly.

> Personally, I was very puzzled, the first time I read the book, to 
> see Harry and Ron going to Lockhart. I thought they would have 
> known that a) he wouldn't even go searching for Ginny, and b) he 
> would be useless anyway even if he did. It's only when the Memory 
> Charm incident happened that it all made sense to me : "Ah, it's to 
> keep Ron back, so Harry has to go and fight alone".

I don't think so.  Although Harry and Ron *thought* Lockhart was a 
git, they didn't know yet that he hadn't had anything to do with the 
heroics in his books.  They were put off by his ego and mystified by 
what they saw as the difference between the actions in his books and 
the buffoon who showed up in the DADA classroom, but he was still a 
*teacher*; and it's not like there was a handy guard in the corridor 
they could report to.  Besides, this is confusing why *Harry and Ron* 
behaved as *they* did with why JKR *wrote it* as she did.

> But anyway : why would they think that no other teacher would go 
> looking for Ginny ? Even if the teachers "officially" turned that 
> task over to Lockhart, it was obvious to me that all the others 
> would keep trying to figure out where she was.

But the important question is, would it be obvious to Harry and Ron?

> When a student goes missing, *all* the teachers have a duty to look 
> for her.

I think assuming more efforts than Lockhart's would be too 
sophisticated for Harry and Ron at this stage of the game.  
*Especially* with Dumbledore out of the picture.  They don't know 
that anyone else, especially anyone in authority, sees Lockhart as 
the ineffectual boob as they suspect he is.

> Moreover, Harry and Ron were the *only* ones in the whole castle 
> who knew where to look for Ginny. If they had been killed on their 
> rescue mission, nobody would have been able to find any of them. I 
> find it at best irresponsible and at worst horribly stupid not to 
> tell any teacher what they knew and where they were going. Imagine 
> that your kid knew where another kid who was kidnapped is being 
> held captive. 

If my kid had a history of being stonewalled by adults, I can readily 
imagine just what happened.

> Wouldn't you expect your kid to tell someone (you, the police, 
> whoever) what he knows ? If he went and freed the kid on his own, 
> wouldn't you lecture him about how irresponsible and stupid it was 
> to go all alone, no matter how good a job he did, how heroic he is?

No.  I might tactfully, even covertly, suggest ways his rescue 
mission might have been reinforced to ensure success.  What I might 
have lectured him for is failing to leave word of where *he* was 
disappearing to.  That's another matter.  That has to do with my 
concern for his well-being, not for how he didn't share what he knew 
with anyone else.  They didn't *know* where Ginny was; they only 
strongly suspected.  If matters hadn't escalated, it's perfectly 
conceivable to me that they'd have gone back for more adult help.

> > As for compassion, I don't think so. As I said before, he doesn't 
> > care much about Ginny, it's more to do with playing the hero.
 
> I don't think Harry is *playing* at anything.

> I didn't mean playing as in having fun. I meant playing as in 
> playing a role, as in having a distorted vision of reality, as in 
> believing that he's the only one who can do things right.

Harry is not playing a role.  Harry is being Harry.  His self-image 
*does* consist of being the only one in his world who can do the 
things that (he thinks) need doing.  He spent ten of his first eleven 
years with people who illustrated that to him daily:  injustice?  
Nobody else cares, it's up to me; to save myself or anyone else, it's 
all the same.  It's up to me.

> > He perceives that someone is in trouble, and he instinctively 
> > tries to help them.

> Most of us would also react like that, don't you think? That's not 
> compassion, though. 

I looked it up, and found:  "Deep awareness of the suffering of 
another coupled with the wish to relieve it." (American Heritage 
online)  I don't know how deep Harry's actual awareness of another's 
suffering is, but he does understand suffering and imagines that what 
anyone else feels is similar to what he has experienced.  Add his 
obvious desire to relieve it, and, yes, I'd say that's compassion.

> > Yes, maybe this is indicative of a hero complex, but hardly a bad 
> > or dishonorable thing. I mean, even when Hermione brought it up 
> > in OOTP, I didn't get the impression that she thought 
> > Harry's "saving people thing" was a negative trait, just that 
> > Voldemort might be trying to use it against him.

> It's not a bad trait in itself. But it gets bad when it leads him 
> to believe that he's a cut above others and that he can dispense 
> with a healthy amount of caution and with listening to others' 
> advice.

The hero thing is his motivation; the heedlessness has to do with how 
he has been repeatedly told: "Voldemort was nearly destroyed when he 
tried to kill you, and *nobody knows why*."  Nobody understands the 
event which defined his existence; why ask anyone anything?  And as 
far as Harry can tell, caution had zilch to do with why he survived 
the first time.  He goes careening into whatever's ahead, assuming 
(so far correctly) that the borrowed time he is on will not run out 
yet.

> > As for compassion... Well, he did show something towards Peter, 
> > but I wouldn't call it compassion. He wasn't trying to save 
> > Peter, he was trying to act noble towards his father's friends. 
> > Basically, what he said is : Peter is such a lowly character, 
> > he's not worthy of your becoming murderers. So what he showed 
> > towards Peter was disdain, a total lack of consideration. Served 
> > him well, by the way.
 
> Again, I don't think he was *acting* anything.

> Almost everyone I know is acting something, but that's another 
> matter :-)

Was Harry merciful?  Yes.  Did Harry disdain Peter?  Yes.  Did he 
think that leaving Peter alive was less a travesty than adding the 
burden of his execution to Lupin and Black's karma?  Probably.  
When's the last time you did anything without a little mix in *your* 
motivations?

> > He spared Peter because, when it really comes down to it, he's 
> > too good of a person to murder a defenseless (if despicable) 
> > person.

> No, he showed that trait when he couldn't bring himself to kill 
> Sirius that same night. But at least he tried, at least he hated 
> Sirius, because Sirius was a strong opponent. But Harry felt only 
> disgust for Peter, he didn't hate him, because he didn't feel he 
> was a worthy opponent.

"...at least he tried, at least he hated..."?  Are you arguing that 
trying to hate Sirius enough to kill him was a *good* thing?  Because 
Sirius was a worthier opponent than Peter?  *Urg*.

> Moreover, do you realize that once again he showed complete 
> disrespect for others' feelings ? Because he, Harry, didn't care 
> enough about Peter to kill him, he wouldn't allow Sirius and Remus 
> to choose for themselves whether or not they wanted to kill him. 
> What right did he have to do that ? Remus and Sirius were at that 
> moment feeling one of the worst kinds of betrayal there is: one of 
> their intimate friends had pretty much killed another friend. How 
> did Harry dare telling them what to do ?

Do you really think Harry could have stopped Sirius and Remus if they 
had been bent on that course of action?  A kid against two adults 
who, as children, co-wrote the Marauder's Map?  He swayed their 
thinking by getting in their way.  What right does anyone ever have 
to do anything contrary to another's desires, anyway?  All anyone can 
do is warn, "You'll be *sorry*, you know" and hope it inspires 
agreement, or at least doubt.  Harry did.

> > I think the idea that Jo is trying to present is that heroes are 
> > normal people who manage to act extraordinary in the midst of 
> > extraordinary events.

> Absolutely !!! That's precisely why I don't agree when people try 
> to convince me that Harry is so incredibly wonderful, that he's a 
> cut above all others. He's not. He just has good opportunities to 
> make use of his talents, a cold head, good wits and reflexes, and a 
> great deal of luck. He's good, but he's not exceptional.

He thinks he's supposed to be.  He has been told since his entry into 
the Wizarding World that he has a mysterious quality; he, as a baby 
in his crib, was all that stood in the way of Voldemort's ultimate 
victory.  *Something* happened there.  And it may very well *have* 
resulted in him becoming more than he was; what else did he get from 
Voldemort?  *Just* the ability to talk to snakes?  Unlikely, IMO.

> > And besides....he killed a *basilisk* with a freaking *sword*. 
> > ^_^ If he doesn't get to be a Hero, does he at least get the 
> > Knight-In-Shining-Armor distinction?

> Oh ! A Knight-In-Shining-Armor, that he is, for sure :-) A bit too 
> much for my taste, even :-) As for being a Hero, he is that too. 
> But he's not "better" than anyone else.

What makes "better"?  If Harry believes he has a responsibility to 
act when he sees the world going down the tubes, then I'd say 
that's "better" than the guy who just goes back to his PlayStation.  
Now we're getting into semantics.  Do you really want to go there?

> You know, Malfoy is a Hero too. Not for you and I, but if our 
> values were the same as his, we'd worship him for his daring 
> attitude, his cunning, his knowledge, his perseverance, etc... He's 
> just as much a Hero as Harry, just not to the same people.

The Church of the Bouncing Ferret.  Now *that*, I like!

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley"




From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Thu Sep 11 18:08:35 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 18:08:35 -0000
Subject: The Gap (was: Ginny: 7 of 7? (was Re: Charlie Weasley's age))
In-Reply-To: <bjpvq8+uced@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjqdn3+32o3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80475

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "urghiggi" <urghiggi at y...> 
wrote:
> A coupla cold-water notes on the "Gap" discussion (just look on 
this as a 
> little... ummmm... disillusionment charm?)
> 
> 1. Fact: Children in biological families do not always look alike. 
This does not 
> mean that mom was snogging the milkman.


 Jeff:

   Very true. I have cousins who are brothers on both sides of the 
family, and one set of 3 brothers have a few traits, but all have 
different hair color. The 2 on the other side have different hair 
color and look nothing alike. Same with my parents. Both came from 
large families and they don't resemble any of their siblings either. 
However, I have seen some siblings that look alike, but not all the 
time.


  Jeff




From tcyhunt at earthlink.net  Thu Sep 11 18:16:09 2003
From: tcyhunt at earthlink.net (tcyhunt)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 18:16:09 -0000
Subject: DA (filk)
Message-ID: <bjqe59+u29p@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80476


DA to the tune of The Way by Fastball
(bit of a cliffhanger - but you know how it ends, right?)


Dedicated to Caius Marcius, The Filker with the Fringe on Top!


They made up their minds
And they started planning
'To Hell' with what that teacher had to say!
Real life defenses are what they're lacking
But where were they going
Without any space for DA?

They put out the word
And got Dobby talking
They now had a great room in which to stay
And as the kids began they started liking
All of the teaching
By Harry, the head of DA!

Everyone could see
The spells that they work on
are good as gold
When faced with trouble
they'll all stand bold
They'll never be victims
They'll never be sitting prey
You can see their spellwork's
Improving - showing flare
It'll take more than Umbridge
To give them a scare
They wanted the DA
They're happy there today, today

The meeting broke up
As Dobby, he rushed in
The word got out and Draco's on his way!
They all ran off
To leave it all behind 'em
But where were they going
With Umbridge's spies on the way?

Everyone could see
The spells that they work on
are good as gold
When faced with trouble
they'll all stand bold
They'll never be victims
They'll never be sitting prey
You can see their spellwork's
Improving - showing flare
It'll take more than Umbridge
To give them a scare
They wanted the DA
They're happy there today, today...


--Tcy





From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 18:25:09 2003
From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 18:25:09 -0000
Subject: Idioms and slang (was: English slang (semi- sorta on topic))
In-Reply-To: <bjof3t+926u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjqem5+6857@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80477

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jeffl1965" <jeffl1965 at h...> 
wrote:
>    Also, while we're on regions, it should be noted that for years 
> the Londoners always considered the Northerers, from Merseyside and 
> Liverpool and all Cockney's to be savages. Speaking cockney or 
> scouse, was considered to be a sign of lower intelligence, so Ron 
> would be considered to be a dolt. However, since the Weasleys are 
> from near Devon, iirc, I don't really think they'd speak like that, 
> but then again, they use Oi a lot, so maybe they do have a thick 
> accent. Comments?
> 
>   Jeff

There is a very interesting book that might be worth your time, 
should you be seriously interested in understanding the dialects uses 
throughout England.  The is _An_Atlas_of_English_Dialects_, by Clive 
Upton and J.D.A. Widdowson.

This book (which I picked up in Bath while visiting on business) 
cried out to me from a bookstore, insisting upon being bought.  It is 
a product of the Survey of English Dialects, and presents English 
dialects as they were roughly in the middle of the Twentieth 
Century.  The primary articles discuss 90 common English words in a 
single page of text, with an accompanying full-page map showing the 
distribution of alternate words and pronunciations.  There are at 
least twice as many additional words and alternatives discussed in 
the bodies of these one-page articles, though, so I'd say there are 
something well over 270+ words covered.

The maps show the distribution of said usage for all of England 
proper, the Isle of Man and a small portion of Wales (Monmouthshire, 
Blaenau Gwent, Torfaen and Newport).  Scotland is NOT included.

There is a long and interesting bibliography that should also be 
examined.

Now, why is this relevant and on-topic?  Well, if you are patient and 
have a decent amount of conversation from an older character (such as 
Hagrid), you can pretty well pin down where he is from.  With a copy 
of _Atlas_of_English_Sounds_ (which I don't have, but had a chance to 
glance at over twenty years ago ... and wish I'd picked up a copy), 
your chances of identifying a speakers origins are even better.  With 
even more patience, lots of work, etc., you could probably map the 
origins of most older, and many younger characters, with only the 
dialectic and pronunciation clues from a few lines of speech.  In 
particular, I'd like to see someone place Hogsmeade, so we could know 
almost precise where Hogwarts is located.


Richard (who regrettably doesn't have the time for this kind of 
research, at the moment)





From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Thu Sep 11 19:09:06 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 19:09:06 -0000
Subject: Idioms and slang (was: English slang (semi- sorta on topic))
In-Reply-To: <bjqem5+6857@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjqh8i+ccqo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80478

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Richard" <darkmatter30 at y...> 
wrote:

  <snipped>



> There is a very interesting book that might be worth your time, 
> should you be seriously interested in understanding the dialects 
uses 
> throughout England.  The is _An_Atlas_of_English_Dialects_, by 
Clive 
> Upton and J.D.A. Widdowson.
> 
   <snipped>

>> 
> Richard (who regrettably doesn't have the time for this kind of 
> research, at the moment)


  Jeff:

   Thanks for this info. I'd love to read this. Sadly, slangs have 
changed quite a bit,and some terms aren't as vogue as they used to 
be. Git isn't as PC as it used to be, and prat seems to be used more, 
at least from what I was told by a friend living near London. I dont 
know that I can do all that research either, but I'd like to know 
where things are as well. Hogwarts is in the north, I'd guess, but as 
to where, I can't really say.


  Jeff




From odilefalaise at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 19:42:01 2003
From: odilefalaise at yahoo.com (Odile Falaise)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 12:42:01 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Filk Suggestion
Message-ID: <20030911194201.98940.qmail@web13101.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80479


Hi Everyone, and Filkers in particular,

 

Odile here.  I hope this isn?t too OT (:::grins sheepishly at Mods:::), but this song is begging to be filked, IMO, and I am having a really hard time with it.  It probably has something to do with the fact that I have never written (re-written?) a filk before? Anyway, upon reading OotP, I got ?Dumbledore?s Army? stuck in my head to the tune of Elvis Costello?s ?Oliver?s Army.?  Besides ?Dumbledore? and ?Oliver? fitting well, it?s about getting career advice and could work with being an auror instead of a soldier (hem hem).  

 

I got as far as the chorus: 

 

Dumbledore?s army is here to stay 
Dumbledore's army are on their way 
And I would rather be anywhere else 
But DADA 

 

And this phrase: 

Only takes one itchy trigger 
One more widow, *one less Death Eater *

 

Any takers?  ^_^

 

Here are the original lyrics:

 

Oliver?s Army by Elvis Costello

 

Don't start me talking 
I could talk all night 
My mind goes sleepwalking 
While I'm putting the world to right 

Called careers information 
Have you got yourself an occupation? 

Oliver's army is here to stay 
Oliver's army are on their way 
And I would rather be anywhere else 
But here today 

There was a checkpoint Charlie 
He didn't crack a smile 
But it's no laughing party 
When you've been on the murder mile 

Only takes one itchy trigger 
One more widow, one less white nigger 

(Chorus) 

Hong Kong is up for grabs 
London is full of Arabs 
We could be in Palestine 
Overrun by a Chinese line 
With the boys from the Mersey and the Thames and the Tyne 

But there's no danger 
It's a professional career 
Though it could be arranged 
With just a word in Mr. Churchill's ear 

If you're out of luck or out of work 
We could send you to Johannesburg 

(Chorus) 

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Thu Sep 11 19:45:12 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 19:45:12 -0000
Subject: Weasley/Potter parent ages (Was - Lily's friends: the candidates)
In-Reply-To: <bjptre+5pau@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjqjc8+c80q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80480

great raven:
>>>Personally I think Mrs. Weasly was either freinds with Lily or 
used to go out with James because she's so overly fond of Harry.>>> 

Sue B:
>>If this was the case, surely she would have said so? Besides, I 
think she's several years older than Lily and James. Remember, she 
has a couple of sons in their 20s. I don't think James and Lily would 
have been old enough for that if they'd survived.>>

Lily and James were 21-2 when they died. We know this because JKR has 
mentioned in an interview that Snape was "35 or 36" during GoF. All 
this information can be found on the HP Lexicon (think there's a link 
on the homepage), which is worth a visit anyway. They've got 
timelines there showing that Bill Weasley was actually at school for 
some of the same period as MWPP+L+S.
 There's actually been some speculation on list that Molly and Arthur 
are in their seventies (because wizards age later - hence McGonagall 
being "a very spritely seventy", and black-haired, and DD being about 
150), based on a comment Molly makes about the Groundskeeper before 
Hagrid, who was at the school when she was there (Hagrid went 
straight into the job after being kicked out of school aged thirteen, 
although many prefer to speculate that he worked as an apprentice for 
some time). Molly and Arthur being around Hagrid's age or older makes 
sense when you consider that they essentially have two families, as 
there's quite a big age gap between Charlie and Percy.
So, no, Molly probably didn't go out with James. Unless she visited 
little Bill at school one year and developed a thing on the arrogant, 
bespectacled Head Boy...calling all Shippers. Take this thing off my 
hands, and quickly.

Kirstini, mildly disgusted with herself. 




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Thu Sep 11 19:54:24 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 19:54:24 -0000
Subject: The magic power of love. Was: BANG! You're dead!
In-Reply-To: <5D7DC3F8-E3E4-11D7-AD27-000A95E29F3E@fandm.edu>
Message-ID: <bjqjtg+bkg8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80481

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Laura Ingalls Huntley <lhuntley at f...> 
wrote:
> Del:
> > As for wanting to save the world, I don't think he thought as far as
> > that. He just didn't want the bad guys to steal something from DD.
> > Remember : originally, he didn't come to fight Voldemort, but Snape.
> > And even when he gets the stone, he still thinks he's only fighting
> > Quirrell.
> > <SNIP>
> > I personnally think that at that moment, Harry hasn't yet
> > realized that LV would go as far as killing him to get the Stone.
> > He's just an 11-year-old boy, and kids that age can't imagine that
> > someone would kill them. He's survived all the abuse from the
> > Dursleys, so it's kind of logical that he's not too afraid of LV.
> 
>> 
> So, from this here very illuminating bit of canon, I'd say not only  
> does Harry go after the Stone to prevent *Voldemort* from destroying  
> the world (or at least Hogwarts ^_~), but that he is also quite aware  
> that Voldemort will kill him even if he *doesn't* try to defend the  
> Stone.


Kneasy: (no hero)
I have to agree with Del.
Does Harry  really understand who or what Voldemort is? It's only been
a few months since he first heard of him. He hasn't lived with years of
seeing adults, your parents even, turning pale at the mere mention of
his name. The ultimate bogey-man. The merciless killer.

And an eleven year old thinks he  can beat him.
Not my definition of heroism.

He knows that V killed his parents. But what are his parents to Harry?
Can he remember them? Are they anything more  than just words?
A vague concept of something other people think he ought to feel 
strongly about. How can you feel strongly about something or some-
body you have never known? You can't. Not when you're just eleven
years old. You just pay lip service and hope one day it will make sense.
 
Death is even more of a puzzle. Death is what happens to old people.
It can't, won't happen to me. I'm on the good side! Besides, I haven't
finished my homework. Young people can't grasp the finality, the
permanence of death these days. Not unless they are very unlucky.

(There is much to be said for the old traditions. Then death came 
to a home, full of relatives keeping watch. The coffin was in the front
room. From there to the cemetary. It  was a ritual. It helped you
develop an understanding of the finiteness of it all. Of your place
in the continuum. Now, of course, all different. Everything is distant,
aseptic. It's easy to believe that granny isn't in there; she's just gone 
away. Nothing really  important at all. The generation now aged, say,
forty and less, are the first in human history not to follow the ritual.
Rituals are there for a reason. They mark the human condition.)

He talks of V flattening Hogwarts, hunting friends and family down,
destroying everything in his path, yet blithely suggests that three
children can stop him. How?

"Well, we  get past Fluffy," (vague plan) " avoid the other security 
measures provided by Hogwarts staff" (no plan and no idea what the 
traps are) and "stop him." (no plan). Then what? (no plan).
So might mice vote to bell the cat. Good strategy, but the logistics
and tactics come up short. (Let's put the show on right here in the barn!)

Heroism is a bit different. A hero knows and *calculates* the risks in
a course of action, but takes them anyway, even if the odds are bad.
Otherwise it's luck or foolhardiness. Harry doesn't have a clue what
he has to face or how he will deal with it. That's foolhardiness.

One day Harry might be a true hero, but not yet. So far he hasn't
had to go and deliberately seek out Voldemort, knowing that he
might fail, but doing it anyway. Cedric has given him a nasty taste
of the realities. If you fall, you don't get up again. Up to now it's 
been skirmishing, chance encounters, no planning from Harry.
The real battle is to come. Then he will have a chance for heroics.







From hulahulagirl205 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 14:08:22 2003
From: hulahulagirl205 at yahoo.com (Nadia Kennedy)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 07:08:22 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Needs to Hate (was: Re: Death Eaters: Etymology--& Dark Mark & Snape)
In-Reply-To: <02fd01c3781a$d99158d0$34c50c0c@computer>
Message-ID: <20030911140822.60385.qmail@web60105.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80482


Nemi:
>>Anyways, what you said, Snape /Needs/ Harry to Hate him, well, what if
it's he other way around?  What if Snape /NEEDS/ to Hate Harry, which is why
he doesn't follow up on the opertunity the Occulmency lessons provided to
understand him.<<

Tamee:
> Actually this makes perfect sense to me, as recently I've been developing a
theory that the reason Snape hasn't been able to get past his hatred for
James and co. is that he's been using that emotion to maintain his cover.  I
think that a truly successful Occlumens must use some emotions or perhaps
obsessions to cover their deceptions.  It keeps them from having obvious
blank spots and can distract the Legilimancer.  Snape himself says, "Only
those skilled in Occlumency are able to shut down those feelings and
memories that contradict the lie, and so utter falsehoods in [Voldemort's]
presence without detection." (US OOP 531).  So I think when faced with
Voldemort, Snape has always used his hatred and resentment to deflect
attention away from his deeper motives.  It seems a simple enough manuever
for him.  He did hate James and Sirius with a passion; they were openly
siding with Dumbledore;  Dumbledore blatantly favored Gryffindors and MWPP
in school (in Snape's mind); they were responsible for all his misery; why
would he help them in anyway.

I think the distractions used depend on the personality.  Snape is a bitter,
miserable man so he uses that.  He makes his hatred useful to him, and yes,
I think Snape wants Harry to hate him as much as Snape hates James and
Harry, especially, if Snape is doing any kind of spying that leads him close
to Voldemort. <<<


Hello!

Great post, Tamee! I've been thinking the same thing myself. After paging through OOTP, I found some canon proof for your theory. It's on pg 591 (US edition).

"A hundred dementors were swooping towards Harry across the lake in the grounds...He screwed up his face in concentration...They were coming closer...He could see the dark holes beneath their hoods...yet he could also see Snape standing in front of him, his eyes fixed upon Harry's face, muttering under his breath...And somehow, Snape was growing clearer, and the dementors were growing fainter..."

Seems like Harry has replaced the dementors with Snape in the Thing that He Fears the Most, as a result Harry throws Snape out of his head. Hmmm, I feel an interesting theory forming...

Nadia






From dfran at sbcglobal.net  Thu Sep 11 17:01:27 2003
From: dfran at sbcglobal.net (deedeee88)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 17:01:27 -0000
Subject: A Sockful of Sweets--Was: Re: Albus Dumbledore and the Socks
In-Reply-To: <bjq43m+2rlk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjq9p7+p4g2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80483

Sandy wrote in 80467:
> IN DEFENSE OF SWEETNESS
> 
> The saga *started out* after all with a great deal of sweetness 
> (Harry forms a friendship with Ron over Chocolate Frogs) without 
> being (an aside:  I've been an Anglophile forever and love all the 
> British variants) treacly.  Isn't Dumbledore known for his love of 
> confections?  Isn't fighting Voldemort as much about how he takes 
> the sweetness out of life and makes it not worth living (think 
> Longbottoms, and there's *another* reference to sweets with the 
> Droobles) as it is about moral stances?  I wonder how sweet Death 
> is to eat?  I'd imagine it's rather bitter.  <snip>


Hello,

I tend to agree with you...just thought I'd add one more "sweet 
incident" from OOP....In St. Mungo's Neville's mom gives him a sweet 
rapper that he doesn't throw away, but keeps.

DeeDee





From gaspode2002 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 18:19:26 2003
From: gaspode2002 at yahoo.com (gaspode2002)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 18:19:26 -0000
Subject: another CoS weird Hagrid tidbit
In-Reply-To: <bjo79p+cti5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjqebe+rh1o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80484

"allies426" <AllieS426 at a...> wrote:
> Aragog the spider says that he came to Hagrid from a traveler as 
> an egg. (It's also in the movie, I know there was some chatter 
> about important movie scenes.)  Who is this traveler, wandering 
> around with spider-monster eggs in his pocket?  Does anyone else 
> think that could be important? <snip>

I think the travelling dragon egg dealer is Mundungus.

Gaspode (named for the famous Gaspode).





From ChaseWildstar at charter.net  Thu Sep 11 19:01:11 2003
From: ChaseWildstar at charter.net (ChaseWildstar)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 15:01:11 -0400
Subject: Percy's age
References: <3B2083C1.14615C4E.00045D72@aol.com>
Message-ID: <001d01c37897$11342250$6401a8c0@mac>

No: HPFGUIDX 80485

Scheherazade wrote:
> Percy is one year younger than everyone else in his year. 
<snip>
> And you must be of age to take the apparition exam.  However, in 
> GoF, Percy had just taken his apparition exam, and was being 
> showoffy about it. Therefore, Percy must be born a year before 
> everyone else in his grade. >>>

If Percy is a year YOUNGER than everyone else, he would not be born a year
BEFORE everyone else in his grade.

"ChaseWildstar" 




From yodamarie78 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 19:09:57 2003
From: yodamarie78 at yahoo.com (Sara Butler)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 12:09:57 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Weasleys - hypocritical?
In-Reply-To: <bjokuj+1kre@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030911190957.72882.qmail@web11704.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80486

Yaira wrote:
> I'm starting to think the Weasley's are a little bit hypocritical.  
> They're all for befriending muggles and defending them when anyone 
> else insults them, but their family's been pureblood for ages. 

To which Richard replied:
> Sorry, but I think you've gone a little off you bean on this one, 
having departed from canon.  Yes, the Weasleys have been pure-blood 
for ages, but that doesn't make them hypocritical.
Richard, who thinks JKR would NEVER portray the Weasley family as 
basically hypocritcal <<<


To which Yoda (me) further adds:
I have to agree with Richard on this one, but I want to add that I think that one of the major reasons that the Weasleys are "purebloods" is that they are in a way supposed to represent the "typical" wizarding family.  One of Ron's major functions, especially in the first book, is to allow Harry, and us, a glimpse into the homelife of the wizarding world.  (Notice that Ron spends a lot of time being surprised by the various things that Harry tells him about Muggle life.)  Hermione is the token muggle-born of the trio and Ron is the one who was raised as a wizard.  Another reason for the Weasley's to me purebloods is to make them a foil for the Malfoy's.  If all of the people who are accepting of muggles were half or part bloods then the only people who were distainful of them would be the purebloods and that wouldn't be right either.  One of the wonderful things about JKR is that she refuses to put people into little boxes.  Not all purebloods are snobby, and not all half-bloods are
 angels (see Tom Riddle).

Yaira again:
> Mr. Weasley might have a fondness for muggles and their objects, but 
> all the rest of the Weasleys are completely contemptuous of him!

I don't think that the Weasleys are contemptuous of Arthur, they just think that he's a little nutty when it comes to muggles and he is.  Aren't we all a little nutty when it comes to Harry Potter?

Yoda, Who's just a little nutty about a great many things





From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk  Thu Sep 11 20:31:50 2003
From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?udder=5Fpen=5Fdragon?=)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 21:31:50 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Do Ravenclaw/Hufflepuff have House Beasts?
In-Reply-To: <bjqc6l+eqi9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030911203150.62621.qmail@web60203.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80487



boyd_smythe <boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com> wrote:
remnant wrote

We have been led to believe that Fawkes was Godric Gryffindor's 
pet/companion at the founding of Hogwarts. It embodies his 
never-faltering, courageous spirit. And maybe he had a Griffin, too.

And Salazar Slytherin had the dangerous, snake-like basilisk. A good 
representation of his spirit, as well.

What about Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff? True, they've been far less 
<snip>
Well, here's my guesses. Rowena Ravenclaw's Swedish Short-Snouted 
Dragon. And Helga Hufflepuff's graphorn.
<snip>
-Remnant

U_P_D

The Hogwarts Coat of Arms depicts, a Lion, a Snake, a Badger and an Eagle. I thought that LLovegood had an Eagle for her hat when she was supporting Ravenclaw. That leaves the Badger for Hufflepuff

Hope this helps

Udder pen Dragon

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. 



---------------------------------
Want to chat instantly with your online friends??Get the FREE Yahoo!Messenger

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From kozmoz47 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 20:09:13 2003
From: kozmoz47 at yahoo.com (Dragonetti)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 13:09:13 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Snape the Traitor or is there one other
In-Reply-To: <1063217687.9610.13099.m3@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030911200913.4873.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80488

When Voldemort returns in his speech to his Death Eaters he says that one of their numbers, he believes, left him forever and adds he shall be killed of course. We most assume that the particular ex-Death Eater is Snape; even take it as a given. Now if so far we are on the same page then,...

Did you notice the possible red herring about Snape being a traitor? When Umbridge calls Snape to demand some Veritaserum from him when Draco and Co. captures Harry and Co., and Snape says that he can't give it to her, Umbridge says that Lucius Malfoy speaks highly of him. L. M. is a Death Eater and if Snape really was a spy for DD and showed his true colors to the Death Eaters as Voldemort wants him dead, then why would L.M. speak highly of him instead of giving him to Voldemort? Snape can't have placed a spell on him, Voldemort would have noticed. In conclusion, Snape is still working for Voldemort, maybe as a double agent, but still close to him. 

If he didn't show his true colors to Voldemort, and he is still working as a spy, then who is the person Voldemort wants dead? Who was it that he believes has left his side forever? If that person IS Snape, then have come he is close to L. Malfoy? OK, show hands, who thinks there is some love potion work going on? 

Anybody? Nobody? 


"Dragonetti" 






From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 20:39:35 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 20:39:35 -0000
Subject: what makes a hero?  (wasRe: The magic power of love.) 
In-Reply-To: <bjqjtg+bkg8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjqmi7+gf4s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80489

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> 
> 
> Kneasy: (no hero)
> Does Harry  really understand who or what Voldemort is? It's only 
been a few months since he first heard of him. He hasn't lived with 
years of seeing adults, your parents even, turning pale at the mere 
mention of his name. The ultimate bogey-man. The merciless killer.
> 
> And an eleven year old thinks he can beat him.
> Not my definition of heroism.

Laura:

In PS/SS, Harry doesn't know that he's going to be facing LV-he 
thinks until the very last possible moment that he's going after 
Snape.  (Still not an easy opponent, but nevertheless human and hence 
vunlerable.)
> 
Kneasy:
> He knows that V killed his parents. But what are his parents to 
Harry? Can he remember them? Are they anything more  than just words?
> A vague concept of something other people think he ought to feel 
> strongly about. How can you feel strongly about something or some-
> body you have never known? You can't. Not when you're just eleven
> years old. You just pay lip service and hope one day it will make 
sense.
>  

Laura

He may not have known his parents but he has a very clear idea of 
what it is LV deprived him of.  Harry lives in the world, so he knows 
what parents are supposed to do-love, protect and care for you.  He 
even has a somewhat warped example in the Dursleys.  They may be 
pretty pitiful as parents and as human beings, but they unarguably 
care for Dudley.  So Harry might not be able to miss the particular 
individuals Lily and James, but he can still feel the absence of 
parents.


> Death is even more of a puzzle. Death is what happens to old people.
> It can't, won't happen to me. I'm on the good side! Besides, I 
haven't
> finished my homework. Young people can't grasp the finality, the
> permanence of death these days. Not unless they are very unlucky.
<snipped discussion of ritual, which was right on but not relevant 
here> 

Laura:

So does that mean that when teenagers do things like rescuing 
drowning friends or family, or something along those lines (it 
doesn't happen all the time but it does happen), it's only heroic if 
the kid has a full understanding that s/he is risking her/his life?  
Can you be a hero if you do something that doesn't risk your life?  
What about the people who refused to testify during the McCarthy 
hearings here in the 1950's?  Their physical lives weren't in danger, 
but their reputations and livelihoods were.  

I'm not sure when it is (if ever) that people come to an "adult" 
understanding of death, but if that's one of the criteria of being a 
hero, it may be that Harry will never qualify within the time span of 
the books.  Boys at 17 and 18 are still in full risk-taking mode, as 
I understand it.  They're still kids, with some of the limitations in 
thought and experience that kids have.

Kneasy:
[Harry] talks of V flattening Hogwarts, hunting friends and family 
down, destroying everything in his path, yet blithely suggests that 
three children can stop him. How?
> 
> "Well, we  get past Fluffy," (vague plan) " avoid the other 
security measures provided by Hogwarts staff" (no plan and no idea 
what the traps are) and "stop him." (no plan). Then what? (no plan).
> So might mice vote to bell the cat. Good strategy, but the logistics
> and tactics come up short. (Let's put the show on right here in the 
barn!)
> 
> Heroism is a bit different. A hero knows and *calculates* the risks 
in a course of action, but takes them anyway, even if the odds are 
bad. Otherwise it's luck or foolhardiness. Harry doesn't have a clue 
what he has to face or how he will deal with it. That's foolhardiness.

Laura:

So would you say that in PoA Hermione is a hero?  She seems to have a 
full understanding of the dangers involved in using the time-turner, 
and she makes sure she and Harry operate within its constraints.  
They don't exactly have a plan, but they can't really have one in 
advance, because they have to see how events unfold from their new 
perspective.  And Hermione, via her correct use of the time-turner, 
(and a well-timed alohomora) works alongside Harry to rescue Sirius 
and Buckbeak.
> 

Kneasy:
> One day Harry might be a true hero, but not yet. So far he hasn't
> had to go and deliberately seek out Voldemort, knowing that he
> might fail, but doing it anyway. Cedric has given him a nasty taste
> of the realities. If you fall, you don't get up again. Up to now 
it's been skirmishing, chance encounters, no planning from Harry.
> The real battle is to come. Then he will have a chance for heroics.




From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Thu Sep 11 20:42:14 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 20:42:14 -0000
Subject: Do Ravenclaw/Hufflepuff have House Beasts?
In-Reply-To: <20030911203150.62621.qmail@web60203.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjqmn6+3iii@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80490

> U_P_D wrote:
> The Hogwarts Coat of Arms depicts, a Lion, a Snake, a Badger and an 
Eagle. I thought that LLovegood had an Eagle for her hat when she was 
supporting Ravenclaw. That leaves the Badger for Hufflepuff <


Thanks, U_P_D, and you do match the Lexicon, but what I was trying to 
get at was more than just what is on the coat of arms. For example, 
neither Fawkes nor the Basilisk are on their house's coat of arms, 
although the snake on Slytherin could look very similar to a basilisk, 
which is also described as serpentine.

My broader question is, why do Slytherin and Gryffindor get to have 
all of the fun? They have very established identities, we know many of 
their members quite well, they even have living beasts (ok, the 
basilisk is now dead) that were left by their founders. Will we ever 
see those things for Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff?

And as a side note I was wondering if Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff left 
behind any magical creatures ("beasts") that are still alive, waiting 
to be called to action like Fawkes and the basilisk.

-Remnant




From lhuntley at fandm.edu  Thu Sep 11 20:54:24 2003
From: lhuntley at fandm.edu (Laura Ingalls Huntley)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 16:54:24 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The magic power of love. Was: BANG! You're
 dead!
In-Reply-To: <bjpo6f+mamo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <1FE9856C-E49A-11D7-966A-000A95E29F3E@fandm.edu>

No: HPFGUIDX 80491


Laura :
>> *sings* WRO-ONG!  ^_^ Let's take a look at SS/PS, American Edition,
>> pg.  270:
> (SNIP very good quote)
>> So, from this here very illuminating bit of canon, I'd say not
>> only  does Harry go after the Stone to prevent *Voldemort* from
>> destroying  the world (or at least Hogwarts ^_~), but that he is
>> also quite aware  that Voldemort will kill him even if he *doesn't*
>> try to defend the  Stone.
>
Del:
> Okay, okay :-) You're perfectly right, I must admit it.

*a little nonplussed* I'm...right? I...I mean, of course I'm right!

*blinks*

>> And I don't quite understand why you would say that Harry thought
>> he was only fighting Quirrell, anyway.  Voldemort had been revealed
>> to him at this point -- in fact, when Quirrellmort first starts
>> coming at Harry, it's with Voldemort's face to the front.
>
> But had Voldemort revealed himself already when Quirrell demands the
> Stone from Harry before attacking him ? I don't remember too well,
> sorry. What I meant is that when Harry went through the trapdoor, he
> thought he was "only" going to fight Snape, not LV. And when he
> discovers Quirrell, he doesn't realize right away that Quirrell is
> carrying LV around with him.
>

That's true...maybe...although I think I've forgotten exactly why this 
was an issue in the first place (you must forgive me, I'm low on 
sleep).   Let's take a look at the  relevant passages, shall we?

"He put the bottle down and walked forward; he braced himself, saw the 
black flames licking his body, but couldn't feel them - for a moment he 
could see nothing but dark fire - then he was on the other side,  in 
the last chamber.

There was already someone there - but it wasn't Snape.  It wasn't even 
Voldemort."

 From this, I *think* I'd say that Harry wouldn't have been too 
surprised if Voldemort had been in that chamber.  I'm not certain what 
exactly the point you were trying to make was, but I'd contend on the 
strength of this and the passage I quoted before that Harry is quite 
clear that, ultimately, he is defending the stone from Voldemort.

And, um...Okay, I'm not going to quote this entire passage, so you're 
just going to have to trust me that I'm sitting with the book open in 
front of me and telling the truth...Here's how it goes down, from A to 
Z.

a) Harry enters the chamber, sees Quirrell, is surprised.
b) Quirrell gloats, calls Snape an "overgrown bat, ties Harry up.
c) Quirrell turns his attention back to the mirror, sees himself 
presenting the Stone to his Master.
d) Meanwhile, Harry tries to distract Quirrell from the Mirror.
e) Harry realizes that if he looked in the Mirror, he would see himself 
finding the Stone and would know how to get it.
f) Harry tries to get in front of the Mirror, falls over as his feet 
are tied.
g) Voldemort's voice issues from Quirrell's being "to Harry's horror", 
telling him to "use the boy."
h) Quirrell releases Harry from the ropes and makes him look in the 
mirror.
i) Harry receives the stone, but lies to Quirrell about it.
j) Quirrell pushes Harry out of the way, Harry tries to "make a break 
for it."
k)Voldemort's voice again, saying, "He lies.."
l) Voldemort has Quirrell remove the turban, Harry freezes in terror 
during this process, Quirrell turns around.
m) Harry sees Voldemort's face and they chat a bit (or rather, 
Voldemort spews Evil Overlord-esque ramblings).
n) Harry is still held transfixed by his fear.
p) Voldemort asks for the stone
p) Harry suddenly regains the use of his legs and "stumbles backward."
q) Harry doesn't get far and Voldemort insults his parents.
r) Harry screams "LIAR!"
s) Quirrel starts walking backward toward him, so that Voldemort 
advances upon him.
t) Meanwhile, Voldemort is taunting Harry about his parents, then asks 
for the stone, to which Harry shouts "NEVER!" and "sprang toward the 
flame door".
u) Quirrellmort goes after him.
v) They tussel, during which there is alot of shouting.
w) Quirrell: "My hands! My hands!" *shrieks*
x) Voldemort: "KILL HIM! KILL HIM!"
y) Unidentified voices in Harry's head (???!!!!): "Harry! Harry!"
z) Harry passes out.

So...I *think* I disagree with you...Harry doesn't actually go into 
full-on Hero Mode until Voldemort asks for the stone.  In his 
interactions with Quirrell before Voldemort is revealed, he seems to 
just be trying to outsmart Quirrell and quietly get away.

Anyway, I was going to reply to the rest of your responses as well, but 
in the time it took me to make my (completely useless) little list, 
"Sandy aka mrsbeadsley" said pretty much everything I wanted to say 
(and better than I could have said it, to boot).

Laura (who *must* find a way to curb her unusual penchant for listing 
things)

P.S.  Ideas about what's up with those unidentified voices, anyone?




From kawfhw at earthlink.net  Thu Sep 11 20:50:44 2003
From: kawfhw at earthlink.net (Ken and Faith Wallace)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 16:50:44 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape the Traitor or is there one other
In-Reply-To: <20030911200913.4873.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BB865864.10890%kawfhw@earthlink.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 80492

"Dragonetti" wrote:

> 
> When Voldemort returns in his speech to his Death Eaters he says that one of
> their numbers, he believes, left him forever and adds he shall be killed of
> course. We most assume that the particular ex-Death Eater is Snape; even take
> it as a given. Now if so far we are on the same page then,...
> 

Well, I actually took that little speech to mean Karkarov, as he is not only
not with Lord V., he also gave away D.E.s to the ministry to save his own
hide.  That's why Karkarov ran off at the end of the book.
Faith




From sydenmill at msn.com  Thu Sep 11 20:52:20 2003
From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 20:52:20 -0000
Subject: The Prank -- A New Thought
Message-ID: <bjqna4+d0vg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80493




I have been reading all the wonderful posts on The Prank and don't 
recall seeing quite this slant on things. So, here goes:


In COS, ch. 18, pg. 357, Lupin speaking about Snape and The Prank:
"'---if he'd got as far as this house, he'd have met a fully grown 
werewolf -- but your father, who'd heard what Sirius had done, went 
after Snape and pulled him back, at GREAT RISK TO HIS OWN LIFE...'" 
(My emphasis.)

Now, since James had been running around with Werewolf! Lupin for a 
couple of years by the time of the Prank, where was this "great risk 
to his own life?" Not from Werewolf! Lupin. Couldn't this "great risk 
to his own life" have come, instead, from a Transformed Snape? 

Since Snape was more schooled in the Dark Arts when he arrived at 
school than most 7th year students, doesn't it make sense that he 
would have also learned how to Transform somewhere along the way? 
Canon is loaded with hints that Snape is either a vampire or a bat. 
These could all be red herrings, true, but I rather doubt it. There 
are just too many mentions of it. 

So, my theory is that Snape is probably a vampire and can Transform 
into a bat and that Sirius and James knew it.

(I also think this is how Snape is able to spy undetected on 
Voldemort and company, but that is another post. . .) 

The scene Sirius probably pictured at the end of the tunnel when he 
sent Snape in there was of his old friend Werewolf! Lupin jumping and 
snapping around at a frantically flapping Bat! Snape, confident that 
a bat could easily escape from the jaws of a werewolf, even if Snape 
did leave an abundance of bat droppings all over the tunnel -- and, 
come to think of it, all over poor Lupin as well.  That is something 
a 16 year old would think hilarious -- and, not even remotely life-
threatening to anyone. In essence, a good Prank.

However, James, at "great risk to his own life" from being bitten by 
a vampire/bat, went after Snape and pulled him back -- not because 
Snape was in danger but because Lupin was -- of having his cover 
being blown.  

Snape, livid at having been played for a fool, accuses Sirius of 
attempted murder. All this did was make James's actions become heroic 
and translate into a lifesaving action.

So, in my opinion, Sirius did not intentionally do anything life-
threatening by pulling The Prank. He did jeopardize his friend's 
cover, which was amazingly thoughtless and stupid, though.

Snape is the one who has given it the slant and built it up into 
something it wasn't.

In my opinion.

Bohcoo 






From severusbook4 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 20:54:05 2003
From: severusbook4 at yahoo.com (severusbook4)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 20:54:05 -0000
Subject: the dementor: alive or dead?
In-Reply-To: <bjlu8k+s9vh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjqndd+e8u3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80494

I believe that a dementor is possibly a human that has received the 
kiss.  But this has been taken one step further by the wizarding 
people.  They resemble humans in form, and human traits, breathing, 
walking upright, etc.  Isn't there canon to support that they are a 
creation of the wizarding world?  Not a creature that roams freely?  
If you think about it, wouldn't a souless human pocessed of 
unnatural life, continuously seek which it didn't have? A soul, no 
matter if it wasn't their own or not?  They are discribed as looking 
diseased and rotting. Just a thought.  Feel free to destroy.

Sevvie




From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Thu Sep 11 21:01:38 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 21:01:38 -0000
Subject: what makes a hero?  (wasRe: The magic power of love.)
In-Reply-To: <bjqmi7+gf4s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjqnri+d98t@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80495

> > Kneasy wrote: (snipped lots)
> > Heroism is a bit different. A hero knows and *calculates* the 
risks 
in a course of action, but takes them anyway, even if the odds are 
bad. Otherwise it's luck or foolhardiness. Harry doesn't have a clue 
what he has to face or how he will deal with it. That's 
foolhardiness. < <

> Then Laura wrote: (snipped lots)
> So does that mean that when teenagers do things like rescuing 
> drowning friends or family, or something along those lines (it 
> doesn't happen all the time but it does happen), it's only heroic if 
> the kid has a full understanding that s/he is risking her/his life?  
> Can you be a hero if you do something that doesn't risk your life?  
> What about the people who refused to testify during the McCarthy 
> hearings here in the 1950's?  Their physical lives weren't in 
danger, 
> but their reputations and livelihoods were.  
> 
> I'm not sure when it is (if ever) that people come to an "adult" 
> understanding of death, but if that's one of the criteria of being a 
> hero, it may be that Harry will never qualify within the time span 
of 
> the books.  Boys at 17 and 18 are still in full risk-taking mode, as 
> I understand it.  They're still kids, with some of the limitations 
in 
> thought and experience that kids have. <


IMHO, when someone risks something valuable to themselves for the sake 
of another, that's heroism; the more valuable, the more heroic.

In SS/PS, Harry is likely too young to understand death well. But he 
does know that he could get in trouble, get hurt, maybe fail and feel 
like a failure. So he's risking those things for the sake of others to 
some extent.

But while we can say those things are heroic, literature (particularly 
fantasy) often raises the stakes extremely high for the individual, so 
that his/her actions can be seen as ultimately heroic (or uber-heroic, 
if you prefer). Think of your favorite story that involves one person 
or a small group sacrificing themselves for others; how about LOTR, 
The Matrix, Beowulf, The Bible, etc.

The common thread is that in all cases, the protagonist at some point 
*realized* what he was risking and what he was risking it for. And 
*still* did it. And I agree with Kneasy that we're still waiting for 
Harry to have that epiphany. He has some growing up yet to do to 
become an uber-hero.

-Remnant




From severusbook4 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 21:02:32 2003
From: severusbook4 at yahoo.com (severusbook4)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 21:02:32 -0000
Subject: CoS scene.
In-Reply-To: <bjm138+dqh6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjqnt8+7a12@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80496

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" <stevejjen at e...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "severusbook4" 
> <severusbook4 at y...> wrote:
> > 
> > I seem to remember the JKR insisted on the Knockturn Alley 
scene, 
> > with Harry in the store, being left in the film.  > 
> 
> Jen:
> 
> I ran across this quote from JKR in a 2000 interview with Larry 
King:
> 
> "But there's a small percentage of the stuff in books that is my 
> modification of what people used to believe was true. For example, 
> there is an object in the second book, which is the Hand of Glory. 
> This is very macabre, but people used to believe in Europe that, 
if 
> you cut off the hand of a hanged man, it would make a perpetual 
torch 
> that gave light only to the holder, which is a creepy, you know -- 
> but a wonderful idea. So I used that. That's a very ancient idea. 
I 
> didn't invent the Hand of Glory."
> 
> My theory is the Hand of Glory will play again and that the 
Knockturn 
> Alley scene was the one JKR insisted on keeping in. My first 
thought 
> when reading that quote was *Wormtail*! 
> 
> Who better to be the "hanged man"? Maybe not literally yet, but as 
> Sirius said, Pettigrew has nowhere to go. His old friends and the 
> Order won't take him back, and Voldemort may have no use for him 
now 
> that he's back to full power. 
> 
>  I think JKR's use of the myth won't be exactly as the one above. 
> Rather than Pettigrew's cut-off hand, he will use his "silvery" 
new 
> hand in an act of mercy towards Harry, or in some way to impede 
> Voldemort. (That's not a new theory around here, but the above 
> interview seems to give it some weight).

Severus here:

A hanged man?  In Tarot cards the symbol of the hanged man means a 
life in suspension, or rather, indecision.  Could this be a clue 
that Wormtail is still making up his mind to who he is loyal?  Could 
Wormtail be torn between staying with LV and joining Harry to settle 
his life debt that he owes him?  Just a thought, played with tarot 
cards years ago, the hanged man is one of the few I really remember.

Sevvie




From thomasmwall at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 21:29:07 2003
From: thomasmwall at yahoo.com (Tom Wall)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 21:29:07 -0000
Subject: Do Ravenclaw/Hufflepuff have House Beasts?
In-Reply-To: <bjqc6l+eqi9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjqpf3+i239@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80497

Remnant wrote:
We have been led to believe that Fawkes was Godric Gryffindor's 
pet/companion at the founding of Hogwarts. It embodies his 
never-faltering, courageous spirit. And maybe he had a Griffin, too.

Tom:
Actually, for what it's worth, I have never received the impression 
that Fawkes had anything to do with Godric Gryffindor in the 
slightest. I don't think it was ever remotely implied by canon, and 
the first time I heard of it was when I joined this list. It does go 
without saying that we have such active, possibly overactive  
imaginations here. ;-) 

But I would love it if someone could just show me where Godric 
Gryffindor and Fawkes are mentioned in conjunction at all, aside from 
the fact that the phoenix's plumage is red and gold. I was always 
under the impression that Fawkes was Dumbledore's pet, not that he 
inherited Fawkes from anyone. Is there anything that would further 
the storyline that requires us to trace Fawkes' ownership back 
further, particularly *that* far back? Not that I can come up with. 
The storyline has enough backstory in demand already, what with 
Snape, Lily & James, and the prophecy.

I've noticed that most of the time, the `Fawkes-belonged-to-
Gryffindor' bit is an idea that shows up when people start talking 
about stuff like how "Harry must be the Heir of Gryffindor because it 
is only fitting that the Heir of Gryffindor meet the Heir of 
Slytherin in a final climactic battle" and so forth. But I don't buy 
it, on the basis that that development would be far Too Eww to be 
Treww. I may be stringent in applying rules to the series (as though 
I had a say,) but there is a difference between innovation and 
tackiness. 

On that note, I think that the whole "Harry-is-the-Heir-of-
Gryffindor, Fawkes-is-his-pet, only-a-*true*-Gryffindor-could-pull-
that-sword-out-of-the-hat-which-is-also?by-the-way-Gryffindor's-hat" 
line of reasoning is cute and appealing in a Star-Warsy sort of way, 
but ultimately seems to be yearning for far more than what we 
actually need to complete the series' plot trajectory.

As for the other houses, I'm quite happy with the additional 
attention they received in OoP, it seems like they're well on their 
way to being more developed in the future, with the obvious exception 
of the poor Slytherins, who are still getting the oh-so-superficial-
bad-guy-treatment from the author. Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff were 
certainly expounded upon in OoP, and particularly in light of the 
Sorting Hat's new song, I think we're going to see them get even more 
press in the next two novels. 

When we hope for this stuff, I think it's easy to forget that this is 
Harry's story. And the rest of it is just background and setting 
material, at least, that's the way it seems to me. So, we really are 
being quite demanding to expect it all, don't you think? Of course, 
one can always hope... ;-)

-Tom





From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Thu Sep 11 21:31:15 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 21:31:15 -0000
Subject: Harry a Hero?  Was: The magic power of love.
In-Reply-To: <bjqdhb+sgt1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjqpj3+lq8o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80498

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
[regarding H&R going to Lockhart in CoS]
> > Wouldn't you expect your kid to tell someone (you, the police, 
> > whoever) what he knows ?

Not if they thought they would get in trouble for it. Remember
that their knowledge (and at that point they did not *know* yet -
they just guessed) came by breaking school rules - brewing illegal
potions, going into the forbidden forest, etc. Don't forget that
they were on probation and had been told by no less than Dumbledore
himself (after the car incident) that any more rule breaking
would lead to their expulsion.

> > If he went and freed the kid on his own, 
> > wouldn't you lecture him about how irresponsible and stupid it 
was 
> > to go all alone, no matter how good a job he did, how heroic he 
is?

When they went to the bathroom they were not even sure that they
would find the entrance. They had a teacher (moreover the teacher
assigned to the task) with them, and they knew that any delay
can lead to Ginny's death. In fact, had they gone for help, by
the time they'd convince a teacher (if they succeeded), Ginny
would indeed be dead.

And lest you forget, the only one who could enter the Chamber of 
Secrets was Harry, as getting it opened required parseltongue (sp?).

> > > As for compassion, I don't think so. As I said before, he 
doesn't 
> > > care much about Ginny, it's more to do with playing the hero.

Ha? He cared very much for Ginny or he would not show the emotions
he showed ("Ginny, please don't be dead!"). He did not love her
romantically (heck, he was 12), but he did care for her. I don't
think he was playing the hero. Yes, he could have been a bit more
carefull and maybe one like you or me who grew up with adult
figures you could actually turn to for help - might have done that.
Harry grew up to only count on himself and not much even at Hogwarts
lead him to think that showing weakness and appealing to adults
would result in any kind of good outcome.

> Harry is not playing a role.  Harry is being Harry.  His self-image 
> *does* consist of being the only one in his world who can do the 
> things that (he thinks) need doing.  He spent ten of his first 
eleven 
> years with people who illustrated that to him daily:  injustice?  
> Nobody else cares, it's up to me; to save myself or anyone else, 
it's 
> all the same.  It's up to me.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

[ being heroic ]
> > It's not a bad trait in itself. But it gets bad when it leads him 
> > to believe that he's a cut above others and that he can dispense 
> > with a healthy amount of caution and with listening to others' 
> > advice.

I have never seen him anywhere thinking that he is cut above others.
He continuously throughout the series is plagued with feelings of
inadequacy. He thinks the Sorting Hat would tell him he should
go back, he is surprised whenever he passes a test (note his
assessment of his OWL tests - thinking that *maybe* he passed on
tests where he clearly did well). During the Triwizard tournament
he repeats how the other champions are so much older, experienced
and fit for the job than he is. I could go on. The only time
when he explodes and lists his accomplishment (early in OoP) is
in context of feeling that they are being ignored and downplayed
and he is clearly acting out his frustration.
And those outbursts are short-lived,
immediately followed by self doubt and self reproach.
If anything he is too hard on himself (well, my 15 year old is
the same way, so it must be a 15-yo-boy thing... :-)).

What he does have is the strong belief that he has to rely on himself
only (a result of his abusive upbringing and unique life experience),
an enormous amount of courage and quick wits and the bad luck of
having everything important that happens in the Wizard World be
centered around him in some way or another.

> He goes careening into whatever's ahead, assuming 
> (so far correctly) that the borrowed time he is on will not run out 
> yet.

I don't think that is necessarily what leads him to act. It is more
the fact that the events that cause him to act were orchestrated
especially to that purpose. Hermione and Ginny were attacked in
CoS for the express purpose of getting him involved. In PoA, Sirius'
goal (aside from capturing Pettigrew) is to meet with Harry. A DE
put his name in the Triwizard tournament. He was lured to the MoM
on purpose. The point is that much wiser and stronger adults are
repeatedly manipulating him (whether it's Voldemort, Sirius,
Dumbledore, etc.), and he is as yet too young and inexperience to
act in the best possible way (that assuming there is a better way).

> > No, he showed that trait when he couldn't bring himself to kill 
> > Sirius that same night. But at least he tried, at least he hated 
> > Sirius, because Sirius was a strong opponent.

Are you suggesting that it would have been better if he had the
power to kill him? He did not because for one he is no
murderer, and I think because he was not 100% sure he was guilty
at that point.

> > But Harry felt only 
> > disgust for Peter, he didn't hate him, because he didn't feel he 
> > was a worthy opponent.

No, he did not want Lupin and Sirius to be murderers and he wanted -
for once - to let the authorities handle the punishment. The result
only reinforced his perception that adult authorities are corrupt
and unjust (ignoring his testimony that Sirius was innocent and
that Pettigrew was alive and guilty). Earlier you said that Harry's
fault is not appealing to autority figures for help - that was
what he was trying to accomplish here, and look what a mess it
ended up being.

> > Moreover, do you realize that once again he showed complete 
> > disrespect for others' feelings ? Because he, Harry, didn't care 
> > enough about Peter to kill him, he wouldn't allow Sirius and 
Remus 
> > to choose for themselves whether or not they wanted to kill him.

No. They let him make the decision and respected him for it.

> > > I think the idea that Jo is trying to present is that heroes 
are 
> > > normal people who manage to act extraordinary in the midst of 
> > > extraordinary events.

Yes and no. I think that she tries to convey that a person's value
is determined by his choices, convictions and willingness to follow
through with them. Being able to do so honorably in the face of
enormous hurdles and obstacles, and being faced with challenges
that noone else had, is what makes Harry exceptional.

> > He just has good opportunities to 
> > make use of his talents, a cold head, good wits and reflexes, and 
a 
> > great deal of luck. He's good, but he's not exceptional.

Maybe we just did not read the same books... :-)

Cool head, good wits and reflexes helped him. But he also has a
lot of magical talent (see his DADA skills, Patronus, etc.), a high
intelligence (he has figured out quite a few things on his own,
even if he may have been given help sometimes), lots of courage
and quick thinking. He had luck, but that alone would not have
lead him to defeat Riddle and the basilisk, to scare off 100
dementors, win the Triwizard tournament, survive Voldemort or
the DE's in the MoM. Just think how any other student from the
books (incl. Hermione, Ron or others) would have coped in similar
situations. In fact, where there were other students with him
(Hermione, Ron, Neville, Cedric, etc.) they all faired worse.

> > You know, Malfoy is a Hero too. Not for you and I, but if our 
> > values were the same as his, we'd worship him for his daring 
> > attitude, his cunning, his knowledge, his perseverance, etc...

Ha? In that case, why go for little Malfoy? Voldemort is all that
and a lot more...

I don't "worship" Harry but I certainly have a lot of respect
and admiration for him. This is not to say that I agree with
everything he does or thinks, I just give respect where it's due.

Salit





From lhuntley at fandm.edu  Thu Sep 11 21:45:58 2003
From: lhuntley at fandm.edu (Laura Ingalls Huntley)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 17:45:58 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The magic power of love. Was: BANG! You're
 dead!
In-Reply-To: <bjqjtg+bkg8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <543A6B3A-E4A1-11D7-966A-000A95E29F3E@fandm.edu>

No: HPFGUIDX 80499

The other Laura already covered what I wanted to say for the first half 
of this post, so I'm going to skip a little bit here...

> Kneasy: (no hero)
> Death is even more of a puzzle. Death is what happens to old people.
> It can't, won't happen to me. I'm on the good side! Besides, I haven't
> finished my homework. Young people can't grasp the finality, the
> permanence of death these days. Not unless they are very unlucky.
>

And Harry *is* lucky?  I wouldn't say that at 11 he has the *best* 
grasp on the meaning of mortality, but I *do* think that he realizes 
that if he doesn't succeed in saving the Stone, Voldemort *is* going to 
kill him, sooner or later.  He says as much on pg. 270 of the American 
edition of SS/PS, which I'm not going to quote, because I just did it 
yesterday.



> He talks of V flattening Hogwarts, hunting friends and family down,
> destroying everything in his path, yet blithely suggests that three
> children can stop him. How?

The question is not "How?", it's "What else is there?"  At this point, 
HRH have already tried to go to Dumbledore and McGonagall.  Dumbledore, 
of course, is flying to the Ministry, and McGonagall flat out *refuses* 
to even listen to them.  Ron and Hermione seem to have resigned 
themselves to letting it happen.  But Harry has *always* had to go it 
alone, has *always* had to take care of himself.  It's only natural for 
him to at least *try*.  It's certainly not the first time he's kept 
fighting without any hope of ever succeeding (his entire life at the 
Dursley's  was like this).  I don't know if Harry even thought he had 
that great of a chance at stopping Quirrell.  His attitude seems to be 
"Well, if I don't die doing this, Voldemort is going to kill me anyway, 
so I might as well give it a go."


> Heroism is a bit different. A hero knows and *calculates* the risks in
> a course of action, but takes them anyway, even if the odds are bad.
>

Are you sure?  It seems to me that in a lot of cases where heroism is 
required, there isn't a lot of time for deliberation or weighing of 
consequences.  I think sometimes people just have to take whatever 
resources they have an *go* for it.  That said, you haven't *entirely* 
convinced me that Harry has never done anything by your definition of 
heroism.  Aside from the SS/PS example, there is the GoF graveyard 
example.  Harry has *just* seen a peer killed by the Dark Lord.  
Furthermore, he has just been tortured and terrorized by said Dark 
Lord.  He's alone in a graveyard with a score of grown Wizards who are 
trying to kill him.  He's only survived thus far through his wits, 
willpower, a good deal of what seems to be luck, and a power he doesn't 
understand.  I *think* he understands, at this point, that he could 
very well die.  And yet he *still* risks his life further in order to 
retrieve a dead body for the sake of a couple of adults he doesn't 
know, one of which has been quite rude to him in the past.

> One day Harry might be a true hero, but not yet. So far he hasn't
> had to go and deliberately seek out Voldemort, knowing that he
> might fail, but doing it anyway.

What was going to the Ministry of Magic at the end of OotP?  He "knew" 
Voldemort was there, about to kill Sirius.

(As a side note: people criticize his actions at this point as "rash",  
but, IMHO, he only *tried* to act rashly.  In the end, he *did* follow 
Hermione's advice and   tried to verify his facts.  There was no way he 
could have known that Kreacher was even *capable* of betraying the 
Order.)

So, to sum everything up:  I don't agree with your definition of 
heroism, but I think Harry probably lives up to it anyway.  I *do* 
agree he hasn't reached his full potential when it comes to heriocs 
yet, though -- which is a good thing for the Wizarding World, because 
it wouldn't do at all for them if Harry sacrificed himself too soon.

Then who would save them?

Neville, probably.

Laura (who loves Neville....*nuzzles poor Neville*...but not as much as 
Harry.)




From MadameSSnape at aol.com  Thu Sep 11 21:44:06 2003
From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 17:44:06 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: CoS scene.
Message-ID: <1d2.10c12fea.2c9246a6@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80500

In a message dated 9/11/2003 5:04:15 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
severusbook4 at yahoo.com writes:
A hanged man?  In Tarot cards the symbol of the hanged man means a 
life in suspension, or rather, indecision.  Could this be a clue 
that Wormtail is still making up his mind to who he is loyal?  Could 
Wormtail be torn between staying with LV and joining Harry to settle 
his life debt that he owes him?  Just a thought, played with tarot 
cards years ago, the hanged man is one of the few I really remember
Been playing with Tarot since I was 13 - I've always read the Hanged Man as 
representing a willing sacrifice (representing Odin on the World Tree, willing 
to sacrifice for knowledge)...

Sherrie
(not gonna say how long I've been reading cards - but Nixon wasn't yet a 
crook...) <g>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 21:47:09 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 21:47:09 -0000
Subject: The Prank -- A New Thought
In-Reply-To: <bjqna4+d0vg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjqqgt+s07a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80501

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bohcoo" <sydenmill at m...> wrote:
> Now, since James had been running around with Werewolf! Lupin for a 
> couple of years by the time of the Prank, where was this "great 
> risk to his own life?" Not from Werewolf! Lupin. Couldn't 
> this "great risk to his own life" have come, instead, from a 
> Transformed Snape? 

James had been running around with Moony as *Prongs*, not as James.  
It would have been hard for Prongs to stop Snape:  no hands.  Anyway, 
he probably did not want to blow his Animagus cover.  (Another reason 
I don't believe Snape is a vampire or Animagus or anything himself is 
that I don't see any of the ameliorating effect I would expect that 
to have on his ego:  if he had a "large and in charge" aspect, it 
might do something to ease his memory of having been the whitening 
detergent poster boy.)

Sandy, aka msbeadsley <stowing Occam's razor under her soapbox>






From jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 21:53:47 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 21:53:47 -0000
Subject: We're In the Money  (a filk)
Message-ID: <bjqqtb+o5fh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80502

This is a filk of the song of the same name from the musical
"Forty-Second Street."

Tis is the sixth filk from the new filk-musical "At 12 Grimmauld Place".
                     We're In the Money 
SCENE:  (Now that Harry has bankrolled them, Fred and George Weasley 
have developed their Skiving Snackboxes and their Weasleys' Wildfire
Whiz-bangs, and have opened for business?funny business.)

FRED:
We got `em

SIXTH-YEAR CUSTOMER:
How much are they?

GEORGE:
Oh, twenty Galleons.

CUSTOMER:
Not the Deflagration Deluxe, just the Basic Blaze box.

GEORGE:
Well, five!

FRED:
We're in the money,
We're in the money,
We think that full-time education we've outgrown.


GEORGE:
We'd love some money,
Pay us the money;
And have a Wildfire Whiz-Bang of your very own.


FRED and GEORGE:
We've perfected our Wheezes, 
Each teases with glee 

And now you all can buy `em
At Diagon Alley, Ninety-Three.

We're in the money 
Just buy some, sonny,
Ignite `em, light `em,
Quite a glorious sight!
 

FRED: 
We're in the money,
We're in the money;
We've got the merchandise if you have got the gall!

GEORGE:
Don't cost much money,
These jokes are funny;
Every one guaranteed for laughs, they'll never pall!

FRED and GEORGE:
We've perfected our Wheezes, 
Each teases with glee 

Now one and all can buy `em
At Diagon Alley, Ninety-Three.
Look below our big marquee.
Buy one Snackbox, get one free. 


We're in the money 
The sky is sunny. 
Be brash, don't stash your cash, no,  
Don't stash that cash, let's flash it 
Buying, buying,
Buying from us!

-Haggridd




From uncpsoccer2 at msn.com  Thu Sep 11 21:17:49 2003
From: uncpsoccer2 at msn.com (Michael)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 21:17:49 -0000
Subject: Voldemort:  Is he after bad grades?
Message-ID: <bjqopt+9hl9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80503

I know that the reason Voldemort always appears to Harry at the end 
of the school year in each book is probably for literary reasons.  
It gives the books a climax point.  I noticed that Harry always runs 
into him around exam time.  Though it isn't really that big a deal, 
wouldn't you like to see him have a confrontation maybe over 
Christmas break or earlier in the year?

"Michael" 




From LilDancinQT86 at aol.com  Thu Sep 11 22:02:07 2003
From: LilDancinQT86 at aol.com (theredshoes86)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 22:02:07 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore & Harry's security
Message-ID: <bjqrcv+7i5o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80504

Dumbledore has said that he's watched Harry more closely than anyone
else... 
Also, in the first book, he says to Harry that 'I don't need a cloak
to be invisible' AND, when Dumbledore explains everything to Harry at 
the end of the Goblet of Fire, he says something like 'I would never 
have expected to be dealing with such a person' implying that 
Dumbledore likes Harry's personality.  Dumbledore hasn't really gotten 
a chance to see Harry's personality though, during all of their little 
scenes together.  The only thing about Harry's personality Dumbledore 
obviously knows about is Harry's heroic side.
So.... maybe... Dumbledore invisibly follows Harry around the school. 
Just my crazy idea... but it kinda makes sense right? 

"theredshoes86" 




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 23:14:55 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 23:14:55 -0000
Subject: photo vs. painting in magical world/DD's legilimency & 1st OoP/worse than de
In-Reply-To: <bjovl8+ekgf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjqvlf+idg6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80505

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "wry1352000" <wry1352000 at y...>
wrote:
> Hello!
> 

> I wonder why there should be such a difference between the arts of 
> photography and painting in the magical world. ...edited...
>

bboy_mn:
A theory... ...just a theory.

I think images in artwork are like actors in a play. The difference
between photos and paintings is like the difference between the actors
in a TV commercial and the actors in a film biography. 

The actors in a TV commercial represent their characters in a 15, 30
or 60 second window of time. Hence, the photo that Colin Creevey took
of Harry and Lockhart in the school courtyard, continues to reflect
both Harry and Lockhart's attitudes and demeanor in the tiny window of
time.

To extend that, you could say that photos have context. The context is
the intented purpose of that photo. The photo of Lockhart and Harry
reflect the context of the moment in which the photo was taken. But
let's remember the photos of Harry that appeared in various
publications take on a context in relation to the context of the
article that accompanied them. If the article showed Harry in a bad
light, then the photo of Harry looked shifty and devious. If the
article showed Harry in a good light, then the accompanying photo
showed Harry bright eyed and smiling. Again, this re-enforces my
belief that to a limited extent photo images are like actors in a
play, they reflect or play out the context of the moment.

One important fact about paintings is that the enchanted painting
actually contains a piece of living tissue from the person represented
in that painting. The living essense of the person is embedded in the
painting. This and the magical complexity of creating an enchanted
painting, make it a more powerful and fully developed magical object.

Using the actor analogy, a painting reflects a much greater context.
Again, I equate this is as the equivalent of an actor portraying a
person in their film biography, where the context is the entire
lifetime and personality of the person. Not just a tiny snapshot, but
a window into the very essense of that person, his personality, his
actions/history, and his life. Because this enchanted painting contain
the actual living essense of the person in the form of living tissue,
the actor does not play an idealized version of the person; he
portrays both the light and the dark; the good and the bad.

On a more superficial level, a painting is a much more complex magical
object than a photo. It seems that exposed film can be developed in a
potion and the images become animated, but not really much more that
animated and reflecting the context of the moment in simple and
superficial ways. A painting, on the other hand, I veiw as magically
much more complex. It takes a exceptionally talented artwizard,
perhaps magical paints, enchanted canvas, assorted potion, spells, and
charms, and as I mentioned, some living tissue from the person being
painted. So, you get a more complex and more complete final product,
because it requires an infinitely (figuratively) more complex process.


 
> Another idea that struck me sometime after I read OoP was how 
> Dumbledore, if he possessed the skill of Legilimency could not know 
> who was the traitor in the first Order of the Phoenix.  
>
< ,,,edited,,,
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> Zinaida.

bboy_mn:
Although, I cut it out of the previous post, a summary of the key
point was, why didn't Dumbledore use Legilimency to detect that Peter
Pettigrew was the spy. Here in lies the fallibility of Legilimancy.
Being as pathetic, fightened, insecure, and generally unreliable as
Peter was, it's possible he was always giving off 'bad vibes'. It's
possible that people even with limited Legilimency skill, always pick
up nervousness, fear, and insecurity, so he could have been a very
hard person to 'read'. Plus, I suspect lying was a normal course of
events for someone like Peter; an everyday occurance.

It's possible that Dumbledore had some suspicions, but given the
general paranoia of that time in history, I suspect everyone was
picking up a degree of suspiciousness from everyone one else; no one
trusted anyone. Even a person you had absolute trust in could be under
the control of the Imperious curse; so really, even the most trusted
person couldn't really be trusted. Paranoia everywhere.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn




From prof_uloth at hotmail.com  Thu Sep 11 23:38:09 2003
From: prof_uloth at hotmail.com (Fred Uloth)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 15:38:09 -0800
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: CoS scene Hagrid crossbow
In-Reply-To: <bjm0sn+jad9@eGroups.com>
References: <bjlth7+r7e5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20030911152800.00b0ed80@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 80506

At 02:05 AM 9/10/2003 +0000, tuck668 wrote:
><<Anna replying to someone who suggested that Hagrid was expecting the MoM>>
>I'm not trying to tear down your post, but do you really think that
>Hagrid would shoot at the MoM if they came to take him to Azkaban? I
>mean, Hagrid can be a little, um, rash (?) at times, but to keep a
>crossbow handy in case the MoM comes seems to be a little much..

Hmm...don't take the tone of this wrong because it is not meant to 
offend..only express strong disbelief. Have you read Order of the Phoenix 
yet?!? The MoM officials arrive to remove Hagrid from Hogwarts (not take 
him to Azkhaban) and he starts doing the Dwarf Tossing bit (no offense 
meant to little people, but the description in the book just reminded me of 
the tasteless sport).

I think the two things that saved Fudge that night were:
1: Harry Potter in the cabin. Remember, Hagrid didn't know Harry was 
looking on in OoP, but he did in CoS. I don't think he wanted to show 
violence in front of Harry.
2: Dumbledore escorting Fudge. DD seems to be one of the very few people to 
whom Hagrid will listen. I have no problem seeing Hagrid doing to Fudge 
what he would later do to Karkaroff...and far worse. Remember, he has the 
giant blood that shields he from quite a bit of the magic that gets thrown 
at him...I doubt Fudge could take him.




From constancevigilance at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 11 23:48:54 2003
From: constancevigilance at yahoo.com (Susan Miller)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 23:48:54 -0000
Subject: Wizard children's filks
Message-ID: <bjr1l6+28eq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80507

Here is a couple of pages from the Songbook for Young Wizards:

The Not So Itsy Bitsy Spider

When Hagrid was a lad, his pet was not a dog.
It was a giant spider, he called him Aragog.
Tom Riddle came along and this is what he did,
He chased the spider out and the school expelled Hagrid.


I'm a Little Teapot-sized Professor:

Flitwick is the name, I'm three feet four.
I'm not very tall but my feet can reach the floor.
To levitate a feather, here's the trick
Wingardium Leviosa, swish and flick.


~ Constance Vigilance




From prof_uloth at hotmail.com  Thu Sep 11 23:49:02 2003
From: prof_uloth at hotmail.com (Fred Uloth)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 15:49:02 -0800
Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Hogwarts librarian
In-Reply-To: <20030910040916.99010.qmail@web20502.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <bjm7h3+e90f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20030911154425.00aaa240@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 80508

At 09:09 PM 9/9/2003 -0700, Rania Melhem <dittoed the comments of 
sbursztynski greatraven at hotmail.com :
>As a librarian, I totally agree with you. I am very irritated by Madam 
>Pince's description by JKR. I dont know why she is depicted so horribly. 
>And she never seems to help any of the Hogwarts students find information.
>Rania

I wonder if JKR had a *VERY* bad experience with a librarian. In SS/PS when 
Harry is getting the Owl Posts, Harry makes some comment along the lines of 
never getting mail and he didn't have a library card, so he didn't even get 
rude notes from the library. (I don't have my book so I can't quote it 
properly...sorry).

To Rania, sbursztnski, and all the other librarians on the list, thanks for 
all your help pointing us to the right resources!

Prof. Uloth 




From jmmears at comcast.net  Fri Sep 12 00:09:56 2003
From: jmmears at comcast.net (serenadust)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 00:09:56 -0000
Subject: The Hogwarts librarian
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20030911154425.00aaa240@localhost>
Message-ID: <bjr2sk+3193@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80509

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Fred Uloth <prof_uloth at h...> 
wrote:


> I wonder if JKR had a *VERY* bad experience with a librarian. In 
SS/PS when 
> Harry is getting the Owl Posts, Harry makes some comment along the 
lines of 
> never getting mail and he didn't have a library card, so he didn't 
even get 
> rude notes from the library. (I don't have my book so I can't 
quote it 
> properly...sorry).


Me (Jo S.)
I had a dim memory of JK saying something concerning her dealings 
with the library, so I checked the interview archives and found the 
following question and answer in the Scholastic Chat - 2000

Did you use the library a lot as a child?

Yes, I loved the library, though I was very bad at returning books 
on time. I once ran up a bill at university of over fifty pounds in 
overdue fines, which was a lot of money to a struggling student. (It 
didn't stop me doing it again though!)


It does seem possible that she could have had an unpleasant 
interlude with a librarian over that fifty pound fine, so perhaps 
she is using Madame Pince to take a gentle jab at librarians in 
general.  I doubt that she has any real ill will toward the 
profession nowadays.

Jo Serenadust







From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 00:22:43 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 00:22:43 -0000
Subject: Filk Suggestion
In-Reply-To: <20030911194201.98940.qmail@web13101.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjr3kj+5220@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80510

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Odile Falaise 
<odilefalaise at y...> wrote:
> 

> Odile here...  this song is begging to be filked, IMO, and I am 
having a really hard time with it...  Anyway, upon reading OotP, I 
got "Dumbledore's Army" stuck in my head to the tune of Elvis 
Costello's "Oliver's Army."  Besides "Dumbledore" and "Oliver" 
fitting well, it's about getting career advice and could work with 
being an auror instead of a soldier (hem hem).  
> 
>  
>Any takers?  ^_^


hg now:
Odile, oh, yes, I'll take on the task.  "Dumbledore's Army" has been 
rattling around in my brain to the same tune since I read OoP too.  
Here goes:


Dumbledore's Army
filked by hg with many thanks to Odile for the prompt.
 
Voldemort is stalking
The orb in the D.O.M. at night
My mind goes sleepwalking
Follows him to doors that are locked tight  

McGonagall's interrogation:
"What's your plan for a future occupation?"

Dumbledore's army is my true calling! 
Dumbledore's army (our skills appalling
) ?
Still I would never be anywhere else 
Than here today!  

We've got no time for traitors;
We'll really put you in your place.
You won't laugh, infiltrator, 
When "SNEAK" is branded on your face!

Only took one discovered session ?
One vacant post, but no more lessons
 

Dumbledore's army is here to stay! 
Dumbledore's army is on our way ?
And I would never be anywhere else 
Than here today!

The Order sits on its hands;
The Ministry's head is in the sand.
We could be the next Defeaters,
Ready to hex all the Death Eaters,
With help from all the Houses (and a few good Beaters!)
 
But there's some danger: 
It's quite the terminal career. 
Still we must stay arranged.
(Don't put the word in Mr. Fudge's ear!)
 
If you're bad at charms or scared of Snape ? 
We can help you get in Wizarding shape! 

Dumbledore's Army ? we take anyone!
Dumbledore's Army ? subversive and fun!
And we'll be gathering somewhere else,
Some future day



-- hg.






From prof_uloth at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 12 00:32:33 2003
From: prof_uloth at hotmail.com (Fred Uloth)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 16:32:33 -0800
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Kelpies ( was Hagrid's odd behavior )
In-Reply-To: <bjm9fr+sjan@eGroups.com>
References: <bjm8f6+gclp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20030911155524.00a87d68@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 80511

At 04:31 AM 9/10/2003 +0000, Laurie (yukonpup) wrote:
><SNIP>
>Shouldn't Hagrid know this and why's he asking Lockhart?

I don't think *anyone* asked Lockhart for advice...he gave unsolicited 
advice to everyone. Remember his Whomping Willow tips he gave to Prof. 
Sprout? He's such an idiot...you'd think he'd realize with all his 
ramblings (to highly qualified people) that he'd expose himself as a fraud.

The kelpies in the well are extremely fishy (pun intended), but if Hagrid 
were lying he could come up with a much better lie than that one. Of 
course, we know he hasn't the quickest mind when under pressure. Put on the 
spot as he was was, he could blunder with something as dumb as kelpies in 
the well.




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Fri Sep 12 01:51:27 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 01:51:27 -0000
Subject: Wormtail the Hanged Man (Re: CoS scene)
In-Reply-To: <1d2.10c12fea.2c9246a6@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bjr8qv+4dje@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80512

> In a message dated 9/11/2003 5:04:15 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
> severusbook4 at y... writes:
> A hanged man?  In Tarot cards the symbol of the hanged man means a 
> life in suspension, or rather, indecision.  Could this be a clue 
> that Wormtail is still making up his mind to who he is loyal?  
Could Wormtail be torn between staying with LV and joining Harry to 
settle his life debt that he owes him?  

Sherrie:
> Been playing with Tarot since I was 13 - I've always read the 
Hanged Man as 
> representing a willing sacrifice (representing Odin on the World 
Tree, willing to sacrifice for knowledge)...
> 

Jen:

Both of these Tarot interpretations provide more possibilities than 
my initial thought(life in limbo). In fact, I think the first 
one, "indecision of loyalty" could symbolize Wormtail's current 
dilemma, and the "willing sacrifice" will come at the end.

We know Wormtail can't go back. His ex-friends are willing to murder 
him and, unlike Snape, his betrayal was too grievous for acceptance 
back in the Order. Any latent hopes of reconciliation are dashed in 
the Shrieking Shack, and Wormtail chooses to return to Voldemort.

Voldemort is obviously very contemptous of Wormtail and only keeps 
him around out of necessity. Wormtail must surely know his days are 
numbered--he only has as long as Voldemort has need for him, then 
Wormtail will be disposed of. That's one of those unfortunate 
consequences of trusting an evil lord.

At this point, Wormtail is also cognizant of his life-debt with 
Harry. In an unchararistic move, he risks bargaining with Voldemort 
for Harry's life. The struggle inside between his fear of Voldemort 
and "magic at its deepest", the pact with Harry, is causing external 
problems--he fumbles LV's orders for Crouch, Sr. 

Ah, but then Voldemort *gifts* him with the magic hand. I have two 
guesses about this hand:

1) Voldemort knowingly gave Wormtail a powerful hand that LV plans to 
unleash in battle later; OR

2) Voldemort unknowingly transfers power to Wormtail through some 
ancient magic he's unaware of.  Yes, that's been done, but you could 
fill a book with the things Voldemort's overlooked or underestimated!

Wormtail now has a power of his own. Sometime before the final 
battle, Wormtail will resolve his loyalty issues, find his inner 
Gryffindor or good Slytherin, and use his powerful hand to "willingly 
sacrifice" himself for Harry. 

I don't know if Wormtail has it in him, but I hope he finds a little 
redemption and finally "chooses what is right instead of what is 
easy."  




From wsherratt3338 at rogers.com  Fri Sep 12 01:51:54 2003
From: wsherratt3338 at rogers.com (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 01:51:54 -0000
Subject: Professor Binns 
Message-ID: <bjr8rq+jrcl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80513

Since discussion has turned to CoS, I noticed for the first time 
Professor Binns.  During his class where he gives the story of the 
Chamber of Secrets, he squashes the discussion when it seems to be 
leading towards Dumbledore and using Dark Magic to find the Chamber 
by saying, "Just because a wizard doesn't use Dark Magic doesn't 
mean that he can't."  This just seems a slightly odd thing to say; 
WOULD Dumbledore use Dark Magic if he had a compelling enough reason 
to?  Also, now that we've heard from Nearly Headless Nick in OotP 
how some wizards become ghosts, I'm wondering why Professor Binns 
did?  He has seemed like a rather inconsequential, comic figure so 
far, but now it sounds as if anyone who becomes a ghost probably is 
rather a sad character.  He might be one of those "most unlikely 
suspects" who turn out to be important after all.

Wanda





From Lynx412 at aol.com  Fri Sep 12 02:23:07 2003
From: Lynx412 at aol.com (Lynx412 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 22:23:07 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sirius's death, Predictions for next book
Message-ID: <d.1861d695.2c92880b@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80514

In a message dated 9/11/2003 9:07:49 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
hickengruendler at yahoo.de writes:

> But there is more in the interview. She also said, that it is not the 
> most likely candidate (in other words Hermione), and then she 
> asked: "Who do you think it is?" The audience said "Ron", and the 
> answer was. "No, it isn't Ron either." Of course it can still be a 
> minor character, but currently, I am totally convinced it is Neville, 
> either in Herbology or in DADA.
> 

       You know, I have wondered about Snape's comment to Crabbe about 
mentioning throttling Neville on his reference. If you wanted to pick the *most* 
unlikely candidate...and his dad is now in Askaban...

       Cheryl the Lynx


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From kkearney at students.miami.edu  Fri Sep 12 03:11:41 2003
From: kkearney at students.miami.edu (corinthum)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 03:11:41 -0000
Subject: Professor Binns
In-Reply-To: <bjr8rq+jrcl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjrdhd+es7u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80515

Wanda wondered:

> Since discussion has turned to CoS, I noticed for the first time 
> Professor Binns.  During his class where he gives the story of the 
> Chamber of Secrets, he squashes the discussion when it seems to be 
> leading towards Dumbledore and using Dark Magic to find the Chamber 
> by saying, "Just because a wizard doesn't use Dark Magic doesn't 
> mean that he can't."  This just seems a slightly odd thing to say; 
> WOULD Dumbledore use Dark Magic if he had a compelling enough reason 
> to? 

I believe so, yes.  

"'He did not wish to tell me,' said Dumbledore.  'But I am a
sufficiently accomplished Legilimens to know when I am being lied to
and I- persuaded him- to tell me the full story, before I left for the
Department of Mysteries.'" (OoP, US p.832)

Perhaps not Dark Magic, but I'm quite sure Dumbledore's persuasion
techniques involved more than forceful words.

-Corinth




From greatraven at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 12 03:18:42 2003
From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 03:18:42 -0000
Subject: Snape the Traitor or is there one other
In-Reply-To: <20030911200913.4873.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjrdui+pup5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80516

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Dragonetti <kozmoz47 at y...> 
wrote:
> When Voldemort returns in his speech to his Death Eaters he says 
that one of their numbers, he believes, left him forever and adds he 
shall be killed of course. We most assume that the particular ex-
Death Eater is Snape; even take it as a given. Now if so far we are 
Umbridge says that Lucius Malfoy speaks highly of him. L. M. is a 
Death Eater and if Snape really was a spy for DD and showed his true 
colors to the Death Eaters as Voldemort wants him dead, then why 
would L.M. speak highly of him instead of giving him to Voldemort? 
Snape can't have placed a spell on him, Voldemort would have noticed. 
In conclusion, Snape is still working for Voldemort, maybe as a 
double agent, but still close to him. 


***I found this confusing too, but then, if you remember, when Harry 
sarcastically asks Snape if it was his job to find out what LV is 
saying to the Death Eaters, Snape smiles and says that, yes, it is. 
Which may be a clue to this mission he's doing for DD. LV doesn't 
get  a chance in GoF to actually give any details to Lucius and Co. 
about *who's* the one who's run, who's left, etc. and remember, they 
haven't seen him in years. The way I see it is, Snape is many things, 
but he's neither a coward nor a fool (a bit overemotional, perhaps, 
but not dumb). I really can't see him actually *liking* Draco. He 
sucks up to him and his awful dad because it's the only way to spy on 
them. I can see him in the last novel punching Lucius (or the wizard 
equivalent) and saying, "By the way, Draco, I never did like you. You 
are a little *** and I'd rather be stuck in a room with Harry Potter 
forever than spend another class with you." Sue B




From fc26det at aol.com  Fri Sep 12 03:39:46 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 03:39:46 -0000
Subject: Professor Binns
In-Reply-To: <bjrdhd+es7u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjrf62+fcn7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80517

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "corinthum" <kkearney at s...> 
wrote:
> Wanda wondered:
> 
> > Since discussion has turned to CoS, I noticed for the first time 
> > Professor Binns.  During his class where he gives the story of 
the 
> > Chamber of Secrets, he squashes the discussion when it seems to 
be 
> > leading towards Dumbledore and using Dark Magic to find the 
Chamber 
> > by saying, "Just because a wizard doesn't use Dark Magic doesn't 
> > mean that he can't."  This just seems a slightly odd thing to 
say; 
> > WOULD Dumbledore use Dark Magic if he had a compelling enough 
reason 
> > to? 
> 
> I believe so, yes.  
> 
> "'He did not wish to tell me,' said Dumbledore.  'But I am a
> sufficiently accomplished Legilimens to know when I am being lied to
> and I- persuaded him- to tell me the full story, before I left for 
the
> Department of Mysteries.'" (OoP, US p.832)
> 
> Perhaps not Dark Magic, but I'm quite sure Dumbledore's persuasion
> techniques involved more than forceful words.
> 
> -Corinth

Now Susan:

But what exactly is Dark Magic?  My interpretation has been that 
*any* magic used in an evil or *dark* way was Dark Magic.  I have 
felt that the intention of the spell caster is what determined 
whether it was good or bad magic.

As for professor Binns, I wonder if he just loved teaching so much he 
couldn't give up teaching.

Susan




From yswahl at stis.net  Fri Sep 12 04:30:58 2003
From: yswahl at stis.net (samnanya)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 04:30:58 -0000
Subject: Did Harry ever shed tears ?  Phoenix animagus perhaps ?
Message-ID: <bjri62+cs2h@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80518

My pensieve sprung a leak and a couple of stray thoughts snuck out ...

Does anyone remember an instance where Harry actually shed tears in 
any of the books ? Even DD did, but no memory of Harry doing so.

Wouldnt it be interesting if Harry could be an animagus in the form 
form of a phoenix? Is this possible o cannonites and, if not, why
not? 
 
It is also clear from CoS that Harry can {whether he knows it or not} 
summon a phoenix when in trouble just like Dumbledore can.  I wonder 
why he hasnt done so more often ?
 
What if someone who is not related Harry {or whomever} by blood 
sacrificed his life for him ? Is there any special charm or shield 
generated by this sacrifice or must it be through a blood relation?
 
if werewolves are so dangerous why was one recuperating at St. Mungos 
in OOP, seemingly unguarded ?

Lots of references to dead things and silver  - Moaning Myrtle, 
Wormtails hand, Unicorn blood, .... any relations to vampires or 
whatever ?

In CoS, when Ron and Harry took the polyjuice potion and ran into a 
Ravenclaw who turned out to be Percy's girlfriend Penelope Clearwater 
(pgs 219, 258 us ed) coming out of the entrance to the dungeon where 
the Slytherin lurk ... uh what was she doing there? If she wasn't 
Percy's girlfriend I wouldnt have given it a second thought ...  

And my ultimate never got an answer to post --- Does anyone care that 
Luna was NOT on the Hogwarts Express at the end of OOTP ???????


Now that these thoughts are out of my pensieve and back in my
brain,., 
I am getting a headache which i will probably have until someone 
addresses these issues. My apologies if i missed something obvious.

Thanks
Sam













From kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 05:15:03 2003
From: kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com (Kewpie)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 05:15:03 -0000
Subject: Did Harry ever shed tears ?  Phoenix animagus perhaps ?
In-Reply-To: <bjri62+cs2h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjrkon+24rd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80519

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" <yswahl at s...> wrote:
> My pensieve sprung a leak and a couple of stray thoughts snuck 
out ...
> 
> Does anyone remember an instance where Harry actually shed tears in 
> any of the books ? Even DD did, but no memory of Harry doing so.

Yes of course he did, at least twice as far as I remember.
We see Harry shed tears way back in Book One. It was right after 
Dumbledore told him that it was Lily's love that saved his life.
(US paperback P. 299) "Dumbledore now became very interested in a 
bird out on the windowsill, which gave Harry time to dry his eyes on 
the sheet."

Then in OOtP, US P. 856, after Harry alienated himself from others 
and sat by the lake thinking about Sirius: "The sun had fallen before 
he realized that he was cold. He got up and returned to the castle, 
wiping his face on his sleeve as he went. "






From greatraven at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 12 05:18:22 2003
From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 05:18:22 -0000
Subject: Did Harry ever shed tears ?  
In-Reply-To: <bjri62+cs2h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjrkuu+indf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80520

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" <yswahl at s...> wrote:
> My pensieve sprung a leak and a couple of stray thoughts snuck 
out ...
> 
> Does anyone remember an instance where Harry actually shed tears in 
> any of the books ? Even DD did, but no memory of Harry doing so.
> 
Ooh, I am SO glad someone has brought up this one. No, I don't think 
he ever did. And this is a shame, because he badly needs to. The 
closest he ever got was at the end of GoF, when Mrs Weasley hugs him 
and I think he was about to, but they were interrupted. I don't think 
this is a coincidence. Harry is going to get more and more stressed 
out until he can finally cry (hopefully before someone tells him that 
big boys don't). His anger would have been a lot less in OoP if he'd 
been able to have that cry at the end of GoF. And now he's lost 
Sirius and still he hasn't been able to let out his grief in a great 
howl. Pity, that, but probably essential to the plot. Sue B




From patientx3 at aol.com  Fri Sep 12 05:21:13 2003
From: patientx3 at aol.com (HunterGreen)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 05:21:13 -0000
Subject: another CoS weird Hagrid tidbit
In-Reply-To: <bjodej+90lu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjrl49+15h7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80521

Richard wrote:

" After all, how did Tom KNOW that Hagrid was in possession of a 
conveniently large and dangerous monster? "

HG:
What I find interesting is how oddly cordial Tom Riddle seems during 
this flashback. 
[from pg 246, chpt 13]
' "Evening, Rubeus," said Riddle sharply.
The boy slammed the door shut and stood up.
"What yer doin' down here, Tom?"
Riddle stepped closer.
"It's all over," he said. "I'm going to have to turn you in, Rubeus.
They're talking about closing Hogwarts if the attacks don't stop."
"What d'yeh-"
"I don't think you meant to kill anyone. But monsters don't make
good pets. I suppose you just let it out for exercise and -"
"It never killed no one!" said the large boy, backing against the
closed door.  '

Of course what he's *doing* isn't very nice, but considering this is 
the young VD, it doesn't seem like he'd care to be nice at all to 
Hagrid in this scene. Notice he says 'I'm going to have to turn you 
in.', not 'I'm turning you in.'. That, and I find it odd that they 
both know each other's names. Now Tom might have made a point of 
knowing Hagrid's name (obviously knowing about Hagrid's interest in 
monsters became useful to him), but why would Hagrid know his name? 
At this point Tom is 16 and Hagrid is 13 or 14 and (assumingly) they 
are in different houses (I'm assuming that Tom is in Slytherin, and 
that Hagrid wasn't), it just seems odd that they would know each 
other. 
On a similar note, I wonder if Hagrid knows that Tom later became VD? 
(if he did, I wonder if that would be cause to protest his expulsion 
from using magic?). 

-HG




From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 12 05:23:19 2003
From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 05:23:19 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?St._Mungo=92s_(filk)?=
Message-ID: <bjrl87+sq6b@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80522

St. Mungo's (OOP, Chap. 23)

To the tune of Joshua Fought the Battle of Jericho

Hear a MIDI at:

http://www.stedwards.plus.com/music/moremusic.html

THE SCENE: St. Mungo's Hospital for Magical Maladies and Injuries. 
The TRIO run into a refugee from Year Two.

HARRY:
You talk about your men of Slytherin
You may talk about your Ravenclaws
There's none better-dressed than Gilderoy
In his placement at St. Mungo's 

TRIO:
Gilderoy's in placement at St. Mungo's, St. Mungo's, St. Mungo's
Gilderoy's in placement at St. Mungo's and he wears a lavender gown

LOCKHART:
On the closed wards of St. Mungo's
I'm everyone's main man
I'm practicing my joined-up writing  
With Gladys as my biggest fan 

TRIO & CHORUS OF MUNGO'S RESIDENTS: 
Gilderoy's in placement at St. Mungo's, St. Mungo's, St. Mungo's
Gilderoy's in placement at St. Mungo's and he wears a lavender gown

LOCKHART:
As my amnesia begins to improve
And I astound all of the staff
I give them my award-winning smile 
Right along with my autograph

TRIO & CHORUS OF MUNGO'S RESIDENTS & STAFF:
St. Mungo's's is now the home of Gilderoy, Gilderoy, Gilderoy,
St. Mungo's's is now the home of Gilderoy and he wears a lavender gown
And 
He 
Wears 
A 
Lavender 
Gown!

    -	CMC

HARRY POTTER FILKS 
http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm 





From eowynn_24 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 05:32:41 2003
From: eowynn_24 at yahoo.com (eowynn_24)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 22:32:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Did Harry ever shed tears ?  Phoenix animagus perhaps ?
In-Reply-To: <bjrkon+24rd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030912053241.81319.qmail@web60203.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80523



Kewpie <kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com> wrote: 
--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" <yswahl at s...> wrote:
> My pensieve sprung a leak and a couple of stray thoughts snuck 
out ...
> 
> Does anyone remember an instance where Harry actually shed tears in 
> any of the books ? Even DD did, but no memory of Harry doing so.

Yes of course he did, at least twice as far as I remember.
We see Harry shed tears way back in Book One. It was right after 
Dumbledore told him that it was Lily's love that saved his life.
(US paperback P. 299) "Dumbledore now became very interested in a 
bird out on the windowsill, which gave Harry time to dry his eyes on 
the sheet."

Then in OOtP, US P. 856, after Harry alienated himself from others 
and sat by the lake thinking about Sirius: "The sun had fallen before 
he realized that he was cold. He got up and returned to the castle, 
wiping his face on his sleeve as he went. "



Eowynn:

There is one more that I can remember. I don't have book right now to give you page references. It is when Lupin is teaching harry the patronus charm. Lupin had been distracted by something or other and harry bent low pretending he was tying his shoe, and dried his tears.


Eowynn







---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com  Fri Sep 12 05:57:33 2003
From: Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com (arcum42)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 05:57:33 -0000
Subject: The Hogwarts librarian
In-Reply-To: <20030910040916.99010.qmail@web20502.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjrn8d+t8po@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80524

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Rania Melhem <dunknegg at y...>
wrote:
> As a librarian, I totally agree with you. I am very irritated by
Madam Pince's description by 
>JKR. I dont know why she is depicted so horribly. And she never seems
to help any of the 
>Hogwarts students find information. 

Actually, this may be for plot reasons. Think how much shorter PS
might have been if Hermione had walked up to Madam Pince, asked her if
they had any books about Nicolas Flamel, and been handed, say, "The
top 10 alchemists of all time", "Approaches to Immortality", and "The
12 uses of dragon blood: Its applications & significance to the modern
wizard"... 

--Arcum




From eowynn_24 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 06:00:05 2003
From: eowynn_24 at yahoo.com (eowynn_24)
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 23:00:05 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Did Harry ever shed tears ?  Phoenix animagus perhaps ?
In-Reply-To: <bjri62+cs2h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030912060005.24668.qmail@web60201.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80525



samnanya <yswahl at stis.net> wrote: 
>My pensieve sprung a leak and a couple of stray thoughts snuck out ...
<snip>
Wouldnt it be interesting if Harry could be an animagus >in the form 
form of a phoenix? Is this possible o cannonites and, if >not, why
not? 

eowynn: 

IMO I don't think he is one. Mostly because the only Phoenix we have heard of is Fawkes, and since we have seen him and Harry together on several occasions I would say no. Also I feel that becoming an animagi is still beyond our young hero.


>It is also clear from CoS that Harry can {whether he knows it or not} 
>summon a phoenix when in trouble just like Dumbledore can.  I wonder 
>why he hasn't done so more often ?

Eowynn:

We have seen on many occasions that Harry forgets the resources at his disposal (i.e. the mirror that Sirius gave him.)Before CoS Harry had never summoned a Phoenix, and he has only (as far as I can remember, again I don't have my books) summoned him that once. He has however been healed by his tears more than the one time (end of GoF.)

>What if someone who is not related Harry {or whomever} by blood 
>sacrificed his life for him ? Is there any special charm or shield 
>generated by this sacrifice or must it be through a blood relation?

eowynn:

This is a good question, that I hope some one may have a better answer to than I. IMO, I would say that a sacrifice of ones life for anyone else would react the same as if a family member gave their life for you. I believe that Harry has a great deal of love for his friends and a few of the grown ups around him. If he gave his life to spare any of theirs I believe he would protect them the same as Lily protected him. 

<snip>

>In CoS, when Ron and Harry took the polyjuice potion and ran into a 
>Ravenclaw who turned out to be Percy's girlfriend Penelope Clearwater 
>(pgs 219, 258 us ed) coming out of the entrance to the dungeon where 
>the Slytherin lurk ... uh what was she doing there? If she wasn't 
>Percy's girlfriend I wouldn't have given it a second thought ...  


Eowynn:

OK, now with out my books i don't have anything to back this, plus I could be completely off base. I always thought that since the Hufflepuffs and the Gryffindors went up the same set of stairs to their separate dormitories (splitting some ways before they reach said dorms.), that Ravenclaw and Slytherine were both located in the dungeons, just separate ways once you entered. Is this just movie contamination?


>And my ultimate never got an answer to post --- Does anyone care that 
>Luna was NOT on the Hogwarts Express at the end of OOTP ???????

<snip>

Thanks
Sam


Eowynn:

I gather that she often misses the train due to having to locate all of her belongings that are stolen and hidden from her. From the conversation she had with Harry this is not the first time it had happened.I do believe that this will be a clue for future books, though I haven't had a chance to really work out my theory yet, but I do believe it is a clue.



Hoping this helped a little,

Eowynn

















---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From mario.pitre at videotron.ca  Fri Sep 12 01:44:53 2003
From: mario.pitre at videotron.ca (oiramertip)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 01:44:53 -0000
Subject: The mystery of Voldemort's wand
Message-ID: <bjr8el+f5ga@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80526

Does anyone know where did Voldemort's wand come from when Wormtail 
had it in the cemetary in GF? If Voldemort was so weak after being 
destroyed from trying to kill Harry, he could certainly not have 
hidden or moved it himself. If a Death Eater got there first before 
Hagrid, he could have taken the wand and tried to kill Harry, but it 
does not appear to have happened.....





From InfiniteWhispers at Aol.com  Fri Sep 12 04:44:36 2003
From: InfiniteWhispers at Aol.com (InfiniteWhispers at Aol.com)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 00:44:36 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Did Harry ever shed tears ?  Phoenix animagus perhaps ?
Message-ID: <c6.220f0fbc.2c92a934@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80527

In a message dated 9/12/2003 12:31:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
yswahl at stis.net writes:
My pensieve sprung a leak and a couple of stray thoughts snuck out ...

Does anyone remember an instance where Harry actually shed tears in 
any of the books ? Even DD did, but no memory of Harry doing so.

Wouldnt it be interesting if Harry could be an animagus in the form 
form of a phoenix? Is this possible o cannonites and, if not, why
not? 

It is also clear from CoS that Harry can {whether he knows it or not} 
summon a phoenix when in trouble just like Dumbledore can.  I wonder 
why he hasnt done so more often ?

What if someone who is not related Harry {or whomever} by blood 
sacrificed his life for him ? Is there any special charm or shield 
generated by this sacrifice or must it be through a blood relation?

if werewolves are so dangerous why was one recuperating at St. Mungos 
in OOP, seemingly unguarded ?

Lots of references to dead things and silver  - Moaning Myrtle, 
Wormtails hand, Unicorn blood, .... any relations to vampires or 
whatever ?

In CoS, when Ron and Harry took the polyjuice potion and ran into a 
Ravenclaw who turned out to be Percy's girlfriend Penelope Clearwater 
(pgs 219, 258 us ed) coming out of the entrance to the dungeon where 
the Slytherin lurk ... uh what was she doing there? If she wasn't 
Percy's girlfriend I wouldnt have given it a second thought ...  

And my ultimate never got an answer to post --- Does anyone care that 
Luna was NOT on the Hogwarts Express at the end of OOTP ???????


Now that these thoughts are out of my pensieve and back in my
brain,., 
I am getting a headache which i will probably have until someone 
addresses these issues. My apologies if i missed something obvious.

Thanks
Sam
On pg 240 of the paperback us version, when Harry is practicing his patronus 
on the boggart with Lupin...

"Harry suddenly realized that their were tears on his face mingling with the 
sweat. He bent his face low as possible, wiping them off on his robes..."


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Fri Sep 12 07:15:34 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 07:15:34 -0000
Subject: Did Harry ever shed tears ?  Phoenix animagus perhaps ?
In-Reply-To: <20030912060005.24668.qmail@web60201.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjrrqm+msn4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80528

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, eowynn_24 <eowynn_24 at y...> 
wrote:
> Wouldnt it be interesting if Harry could be an animagus >in the 
form 
> form of a phoenix? Is this possible o cannonites and, if >not, why
> not? 

I believe that JKR said that none of the kids will become animagi.
I also doubt that one can turn into a magical animal like the
phoenix. All animagi seen thus far turned into "ordinary" animals.

> >It is also clear from CoS that Harry can {whether he knows it or 
not} 
> >summon a phoenix when in trouble just like Dumbledore can. 

No he can't. The phoenix belongs to Dumbledore and only came in
response to Harry's loyalty to Dumbledore. I also have a hunch
that Dumbledore himself may have sent him (i.e. he somehow knew
he needed help). Perhaps the phoenix could sense that Harry was
in trouble because his wand was taken by Riddle, and the core of
the wand is Fawkes' tail feather.

> >What if someone who is not related Harry {or whomever} by blood 
> >sacrificed his life for him ? Is there any special charm or shield 
> >generated by this sacrifice or must it be through a blood relation?

My understanding is that the shield requires the blood connection.
If it weren't, Dumbledore could have left Harry with the Weasleys
and not the Dursleys...

> >In CoS, when Ron and Harry took the polyjuice potion and ran into 
a 
> >Ravenclaw who turned out to be Percy's girlfriend Penelope 
Clearwater 
> >(pgs 219, 258 us ed) coming out of the entrance to the dungeon 
where 
> >the Slytherin lurk ... uh what was she doing there? If she wasn't 
> >Percy's girlfriend I wouldn't have given it a second thought ... 

I believe that Percy and Penny looked for secluded spots to kiss
as far away from their respective houses' dormitories. Both
Gryffindor and Ravenclaw have dormitories up in a tower so they
naturally hid in the dungeons.
 
> OK, now with out my books i don't have anything to back this, plus 
I could be completely off base. I always thought that since the 
Hufflepuffs and the Gryffindors went up the same set of stairs to 
their separate dormitories (splitting some ways before they reach 
said dorms.), that Ravenclaw and Slytherine were both located in the 
dungeons, just separate ways once you entered. Is this just movie 
contamination?

Yes. In OoP it is mentioned at least in one place that Ravenclaw
dormitories are in a tower and Hufflepuff in the dungeons (I don't
remember the exact place but I think it's described when they
depart the first DA lesson).

> >And my ultimate never got an answer to post --- Does anyone care 
that 
> >Luna was NOT on the Hogwarts Express at the end of OOTP ???????

It is never said she was not on the train. She was not in the same
compartment as Harry, but then she hasn't been there the first
four books either... I am sure she was on the train.

Salit





From quigonginger at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 07:20:10 2003
From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 07:20:10 -0000
Subject: Sam's questions (was:Did Harry ever shed tears ?  Phoenix animagus perhaps ?)
In-Reply-To: <bjri62+cs2h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjrs3a+s1lt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80529

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" <yswahl at s...> wrote:
> My pensieve sprung a leak and a couple of stray thoughts snuck 
out ...
 
> Wouldnt it be interesting if Harry could be an animagus in the form 
> form of a phoenix? Is this possible o cannonites and, if not, why
> not? 
Ginger:  JKR said in an interview that Harry would not become an 
animagus.  Sorry, but I don't remember which interview.  Perhaps a 
computer-literate listee will help?
 
> It is also clear from CoS that Harry can {whether he knows it or 
not} 
> summon a phoenix when in trouble just like Dumbledore can.  I 
wonder 
> why he hasnt done so more often ?
Ginger:  Harry summoned Falkes by showing loyalty to Dumbledore (CoS 
p. 332 US paperback).  This opportunity is not available at all times.
  
> if werewolves are so dangerous why was one recuperating at St. 
Mungos 
> in OOP, seemingly unguarded ?
Ginger:  It was still 2 weeks until the full moon, so he was "safe". 
(OoP p. 488 US)
 
> In CoS, when Ron and Harry took the polyjuice potion and ran into a 
> Ravenclaw who turned out to be Percy's girlfriend Penelope 
Clearwater 
> (pgs 219, 258 us ed) coming out of the entrance to the dungeon 
where 
> the Slytherin lurk ... uh what was she doing there? If she wasn't 
> Percy's girlfriend I wouldnt have given it a second thought ...  
Ginger:  If you notice, Percy appeared a few moments later.  I don't 
have canon for this, but my personal opinion is that they were 
(giggle, giggle) kissing.  (or whatever)

> And my ultimate never got an answer to post --- Does anyone care 
that 
> Luna was NOT on the Hogwarts Express at the end of OOTP ??????
Ginger:  It doesn't say that Euan Abercrombie was there either. (wave 
and wink to CMC), but that doesn't mean he wasn't.  Come to think of 
it, Orla Quirke wasn't mentioned either!  Shippers ahoy!  All hands 
on deck!  OK, I'm kidding.  I hope you didn't take that badly.  I'm 
just pointing out that she wasn't missing, she just wasn't 
mentioned.  It is quite logical to think she'd be with Harry and the 
others, given what they'd been through, but she may have been with 
her Ravenclaw friends (perhaps Orla).

I love posts like this!  They give me a chance to stretch my memory 
and cognitive skills (such as they are).  Please excuse that I 
snipped the questions for which I had no clue.

Got any more?
Ginger, who is unable to prophesy, and therefore will never produce a 
prophecy.  (practice, practice, practice) 





From eiffelangel at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 12 02:10:33 2003
From: eiffelangel at hotmail.com (eiffelangel)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 02:10:33 -0000
Subject: photo vs. painting in magical world/DD's legilimency & 1st OoP/worse than de
In-Reply-To: <bjqvlf+idg6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjr9up+a2ck@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80530

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" 
<bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "wry1352000" 
<wry1352000 at y...>
> wrote:

<snip>
  
> > Another idea that struck me sometime after I read OoP was 
how 
> > Dumbledore, if he possessed the skill of Legilimency could 
not know 
> > who was the traitor in the first Order of the Phoenix.  
> >
> < ,,,edited,,,
> > 
> > What do you think?
> > 
> > Zinaida.
> 
> bboy_mn:
> Although, I cut it out of the previous post, a summary of the key
> point was, why didn't Dumbledore use Legilimency to detect 
that Peter
> Pettigrew was the spy. Here in lies the fallibility of Legilimancy.
> Being as pathetic, fightened, insecure, and generally 
unreliable as
> Peter was, it's possible he was always giving off 'bad vibes'. It's
> possible that people even with limited Legilimency skill, 
always pick
> up nervousness, fear, and insecurity, so he could have been a 
very
> hard person to 'read'. Plus, I suspect lying was a normal 
course of
> events for someone like Peter; an everyday occurance.
> 
> It's possible that Dumbledore had some suspicions, but given 
the
> general paranoia of that time in history, I suspect everyone was
> picking up a degree of suspiciousness from everyone one 
else; no one
> trusted anyone. Even a person you had absolute trust in could 
be under
> the control of the Imperious curse; so really, even the most 
trusted
> person couldn't really be trusted. Paranoia everywhere.
> 
> Just a thought.
> 
> bboy_mn

Adding to this idea, I doubt whether Lord Voldemort would ever 
pick a spy or employ someone without making sure they are 
skilled at occlumency. He wouldn't want to be exposed by his 
sniveling henchmen, now, would he? Perhaps this is why he 
murders many of his informants... they know too much and have 
sensetive material now in their minds, ready to be discovered by 
any legilimens. And even so, the only people who he has a 
personal audience with and who he doesn't kill (i.e. Death 
Eaters and the like) are all very powerful wizards. He did not 
murder Pettigrew, twitchy as he was, but he did kill Bertha, who 
gave me the impression that she was not too good a witch... Can 
we then assume that Peter is quite a powerful little rat?





From eiffelangel at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 12 02:26:00 2003
From: eiffelangel at hotmail.com (eiffelangel)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 02:26:00 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore & Harry's security
In-Reply-To: <bjqrcv+7i5o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjraro+6a6l@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80531


<snip>

 So.... maybe... Dumbledore invisibly follows Harry around the 
school. 
> Just my crazy idea... but it kinda makes sense right? 
> 
> "theredshoes86"

I believe you are correct, theredshoes86, and I think I can prove 
it. Based on what I know of J.K. and her writing style, I know that 
she scrutinizes over every name in her books, and each has 
double, or even tripple meanings. (to see what I mean, try and 
find out about the symbolic meanings of Lilies and Petunias). I 
never knew what "Dumbledore" meant until I read "THe 
Mysteries and Secrets of Harry Potter" (the reason I got "Hooked 
on Harry" in the first place, an awesome read, I highly 
recommend it). The book says that Dumbledore means 
"bulmblebee" 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 htis 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?





From happydenim at netscape.net  Fri Sep 12 02:46:22 2003
From: happydenim at netscape.net (denimtoday)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 02:46:22 -0000
Subject: Umbridge's 'Writing Lines' Detention for Harry
Message-ID: <bjrc1u+fpv5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80532

JK Rowling is supposed to be a very well-read person. The following 
must have given her the inspiration for Harry's torturous 'writing 
lines' detention by Professor Umbridge. We'll, probably, never know 
for sure, though, will we? <grin>

The Secrets of Writing with Quills 

The Writing Pressure 

LIGHT, LIGHT, LIGHT!!! As Jim Downey told me, hold the
quill as if writing and make small circles with it on
the back of your other hand (Try this without ink). When
you can make slight indentations on your hand without
leaving a slight scratch mark, you are using the proper
pressure to write. The pressure most of us use to write
with today is way, way, too hard to use with a quill. 

Source: http://www.sullivanpress.com/quills.htm

Denim


 
 





From deemarie1a at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 09:41:52 2003
From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 09:41:52 -0000
Subject: Harry's Temper Was Re: Feelings on OoP
In-Reply-To: <bjptr7+b95m@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjs4d0+a8pf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80533

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Doriane" <delwynmarch at y...> 
wrote:
 
> That's always been the stickiest part for me, right from PS. Harry 
> *never* asks the most obvious and necessary questions. He *never* 
> asked anyone to tell him about his parents. He still doesn't know 
for 
> sure what they did as a job. He never inquired about his 
grandparents 
> either. He *accidentally* discovered about Sirius, his father's 
very 
> best friend, his parents' best man, during his *third* year at 
> Hogwarts !! Etc, etc, etc...
> 
> I understand JKR had to withhold information from us, but this 
never 
> made any sense to me, so I'm not bothered anymore that he doesn't 
ask 
> the questions that truly bother him in OoP...
> 
> Del

D replies -

Harry grew up knowing only not to ask questions.  (SS US edition pg. 
20 Paperback):

The only thing Harry liked about his own apperance was a very thin 
scar on his forehead that was shaped like a bolt of lightning.  He 
had had it as long as he could remember, and the first question he 
could ever remember asking his Aunt Petunia was how he had gotten it.

"In the car crash when your parents died," she had said.  "And don't 
ask questions."

*Don't ask questions* - that was the first rule for a quiet life with 
the Dursleys.

A leopard cannot change its spots overnight.  So, I find it 
reasonable that Harry doesn't ask the right questions.  He hasn't 
been around the right people to ask about his parents either.  Let's 
face it, Sirius has to be in hiding as the MoM is after him, so that 
doesn't lend itself to long intimate conversations.  Remus leaves 
Hogwarts and is not readily available to Harry.  Dumbledore is fairly 
inaccessable also.  (But personally, I think if Harry wanted to, and 
before OotP, he could sit down with him and ask questions.) Ron would 
only know what he has been told growing up.  Hermione knows only what 
she has gleaned from books about LV.  Molly and Arthur probably knew 
James and Lily, but I do not get the impression they were intmate 
friends.  So, where does that leave Harry to go to find out?

Yet, we see Harry developing over the series.  I think that in the 
last two books we will see Harry asking the "right" questions.  He is 
becoming more mature and independent.  

A side note - as to what DD sees in the mirror - Harry wasn't 
entirely sure DD was telling him the truth, but just enough of the 
truth of what he saw to satisfy Harry at the time.  Yes, he probably 
saw himself with socks.  But I think he saw a grown up, healthy, 
happy Harry giving him those socks.  Don't you think at the time that 
that was the deepest, most despirate desire of DD's heart?

D  




From liliana at worldonline.nl  Fri Sep 12 09:54:25 2003
From: liliana at worldonline.nl (laylalast)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 09:54:25 -0000
Subject: Mistaken identity - part one
Message-ID: <bjs54h+a7p0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80534

Lately, I have seen posts pondering on the haircolor of the 
Weasley's, the importance of Ginny to the coming books, whether
all 
Weasley children are actually Arthur & Molly's and Lily's
friends at 
Hogwarts.  

Well, I already had an idea about this all, a theory is the better 
word rather, which I will present here after having finished it on a 
top note (looks apprehensive at yellow flags standing in line to 
pounch theory). As it ranges over various books and through time, 
this is rather a long post. Therefore I will snip it into parts. On a 
side note: all the HP canon mentioned here comes from the UK 
paperback editions, with exception of GOF, which is still with my 
mother. The canon quoted from that book is possibly slightly 
incorrect as I have used the Dutch translation for lack of better.
 
Also I would like to mention that I`d like to pay tribute to
those 
people who have said valuable things in past posts which dealt with 
the events that come up in my theory. As these posts sometimes go 
back quite a while, it was too difficult to trace them back and name 
people exactly. Sorry for that. 

Having said that, on with the theory!
Let's go back in time, the time when MWPP, Lily, Snape and Bertha 
Jorkins were all attending Hogwarts. Why Bertha Jorkins? Well, it is 
with the pensieve scene of Bertha Jorkins, this theory more or less 
started.

GOF: ,He put a hex on me, professor Perkamentus, I was only teasing 
him. All I said that I had seen him kissing Florence behind the 
greenhouses last Thursday'

It has been pondered on before whether this scene had something to do 
with Snape or Sirius. Since OotP we know that of MWPP and Snape, the 
last three are the ones who are rather trigger-happy, or to speak in 
magical terms, hexing-happy. Of the three, it will not have been 
James as it was pointed by both Snape's worst memory and Sirius 
evidence later, James was already in love with Lily. No snogging 
Florence by James. So that leaves Snape and Sirius.
If it is Sirius, and Bertha had been set up by Snape to follow 
Sirius, why would Sirius be so pissed off at Snape to want to play 
the Prank on him? Considering Sirius' behaviour at the time, he
was a 
rather carefree type, who was not going to be bothered if he was seen 
kissing a girl. Even if Snape found out through Bertha. I mean, he 
knew that James had `something' for a girl, why feel
embarassed if 
James knew the same thing about him?
Conclusion: Snape was kissing Florence. But why would Sirius take 
offence then. Hmmmm, I have a take on that which has a lot to do with 
Bertha Jorkins herself. What kind of girl was Bertha? Here we receive 
evidence from Sirius himself:

GOF: , 
the Bertha I knew was not forgetfull at all. She was
rather 
dim but she had a good memory for gossip. That caused her a lot of 
trouble, because she did not know when to keep her mouth shut.'

So Bertha had a good memory for gossip, but she was not too bright. 
As Sirius says: a dangerous combination.

Bertha saw Snape kissing Florence behind the greenhouse, shortly 
after `Snape's worst memory'. Snape, just having been
thoroughly 
humiliated by James and Sirius, even if they did not take his pants 
off, hides in a place where nobody bothers him and he can, 
metaphorically speaking, lick his wounds and not be humiliated 
further by others. Enter Florence, who is IMO a friend of Lily, and 
who has a kind soul and a thing for Snape. JKR said about Snape and 
love:

"Q: Will Snape ever fall in love?
A: (laughs) Who would want Snape to be in love with them? <snips rest 
of quote for later reference>"

Funny answer when you come to think of it. Seems a bit as if someone 
wanting Snape to be in love is more on JKR's mind than Snape
being in 
love himself. Curious (oh, and BTW, do you notice that JKR 
said `them'. Not her ? not him either, but that's
another discussion 
entirely ? but THEM. Plural, two persons at least). Very curious 
indeed.

So yeah, we have Florence, coming after Snape, and wanting him 
(subcounsciously) to be in love with her. What happens then is a bit 
like what happens to Harry and Cho in the room of requirement. Snape 
is a bit too hurt to throw her off, she tries in a friendly way to 
comfort him and oh well, the next is what Bertha saw.

And off Bertha goes with her new piece of gossip. Runs into Sirius 
and tells him all about it. So, why would Sirius piss this off so 
much that he is off into the Prank? Florence was his girl, you will 
say. Nope, she wasn't because if she was, I believe that we would 
have read something about it now, given that Sirius is dead. But why 
then, do you ask? 
Well, what did Bertha see? Snape kissing a red-haired girl. Snape 
kissing red-haired Florence. What did dim-witted Bertha tell Sirius? 
Snape was kissing a red-haired girl. Maybe even dim-witted Bertha 
said that it was Lily. All she saw was a red-haired girl, from 
behind. Right after Lily's interference with James and Sirius on 
behalf of Snape. 
So who does Sirius think (or hears from Bertha) the red-haired girl 
is? Lily. The Lily his best friend is in love with. And who is now 
stolen by Snape. Snivellus, greasy-haired, odd-ball, and all  the 
other epithets-Snape. No way that Sirius will let that happen. 
Instead: scare Snape out of his wits, put him in disgrace with Lily, 
and the field is clear for James again. Yes, the stage is set for: 
the Prank.

-  This is what the title of the post refers to and this is why I 
believe that Lily has red hair. No family relation with the Weasleys, 
no family relation with Dumbledore. A case of mistaken identity. 
Mistaken identity by Bertha, which sets off a course of incidents. 
Mistaken identity as a plot twist by JKR.  -

Bertha does mention later to professor Dumbledore that she saw 
Florence. But that was after she was hexed by Snape, when she finally 
confronted him with what she saw. But she had IMO told Sirius before 
that. And I don't think she has ever set that error right, why
should she?

Lilian




From liliana at worldonline.nl  Fri Sep 12 09:55:41 2003
From: liliana at worldonline.nl (laylalast)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 09:55:41 -0000
Subject: Mistaken identity - part two
Message-ID: <bjs56t+k3uf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80535

On with the theory.

Florence identity:

We have Snape, behind the greenhouses, emotionally uptight and all of 
a sudden face to face with a nice-looking red-haired girl, named 
Florence, who has a kind nature but will not be turned down (Why do I 
assume that? Evidence will follow later). Do we have any evidence as 
to who Florence is? No, not direct evidence. Speculations have been 
made as to whether she was the now-Mrs. Lestrange, but that has been 
completely ruled out by OotP. So we're back to the question, who is 
Florence?
I believe she has red hair because of my `mistaken identity'-theory, 
but where can she get red hair from? Let's hear what Draco Malfoy has 
to say:

PS/SS pg 81: `
No need to ask you who you are. My father told me all 
the Weasleys have red hair, freckles and more children than they can 
afford.'

Draco's father, Lucius is 41 in OotP, Bill, the oldest child of 
Arthur and Molly is at least 13 years younger. Lucius has not known 
Bill at school. But Lucius has not known Arthur at school either, at 
least not as a year-mate, because Arthur must be at least 46. Then 
why does Lucius talk about `all the Weasleys'? Surely he does not 
talk about Arthur's own kids in that way. But Lucius could have known 
Arthurs brothers and sisters, as they all would have gone to 
Hogwarts. And that would fit with Lucius saying that `all the 
Weasleys
..'. 
Add to this the idea the thread that the Weasleys put an A-B-C 
sequence in their first names for their children, then Arthur is the 
oldest brother and some 10-12 years later, there comes his sister. 
Red-haired. Florence. Florence Weasley.
In addition to the canon offered by Draco, there are multiple 
references throughout all the books to the red hair of the Weasleys. 
In fact, we are reminded of it so often that we tend to `overlook' 
it,..(sort of: yeah, yeah, we know, we know but get on with the 
story).

But, but, that would mean that Snape got himself involved with a 
WEASLEY, I can hear you all think. Yes, he did. Sorry, for the 
LOLLIPOPS-ers among us, but Snape himself ruled Lily out in OotP as 
she was `a filthy, little mud-blood' (don't like it anymore than you 
do, but he said so). But Florence Weasley is a pureblood after all. I 
don't believe for a minute that she was in Slytherin, but still: a 
pureblood. From a poor family, but Snape was probably also, so that 
didn't really matter. Gryffindor, likely, but we just have something 
blossoming up between these two and who then thinks of these matters?

What happpened then to Snape and Florence? The Prank. 

The Prank could have taken place at the end of the fifth year, 
because all we know is that Sirius was sixteen at the time of the 
Prank, but not when he became sixteen. He may very well have been 
sixteen at the end of the fifth year. But it is more likely that the 
Prank took place at the beginning of the sixth year. Snape would not 
have listened to anything Sirius would have told him shortly after 
the `Snape's worst memory'-scene. But after the summer holidays, some 
sweet dreams about Florence, and a different attitude from Sirius in 
the new school year
. Yup, Snape falls for it.
The `Snape the iconoclast'-thread deals with the, what I consider the 
best, reasons for Snape to become a DE later, but there is IMO 
something else that happened which caused the rift between Snape and 
Florence. 

PS/SS pg 214: `What happened down in the dungeons between you and 
Professor Quirrell is a complete secret, so, naturally, the whole 
school knows.'

OotP pg 513: `By the end of the day, though Harry had not seen so 
much as a corner of The Quibbler anywhere in the school, the whole 
place seemed to be quoting the interview to each other.'

Just picture this. The Prank happens and Snape is sworn to secrecy by 
DD about Lupin being a werewolf. But the school knows that Snape went 
to the Shrieking Shack. And was rescued by James. All the school 
knows. Nothing about Lupin. Maybe about Sirius setting Snape up, but 
oh well, that's a good joke! And Snape fell for it! All they need to 
think to make it worse for Snape. Just imagine ::shudders::. And 
Snape cannot tell the truth because he promised to keep silent. 
Besides, even if he tried, nobody would believe him. James was the 
popular guy, not he.  James was the guy who did heroic things (in 
Quidditch at least), not he.
This is the story that Florence hears. Tells Snape how foolish it was 
to go to the Shrieking Shack. How lucky he was that James saved him. 
How grateful he should be. ::shudders again::. And there goes -by now 
Volcano- Snape! He tells, shouts the truth at her, but Florence will 
not believe it. Lupin, a werewolf? Severus, now really
.Be honest, 
Severus
.. etc. etc. Result: end of affection between the two of them.

- On a side note, Sirius never finds out that it was not Lily that 
Bertha saw with Snape, or who Bertha thought she saw with Snape.  And 
when Harry asks for the reason of the Prank, Sirius will never tell 
Harry it was because his mother, Lily, was ever seen kissing Snape. -

As  Florence is a friend of Lily she later finds out that Lupin is 
indeed a werewolf. Florence then realises that Snape had told her the 
truth all along.
Perhaps as an auror or Order-member, Florence comes across Snape 
again, possibly they just met somehow or other. Some heated 
discussions may have followed, some heartwrenching apologies, 
accusations, whatever but the endresult is: they become a couple 
(again). And this is why (and when) Snape starts to spy for the other 
side. Florence, or his feelings for her, convinces him. 

Canon for this:

GOF:  `Snape was indeed a Death Eater, but came back to our side 
before Voldemort's downfall and has been a spy at great personal 
risk.'

OotP pg 734: `I trust Severus Snape,' said Dumbledore simply.'

Florence convincing Severus to change sides is a bit thin IMO for 
Dumbledore completely trusting him. And that is were the Weasley kids 
come in. 

Lilian




From liliana at worldonline.nl  Fri Sep 12 09:56:41 2003
From: liliana at worldonline.nl (laylalast)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 09:56:41 -0000
Subject: Mistaken identity - part three
Message-ID: <bjs58p+qj6k@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80536

Apart from the current Weasley speculation, speculation has also been 
made whether Snape has a kid, and if that kid is at school or will 
come in the near future. My idea is, that if there is such a kid, JKR 
would have let Snape given some clue to its existence. 

One of the things that struck me while reading COS is that the scene 
in which Snape berates Harry and Ron for flying the Ford Anglia, is 
that there are in fact three possible meanings to that scene:
1) Surface meaning: just another way for Snape to get back on Harry 
and his ` faithful sidekick';
2) Deeper meaning; Snape (as a Malfoy family member ?see my post 
79062) has ordered Dobby to keep Harry from Hogwarts. Dobby has, 
obviously, not succeeded so Snape now tries himself.
3) Well, what actually happens? Harry and Ron do not attend the 
feast, or more particular at that very moment: the Sorting Ceremony. 
COS pg 65: `The Sorting Ceremony is over,' said Professor McGonagall. 
But this also means that Snape is not present at the sorting either. 

I believe that (3) is the actual meaning of that scene, showing us in 
a very sly and undercover way that Snape does not attend the sorting. 
And why would he do that? Because his kid will be sorted. His kid, 
who does not know him. Who is being sorted that we know of? Ginny 
Weasley and Colin Creevey. 

It could have been Colin Creevey but this is later contradicted by 
GOF when Colin's brother gets sorted. Snape does not have more kids 
in my theory. And that leaves us
. Ginny.

Canon has told us until now that Ginny is a daughter of Arthur and 
Molly. But as someone else mentioned lately, canon is sometimes 
disproven by later canon. Madeye Moody was never someone else until 
he was revealed as poly-juiced Barty Crouch jr.
Why is Ginny with Arthur and Molly? It has been speculated here that 
Arthur has personal experience with the Dark Mark showing above his 
home. It's that and Florence was visiting at the moment and therefore 
killed, or Arthur had to come to his sister's house, with the Dark 
Mark hovering above it. Either way, Florence is dead.
Snape, being a spy, is in no position to take care of Ginny. If he is 
ever outed, he is dead and Ginny too. After Voldemorts' downfall, 
that situation is not different as he, like Dumbledore and Hagrid, 
expects that one day Voldemort will be back. Next to that, Snape 
might distrust himself as father. He is no fool, after all. 

In addition to that: how do Arthur and Molly treat other children who 
stay with them but are not family. Very affectionate and caring, 
Molly especially. And Harry is being treated as a foster-son. 

OotP pg 85: `He's not your son,' said Sirius quietly. `He's as good 
as,' said Mrs Weasley fiercely. `Who else has he got?'

GOF: comforting Harry after Voldemort's rising (sorry, too difficult 
to translate just like that)

IMO, canon has it  that if a kid enters the Weasley family as a 
fosterchild at a very young age, it will be their kid to Arthur and 
Molly. That is also why, still IMO, we are so often told about their 
affectionate and parental behaviour. 

And is there additional evidence that it is Ginny who is the daughter 
of Snape and Florence? In canon:

OotP pg 149: `I don't believe it! I don't believe it! Oh Ron, how 
wonderful! A prefect! That's everyone in the family!'. `What are Fred 
and I, next-door neighbours?' said George indignantly'

OotP pg 160: Ron's dead body ? Bill's body ? Mr Weasley  -Dead twins ?
 Dead Percy ? Dead Harry 


In the first scene Fred, George and Ginny are excluded, in the second 
scene Charlie and Ginny. Both times: Ginny. Surface explanations like 
Ginny cannot yet be a prefect and hey, Charlie was left out as well 
are IMO red herrings. The significance is that Ginny is not included 
TWICE.

Add to that the following:

OotP pg 73: ` Snape never eats here,' Ron told Harry quietly.'

The idea has been brought up that Snape does not eat at Grimmauld's 
place because of Sirius or the dislike of the other Order members. 
But at dinner Order members are not always present as we learn later, 
but during the summer holidays ALL the Weasleys are.  And does 
nowadays Snape really strikes us as someone who is bothered by the 
dislike of others? 

And Molly is concerned about how Snape is being treated:

OotP pg 457: `Snape?' said Harry blankly. `Professor Snape, dear. In 
the kitchen. He'd like a word.' 

Surface explanation: Molly is just insisting on Harry showing 
respect. But below that
. Molly is the foster-mother of Snape's 
daughter.

Before I gave Florence a few character traits which I would explain 
later. IMO, it is Ginny's character growth shown in OOtP which is a 
clue in itself. They come from her mother, Florence. Ginny is not 
subdued by Harry's sultry behavior now as Florence was not subdued by 
Snape's sultry behavior then.

It does also explain Dumbledore's trust in Snape. Snape will never 
betray the side his daughter is with, even if he has little feelings 
for her. And Dumbledore's patience with the man. Taking him in a 
fatherly way to the feast in COS, Snape's not wanting Lupin to teach 
in POA (no werewolf at the school where my kid is! ?apart from 
Snape's other reasons-). Realising that it is not easy for any 
person, even Snape, to give up its child, distance itself from it.

As an end note I bring to mind JKR's quote as who would want Snape to 
be in love with them. The them is first Florence and later their 
daughter . In the latter case love is not meant in the adult way but 
the child who wants its parent to care about him/her, no matter what. 
Also the quote about the relation `that is at the heart of it all' 
and that the information about Hogwarts' spouses is rather 
restricted. To quote a fictional detective (I believe Lord Peter 
Wimsey ? by Dorothy L. Sayers -): If you look at all evidence 
separately, they sort of seem to melt away. Together it becomes 
suspicious. Very suspicious.'

Well.
This is it.
This is what I believe and I'm sticking to it.

Lilian (now looking hopefully at the distant shore of TBAY, wondering 
if this is enough vessel to come into harbour)




From ffionmiles at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 12 11:49:52 2003
From: ffionmiles at hotmail.com (ffimiles)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 11:49:52 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore & Harry's security
In-Reply-To: <bjraro+6a6l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjsbt0+tai3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80537

> I believe you are correct, theredshoes86, and I think I can prove 
> it. Based on what I know of J.K. and her writing style, I know that 
> she scrutinizes over every name in her books, and each has 
> double, or even tripple meanings. (to see what I mean, try and 
> find out about the symbolic meanings of Lilies and Petunias). I 
> never knew what "Dumbledore" meant until I read "THe 
> Mysteries and Secrets of Harry Potter" (the reason I got "Hooked 
> on Harry" in the first place, an awesome read, I highly 
> recommend it). The book says that Dumbledore means 
> "bulmblebee" 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 htis 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?

Great idea - only thing that occurs to me is that Hermione has looked 
up the registered animagi and didn't mention Dumbledore - he could be 
an unofficial one like Rita Skeeter and james, Lupin, sirisu and 
Pettigrew of course...would dumbledore risk that?  Probably...
but I have been wondering how he has been watching Harry 'more 
closely than you could ever know' - above and beyond just teachers 
reporting back to him on how he was getting on in class - afterall, 
there are rarely any teachers in the Gryffindor Commonroom, which is 
where much of the deductions about Harry being happy/stressed/upset  
could be made.
Ffi




From delwynmarch at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 12:11:19 2003
From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (Doriane)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 12:11:19 -0000
Subject: Harry a Hero?  Was: The magic power of love.
In-Reply-To: <bjqpj3+lq8o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjsd57+hoae@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80538

"slgazit" wrote:

> > > Wouldn't you expect your kid to tell someone (you, the police, 
> > > whoever) what he knows ?
> 
> Not if they thought they would get in trouble for it. Remember
> that their knowledge (and at that point they did not *know* yet -
> they just guessed) came by breaking school rules - brewing illegal
> potions, going into the forbidden forest, etc. Don't forget that
> they were on probation and had been told by no less than Dumbledore
> himself (after the car incident) that any more rule breaking
> would lead to their expulsion.

But just the year before, he was saying that school rules, expulsion 
and stuff like that, don't matter anymore when a matter of life and 
death is at stake... Still I get your point. Especially since the 
only one who could teach Harry to turn to adults for help when needed 
is DD, and he won't do that, because he wants Harry to rely on 
himself only.


> Ha? He cared very much for Ginny or he would not show the emotions
> he showed ("Ginny, please don't be dead!").

Not convincing to me. Reminds me of when I go "Please let it not be 
broken !" when I drop a valuable and fragile object. I don't care 
about the thing itself, just about what its being broken would mean 
to me. In Harry's case, he doesn't want Ginny to be dead both because 
it'd be a sad thing of course, but also because it would mean he's 
failed in trying to save her.

> maybe one like you or me who grew up with adult
> figures you could actually turn to for help - might have done that.
> Harry grew up to only count on himself and not much even at Hogwarts
> lead him to think that showing weakness and appealing to adults
> would result in any kind of good outcome.

If I may say so, you have no idea what kind of environment I grew up 
in. In fact I grew up thinking and feeling like I had to take care of 
myself emotionally, like I wasn't allowed to be weak, I *had* to be 
strong, I'd better not let my emotions (whether pleasure, pain, hurt, 
fear...) show or someone would use them against me, etc... I didn't 
have it as bad as Harry, all right, but no I didn't grow up among 
adult figures I could turn to for help. Quite the opposite in fact. 
And now that I think of it, I'm not sure I'd have done much 
differently than Harry... Ouch !! I'm bringing my whole point down 
myself !!

> I have never seen him anywhere thinking that he is cut above others.
> He continuously throughout the series is plagued with feelings of
> inadequacy. He thinks the Sorting Hat would tell him he should
> go back, he is surprised whenever he passes a test (note his
> assessment of his OWL tests - thinking that *maybe* he passed on
> tests where he clearly did well). During the Triwizard tournament
> he repeats how the other champions are so much older, experienced
> and fit for the job than he is. I could go on. The only time
> when he explodes and lists his accomplishment (early in OoP) is
> in context of feeling that they are being ignored and downplayed
> and he is clearly acting out his frustration.
> And those outbursts are short-lived,
> immediately followed by self doubt and self reproach.
> If anything he is too hard on himself (well, my 15 year old is
> the same way, so it must be a 15-yo-boy thing... :-)).

Do you notice the pattern here ? Harry is afraid of not doing well in 
school or in competition, because he knows others can be just as good 
as he is. But when it comes to saving the world, he's not afraid of 
taking on the whole task on his own, because he's intimately 
convinced that he's the best there is, that nobody can do as well as 
he. Look how reticent he was about bringing Neville, Luna and Ginny 
along to the DoM : he knew they weren't as good as he for the job, so 
why bother ?
But I am aware, of course, that he knows he's the only one who could 
defeat LV. That's bound to distort anyone's self-image.

> What he does have is the strong belief that he has to rely on 
> himself only

Only when it comes to saving-the-world. He doesn't mind asking for 
help from Hermione where school or competition is concerned.

> I don't think that is necessarily what leads him to act. It is more
> the fact that the events that cause him to act were orchestrated
> especially to that purpose. Hermione and Ginny were attacked in
> CoS for the express purpose of getting him involved. In PoA, Sirius'
> goal (aside from capturing Pettigrew) is to meet with Harry. A DE
> put his name in the Triwizard tournament. He was lured to the MoM
> on purpose. The point is that much wiser and stronger adults are
> repeatedly manipulating him (whether it's Voldemort, Sirius,
> Dumbledore, etc.), and he is as yet too young and inexperience to
> act in the best possible way (that assuming there is a better way).

Quite true. It's the lot of all kids, to be manipulated one way or 
another by adults around them, but those manipulating Harry have 
particularly bad intentions in doing so.

> > > No, he showed that trait when he couldn't bring himself to kill 
> > > Sirius that same night. But at least he tried, at least he 
> > > hated Sirius, because Sirius was a strong opponent.
> 
> Are you suggesting that it would have been better if he had the
> power to kill him?

?? He did have the power to kill him. Or at least he *thought* so, 
though we know he couldn't have killed Sirius with magic (what spell 
to use ?) But he chose not to.

> No, he did not want Lupin and Sirius to be murderers

It wasn't his choice to make, but I understand his wish.

> and he wanted - for once - to let the authorities handle the 
> punishment.

And get Sirius officially cleared of all charges ! *That* was the 
main reason he wanted to hand Peter to the authorities for.

> The result only reinforced his perception that adult authorities 
> are corrupt and unjust (ignoring his testimony that Sirius was 
> innocent and that Pettigrew was alive and guilty). Earlier you said 
> that Harry's fault is not appealing to autority figures for help - 
> that was what he was trying to accomplish here, and look what a 
> mess it ended up being.

He didn't intend to ask for help. Quite the opposite actually. He 
intended to demonstrate to the authorities that they had been wrong 
all along but that thanks to him and his friends, they were now able 
to correct their mistake. That's not asking for help.

> Yes and no. I think that she tries to convey that a person's value
> is determined by his choices, convictions and willingness to follow
> through with them. Being able to do so honorably in the face of
> enormous hurdles and obstacles, and being faced with challenges
> that noone else had, is what makes Harry exceptional.

Hermione does that too, but somehow she doesn't strike me as being 
presented as a hero. She's deeply convinced she's acting right in 
everything she does, whether it's working hard in school, or setting 
up SPEW, but she comes through as a silly foolish girl who doesn't 
get her priorities right. So why Harry and not Hermione, not Neville, 
not Luna or Ginny ? They are all doing exactly the same, more or 
less. As for the "being faced with challenges that noone else had", 
remember how it was when you were a kid and a teen : deep inside, you 
were convinced that noone, ever, had been through the trials you were 
facing. I felt that way, even when I read or heard of other people 
who had experienced the very same things as I was living : it just 
wasn't the same, it was somehow worse for me.

> Maybe we just did not read the same books... :-)

Nah :-) We just didn't read them the same way.

> Cool head, good wits and reflexes helped him. But he also has a
> lot of magical talent (see his DADA skills, Patronus, etc.),

I'll state it once again : I don't see that his DADA skills are so 
exceptional. So he practiced the Patronus Charm for months and he 
finally managed it ? Not such a big deal. So he practiced additional 
charms and hexes with Hermione for the Triwizard Tournament, so that 
now he knows more than the other kids ? Again, what's the deal here ? 
So what DADA skills, what magical talents, are you talking about ? 
He's got a fair amount of it, all right, but not exceptionally much 
as far as I can see.

> a high intelligence (he has figured out quite a few things on his 
> own, even if he may have been given help sometimes),

He's intelligent, sure, but not overly brilliant.

> lots of courage

In the heat of fire, yes. But when it comes to planned events, he's 
just as afraid as anyone : he was almost fainting with fear before 
the first task of the Tournament.

> and quick thinking.

Quick thinking is about the only thing that really puts him apart 
from most other kids.

> He had luck, but that alone would not have lead him to defeat 
> Riddle and the basilisk,

No, but he *was* lucky that Fawkes was there to turn the Basilisk 
blind. He *was* lucky that his sword went through the roof of the 
mouth of the Basilisk as he intended it too, *and* that he wasn't 
killed instantly while doing it. *And* also that the Basilisk tooth 
tore off. Though I'll admit I would never in a million years have 
thought of using it to destroy the Diary :-)

> to scare off 100 dementors,

As I said earlier, he *knew* he was going to manage it, and he'd 
practiced the spell a hundred times, and he couldn't feel the 
Dementors' influence from where he was, and he had a very strong 
motivation to succeed this time, so it wasn't such a hard thing to do 
anymore. Now if he'd managed to scare them off the first time around, 
then I'd have been convinced that this boy is something special 
indeed.

> win the Triwizard tournament,

He did get a lot of help on that one, and Cedric did just as well as 
he did.

> survive Voldemort or the DE's in the MoM.

The others managed that too.

> Just think how any other student from the
> books (incl. Hermione, Ron or others) would have coped in similar
> situations. In fact, where there were other students with him
> (Hermione, Ron, Neville, Cedric, etc.) they all faired worse.

Hermione tends to lose her head in tense situations. But she still 
does very well most of the time. In the MoM, she was taken by 
surprise : she didn't think a spell could still work if you can't say 
it out loud.
Ron : he's got what it takes, but he can't decide what he wants 
most : fame or comfort.
Neville : he's clumsy, just like Tonks, and he was brought up 
thinking he was no good. But he did very well in the DoM.
Cedric : he did just as well as Harry, but he had no luck, LV didn't 
need him. Had LV decided to kill Harry first, he could not have done 
anything to prevent it. Cedric literally didn't see his death coming, 
so what could he do to prevent it ?
So you see, all those students could do just as well as Harry in most 
cases, but they are not the ones LV is interested in, so they are not 
the ones who are manipulated into those situations. And they 
sometimes lack Harry's insolent luck.

> > > You know, Malfoy is a Hero too. Not for you and I, but if our 
> > > values were the same as his, we'd worship him for his daring 
> > > attitude, his cunning, his knowledge, his perseverance, etc...
> 
> Ha? In that case, why go for little Malfoy? Voldemort is all that
> and a lot more...

Oh, but I *do* have a lot of respect for Voldemort. He made morally 
wrong choices, but other than that he's admirable. So much work, so 
much endurance, so much determination... But of course, if I got a 
chance to rid the world of him, I'd do it right away. Whaddayamean, 
he's not for real ??? ;-)

> I don't "worship" Harry but I certainly have a lot of respect
> and admiration for him. This is not to say that I agree with
> everything he does or thinks, I just give respect where it's due.

I do too. I'm just annoyed that he's given so much more respect than 
any other character in the books, when so many other characters 
deserve at least as much respect as he does, and could be just as 
good heroes as Harry, if they were the ones the bad stuff was 
happening to.

Del




From sleepingblyx at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 12:29:02 2003
From: sleepingblyx at yahoo.com (sleepingblyx)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 12:29:02 -0000
Subject: Sirius's death, Predictions for next book
In-Reply-To: <bjprvi+icim@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjse6e+86ce@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80539

> But there is more in the interview. She also said, that it is not 
the 
> most likely candidate (in other words Hermione), and then she 
> asked: "Who do you think it is?" The audience said "Ron", and the 
> answer was. "No, it isn't Ron either." Of course it can still be a 
> minor character, but currently, I am totally convinced it is 
Neville, 
> either in Herbology or in DADA.
> 
> Hickengruendler

I am betting on Petunia, teaching Muggle Studies. There isn't anyone 
else more qualified on "normal muggle life" then her... it fits in 
with the "Petunia as a closet witch" theory. 

--Blyx




From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Sep 12 12:38:32 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 12:38:32 -0000
Subject: Mistaken identity - part three
In-Reply-To: <bjs58p+qj6k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjseo8+bcp9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80540

God, Lilian, I'm really, really sorry to do this to you when you've 
put in so much work, but I'm afraid I have to yellow flag you:
The only reason we know that Florence exists at all is because Bertha 
Jorkins names her to Dumbledore. "I saw him kissing Florence", she 
says. This presumes that she knows who Florence is. If she has seen 
and identified Florence, she's not going to tell Sirius "I saw him 
kissing a girl with red hair" if she knows the name of this girl. 
Therefore we can't deduce at all what Florence looks like from this 
tiny bit of information.
Also, I don't really think that Sirius would be *that* bothered, 
Prank-causing-bothered, by Snape/Lily, even if he was sexist enough 
to view Snape as "moving in on James' patch" - "I think it means she 
thinks you're a bit conceited, mate." He's *amused* by Lily's 
rejection of James, as teenage boys always are when this sort of 
thing happens to their friends, really.
Finally - if he's going out with a Weasley the entire time, 
particularly such a sympathetic one, I don't quite understand where 
Snape gets the motivation to join and remain in the DEs for this sort 
of time period.

I like the idea of a secret love cild lurking somewhere (I tried to 
start a theory that it was actually Tonks a while back, but was 
defeated on age grounds), and if you can make it work around all 
these obstacles, I'll probably go a bit worshipful.
There you go. My objections. Impress me with your manoeuvres, then!
Kirstini




From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Sep 12 12:55:52 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 12:55:52 -0000
Subject: photo vs. painting in magical world
In-Reply-To: <bjovl8+ekgf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjsfoo+trha@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80541

Zinaida:
>>I wonder why there should be such a difference between the arts of 
photography and painting in the magical world.  Both people in 
photographs and people in pictures move and get in and out of their 
frames, but people in paintings can also talk and seem to be aware of 
what goes on, while people in photographs don't talk and don't seem 
to be aware of later events <snip> photographs' sitters are more 
like images frozen in time.  It seems important to me, for otherwise 
Harry could have communicated with Sirius as well as his parents.>>

Now, this is something that bothers me. Until OoP, I was quite happy 
to think within these terms of reference. Until that bit where Sirius 
throws out all the Black family photos, and the photos *squeal*. 
Which implies a capacity for at least wordless noise. And they aren't 
frozen in time, either. They should be, if that blooming woman ever 
stuck to the laws of probability she herself creates, but they 
aren't. Why does Penelope Clearwater duck beneath the frame to hide 
her blotchy nose? Why does Percy walk out of a family photo taken 
before he was angry with his family? How do the Black photos know 
that they are being thrown away in order to register their distress 
in screams? And if they can scream, *why* can't Harry communicate 
with J/L/S? ("Two squeals for yes and a screech for no, mum.")
Oh, she infuriates me, that JKR. And all this is without going into 
philosophical speculation about whether or not a painted 
representation of a person is an accurate representation of that 
person as they are, or whether they are more like the painter's 
conception of them (Dobby's portrait of Harry, for example, I would 
expect to behave rather more like my own dear MC!James than a sulky 
teenager). Oh yes, one more thing: is there only ever one possible 
portrait? Does one image of Dumbledore spend its time magically to-
ing and fro-ing between all the Choclate Frog cards and portraits of 
him in the WW? Could JKR herself please come on line and answer all 
of this to stop my head hurting and so I can throttle her for 
distracting me from my thesis, please?

Kirstini, reflecting miserably that this was only supposed to be a 
three liner.  




From delwynmarch at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 12:58:51 2003
From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (Doriane)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 12:58:51 -0000
Subject: what makes a hero?  (wasRe: The magic power of love.)
In-Reply-To: <bjqmi7+gf4s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjsfub+pigo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80542

> Laura :
> 
> He may not have known his parents but he has a very clear idea of 
> what it is LV deprived him of.  Harry lives in the world, so he 
> knows what parents are supposed to do-love, protect and care for 
> you.  He even has a somewhat warped example in the Dursleys.  They 
> may be pretty pitiful as parents and as human beings, but they 
> unarguably care for Dudley.  So Harry might not be able to miss the 
> particular individuals Lily and James, but he can still feel the 
> absence of parents.

I'm not sure. I grew up without a father, and only recently did I 
start to realize what I was missing. As I read about the 
psychological scars that fatherless people can have, I discovered the 
source of some of my emotional problems. But when I was 5, 10 or 15, 
I was convinced I wasn't worse off for not having a father. Because I 
didn't know what I was missing. And I still don't, not even after 
seeing so many people interact with their fathers, so many men taking 
care of their kids. I did have a few father figures from time to 
time, but they never meant much to me *consciously*, I didn't think I 
needed them. Unconsciously, I desperately needed them of course. But 
I wasn't aware of it. So I'm not sure Harry knows what he's missing. 
I'm not even sure he's aware he's missing anything. How can you 
consciously miss something you've never had ?

> So does that mean that when teenagers do things like rescuing 
> drowning friends or family, or something along those lines (it 
> doesn't happen all the time but it does happen), it's only heroic 
> if the kid has a full understanding that s/he is risking her/his 
> life?  

Ask them : they'll generally be the first ones to tell you they 
aren't heroes. We think they are, because we know what they risked. 
But they weren't aware of it, the thought that they could die didn't 
come to them, so they don't see anything heroic in what they did. It 
had to be done, so they did it. I did something once to defend a 
classmate, it didn't put my life in danger, but it did put my 
physical safety at risk (in other words, I took a blow to the nose :-
), but when I did it, I didn't think anything of it. It had to be 
done.

> Can you be a hero if you do something that doesn't risk your life?  
> What about the people who refused to testify during the McCarthy 
> hearings here in the 1950's?  Their physical lives weren't in 
> danger, but their reputations and livelihoods were. 

I agree they were heroes. And Harry is a hero when he puts everything 
he holds *dear* (school, friends, etc...) in jeopardy in order to do 
what he feels is right. But putting his life at risk is not 
necessarily a sign of heroism, because most of the time he doesn't 
realize beforehand that he might actually die.

> I'm not sure when it is (if ever) that people come to an "adult" 
> understanding of death, but if that's one of the criteria of being 
> a hero, it may be that Harry will never qualify within the time 
> span of the books.  Boys at 17 and 18 are still in full risk-taking 
> mode, as I understand it.  They're still kids, with some of the 
> limitations in thought and experience that kids have.

I think the sad Sirius's death experience will bring Harry precisely 
that : a true sense of death. Not just for himself, which wouldn't be 
a strong incentive to change his behaviour, but mostly for others. He 
will finally understand that his actions can bring the death of 
people he loves. His actions, not just LV's actions, or whoever 
else's actions. No, his, Harry's. He can end up getting someone he 
loves killed. So I think he will finally understand what caution is 
about, why he has to learn to be more cautious.

> So would you say that in PoA Hermione is a hero? 

Of course she's a hero ! She's putting pretty much everything she 
holds dear at risk in order to try and save someone that's nothing to 
her. She risks being killed, being expelled from school, being stuck 
in time, creating a major time problem, etc, etc... And she does it 
only because it's the right thing to do and because of Harry and 
Hagrid. I mean, what is in there for her to gain ? Pretty much 
nothing, as far as she can tell. They *might* save Buckbeak, they 
*might* save Sirius, but more surely they might get themselves in big 
troubles. And still she does it. Though I suspect there was also a 
strong hint of intellectual challenge in the whole thing : can we 
actually pull such a crazy scheme off ?

Del




From delwynmarch at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 13:12:18 2003
From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (Doriane)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 13:12:18 -0000
Subject: The magic power of love. Was: BANG! You're dead!
In-Reply-To: <bjqjtg+bkg8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjsgni+eb5t@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80543

"arrowsmithbt" wrote:

> Kneasy: (no hero)
> I have to agree with Del.
> Does Harry  really understand who or what Voldemort is? It's only 
> been a few months since he first heard of him. He hasn't lived with 
> years of seeing adults, your parents even, turning pale at the mere 
> mention of his name. The ultimate bogey-man. The merciless killer.

It's just like us when we grow up. We discover about past and present 
tyrants, about past and present wars. But at first they mean nothing 
to us. We might see our parents react strongly, but we don't 
understand why. It takes time and some kind of personal experience to 
understand what's going on.
I grew up in France, and when I was a kid, I would sometimes hear 
people saying mean things about Germans. I knew about the Wars, of 
course, but I felt like saying : "Hey, this is the past ! Can't you 
see that it's all over ? Can't you move on ?" It's only as I 
discovered a bit through testimonies, books, movies, what the Wars 
had been like, that I started to understand their feelings. And it's 
only as I discovered fear, pain and hatred in myself because of 
things that were happening in the world around me because some people 
were being mean to others, that I started to understand what war, 
violence and death are about.
In PS/SS, Harry knows intellectually what LV is, he's mad because LV 
took something from him (his parents), but that's all. He doesn't 
have any gut feeling of fear of LV.

> One day Harry might be a true hero, but not yet. So far he hasn't
> had to go and deliberately seek out Voldemort, knowing that he
> might fail, but doing it anyway. Cedric has given him a nasty taste
> of the realities. If you fall, you don't get up again.

And Sirius's death will teach him that the action-reaction mechanism 
can also work against him. He can make bad decisions, and they can 
end up in horrible consequences.

> Up to now it's been skirmishing, chance encounters, no planning 
> from Harry. The real battle is to come. Then he will have a chance 
> for heroics.

I think he will be ready for heroism as soon as he's digested what 
happened in the DoM, and understood and accepted his responsibility 
in it. Then he will be aware of what he's got to loose, what 
tragedies he can bring upon himself and others, and that he can't 
escape the consequences of his actions. And he will be ready to 
choose a truly heroic path.

Del





From nelliot at ozemail.com.au  Fri Sep 12 05:31:07 2003
From: nelliot at ozemail.com.au (njelliot2003)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 05:31:07 -0000
Subject: A Sockful of Sweets--Was: Re: Albus Dumbledore and the Socks
In-Reply-To: <bjq9p7+p4g2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjrlmr+45bq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80544


> Hello,
> 
> I tend to agree with you...just thought I'd add one more "sweet 
> incident" from OOP....In St. Mungo's Neville's mom gives him a 
sweet 
> rapper that he doesn't throw away, but keeps.
> 
> DeeDee

and I want to add one too. Socks are very 'sweet' to Dobby - it's 
what Lucius 'gave' him that set him free.
Nicholas
PS another thought. Didn't Harry wrap Sirius 2 way mirror in a sock? 
If so (I don't have OoP with me) that would add a touch of bitterness 
to the sock symbol. 





From dfran at sbcglobal.net  Fri Sep 12 07:02:09 2003
From: dfran at sbcglobal.net (deedeee88)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 07:02:09 -0000
Subject: Did Harry ever shed tears ?  Phoenix animagus perhaps ?
In-Reply-To: <bjrkon+24rd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjrr1h+rovo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80545

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kewpie" <kewpiebb99 at y...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" <yswahl at s...> 
wrote:
> > Does anyone remember an instance where Harry actually shed tears 
in 
> > any of the books ? Even DD did, but no memory of Harry doing so.
> 
> Yes of course he did, at least twice as far as I remember.
> We see Harry shed tears way back in Book One. It was right after 
> Dumbledore told him that it was Lily's love that saved his life.
> (US paperback P. 299) "Dumbledore now became very interested in a 
> bird out on the windowsill, which gave Harry time to dry his eyes 
on 
> the sheet."
> 
> Then in OOtP, US P. 856, after Harry alienated himself from others 
> and sat by the lake He got up and returned to the castle, 
> wiping his face on his sleeve as he went. "

I was just reading this post...and had a thought...

Harry, drying eyes on a sheet.....and then on a robe...

at best, this is a house elf clue..a huge house elf clue..

In the end who are you going to have do your laundry??!?

Washing someone elses dirty laundry is not a pleasant 
experience...but washing someone else's clothes teaches a great deal
about the persons' whoms dirty clothes you wash..

Then when one(esp. DD) has a pet...the more tears Dumbledore 
sheds..probably the more tears his "pet" can give(this makes sense 
given how many times Fawkes has saved harry)...a great thing for 
Harry..

How many tears do elves collect during cleaning robes and sheets?  Is 
this a source of their power?

Why else do Dobby(house elves) and the Phoenix show up and such 
opportune times?(those who have cried, sweated, bled..the most?!?!?)

When one gets into the whole "blood, sweat, tears" thing and how 
house elves are not free but love to serve...it provides 
understanding why such powerful magical creatures serves witches and 
wizards doesn't it?  Especially if they garner an empathic appeal of 
the feelings one experienced when excreteing such bodily fluids.

It would also explain why Dobby is the way he is(loyal to those he 
does laundry for--woohoo for Gryphindor!(no other elves will clean 
Gryphindor after Hermione leaves her craftwork for them...and also it 
also more explains why winky doesn't want to work at Hogwards and why 
she is so tied to her former family(she had a mixture of both 
sides...but even she..like dobby had a favorite)...  As opposed 
to 'K'reature who didn't do "laundry" for his family for more than a 
decade...I find it really wonderful that Dobby 
loves/respects/appreciates harry so much he will do this...

Who sheds more passionate tears?,has an excessive amount of 
nervous/strenuous sweats, etc...?


Poor Kreature..washing so many bitter tears in his household.(what 
wouldn't he have done to get so many tears from Sirius after all 
those "barren" years--hence his horrible insults to the children in 
the home....(really if at the snap of several elves they can move all 
that food into the great hall, Dobby can appear and reappear like 
Fawkes,(not nececarrily apparate...).

I should quit...to find out if I'm just spewing now...LOL

all flames welcome..  :)





From eloiseherisson at aol.com  Fri Sep 12 14:03:40 2003
From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloiseherisson at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 10:03:40 EDT
Subject: Re Mistaken Identity (slight TBAY refs)
Message-ID: <ba.464c10c4.2c932c3c@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80548

A very interesting theory, Lilian, and definite TBAY material.
But you know what? You've got to give your vessel a snazzy name and try to 
recruit some crew and throw in some obscure acronyms.  And don't forget the 
fish!  (CARP* are best)

<"((><  <"((><  <"((><  <"((><  <"((><  <"((><  <"((><  <"((><  <"((><  <"((><
    

Of course, HEDGEHOGS are my speciality. ;-)
FIE! FIE!

I'm now going to throw a spanner in the works, but don't worry about that. 
I'm sure you'll throw it back.

Lilian:
>- This is what the title of the post refers to and this is why I 
>believe that Lily has red hair. No family relation with the Weasleys, 
>no family relation with Dumbledore. A case of mistaken identity. 
>Mistaken identity by Bertha, which sets off a course of incidents. 
>Mistaken identity as a plot twist by JKR. -

~Eloise:
See, I find this element of the argument a bit circular. You believe, if I 
understand correctly, that Lily has red hair because Florence has. But where 
does canon state that Florence has red hair?

I'm not *quite* certain what you mean, actually. Do you meant you have come 
to the conclusion that Lily's hair is red because that way she could have been 
mistaken for the red-haired Florence (in which case it might be expressed that 
Florence must have red hair because Lily's is)? Or do you mean that the 
*literary* reason for Lily having red hair is in order for the mistaken identity 
thing to take place?

Canon tells us that Lily has red hair:

"She was a very pretty woman. She had dark red hair  and her eyes - her eyes 
are just like mine, harry thought...."
PS/SS UKPB, 153.


Lilian (quoting interview):

>"Q: Will Snape ever fall in love?
>A: (laughs) Who would want Snape to be in love with them? <snips rest 
>of quote for later reference>"
>
>Funny answer when you come to think of it. Seems a bit as if someone 
>wanting Snape to be in love is more on JKR's mind than Snape
>being in 
>love himself. Curious (oh, and BTW, do you notice that JKR 
>said `them'. Not her ? not him either, but that's
>another discussion 
>entirely ? but THEM. Plural, two persons at least). Very curious 
>indeed.


Eloise: 
Not curious in the least to my mind. It's just normal, rather sloppy informal 
English usage. If there *were* a hidden meaning there (which I don't think 
theres is), I would have said it was an attempt to cover up the *sex* of the 
person who wanted Snape in love with them (note *my* use of the word "them", 
which is a commonly used instead of "him/her", not that I think JKR has any 
intention of introducing Snape's gay lover into the series. Well, I certainly hope 
not!) 
    
Lilian: 
>But, but, that would mean that Snape got himself involved with a 
>WEASLEY, I can hear you all think. Yes, he did. Sorry, for the LOLLIPOPS-ers 
>among us, but Snape himself ruled Lily out in OotP as 
>she was `a filthy, little mud-blood' (don't like it anymore than you 
>do, but he said so).   


Eloise: 
Mmm. You really think so? That he ruled her out? Is it not a case of 
"Methinks the gentleman doth protest too much?". I have to admit that I never did 
volunteer for service aboard the Good Ship LOLLIPOPS, but OoP made me think that 
perhaps I was wrong <doffs cap in direction of Captain Tabouli>.


Lilian:
>OotP pg 734: `I trust Severus Snape,' said Dumbledore simply.'

>Florence convincing Severus to change sides is a bit thin IMO for 
>Dumbledore completely trusting him. And that is were the Weasley kids 
>come in. 


~Eloise:    
Oh, yes. I completely agree here. There is some Big Reason why Dumbledore 
trusts Snape.   Well, I think there is. There might not be. Of course I happen to 
believe Dumbledore is not infallible, even though the superficial impression 
is given that he is. I very much hope that this is not one of those things 
that no-one ought ever to say in a book. You know the kind of thing...."It's OK, 
earthquakes never happen in England" which you just *know* is the heralding of 
the entire population of London being swallowed up in a great cataclysm.

I am sure, though, that at some point we are going to call into question 
Dumbledore's trust in Snape.

Of course, dear Severus will be vindicated. ;-)

As for Ginny being his child?
Well, I'm sorry, but I don't buy it. His reaction when Ginny is taken into 
the Chamber doesn't tally. Before he knows who it is that has been taken, he 
grips the back of a chair very hard. But after he knows, his only recorded 
reactions are to belittle Lockhart. There is no hint whatsoever that he himself 
tries to do anything to secure her safety. You are right: he would have not to 
care much about her. But then, why distance himself from her sorting, or refuse 
to eat with her?


Lilian:
>And Dumbledore's patience with the man. Taking him in a 
>fatherly way to the feast in COS, Snape's not wanting Lupin to teach 
>in POA (no werewolf at the school where my kid is! ?apart from 
>Snape's other reasons-). Realising that it is not easy for any 
>person, even Snape, to give up its child, distance itself from it.
    

Eloise: 
Dumbledore *is* patient. And he is trusting. And if you look for it there is 
a lot of evidence of father/surrogate son interaction between Dumbldedore and 
Snape. Snape is the wayward son, the prodigal brought back into the fold. He 
is the difficult, challenging child. Dumbledore is the caring father figure 
that OoP implies Snape lacked. They have a relationship of mutual trust, 
dependence and profound disagreement. I don't think we need to bring Ginny in to 
explain their relationship.

~Eloise

*Cyber-Action Role-Playing























[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From hansiregi at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 13:40:44 2003
From: hansiregi at yahoo.com (hansiregi)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 13:40:44 -0000
Subject: Love and Forgiveness - long
Message-ID: <bjsics+2h52@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80549

Hi Group,

I am only an occasional visitor to HPFGU, so pardon me if this topic 
has been discussed before.

I have been re-reading the last few chapters of Order of the Phoenix 
and have been thinking about Voldemort's final defeat.  We all know 
that it was love and sacrifice that first saved Harry from Voldemort 
and protected him over the years.  It was Harry's love for Sirius 
that saved him from Volemort's clutches at the end of the last book.  
Finally, love is the most mysterious power that resides in the 
Department of Mysteries.  I believe that this is one of the forces 
that will defeat Voldemort in the end.

However, Dumbledore hinted that Harry may one day have to choose what 
is right over what is easy.  What could be less easy than 
forgiveness?  There are certainly plenty of people in Harry's life 
that could use his forgiveness -- the Dursley's, unkind Hogworts 
staff like Snape, and Voldemort himself.  We were given a hint in the 
latest book that an understanding seemed to be developing between 
Aunt Petunia and Harry.  In addition to learning how much his aunt 
knows about wizarding world, will Harry discover the true source of 
her deep resentment toward her sister?  Can an understanding of the 
neglect they both may have suffered allow them to forgive each other?

In Order of the Phoenix we caught a glimpse of the wretched childhood 
and adolescence of Severus Snape.  Can Harry bring himself to accept 
that Snape's odious behavior toward him is an outgrowth of the 
cruelties he himself suffered as a youth?  Can Harry forgive him?

Finally, the unthinkable: Can Harry forgive Voldemort?  Voledmort, 
perhaps not, because I do not think of Voldemort as a person but as a 
force of Evil itself.  The man who now calls himself Voldemort, Tom 
Riddle, was a wronged and neglected child like many other characters 
in this story, and his anger, hate and unwillingness to forgive 
allowed the force of Evil to possess him.  During Dumbledore's most 
recent encounter with him he addressed him as "Tom", not necessarily  
as a teacher would have addressed his student, but perhaps because he 
was trying to reach the real man within Voldemort.  I think if Harry 
could forgive that orphaned boy, he could destroy the evil force 
known to the wizarding world as Voldemort.





From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 14:06:58 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 14:06:58 -0000
Subject: Harry a Hero?  Was: The magic power of love.
In-Reply-To: <bjsd57+hoae@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjsju2+5ig1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80550

--- "Doriane" <delwynmarch at y...> wrote (post 80538):

> I'll state it once again : I don't see that his DADA skills are so 
> exceptional. So he practiced the Patronus Charm for months and he 
> finally managed it ? Not such a big deal. So he practiced 
additional charms and hexes with Hermione for the Triwizard 
Tournament, so that now he knows more than the other kids ? Again, 
what's the deal here ? 
> So what DADA skills, what magical talents, are you talking about ? 
> He's got a fair amount of it, all right, but not exceptionally much 
> as far as I can see.  

hg replying:
I think his DADA skills are remarkable.  He (at 15) held off 
Bellatrix LeStrange in the MoM battle. I'll admit that she was 
constrained by the need to get the prophecy, but still, it's 
remarkable. She had just defeated Sirius, Tonks and Shacklebolt in 
short order before Harry went after her. 

There are plenty of wizards (Marchbanks and Bones, for example)in the 
book who are deeply impressed by the fact that Harry can conjure a 
corporeal patronus at 15, something he learned at 13.

Hermione is also impressed by his capabilities. 


Del:
> lots of courage. In the heat of fire, yes. But when it comes to 
>planned events, he's just as afraid as anyone : he was almost 
>fainting with fear before the first task of the Tournament.

hg:
Courage is not the the lack of fear, it's the ability to act in the 
face of fear, something that he does prove in the first task. And 
over and over again in the books.

The most profound--to me anyway--example of courage is in the 
graveyard scene in GoF when Harry chooses to step out from behind the 
tombstone, certain that he is going to be killed. But he does it 
anyway.

I am not saying that there are no other courageous characters here. 
Obviously the other five teenagers who go to the MoM are brave.
Ron, for example, consistently shows courage. He sacrifices himself 
on McGonagall's chessboard in SS.  He faces the spider colony in CoS 
and would have certainly gone into the chamber if he could have. In 
PoA, he stands on a broken leg and tells Sirius that Sirius will have 
to kill him to get at Harry. 

But does anyone else in the series face certain death? I don't think 
so, although I am sure this is an arguable point.

Finally, what most clearly sets Harry apart for me is grace under 
pressure.  Quick thinking doesn't quite do this justice. It is far, 
far more than that. He's courageous, and he intuitively knows what 
needs to be done, and he does it. 

His luck is an extension of this and the choices he makes.  He 
chooses to act in the graveyard scene. That saves him. In the 
chamber, he chooses to oppose Riddle and trust Dumbledore.  That 
saves him.  In SS, he chooses to attack Quirrelmort, and that saves 
him.
 
Del:
> I'm just annoyed that he's given so much more respect than 
> any other character in the books, when so many other characters 
> deserve at least as much respect as he does, and could be just as 
> good heroes as Harry, if they were the ones the bad stuff was 
> happening to.

hg:
Harry gets respect because he has earned it. I don't feel I am 
belittling other characters because I feel strongly about one.







From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au  Fri Sep 12 14:34:44 2003
From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 14:34:44 -0000
Subject: photo vs. painting in magical world
In-Reply-To: <bjsfoo+trha@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjsli4+5ia6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80551

--- "Kirstini" wrote:
> Zinaida:
> Both people in photographs and people in pictures move and 
> get in and out of their frames, but people in paintings can also 
> talk and seem to be aware of what goes on, while people in 
> photographs don't talk and don't seem to be aware of later events 

but they 
> aren't. Why does Penelope Clearwater duck beneath the frame to hide 
> her blotchy nose? Why does Percy walk out of a family photo taken 
> before he was angry with his family? How do the Black photos know 
> that they are being thrown away in order to register their distress 
> in screams? And if they can scream, *why* can't Harry communicate 
> with J/L/S? ("Two squeals for yes and a screech for no, mum.")
> Oh, she infuriates me, that JKR. 

Give her a break ... You have to take some things with a grain of 
salt.
eg: If the Dursleys never took Harry anywhere growing up, how did he 
learn to swim for the 2nd Tri-Wizard task?
Answer: I don't know and I don't care! JKR lets us explore another 
part of the wizarding world by taking us underwater. - aussie




From keltobin at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 14:38:41 2003
From: keltobin at yahoo.com (Kelly)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 14:38:41 -0000
Subject: A Sockful of Sweets--Was: Re: Albus Dumbledore and the Socks
In-Reply-To: <bjrlmr+45bq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjslph+k0kk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80552


> Nicholas says:

> PS another thought. Didn't Harry wrap Sirius 2 way mirror in a 
sock? 
> If so (I don't have OoP with me) that would add a touch of 
bitterness 
> to the sock symbol.

I believe you're thinking of the sneakoscope that Ron sends Harry for 
his birthday in PoA.  Harry wraps it in one of Vernon's old socks 
because it keeps going off.  I don't have OoTP with me to check, but 
I think the mirror stays wrapped in Harry's trunk until he remembers 
it at the end.

Kelly




From wsherratt3338 at rogers.com  Fri Sep 12 14:39:39 2003
From: wsherratt3338 at rogers.com (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 14:39:39 -0000
Subject: Are we having fun?
Message-ID: <bjslrb+kcj6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80553

Last week on the "Thoughts on OOP" thread, there was some discussion 
about the tug of war between JKR and her readers, as we try to tease 
out information and she tries to withhold it.  When some said that 
this made the whole thing more fun, I remembered an exchange 
in "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory", as the visitors to the 
factory get more and more enmeshed as they try to find their way 
through the factory.  "What is this, Wonka?  Some kind of 
funhouse?"  "Why?  Having fun?"  Are WE having fun anymore?  
Speaking for myself, I have to say no.  For me, the fun died on June 
21, when OotP was released.  And so much of the discussion of that 
book, and speculation of what it will lead to, make me think that 
very few readers are having fun anymore.  Instead, I read worries 
and foreboding about how much horror Harry is going to have to 
endure until we finally make it to the end of book 7.  Nobody seems 
to expect anything but anguish and pain, with maybe a happy ending, 
but very possibly just a merciful release to look forward to.  

It's interesting that when the HP books first became popular among 
kids and adults, a big point in their favour was that they were so 
much fun to read.  Kids wanted to read again, because it was so 
enjoyable; adults became receptive to a children's book because the 
high spirits and wit were so irresistible.  Now the situation is 
reversed; now life is so serious and tragic, it's irresponsible not 
to expose children to its bitterness.  Now fun is something we have 
to realize is just a little temporary gilding, which should be cast 
aside as soon as possible, and was never very important anyway.  I 
haven't given up on Harry Potter, but I think Rowling is starting to 
take the loyalty of her readers for granted.  I'm not sure I'll be 
following her to the end of this road, since it seems to have taken 
a few turns and is now going in a direction I wouldn't have chosen 
if it had been clear to me from the start.

Wanda
   




From keltobin at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 14:48:40 2003
From: keltobin at yahoo.com (Kelly)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 14:48:40 -0000
Subject: Professor Binns
In-Reply-To: <bjs8eb+g8rc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjsmc8+tn0d@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80554


> WANDA:  I'm wondering why Professor Binns 
> > did?  He has seemed like a rather inconsequential, comic figure 
so 
> > far, but now it sounds as if anyone who becomes a ghost probably 
is 
> > rather a sad character. 
> 
> I don't think he knows he's dead.  In OOTP, he called 
Harry 'Perkins' 
> and I remember Arthur's boss is named Perkins.  I suspect Binns is 
> reliving his life. He couldn't think of giving up teaching. He died 
> and just got up and went back to work. 
> 
> What Nick said is standard mythology about ghosts - spirits bound 
to 
> this plane because they felt they had something to do and would not 
> pass on.
> 
> > Wanda

I remember thinking it very strange when Nick asserted that becoming 
a ghost was a choice.  He mentions "choice" twice in his conversation 
with Harry in OoTP (US ed. p.861).  Yet, I immediately thought of 
Prof. Binns.  To me it doesn't sound like he had or made any choice 
at all when he became a ghost.  He just stood up one day and went to 
class and left his body behind.

I think Nick was skirting the issue and knows more than he let on 
anyway.  

Kelly




From delwynmarch at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 14:58:01 2003
From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (Doriane)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 14:58:01 -0000
Subject: Mistaken identity - part three
In-Reply-To: <bjseo8+bcp9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjsmtp+krvk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80555

"Kirstini" wrote:

> The only reason we know that Florence exists at all is because 
> Bertha Jorkins names her to Dumbledore. "I saw him kissing 
> Florence", she says. This presumes that she knows who Florence is. 
> If she has seen and identified Florence, she's not going to tell 
> Sirius "I saw him kissing a girl with red hair" if she knows the 
> name of this girl. 

No ? Try and picture something like this :
We know that Bertha was the gossiping kind. We also know that Sirius 
was extremely good-looking, so it's not that wild an assumption that 
Bertha would try and attract his attention, like half the girls in 
the castle. So imagine Bertha coming up to Sirius, right after the 
kissing scene, which admittedly took place a little after the grey-
pants scene :
B, looking mysterious : Sirius ?
S, mightily annoyed : Yeah, what ?
B : I *think* you'd be *very* interested in what I saw just an hour 
ago...
S, not interested : Oh yeah ?
B : Huh-huh...
S, bored : OK, so what is it ?
B : I saw someone doing something...
S, bruskly, getting more and more bored : Yeah ? Who, what ?
B : Someone you don't like...
S : ???
B : Someone you don't like *at all*... Someone you keep fighting 
with...
S, after a moment of reflexion : Snivellus ?
B : Uh-uh.
S, slightly interested : So what ?
B : He was doing something incredible...
S, getting impatient : What ?!
B, looking disgusted : Something *I* wouldn't dream of doing with 
*him*...
S, bemused : Huh ???
B : In fact, I'm surprised *she* could stand it...
S, completely flabbergasted : She could stand what ???
B : Well, you know, a boy, a girl ...
S, guffawing as the truth dawns on him : You mean Snivellus got 
himself a *girlfriend* ??? Harf, harf !!!
B : Yep. And you will never guess who it is...
S : Like I care ! Whoever she is, she must have a troll as a dad to 
be so desperate !
B, displeased and hurt : I wouldn't say so. She's quite pretty in 
fact.
S, still laughing : Oh yeah ?? Like what ? A cross between Moaning 
Myrtle and a hag ?
B, curtly : Not exactly. Very cute, beautiful red hair...
S, interrupting, not laughing anymore suddenly : Red hair ?
B : Yes, and...
S, not listening anymore : how *dare* he ? He must have put a Charm 
on her or something, just to get back at James ! How *dare* he !!! 
Oooh, he'll pay for that, all right...
And off he goes, leaving Bertha completely befuddled. But Bertha 
doesn't want him to go. She runs after him, and grabs his arm. But 
Sirius is in such a wrath that he hexes her just to get her out of 
his way.

And later, when talking about that scene, Bertha would of course say 
that she was telling him about Snape, that she saw him kissing 
Florence, not realizing that this is not at all what Sirius 
understood.

Does it sound credible ?

Del




From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Fri Sep 12 15:07:43 2003
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 15:07:43 -0000
Subject: Are we having fun?
In-Reply-To: <bjslrb+kcj6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjsnfv+njcn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80556

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Wanda Sherratt" 
<wsherratt3338 at r...> wrote:
>  For me, the fun died on June 
> 21, when OotP was released.  And so much of the discussion of that 
> book, and speculation of what it will lead to, make me think that 
> very few readers are having fun anymore.  Instead, I read worries 
> and foreboding about how much horror Harry is going to have to 
> endure until we finally make it to the end of book 7.  Nobody seems 
> to expect anything but anguish and pain, with maybe a happy ending, 
> but very possibly just a merciful release to look forward to. 

Rowling said in the interview with Stephen Fry, that was done shortly 
after the release of OOTP, that Harry's fifth year is probably his 
hardest, because in the following books, at least everybody knows, 
that he is speaking the truth. So maybe the remaining two books won't 
be to dark. I think it would also be logical, because Harry's growing 
up, and it is indeed the puberty, when the world looks particularly 
grim for an adolescent. At least it did in my case.
 
However, I have to say, that I personally prefer the darkness of book 
5 over the lightness of the first two books. While these books were 
indeed fun to read, it took me a long time before I started book 3, 
because after reading the first two books, I thought they were all 
basically the same. Only when a friend told me, that book 3 and 
especially 4 (that was of course before the release of OOTP) is 
darker than the first two, I continued reading the Potter series. And 
it was not before I finished book 4, that I called myself a Harry 
Potter fan. I reread the first two books only, when I needed to, for 
a Potter course in the university, and my opinion about them didn't 
change much. Book 4 remains my favorite, by far, because it has IMO 
the right mixture of dark and light moments, but I like book 5 with 
it's overall darkness better, than book 1 and 2, and maybe even 3.

Hickengruendler




From delwynmarch at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 15:12:27 2003
From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (Doriane)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 15:12:27 -0000
Subject: Are we having fun?
In-Reply-To: <bjslrb+kcj6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjsnor+5mn7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80557

"Wanda Sherratt" wrote:

> Are WE having fun anymore?  Speaking for myself, I have to say no.  
> For me, the fun died on June 21, when OotP was released.  And so 
> much of the discussion of that book, and speculation of what it 
> will lead to, make me think that very few readers are having fun 
> anymore.  Instead, I read worries and foreboding about how much 
> horror Harry is going to have to endure until we finally make it to 
> the end of book 7.  Nobody seems to expect anything but anguish and 
> pain, with maybe a happy ending, but very possibly just a merciful 
> release to look forward to.  

...unless Harry discovers love and forgiveness, in which case the 
next 2 books could be filled with horrible things happenings, but 
abounding with good feelings. Maybe we're going to see Harry 
accepting the love people try to give him (the Weasleys, especially 
Molly, Hermione, DD, ...), and start truly giving some around, to his 
best friends of course, but also to people like Neville, Luna, Ginny, 
etc... Maybe he could even get Cho back, or start a new story with 
someone else, a story that would be full of care for each other, of 
tenderness, of humility.

I know this is highly unlikely, but it *is* possible. And it'd be 
much nicer to read than the dark and somber OoP book. JKR would be 
teaching kids that they can live in a warm emotional environment even 
in the midst of turmoil and war. What better lesson to teach them ?

Del





From entropymail at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 15:19:59 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 15:19:59 -0000
Subject: Are we having fun?
In-Reply-To: <bjslrb+kcj6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjso6v+88ov@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80558

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Wanda Sherratt"
<wsherratt3338 at r...> wrote:
> Last week on the "Thoughts on OOP" thread, there was some discussion 
> about the tug of war between JKR and her readers, as we try to tease 
> out information and she tries to withhold it.  When some said that 
> this made the whole thing more fun, I remembered an exchange 
> in "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory", as the visitors to the 
> factory get more and more enmeshed as they try to find their way 
> through the factory.  "What is this, Wonka?  Some kind of 
> funhouse?"  "Why?  Having fun?"  Are WE having fun anymore?  
> Speaking for myself, I have to say no.  <snip>

I am having SO much fun! Besides the fabulous excitement of seeing my
nine year old so thrilled about the series that he's read the five
books over and over (and over)...so many times that they're dog-eared
and ready to fall apart, and the fun of beginning to share this
excitement with the seven year old by reading out loud to him for
months at a time -- well, all that would be enough!

But I love the books myself, on a completely different level than the
little ones. The stories are layered and serpentine, with humorous
little inside jokes and mysteries that one would only find if one is
actually looking for them! Intriguing, dimensional characters that
fuel my already-too-full internal life (that means I daydream too
much!). What more could a grown-up ask for in a children's book? So
what if the stories go in directions I hadn't anticipated, or am not
completely in agreeance with? What fun would it be if I agreed with or
could predict everything that happened, or if were all lightness and
no darkness? I'm all for darkness! Am I having fun? Absolutely!

:: Entropy ::




From entropymail at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 15:27:27 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 15:27:27 -0000
Subject: Hermione's House Elf Hats: Question
Message-ID: <bjsokv+1vo7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80559

Just a quick question: 

I know I must be missing something, but why does Hermione leave the
hats she's knitted for the house elves all around the Gryffindor
common room? Don't the clothes have to be given to the elves by their
master for them to be freed? In that case, wouldn't Dumbledore have to
give them to the elves, or else they wouldn't count? What have I missed?

:: Entropy ::




From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au  Fri Sep 12 15:30:54 2003
From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 15:30:54 -0000
Subject: CoS scene Hagrid crossbow
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20030911152800.00b0ed80@localhost>
Message-ID: <bjsore+c2j3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80560

--- Fred Uloth wrote:
> ... two things that saved Fudge (from crossbow) that night were:
> 1: Harry Potter in the cabin. ...
> 2: Dumbledore escorting Fudge. DD seems to be one of the very few 
> people to whom Hagrid will listen. I have no problem seeing Hagrid 
> doing to Fudge what he would later do to Karkaroff...and far worse. 
> Remember, he has the giant blood that shields he from quite a bit 
> of the magic that gets thrown at him...I doubt Fudge could take him.

I may be biased, but I don't think Hagrid would be lethal to MoM 
wizards. 

I just re-read Hagrid with Karkaroff (GoF Chap 28). Hagrid didn't 
punch nor use the crossbow in his hand. He just grabbed a fist full 
of K's coat and pinned him against a tree.

The evicting wizards in OotP:
1) Outnumbered Hagrid 4 to 1. 
2) Stunned Fang 
They invited Hagrid to get physical. 

Also, the "Giant's Blood" was Hermione's unproven theory - but 
fullblooded giants dread magic used against them. Hagrid may have 
used a protective brew like Murtlap (see FBWTFT). He knew his time 
was short at Hogwarts and McG could have helped him prepare.

aussie




From fc26det at aol.com  Fri Sep 12 15:52:56 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 15:52:56 -0000
Subject: Are we having fun?
In-Reply-To: <bjslrb+kcj6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjsq4o+ae05@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80561

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Wanda Sherratt" 
<wsherratt3338 at r...> wrote:
> Last week on the "Thoughts on OOP" thread, there was some 
discussion 
> about the tug of war between JKR and her readers, as we try to 
tease 
> out information and she tries to withhold it.  When some said that 
> this made the whole thing more fun, I remembered an exchange 
> in "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory", as the visitors to the 
> factory get more and more enmeshed as they try to find their way 
> through the factory.  "What is this, Wonka?  Some kind of 
> funhouse?"  "Why?  Having fun?"  Are WE having fun anymore?  
> Speaking for myself, I have to say no.  For me, the fun died on 
June 
> 21, when OotP was released.  And so much of the discussion of that 
> book, and speculation of what it will lead to, make me think that 
> very few readers are having fun anymore.  Instead, I read worries 
> and foreboding about how much horror Harry is going to have to 
> endure until we finally make it to the end of book 7.  Nobody seems 
> to expect anything but anguish and pain, with maybe a happy ending, 
> but very possibly just a merciful release to look forward to.  
> 
> It's interesting that when the HP books first became popular among 
> kids and adults, a big point in their favour was that they were so 
> much fun to read.  Kids wanted to read again, because it was so 
> enjoyable; adults became receptive to a children's book because the 
> high spirits and wit were so irresistible.  Now the situation is 
> reversed; now life is so serious and tragic, it's irresponsible not 
> to expose children to its bitterness.  Now fun is something we have 
> to realize is just a little temporary gilding, which should be cast 
> aside as soon as possible, and was never very important anyway.  I 
> haven't given up on Harry Potter, but I think Rowling is starting 
to 
> take the loyalty of her readers for granted.  I'm not sure I'll be 
> following her to the end of this road, since it seems to have taken 
> a few turns and is now going in a direction I wouldn't have chosen 
> if it had been clear to me from the start.
> 
> Wanda

Now Susan:

Wanda, a few days ago I read a post that you did where you said that 
you have not and will not reread OOP because it was so dark and 
disappointing for you that you didn't feel you could.  (if I 
misunderstood please forgive me.)  I felt the same way when I first 
finished with it.  I was so wrapped up with who was going to die, and 
what DD was going to finally tell Harry that I read it so quickly to 
get to these areas that I missed a lot.  I felt like someone was 
sitting on my chest when I finished the book.  I was angry with JKR 
for having killed off Sirius (who at that time was my favorite 
character) and I was confused with the sudden change in the *feel* of 
the Harry Potter world.

Then I went on a few HP sites, found this one, and started to read 
the posts talking about the happy moments.  Frankly, I thought some 
of the posters here were totally delusional. <grin>  I realised that 
I had obviously missed something somewhere.  I took a deep breath and 
reread OOP *looking* for anything that wasn't depressing.

You know what?  It was a totally different experience.  I had missed 
so much.  This is one of the things I love about JKR's writing 
style.  You can read and reread her books and find something you 
missed each time.  

I am asking you to reread OOP cover to cover.  I am hoping that you 
will find that OOP is not as dark and bleak as it was the first time 
you read it.  Personally, I think the story is growing with Harry at 
an appropriate level.  Life is that way.  As we age we acquire more 
responsibility and have to deal with what comes.  Sometimes this is 
good and sometimes this is bad.  Part of growing is dealing with the 
bad and conquering it on our own.

Susan--who for some reason was touched by Wanda's feelings about OOP.




From Koinonia2 at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 12 16:03:09 2003
From: Koinonia2 at hotmail.com (koinonia02)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 16:03:09 -0000
Subject: Mistaken identity - long
In-Reply-To: <bjs54h+a7p0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjsqnt+8qmo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80562

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "laylalast" <liliana at w...> 
Message 80534 wrote:

> Lately, I have seen posts pondering on the haircolor of the 
> Weasley's, the importance of Ginny to the coming books, whether
> all 
> Weasley children are actually Arthur & Molly's and Lily's
> friends at 
> Hogwarts.  
> 
> Well, I already had an idea about this all, a theory is the better 
> word rather, which I will present here after having finished it on 
a 
> top note (looks apprehensive at yellow flags standing in line to 
> pounch theory).

"K":
Well I'm not really waving that yellow flag with a great amount of 
gusto nor am I anxious to punch holes. However, I will comment on a 
few things <G>.

Lilian:

 Well, it is 
> with the pensieve scene of Bertha Jorkins, this theory more or 
less 
> started.
> 
> GOF: ,He put a hex on me, professor Perkamentus, I was only 
teasing 
> him. All I said that I had seen him kissing Florence behind the 
> greenhouses last Thursday'

"K":
I think it's important to remember the age of Bertha at the time she 
was snooping as we will see later.

GoF/Ch 30 Instantly, a figure rose out of it, a plump, scowling girl 
of about sixteen...

Lilian:

 Since OotP we know that of MWPP and Snape, the 
> last three are the ones who are rather trigger-happy, or to speak 
in 
> magical terms, hexing-happy.

"K":
I admit I use to believe it was Snape or Sirius kissing Florence. 
One of the reasons was because of the 'hexing-happy' stuff. I'm 
still unsure of who it is but I do believe Florence is going to be 
important to the story.

GoF/Ch 27 "Snape knew more curses when he arrived at school than 
half the kids in seventh year...

It is also in OoP where we hear about Snape knowing all those 
curses. The hexing just seems to fit in with Snape. Of course now we 
know James was a bit 'hexing-happy' too.

Lilian:

 Of the three, it will not have been 
> James as it was pointed by both Snape's worst memory and Sirius 
> evidence later, James was already in love with Lily. No snogging 
> Florence by James.

"K":
James did have his eye on Lily but she wasn't paying him much 
attention. Maybe James was the one and he had to make sure Lily 
didn't hear about it if he ever wanted to have a chance with her.
 

Lilian:

 Considering Sirius' behaviour at the time, he
> was a 
> rather carefree type, who was not going to be bothered if he was 
seen 
> kissing a girl.

"K":
Not unless this girl belonged to someone else.


Lilian:
 
> Bertha saw Snape kissing Florence behind the greenhouse, shortly 
> after `Snape's worst memory'.

"K":
This is where the ages of those involved come into play. During *The 
Pensieve* Bertha is about sixteen.

GoF/Ch 19 "Listen, I knew Bertha Jorkins," said Sirius grimly. "She 
was at Hogwarts when I was, a few years above your dad and me."

When Bertha was sixteen, James/Sirius/Snape would have been about 
thirteen. Possibly fourteen. The Pensieve would have happened before 
The Prank. The guys are in year six (?) at the time of the Prank and 
Bertha is no longer at Hogwarts. She is several years ahead of them. 

Lilian:

 JKR said about Snape and 
> love:
> 
> "Q: Will Snape ever fall in love?
> A: (laughs) Who would want Snape to be in love with them? <snips 
rest 
> of quote for later reference>"
> 
> Funny answer when you come to think of it. Seems a bit as if 
someone 
> wanting Snape to be in love is more on JKR's mind than Snape
> being in 
> love himself. Curious (oh, and BTW, do you notice that JKR 
> said `them'. Not her ? not him either, but that's
> another discussion 
> entirely ? but THEM. Plural, two persons at least). Very curious 
> indeed.

"K":
I don't think it is strange that she said 'them'. Who in the world 
would want Snape to be in love with them. That could also just be 
one person. However, you most certainly could take that to mean more 
than one person and I'm going to keep that in mind. 

Lilian:
 
> Well, what did Bertha see? Snape kissing a red-haired girl.

"K":
Of course canon doesn't tell us it's a red-haired girl but that 
doesn't mean Florence doesn't have red hair.

Lilian Message 80535 Mistaken identity - part two

PS/SS pg 81: `
No need to ask you who you are. My father told me all 
the Weasleys have red hair, freckles and more children than they can 
afford.'

"K":
I would be surprised if we don't meet other Weasley family members 
later on.

Lilian Message 80536  Mistaken identity - part three

Apart from the current Weasley speculation, speculation has also 
been 
made whether Snape has a kid, and if that kid is at school or will 
come in the near future. My idea is, that if there is such a kid, 
JKR 
would have let Snape given some clue to its existence.

"K":

Now this is where the story gets interesting. As you said, if there 
is a child, surely JKR would have given some clues. Maybe she did.  

Post 77832 greatlit2003

This post makes a strong case for Snape and the 'stringy and pallid' 
Slytherin kid. I personally believe there is more of a chance of 
that child being the son of Snape than of Ginny being his daughter. 
What I do like about both theories is the idea that there is so much 
more to Snape and his actions. I've been wanting to comment on 
the 'stringy and pallid' theory forever but haven't found the time. 
I do believe some very good points are made in that post.

Lilian:

2) Deeper meaning; Snape (as a Malfoy family member ?see my post 
79062) has ordered Dobby to keep Harry from Hogwarts. Dobby has, 
obviously, not succeeded so Snape now tries himself.

"K":
Even if Snape is related to Lucius, can he give orders to Dobby? I 
don't remember.

Lilian:

3) Well, what actually happens? Harry and Ron do not attend the 
feast, or more particular at that very moment: the Sorting Ceremony. 
COS pg 65: `The Sorting Ceremony is over,' said Professor 
McGonagall. 
But this also means that Snape is not present at the sorting either. 

I believe that (3) is the actual meaning of that scene, showing us 
in 
a very sly and undercover way that Snape does not attend the 
sorting. 
And why would he do that? Because his kid will be sorted. His kid, 
who does not know him. Who is being sorted that we know of? Ginny 
Weasley and Colin Creevey.

"K":
I believe the reason Snape isn't at the soring ceremony is only 
because he is busy looking for Harry and Ron. If anything, wouldn't 
Snape 'want' to see his child being sorted? 

Lilian:

It has been speculated here that 
Arthur has personal experience with the Dark Mark showing above his 
home. It's that and Florence was visiting at the moment and 
therefore 
killed, or Arthur had to come to his sister's house, with the Dark 
Mark hovering above it. Either way, Florence is dead.
Snape, being a spy, is in no position to take care of Ginny. If he 
is 
ever outed, he is dead and Ginny too.

 After Voldemorts' downfall, 
that situation is not different as he, like Dumbledore and Hagrid, 
expects that one day Voldemort will be back. Next to that, Snape 
might distrust himself as father. He is no fool, after all. 

"K"
Now I'm going to agree with a couple of things here. I do believe 
that Snape, like Dumbledore, knows that Voldemort is not gone for 
good. Also, if Snape had a child then that boy or girl would be in 
danger. Could this not be why Snape left the DE's? He will do what 
it takes to see that his child lives. But this is where there is 
more evidence that said child could be 'stringy and pallid' instead 
of Ginny. Ginny does not seem to be able to see a thestral. 

OoP/Ch 33 "Oh, more of them will come," said Ginny confidently, who 
like Ron was squinting in quite the wrong direction, apparently 
under the impression that she was looking at the horses.

OoP/Ch 34 Ron, Hermione, and Ginny, however, were still standing 
motionless on the spot, open mouthed and staring. 

"How're we supposed to get on?" said Ron faintly "When we can't see 
the things?"

One could argue that Ginny wasn't there when Florence was killed and 
maybe one could say she was too young. It just seems that Ginny 
would have been with Florence and would be able to see a thestral.  

I'm also not sure if Ginny would be of the right age. Snape turned 
spy before the downfall of Voldemort. If Snape turned back to 
Dumbledore because of his family, then the child would probably be 
around the same age as Harry and not Ginny. I will admit I'm not up 
to date on the birthdays for the kids. I'm not sure if we even know 
when Ginny was born. 

Lilian:

In addition to that: how do Arthur and Molly treat other children 
who 
stay with them but are not family. Very affectionate and caring, 
Molly especially.

"K"
I do believe Molly and Arthur are very loving people and could of 
course love a child that wasn't there. Maybe even more so if that 
child belonged to a deceased family member.

Lilian:

And is there additional evidence that it is Ginny who is the 
daughter 
of Snape and Florence? In canon:

OotP pg 149: `I don't believe it! I don't believe it! Oh Ron, how 
wonderful! A prefect! That's everyone in the family!'. `What are 
Fred 
and I, next-door neighbours?' said George indignantly'

"K":
Ginny isn't old enough to be a prefect yet. That's probably why she 
isn't mentioned. As far as the twins, I just think Molly figures 
neither Fred nor George have any hope of ever being a prefect 
considering all their antics at school.

Lilian:

OotP pg 160: Ron's dead body ? Bill's body ? Mr Weasley -Dead twins ?
Dead Percy ? Dead Harry 


In the first scene Fred, George and Ginny are excluded, in the 
second 
scene Charlie and Ginny. Both times: Ginny. Surface explanations 
like 
Ginny cannot yet be a prefect and hey, Charlie was left out as well 
are IMO red herrings. The significance is that Ginny is not included 
TWICE.

"K":
But Molly does see Harry and he isn't her child. It's a love thing. 
Molly loves Harry but she also loves Ginny. If it revolved around 
Molly only seeing her family she wouldn't see Harry. Now as to why 
Molly doesn't see Ginny or Charlie I don't know and I guess your 
idea is as good as any other I've seen.

As for eating with the Order, I just don't think Snape would enjoy 
the company of any of them. Why put yourself in a miserable 
situation if you don't have to do so. 

Lilian:
And Molly is concerned about how Snape is being treated:

OotP pg 457: `Snape?' said Harry blankly. `Professor Snape, dear. In 
the kitchen. He'd like a word.' 

Surface explanation: Molly is just insisting on Harry showing 
respect. But below that
. Molly is the foster-mother of Snape's 
daughter.

"K"
I guess I see this as another instance where someone is trying to 
get Harry to show some respect for Professor Snape. Dumbledore has 
done the same thing.

Lilian:

IMO, it is Ginny's character growth shown in OOtP which is a 
clue in itself. They come from her mother, Florence. 

"K":
I won't get into this but count me as one who didn't like this 
sudden and great growth. Yeah, I know there have been other clues 
but I still don't like it.

Lilian:

It does also explain Dumbledore's trust in Snape. Snape will never 
betray the side his daughter is with, even if he has little feelings 
for her. And Dumbledore's patience with the man. Taking him in a 
fatherly way to the feast in COS, Snape's not wanting Lupin to teach 
in POA (no werewolf at the school where my kid is! ?apart from 
Snape's other reasons-). Realising that it is not easy for any 
person, even Snape, to give up its child, distance itself from it.

"K":
I can agree with all the above except I'm not sold that it is Ginny. 
Actually, I do love the idea that Dumbledore has patience with Snape 
because he knows what Snape is going through. He knows the sacrifice 
Snape has made. I like it because that would mean there is so much 
more to Snape. There is something or someone that drives him.

Lilian:

Also the quote about the relation `that is at the heart of it all' 
and that the information about Hogwarts' spouses is rather 
restricted. To quote a fictional detective (I believe Lord Peter 
Wimsey ? by Dorothy L. Sayers -): If you look at all evidence 
separately, they sort of seem to melt away. Together it becomes 
suspicious. Very suspicious.'

"K":

~~Have any of the Hogwarts professors had spouses?
Good question - yes, a few of them but that information is sort of 
restricted - you'll find out why....~~

McGonagall, Dumbledore, and Snape. My bet is on one of those three, 
if not all. 
 
Lilian:

Well.
This is it.
This is what I believe and I'm sticking to it.

"K":

I will say I thoroughly enjoyed your post. Though I don't believe it 
is Ginny and Snape, I will admit anything is possible with JKR.

"K"  

 



 







From melclaros at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 16:13:52 2003
From: melclaros at yahoo.com (melclaros)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 16:13:52 -0000
Subject: The Prank -- A New Thought
In-Reply-To: <bjqna4+d0vg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjsrc0+r6uc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80563

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bohcoo" <sydenmill at m...> wrote:
> 
> So, in my opinion, Sirius did not intentionally do anything life-
> threatening by pulling The Prank. He did jeopardize his friend's 
> cover, which was amazingly thoughtless and stupid, though.
> 
> Snape is the one who has given it the slant and built it up into 
> something it wasn't.
> 
>

Well Sandy has already explained that James was in danger because he 
was in *human* form, so I'll take on the "slant" issue. Let's take 
Snape's opinion right out of the picture, shall we?
*Remus Lupin* believes that the "prank" was stupid and dangerous and 
in fact threatened Snape's life seriously.  In his own words: "a 
trick...which nearly killed him, a trick which 
involved me - "

You say he jeopardized his friend's cover? His *cover* was the least 
of what he jeopardized. Just try to imagine what would have happend 
to poor Lupin (reminder--sirius' FRIEND) if anything had happened to 
Snape. Even if you discount the legal problems, what would it have 
done to a 16yo mental state to have been set up to eat a classmate by 
one of his closest friends?
Even if you Hate Snape you have to see the harm this "prank" could 
have done.
And I still think James only went after Severus to gain brownie 
points with Lily.

Melpomene...shaking her head over that bat-droppings idea.




From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Sep 12 16:15:56 2003
From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Ivan=20Vablatsky?=)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 17:15:56 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Are we having fun?
In-Reply-To: <bjso6v+88ov@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030912161556.70925.qmail@web21507.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80564

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Wanda Sherratt"
<wsherratt3338 at r...> wrote:
> Last week on the "Thoughts on OOP" thread, there was some discussion 
> about the tug of war between JKR and her readers, as we try to tease 
> out information and she tries to withhold it. When some said that 
> this made the whole thing more fun, I remembered an exchange 
> in "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory", as the visitors to the 
> factory get more and more enmeshed as they try to find their way 
> through the factory. "What is this, Wonka? Some kind of 
> funhouse?" "Why? Having fun?" Are WE having fun anymore? 
> Speaking for myself, I have to say no. <snip>


Hans writes:

Yes, I am having the fun ofmy life. Never have I seen such spiritual depth
in any story. All my life I have studied and tried to put into practice
Alchemy, Hermeticism, Gnosticism and Rosicrucianism and the liberation they
offer. Then to see this path so clearly outlined in a "children's story" I
find utterly, breathtakingly beautiful. Hundreds of millions of people are
and will befor centuries to come reading the story of "Christian Rosycross
in jeans". (Please note the word "Christian".)

I recognise ("recognise", not "imagine") the Path of the return of the
fallen human being to the multi-dimensional, timeless Kingdom of Light,
where he will live in eternal, selfless rapture in the Love-radiation of the
Original Spirit, free from death, sickness and suffering. That is the future
awaiting Harry! Harry will die, yes, but there's nothing upsetting about
that. It will be the voluntary death of self-sacrifice in which Harry will
simply neutralize his time-spatial consciousness in order to merge into the
universal Spirit-consciousness. Harry will be happy beyond words; his future
will be ecstatic and blissful far and far beyond anything we can imagine.
The only thing stopping him from attaining boundless rapture will be his
compassion for those who are still living in this world of suffering, hatred
and violence. He will never cease working for his imprisoned brothers and
sisters until the last of them is free.

Yes, I'm having fun writing my posts to the group, I'm having fun when I
read some of the exquisite posts you people write, I'm having fun when I get
enthusiastic reactions off board (thanks people), and I'm having fun when I
think about the surprise you will all get at the end of book 7 when you
realize that Harry will defeat Voldemort through Love and forgiveness. I had
incredible fun when my predictions came out in book 5. See post 55793.
Finally, I must say it gives me extremely great joy when I think about the
powerful liberating symbols and archetypes that are being blasted into the
collective unconscious by the books and films. One day these unconscious
forces will enable great numbers of people to go the Path of the return to
God. HP is a window on eternity. One day a door will open so that people can
not only see, but go. That thought gives me more joy than I can say.

Hans in Holland

For those of you who don't know what I'm talking about see my previous
posts, incl. 55907, 56071, 56254, 56477, 67775, 68623, 69086, 70287, 70318,
70963, 71831, 72782, 73252, etc.



________________________________________________________________________
Want to chat instantly with your online friends?  Get the FREE Yahoo!
Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk



From wsherratt3338 at rogers.com  Fri Sep 12 16:20:02 2003
From: wsherratt3338 at rogers.com (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 16:20:02 -0000
Subject: Are we having fun?
In-Reply-To: <bjsq4o+ae05@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjsrni+ga3f@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80565

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Potterfanme" <fc26det at a...> 
wrote:
> Now Susan:
> 
> Wanda, a few days ago I read a post that you did where you said 
that 
> you have not and will not reread OOP because it was so dark and 
> disappointing for you that you didn't feel you could.  (if I 
> misunderstood please forgive me.)  I felt the same way when I 
first 
> finished with it.  I was so wrapped up with who was going to die, 
and 
> what DD was going to finally tell Harry that I read it so quickly 
to 
> get to these areas that I missed a lot.  I felt like someone was 
> sitting on my chest when I finished the book.  I was angry with 
JKR 
> for having killed off Sirius (who at that time was my favorite 
> character) and I was confused with the sudden change in the *feel* 
of 
> the Harry Potter world.
> 
reread her books and find something you 
> missed each time. (SNIP) 
> 
> I am asking you to reread OOP cover to cover.  I am hoping that 
you 
> will find that OOP is not as dark and bleak as it was the first 
time 
> you read it.  Personally, I think the story is growing with Harry 
at 
> an appropriate level.  Life is that way.  As we age we acquire 
more 
> responsibility and have to deal with what comes.  Sometimes this 
is 
> good and sometimes this is bad.  Part of growing is dealing with 
the 
> bad and conquering it on our own.
> 
> Susan--who for some reason was touched by Wanda's feelings about 
OOP.

Well, thank you - that's a very kind and sensitive post!  But you 
know, it's not like I've resolved never to read OotP again.  Every 
few days I think to myself "I guess I should reread OotP again," but 
it's sort of the way kids talk about homework at the end of a long 
holiday.  (Glumly) "Well, I guess I'd better get started on that 
math..." (deep sigh)  That's how I feel about it - reluctant and 
almost repulsed.  Then I think to myself, "No. I'm a grownup, mother 
of three children - I don't have to do homework anymore.  I don't 
have to read a book I don't like."  And I don't think it's my fault, 
either.  Maybe I'll give it a try someday, or maybe I'll just wait 
until the next book comes out and see if the magic works again.  

Wanda




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Fri Sep 12 16:28:07 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (B Arrowsmith)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 17:28:07 +0100
Subject: what makes a hero?
Message-ID: <175FC764-E53E-11D7-8553-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80566

It's always interesting and instructive sharpening my wits for a match 
with Laura, especially when venturing into the abstract.

Laura:

He may not have known his parents but he has a very clear idea of
what it is LV deprived him of. Harry lives in the world, so he knows
what parents are supposed to do-love, protect and care for you. He
even has a somewhat warped example in the Dursleys. They may be
pretty pitiful as parents and as human beings, but they unarguably
care for Dudley.

Kneasy:

Hmm. Arguable, I'll agree. But warped is the right word, without a 
doubt. And he was transferred straight from this to Hogwarts. He has a 
not-so-secret contempt for the Dursleys, but any alternative family 
behaviour is largely theoretical. It's not until later in the series, 
when he visits the Burrow, that the truth of what a real home with a 
real family can be, is revealed.

Laura:

So does that mean that when teenagers do things like rescuing
drowning friends or family, or something along those lines (it
doesn't happen all the time but it does happen), it's only heroic if
the kid has a full understanding that s/he is risking her/his life?


Kneasy:

It's amazing  that humanity is fortunate enough to have a surprising 
number of people (including children) who perform the most astonishing 
acts. Without denigrating them, the vast majority performed by 
individuals are instinctive, a reaction to circumstances rather than 
the result of thought. It's almost as if there's an inbuilt altruistic 
drive that kicks in during emergencies. Usually it is only in 
retrospect that the dangers are evaluated. For example, compare a boy 
who rushes out on to thin ice to rescue his little dog with the Firemen 
at the Twin Towers. I'd personally class the former as 'reaction' and 
the latter as 'thought'. Both are laudable, but the boy will get a good 
talking to from his parents, despite what the local newspapers say. But 
at the time, to the boy, there was no contest. The dog  must be saved!
Now!

Bravery, heroes and heroics. This is where we probably  really start 
splitting hairs. It's rare to come across examples that all can view 
objectively and agree. I'm also very much afraid that the terms have 
been devalued, rather as the word 'star' has been (don't get me started 
on that one!). Indeed 'heroics'  is so often used ironically or 
slightingly that it's better to put that one aside.

OK. Bravery. To my mind this would be defined as fortitude, stoicism 
and resistance in the face of adversity or danger.
As a rough rule of thumb, while admitting  that the man or woman in the 
street are capable of it, I think it is best exemplified by those such 
as trained personnel who regularly face dangerous situations. Being a 
member of a cave rescue team, for example. I know I couldn't crawl 
through narrow openings, in the dark, in rising water, 300 ft 
underground to free someone trapped down there. They volunteer for this 
-  no  pay. They know the risks, they know what has to be done. They do 
  it. That's bravery in my book.

A hero is a class apart. Heroism requires a specific act or acts in an 
unfamiliar situation that includes putting your own life on the line 
and even though you see the dangers, the safety  of others is 
considered paramount. The difference to the rescue team is that they 
(the team) do not put the recovery of the trapped person above  the  
safety of the team members.
Prime example of heroism: Grace Darling [1]

IMO in the final part of PS/SS there is one act of bravery and  one of 
heroism.

For bravery - Stand up Neville! Confronting the only  friends he has, 
certain that resistance to their escapade was right and risking 
ostracism and loneliness by doing so.

For heroism - a big hand for Ron! Having seen what  happened to chess 
pieces that were  taken, he deliberately sacrifices himself, resigned 
to injury or worse, so that his friends can go on.

By contrast, once Harry encounters Quirrell!Voldy, the whole thing runs 
on rails. Harry  has no choices; it all has an inevitability. Retreat 
is impossible, he has no means of attack. All he can do is  lie, 
prevaricate, hoping some deus ex machina will intervene. A species of 
bravery, maybe. But the action of a hero? I don't think so.


Laura:

Can you be a hero if you do something that doesn't risk your life?
What about the people who refused to testify during the McCarthy
hearings here in the 1950's? Their physical lives weren't in danger, 
but their reputations and livelihoods were.


Kneasy:

Fascinating example. As someone with strong libertarian [2] leanings I 
find McCarthy despicable [3], but most of his victims I would class 
with Harry as above.


Laura:

So would you say that in PoA Hermione is a hero? She seems to have a
full understanding of the dangers involved in using the time-turner,
and she makes sure she and Harry operate within its constraints.
They don't exactly have a plan, but they can't really have one in
advance, because they have to see how events unfold from their new
perspective.

Kneasy:

Probably not. Hermione makes a judgement, based on experience, that so 
long as the rules of time-turning are obeyed, then the risk is low. Of 
course, she can't be absolutely sure that Harry will behave himself. 
But she probably calculates that Harry can be restrained through his 
ignorance of the possibilities.

I may be strict in my judgements, but I reckon he'll make the grade 
before it all ends.



[1] For those that are not familiar with the story, Grace Darling was 
the daughter of the lighthouse keeper at Bamburgh, in Northumberland. 
In 1838, when Grace was 23, the S.S. Forfarshire ran aground on the 
rocks in a severe  storm and was slowly being  pounded to pieces. Grace 
and her father put out in  an open rowboat to negotiate  a  mile of  
mountainous seas and rocks to effect the rescue of the survivors on 
board. They succeeded and got them all off. She died three years later 
of T.B.

[2] Mostly  drawn from Locke and Rand, but with saltings of Edmund 
Burke. If that seems slightly  contradictory, libertarianism does not 
require you to accept whole cloth from anyone. It's also  very 
comforting to be able to treat left and right with equal suspicion 
and/or scorn. Neither are to be  trusted.

[3] McCarthy engenders a sort of hypnotic revulsion. These days he's 
used as the stereotype of the archetypal right wing monster.
He seems a bit more (or less!) than that. He was  considered a radical 
Republican. Robert Kennedy, (JFKs brother), who worked for him, denied 
he was evil. His biographer considered he was "...incapable of true 
rancour, spite and animosity as a eunuch is of marriage...He faked it 
all and could not understand anyone who didn't." In my opinion more 
damning  than, however mistakenly, truly held beliefs. He was another 
of those opportunist demagogues who does great damage by espousing a 
'cause' he doesn't believe in. IMO his victims emboldened him by not 
taking him on. He was not part of the legal process and if they'd got 
him out of his hearings and  into a courtroom he'd soon have desisted. 
But 'taking the 5th' just encouraged him. He could then rant to  his 
hearts content. Moral cowardice in Hollywood and Washington didn't help.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Fri Sep 12 16:28:29 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 16:28:29 -0000
Subject: Did Harry ever shed tears ?
In-Reply-To: <bjrkuu+indf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjss7d+afuk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80567

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sbursztynski" 
<greatraven at h...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" <yswahl at s...> 
wrote:
> > My pensieve sprung a leak and a couple of stray thoughts snuck 
> out ...
> > 
> > Does anyone remember an instance where Harry actually shed tears 
in 
> > any of the books ? Even DD did, but no memory of Harry doing so.
> > 
> Ooh, I am SO glad someone has brought up this one. No, I don't 
think 
> he ever did. And this is a shame, because he badly needs to. The 
> closest he ever got was at the end of GoF, when Mrs Weasley hugs 
him 
> and I think he was about to, but they were interrupted. 


Geoff:
I must admit that I've always read this as Harry beginning to cry 
before Hermione slams yhe window.


Sue B:
> I don't think 
> this is a coincidence. Harry is going to get more and more stressed 
> out until he can finally cry (hopefully before someone tells him 
that 
> big boys don't). His anger would have been a lot less in OoP if 
he'd 
> been able to have that cry at the end of GoF. And now he's lost 
> Sirius and still he hasn't been able to let out his grief in a 
great 
> howl. Pity, that, but probably essential to the plot. 


Geoff:
I suspect that he already subscribes to the "big boys don't cry" 
club. After ten years of the Dursleys TLC and the problems of Dudley 
and his gang of thugs, I think Harry had alreayd learned to bottle up 
his feelings.

As I've said before, it's that wretched English habit. I caught it 
when I was a kid. I remember being totally unable to cry when my 
mother died twenty years ago and feeling there was something wrong 
with me until a friend (sensibly a female who didn't have the 
syndrome) helped me to close the matter.




From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 16:42:52 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 16:42:52 -0000
Subject: Mistaken identity - long
In-Reply-To: <bjsqnt+8qmo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjst2c+l27i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80568

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "koinonia02" <Koinonia2 at h...> 
wrote (80565, replying to laylalast post 80534)

> "K": (snipped)
During *The Pensieve* Bertha is about sixteen. GoF/Ch 19 "Listen, I 
knew Bertha Jorkins," said Sirius grimly. "She was at Hogwarts when I 
was, a few years above your dad and me."  James/Sirius/Snape would 
have been about thirteen. Possibly fourteen. The Pensieve would have 
happened before The Prank. The guys are in year six (?) at the time 
of the Prank and Bertha is no longer at Hogwarts. 

hg:
Maybe we should remember that LUCIUS MALFOY is three years older than 
the Marauders.  
I suppose it could be possible that Florence was an Evans.  Lily and 
Petunia are flower names.  Is there any definitive mention of how 
many siblings Lily had, still living or not?  


>> laylalast:
> ~~Have any of the Hogwarts professors had spouses?
> Good question - yes, a few of them but that information is sort of 
> restricted - you'll find out why....~~

hg:
This is JK in an interview?  Which one?  It's certainly a provokative 
statement, isn't it?
hg.




From sofdog_2000 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 17:07:54 2003
From: sofdog_2000 at yahoo.com (sofdog_2000)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 17:07:54 -0000
Subject: what makes a hero?  (wasRe: The magic power of love.)
In-Reply-To: <bjsfub+pigo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjsuha+270p@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80569

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Doriane" <delwynmarch at y...> 
wrote:
> > Can you be a hero if you do something that doesn't risk your 
life?  


Sof: I tend to think of heroism from a classical standpoint: "By 
definition, the hero is the one who finally accepts the call [to 
action] and confronts his destiny, his true being." ? David Adams 
Leeming, "The World of Myth"

Harry is a hero because he accepts a call to action whenever one is 
presented. He refused to stay put and wait for Dumbledore to return 
in SS. He insisted on going to get Hermione in the girls bathroom, 
rather than informing a teacher. In CS, Harry insisted on going down 
the chute into the Chamber of Secrets. He didn't wait to see if Ron 
wanted to be first to go after his sister nor enlist the elder 
Weasley's in the rescue. He just jumped. Likewise his many feats in 
the TriWizard tournament, giving Norbert to Charlie's friends, and 
rescuing Sirius. 

In many of these circumstances, Harry could easily have passed the 
information on to someone else. (It made no sense at all for Hermione 
and Harry to be out after hours getting rid of Norbert when Hagrid is 
free to roam the grounds.) Harry never abdicates responsibility when 
it comes down to it. Thoughtless, but absolutely brave.

The same is true of Ron and Hermione, largely. Hermione is a thinker 
and planner which is why she insists on calling in true authorities. 
At the same time, she's still there for the team in the clinch. 

As for Ginny, Neville and Luna. Their insistence on rescuing Sirius - 
their membership in the DA - is essentially heroic. They are 
presented with a problem and they agree to deal with it. 




From sydenmill at msn.com  Fri Sep 12 17:10:45 2003
From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 17:10:45 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Trust of Snape
Message-ID: <bjsuml+eo5p@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80570

A possible explanation for Dumbledore's unshakable trust in Snape:

After The Prank Snape didn't tell anyone that Lupin is a werewolf 
because he gave his word to Dumbledore he wouldn't.

That had to be one of the hardest things a 16-year old boy could be 
asked to do:  Don't destroy another kid who belonged to a group of 
boys who had taunted and humiliated him continually for the previous 
4-5 years, in front of the entire school. Keep secret the one thing 
that would be guaranteed to completely ruin Lupin's life. What 
awesome sweet revenge that would have been. But. Snape kept silent. 
Snape kept his word to Dumbledore.

So, then, later Snape joins the Death Eaters but has a change of 
heart and goes to Dumbledore to offer his spy services to the Order 
of Phoenix. Having proven himself to be a man of his word to 
Dumbledore in the past, under possibly the most gut-wrenchingly 
tempting circumstances imaginable, Dumbledore continues to trust him.

I know I would.

Bohcoo




From CareALotsClouds at aol.com  Fri Sep 12 17:21:34 2003
From: CareALotsClouds at aol.com (CareALotsClouds at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 13:21:34 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione's House Elf Hats: Question
Message-ID: <1ab.19ff6df3.2c935a9e@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80571

In a message dated 12/09/03 16:29:45 GMT Daylight Time, entropymail at yahoo.com 
writes:


> I know I must be missing something, but why does Hermione leave the
> hats she's knitted for the house elves all around the Gryffindor
> common room? Don't the clothes have to be given to the elves by their
> master for them to be freed? In that case, wouldn't Dumbledore have to
> give them to the elves, or else they wouldn't count? What have I missed?

I dont think you have missed anything.  I think you are right.  Harry took 
great care into making sure that Lucius gave the sock to Dobby.

CoS Chapter: The Rogue Bludger, pg 133 UK version:

'Why d'you wear that thing, Dobby?' he asked curiously.
'This, sir?' said Dobby, plucking at the pillowcase. ''Tis a mark of the 
House-elf's enslavement, sir.  Dobby can only be freed if his masters present him 
with clothes, sir.  The family is careful not to pass Dobby even a sock, sir, 
for then he would be free to leave the house forever.'

>From the canon, dobby says his 'masters' with a plural.  So maybe every 
student in hogwarts is his master since all the house elves serve the students.  
But Dobby does say in GoF that Dumbledore is his master. (My GoF is in America 
at the moment with my Mother).

I think its a plot hole ;)

Loadsa love
Nic xx


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From Koinonia2 at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 12 17:25:35 2003
From: Koinonia2 at hotmail.com (koinonia02)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 17:25:35 -0000
Subject: Snape's son at Hogwarts?!!
In-Reply-To: <bhr6eq+n7hu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjsvif+fnh6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80572

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "greatlit2003" Message 77832

> "There were only two other people who seemed to be able to see 
>them [the thestrals]: a stringy Slytherin boy standing just behind 
>Goyle was watching the horse eating with an expression of great 
>distaste on his face, and Neville..." (OoP, US hardcover, 445)

>"Snape-the-teenager had a stringy, pallid look about him..." (p. 
>640)
> 
> JKR doesn't use the word "stringy" too often. (I don't recall 
>seeing that word in the book series before, if anyone *has* seen 
>it, please let me know). So when she uses it twice in the same 
>book, I am suspicious.
> 
> The boy wore a disgusted expression on his face. For me, this is 
>an important clue, because JKR repeatedly mentions Snape's habitual 
> sneers and smirks. If Snape has a son at Hogwarts, his position as 
> a character will completely change. Perhaps he is not a spy for 
> Dumbledore out of a sense of honor. Maybe he wasn't in love with 
> Lily, or have some kind of vendetta against Voldemort. Perhaps > 
he's  just trying to protect his kid.

"K"

Whether or not any of us agree on whether that boy is
the son of Snape, I think there is something that
drives Snape and that is what we need to figure out. 
I just commented about this on the thread about Snape being the 
father of Ginny.

Snape seems to be either driven by revenge and/or because
he has something to gain with the defeat of Voldemort.
Hence, he isn't 'too nice' according to JKR. In other
words, don't think Snape's motives are because he is
some good and sweet guy. He's in this for his own
personal reasons. (That's just one explanation I can think of for 
Snape being not 'too nice').

greatlit:
> Snape became a spy for DD circa 1980. I had previously assumed 
>that this was somehow connected to Harry's birth in 1980. But what 
>if it wasn't? If Snape's own son was born in 1980, he had a reason 
>for stopping the violence. Maybe he had witnessed atrocities 
>against other families, and he didn't want his own son mixed up in 
>that. The possiblities are endless. And it also accounts for 
>Dumbledore's trust in Snape. DD knows that Snape would never betray 
>him, because by doing so he would be killing his own son.

"K"
That could definitely be it. *DD knows that Snape would never betray 
him, because by doing so he would be killing his own son.* That 
could be a very big reason for D's trust in Snape. I can't believe 
all Snape had to do was tell Dumbledore he changed his mind and now 
wanted to join the good side. 


> As for Snape's hatred for James, I have a feeling that the 
>mysterious Florence was Snape's girlfriend, and maybe James killed 
>her in his work for the Order. Maybe the boy witnessed his mother 
>die, which is why he can see thestrals?

"K"
Wouldn't that be something. Don't know if I believe it yet...

Now I do think Snape could have a vendetta against Voldemort even if 
it was James that was responsible for the death of Snape's wife.

Let's say Snape does indeed have a son at Hogwarts the same age as 
Harry. Here is the child of a man you hated. The famous Harry 
Potter. Snape has to teach this kid while he also has to teach his 
own child but can't even let on that he has a child. Follow that ;-)
The kid doesn't know.

Let's go back to when Harry first came to Hogwarts. I think we have 
to remember the hatred Snape seems to have for Harry. I know there 
has been talk of how Snape must appear to hate Harry for a number of 
reasons and I'm not discounting that at all. I just think it's 
possible that Snape did truly hate Harry when he first showed up at 
Hogwarts. I believe there is some reason for Snape's hate that we 
haven't found out about yet and we see that by Hagrid's reaction to 
Harry after Harry says Snape seems to really hate him.
......................................................
SS, Ch 3, Sch, pg 141
Harry told Hagrid about Snape's lesson. Hagrid, like
Ron, told Harry not to worry about it, that Snape liked
hardly any of the students.
"But he seemed to really hate me."
"Rubbish!" said Hagrid. "Why should he?"
Yet Harry couldn't help thinking that Hagrid didn't
quite meet his eyes when he said that.

pg 142
And did Hagrid know something about Snape that he
didn't want to tell Harry?
......................................................

What was it that Hagrid couldn't or wouldn't tell
Harry? Would it matter if Hagrid had said that Snape
loved Lily? Would that really be such a big secret? The
only way I could see that being so important is if
Snape only wanted Lily and didn't care if James and
Harry died. Yet that still wouldn't explain why Snape
hated Harry unless Snape was ticked that Harry lived
and Lily died. But would this still be affecting Snape
so much? Is Snape mad because Voldemort went back on
his word and didn't spare Lily? I suppose that is
possible but I can't believe that is what is still
driving Snape after all these years. It would seem to
be revenge or that Snape still has something to gain or a
combination of both.

Snape loving Lily and therefore all his actions revolving around 
that unrequited loved is a red herring. I can't see Lily as the 
reason that Snape joined the DE's and as the reason he left them.
There's something else out there. Something that affected him in a 
far bigger way and that still drives him to this day. That is why I 
like this theory so much. It puts Snape in a far different light 
than what we have seen so far. 

greatlit: 
> If the boy is Snape's son, one might wonder why he isn't good 
>friends with Malfoy, who clearly likes Snape? Maybe Snape has 
>chosen not to tell anyone that the boy is his, because he is afraid 
>that someone might harm him. The boy himself might not know.
> Maybe Snape would like to teach DADA so badly because he wants to 
> teach his own son how to fight, without anyone suspecting that the 
> two are related.
> 
> Why doesn't Snape raise his own son? Maybe he's just afraid that 
>he will be a bad parent like his own father was. He may not want 
>his son to inherit his reputation and get picked on. More 
>importantly, he may not want Voldemort to know he has a son, in 
>case Voldemort wants to recruit him into the Death Eaters, or 
>people like Malfoy try to befriend him. (I think that Snape 
>dislikes the Malfoys deep down).

"K":
I also believe Snape doesn't like Lucius Malfoy and possibly looks 
upon Lucius as someone who took advantage of him. Snape joins the 
DE's and then realizes it's not exactly what he thought it was. But 
once a DE there seems to be no way out.

OoP/Ch 2
"Well, you don't just hand in your resignation to Voldemort. It's a 
lifetime of service or death." 

So what is Snape to do? It seems one way or another his goose is 
cooked. But Snape can see to it that his child has a chance. Notice 
that Snape is the hardest on Harry and Neville, the two boys
that are connected with the Prophecy. Snape needs those boys to be 
able to defeat Voldemort. He's doing his best to get them ready. One 
might not agree with his methods but he is preparing them. (I think 
it will be Harry who has to defeat Voldy but that's for another 
thread). Snape wants Voldemort gone. It's the only chance his son 
has of living a somewhat normal life. (Personally, I don't see how 
Snape or a son could ever live a peaceful life). I imagine there 
will always be some disgruntled DE lurking around. Including Lucius 
Malfoy. Malfoy has to go also. Snape will see to that.

greatlit:
 
> Does anyone else think it's crazy that although there are only 
>twenty kids in Harry's Potions and Care of Mag. Creatures class(the 
>same kids too, year after year), and Harry still doesn't know their 
>names? We only know Harry, Hermione, Ron, Dean, Neville, Seamus, 
>Parvati,Lavender, Draco, Crabbe, Goyle, and Pansy. What about the 
>other eight?

"K"

Let's go back to the scene you first mentioned. I believe you forgot 
an important part. 

OoP/Ch 23

"Oh, an' here comes another one!" said Hagrid proudly, as a second 
black horse appeared out of the dark trees, folded its leathery 
wings closer to its body, and dipped it's head to gorge on the 
meat. "Now...put yer hands up, who can see 'em?"

Immensely pleased to feel that he was at last going to understand 
the mystery of these horses, Harry raised his hand. Hagrid nodded at 
him.

"Yeah...yeah, I knew you'd be able ter, Harry," he said 
seriously. "An you too, Neville, eh? An'___

"Excuse me," said Malfoy in a sneering voice......
*******************************************************

An'___

Well Hagrid doesn't get to name the Slytherin stringy and pallid boy 
who can see a thestral because JKR has Malfoy opening his big mouth 
at the wrong (or right) time. Why aren't we told his name? 

greatlit:
> But I digress.
> 
> Any thoughts about this?
> 
> greatlit2003
> Snape Daddy: name has a nice ring

"K"
I think Snape Daddy does have a nice ring. It would explain so 
much.  

I'm not sold on this theory 100% but I do believe you made some 
great points.

"K"











 

 













From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 17:40:40 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 17:40:40 -0000
Subject: what makes a hero?
In-Reply-To: <175FC764-E53E-11D7-8553-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bjt0eo+r5k5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80573

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
 
Kneasy wrote:

For heroism - a big hand for Ron! Having seen what happened to chess 
pieces that were taken, he deliberately sacrifices himself, resigned 
to injury or worse, so that his friends can go on.

By contrast, once Harry encounters Quirrell!Voldy, the whole thing 
runs 
on rails. Harry has no choices; it all has an inevitability. Retreat 
is impossible, he has no means of attack. All he can do is lie, 
prevaricate, hoping some deus ex machina will intervene. A species of 
bravery, maybe. But the action of a hero? I don't think so.

HG:

I would suggest that the word 'hero' can mean a lot of different 
things. Although the modern use of the word is looser, in the 
strictest sense, a hero is someone with outstanding qualities who is 
able defeat terrifying enemies, often WITH supernatural or divine 
help. Like Achilles, Odysseus, Perseus, Jason.

Plenty of heroes must act with their backs to the wall, so to speak, 
but they are still considered heroes. Examples that come to mind 
include the Alamo, Geronimo, various congressional medal of honor 
winners, etc.

Bravery, courage, and fortitude are virtues. 

I would also suggest that Harry's heroic act is the choice to go 
after the stone in the first place. He realizes the danger and acts 
despite seemingly overwhelming odds. 

I will also say categorically that none of this detracts from Ron's 
or Hermione's courage in accompanying him.





From nelliot at ozemail.com.au  Fri Sep 12 07:06:45 2003
From: nelliot at ozemail.com.au (njelliot2003)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 07:06:45 -0000
Subject: Did Harry ever shed tears ?
In-Reply-To: <bjrkuu+indf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjrra5+9pj8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80574

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sbursztynski" 
<greatraven at h...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" <yswahl at s...> 
wrote:
> > My pensieve sprung a leak and a couple of stray thoughts snuck out ...
> > 
> > Does anyone remember an instance where Harry actually shed tears in 
> > any of the books ? Even DD did, but no memory of Harry doing so.
> > 
> Ooh, I am SO glad someone has brought up this one. No, I don't think 
> he ever did. And this is a shame, because he badly needs to. The 
> closest he ever got was at the end of GoF, when Mrs Weasley hugs him 
> and I think he was about to, but they were interrupted. I don't think 
> this is a coincidence. Harry is going to get more and more stressed 
> out until he can finally cry (hopefully before someone tells him that 
> big boys don't). His anger would have been a lot less in OoP if he'd 
> been able to have that cry at the end of GoF. And now he's lost 
> Sirius and still he hasn't been able to let out his grief in a great 
> howl. Pity, that, but probably essential to the plot. Sue B

I reckon he has but you have to read between the lines because JKR 
won't share Harry's crying feelings with us. There's a reference in 
OoP (I think) to Harry coming back from having sat out by the lake 
till it got dark 'wiping his face? eyes?' on his sleeve. I don't have 
the books with me, I'm just leaving work, but I'll look them up later 
tonight. 
Nicholas





From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 17:44:57 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 17:44:57 -0000
Subject: Not Writers Block After All---Was Re: Are we having fun?
In-Reply-To: <bjslrb+kcj6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjt0mp+spu4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80575

Wanda wrote:
> Having fun?  Are WE having fun anymore?  Speaking for myself, I 
> have to say no.  For me, the fun died on June 21, when OotP was 
> released.  And so much of the discussion of that book, and 
> speculation of what it will lead to, make me think that very few 
> readers are having fun anymore.  Instead, I read worries and 
> foreboding about how much horror Harry is going to have to endure 
> until we finally make it to the end of book 7.  Nobody seems to 
> expect anything but anguish and pain, with maybe a happy ending, 
> but very possibly just a merciful release to look forward to.  
 
This is SO *#$%@!!! frustrating.  (Oh, no, sorry, not you, Wanda.)  I 
*know* I read, less than a week ago, a line in a post-OoP interview 
with JKR where she responded to a comment about its length with a 
statement about having written it through writer's block; now, of 
course, that I want to cite it, all I can find is denials that she's 
ever *had* writer's block.  It's occurred to me that (please let me 
not have gone 'round the bend) what I know I read *was* really there 
and has since been excised; no, I'm not being paranoid (not very, 
really), I just thought, after I stopped being able to find the 
quote, that she must have been being *ironic* and that the quote was 
removed since it really didn't come off at all that way in print.  
(If you know where that came from, I beg you, let me know!)

And it had made so much sense to me, too!  The first four books had a 
lovely "flow" to them; reading them was effortless.  Even when bad 
things happened to Harry, the narrative voice (not to be confused 
with the viewpoint character's:  the point of view is Harry's; the 
narrative voice is *the author's*) had a certain resilence to it that 
reassured us; in OoP that seemed to me to be sadly lacking.  My 
problem with OoP didn't have to do so much with Harry yelling and 
fighting his way through it; my problem had to do with how I felt as 
if *I* was the one having to yell and fight my way through the book.  
I want to know that Harry feels punished and frustrated and feel him 
feeling it, but I don't want it presented in a way that leads me to 
internalize that, myself; life does enough of that in real life, 
thank you.  IMO, a better written book would have communicated every 
bit of what Harry was going through and left it Harry's without 
making it mine (which I'd have resisted going in except that the 
first four books built up such a great level of trust in me that I 
failed to mount defenses).  And that's where I was happily chalking 
up the notion that JKR had writer's block when she wrote it:  I saw 
her as having had to fight her way through writing it as well.

Come to think of it, if it had that effect on me (as someone old 
enough to be a grandmother): what happens when a fairly young child 
ends up plunging happily into OoP, expecting that narrative buffer 
between reader and viewpoint character, and ends up staring bleakly 
into the void?  Should the fifth book come with a PG-13, or is that 
element simply going to escape very young readers?

That's what *I* get for reading (and not bookmarking interviews). 

Sandy aka "msbeadsley" who is considering using her soapbox as 
kindling for a nice, warm bonfire




From aldhelm at earthlink.net  Fri Sep 12 12:54:41 2003
From: aldhelm at earthlink.net (carin_in_oh)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 12:54:41 -0000
Subject: Mistaken identity - part one
In-Reply-To: <bjs54h+a7p0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjsfmh+ekhq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80576

Lilian wrote:

> Curious (oh, and BTW, do you notice that JKR 
> said 'them'. Not her ? not him either, but that's
> another discussion 
> entirely ? but THEM. Plural, two persons at least). Very curious 
> indeed.

A minor comment from me:

Just on this point of JKR's usage: She routinely & everywhere uses forms of "they" as the gender-neutral 3rd person singular pronoun, even when it's very clear from 
context that she must have a particular gender or even a particular individual in mind. 

So I don't think we can build the argument on the pronoun.

(My first post, btw, and lest everyone think I'm a hopeless niggler, I should explain that I teach the history of the English language and I'm consititutionally incapable of not noticing drifts in usage)

Carin





From nelliot at ozemail.com.au  Fri Sep 12 13:59:18 2003
From: nelliot at ozemail.com.au (njelliot2003)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 13:59:18 -0000
Subject: Did Harry ever shed tears ?  Phoenix animagus perhaps ?
In-Reply-To: <20030912053241.81319.qmail@web60203.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjsjfm+5dht@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80577

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, eowynn_24 <eowynn_24 at y...> 
wrote:
> 
> 
> Kewpie <kewpiebb99 at y...> wrote: 
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" <yswahl at s...> wrote:
> > My pensieve sprung a leak and a couple of stray thoughts snuck  out ...
> > 
> > Does anyone remember an instance where Harry actually shed tears in 
> > any of the books ? Even DD did, but no memory of Harry doing so.
> 
> Yes of course he did, at least twice as far as I remember.
> We see Harry shed tears way back in Book One. It was right after 
> Dumbledore told him that it was Lily's love that saved his life.
> (US paperback P. 299) "Dumbledore now became very interested in a 
> bird out on the windowsill, which gave Harry time to dry his eyes on 
> the sheet."
> 
> Then in OOtP, US P. 856, after Harry alienated himself from others 
> and sat by the lake thinking about Sirius: "The sun had fallen before 
> he realized that he was cold. He got up and returned to the castle, 
> wiping his face on his sleeve as he went. "
> 
> 
> 
> Eowynn:
> 
> There is one more that I can remember. I don't have book right now 
to give you page references. It is when Lupin is teaching harry the 
patronus charm. Lupin had been distracted by something or other and 
harry bent low pretending he was tying his shoe, and dried his tears.


 
What I would like to know is why JKR is so circumspect about Harry 
having a cry. I suppose she's made Harry too stoic to cry in front 
of others, if he can help it, but why does she have to keep her 
faithful readers at arms length? When he was by the lake in OoP, how 
hard did he cry? How long? Did he make any noise? Did he feel 
foolish, or better for it? I feel cheated for not having these 
details. I think we get too much of Harry's agony, misery and pain. 
What about a bit of contrast? 

This is OT I know, but I feel similarly cheated by Harry's first 
kiss. "She was much too close. He could see every tear clinging to 
her eyelashes 
" (OoP pg 403). Pathetic!

Nicholas, who wants more juicy detail!






From feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca  Fri Sep 12 15:46:56 2003
From: feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca (feetmadeofclay)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 15:46:56 -0000
Subject: Professor Binns
In-Reply-To: <bjsmc8+tn0d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjsppg+qhut@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80578

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kelly" <keltobin at y...> wrote:

> I remember thinking it very strange when Nick asserted that becoming 
> a ghost was a choice.  He mentions "choice" twice in his conversation 
> with Harry in OoTP (US ed. p.861).  Yet, I immediately thought of 
> Prof. Binns.  To me it doesn't sound like he had or made any choice 
> at all when he became a ghost.  He just stood up one day and went to 
> class and left his body behind.


Willfull blindness is a choice.  If you refuse to see reason - ie 
that you are hovering over your own body -, then you've made a 
choice.  You've refused to let that tiny little fact keep you from 
your appointments.  

If you remain ignorant our of fear or just sheer willfullness that is 
a part of free will.  

Call it soft determinism if you will...  But it is the reason why 
willfull blindness is considered equivalant to intent in many western 
legal systems.  

Golly





From feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca  Fri Sep 12 15:50:49 2003
From: feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca (feetmadeofclay)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 15:50:49 -0000
Subject: Hermione's House Elf Hats: Question
In-Reply-To: <bjsokv+1vo7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjsq0p+qgaa@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80579

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "entropymail" 
<entropymail at y...> wrote:
> Just a quick question: 
> 
> I know I must be missing something, but why does Hermione leave the
> hats she's knitted for the house elves all around the Gryffindor
> common room? Don't the clothes have to be given to the elves by their
> master for them to be freed? In that case, wouldn't Dumbledore have to
> give them to the elves, or else they wouldn't count? What have I missed?


I wondered that too.  But from the apparent reaction by the 
elves it would seem that students are considered to be masters.  I 
suppose it means that if you can command someone - as Draco does 
Dobby, you have the ability to free them. Students must be considered 
part of the Hogwarts house/family for the time they are students - 
just as Draco is a member of the Malfoy house. 

It would also mean that every student can order house elves about.

Golly 





From eileenh28 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 15:53:38 2003
From: eileenh28 at yahoo.com (eileenh28)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 15:53:38 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore & Harry's security
In-Reply-To: <bjsbt0+tai3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjsq62+j4hn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80580

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ffimiles" <ffionmiles at h...> 
wrote:
<snip-a-rama>
> only thing that occurs to me is that Hermione has looked 
> up the registered animagi and didn't mention Dumbledore - he could be 
> an unofficial one like Rita Skeeter and James, Lupin, Sirius and 
> Pettigrew of course...would Dumbledore risk that?  


Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Hermione say that there were 7 
registered animagi in the last century?  Also, isn't Dumbledore well 
over 100 years old?

Maybe Albus registered sometime *before* the last century.  Hermione 
just didn't look back that far in the records.

Eileen






From InfiniteWhispers at Aol.com  Fri Sep 12 16:40:52 2003
From: InfiniteWhispers at Aol.com (InfiniteWhispers at Aol.com)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 12:40:52 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione's House Elf Hats: Question
Message-ID: <130.24f1360b.2c935114@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80581

In a message dated 9/12/2003 11:29:45 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
entropymail at yahoo.com writes:
Just a quick question: 

I know I must be missing something, but why does Hermione leave the
hats she's knitted for the house elves all around the Gryffindor
common room? Don't the clothes have to be given to the elves by their
master for them to be freed? In that case, wouldn't Dumbledore have to
give them to the elves, or else they wouldn't count? What have I missed?

:: Entropy ::
I think so, too. Dumbeldore would have to give out the socks in order for the 
house elves to be free, but it is still insulting to them. At least, that's 
what Dobby says when he talks about how he has to clean the common room by 
himself.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From aldhelm at earthlink.net  Fri Sep 12 16:44:53 2003
From: aldhelm at earthlink.net (carin_in_oh)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 16:44:53 -0000
Subject: Harry a Hero?  Was: The magic power of love.
In-Reply-To: <bjsju2+5ig1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjst65+s372@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80582

> hg replying to Doriane:
...
> There are plenty of wizards (Marchbanks and Bones, for example)in the 
> book who are deeply impressed by the fact that Harry can conjure a 
> corporeal patronus at 15, something he learned at 13.
> 
> Hermione is also impressed by his capabilities. 



I agree that we should take seriously the mounting evidence about what impresses others about Harry. It strikes me that an important (and also an elegant) thing about OotP is that while we are most enmeshed in Harry's p.o.v., and while that p.o.v. is at its most adolescent-self-centered, JKR is also giving us glimpses of how Harry's developing skills and innate talents measure up in the world outside Hogwarts. That's what O.W.L. year is all about, isn't it? 

The attitude of people at Harry's hearing, the vote of confidence from Hermione and the DA-ers, and the reactions of the OWL examiner in DADA are, imho, an important corrective to the suspicion we might otherwise entertain that Harry _only_ got where he is by a combination of mother-love and happenstance, which would be a little too sweet and a little too skimpy, for my tastes, to support the whole weight of the coming showdown. It's crucial at this juncture in the series that we see that Harry is innately powerful AND talented BUT with a lot of room to improve as he develops awareness and self-control. His poorly-controlled power (evident esp. in episodes of wandless magic) and (closely related) his poorly-controlled rage are what make Harry more than just a stick-figure hero.

hg again:

> The most profound--to me anyway--example of courage is in the 
> graveyard scene in GoF when Harry chooses to step out from behind the 
> tombstone, certain that he is going to be killed. But he does it 
> anyway.



This gives me a chance to mention something that's been occupying me as I've been thinking over the implications of the prophecy. I wouldn't be surprised if in the next book it dawns on Harry that, if he's destined for mortal combat with LV, he's not going to die in lesser conflicts in the meantime. I could see that realization prompting him to even more Sirius-like recklessness in his moment-by-moment dealings with the enemy, if not in his long-term strategy. (Does Harry ever strategize? Not yet...)

Carin





From feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca  Fri Sep 12 17:17:24 2003
From: feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca (feetmadeofclay)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 17:17:24 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Trust of Snape
In-Reply-To: <bjsuml+eo5p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjsv34+f72a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80583

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bohcoo" <sydenmill at m...> wrote:

> So, then, later Snape joins the Death Eaters but has a change of 
> heart and goes to Dumbledore to offer his spy services to the Order 
> of Phoenix. Having proven himself to be a man of his word to 
> Dumbledore in the past, under possibly the most gut-wrenchingly 
> tempting circumstances imaginable, Dumbledore continues to trust him.
> 
> I know I would.



The very nature of offering your services as a spy means that person 
is going to go around lying. It is why people never fully trust 
turncoats.  

My suspicion is that DD took a risk on a kid he knew.  Snape likely 
gave him ample reason to take that risk, but it was always going to 
be a risk. 

DD is the type of man to take a risk and give a person a second 
chance to prove himself.  I always suspected he gave him a job at 
Hogwarts to protect him and make leaving LV easier.  

But as a spy he could very well have turned out to be triple agent- 
no matter what he did what he was 16.  Afterall he let LV brand him - 
a sign of loyalty to Voldemort if I ever saw one.  Which means he 
either was lying at the time or violated his promise of loyalty at a 
later point. 

Such is the nature of being a spy.

Golly





From sydenmill at msn.com  Fri Sep 12 18:04:17 2003
From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 18:04:17 -0000
Subject: The Prank -- A New Thought
In-Reply-To: <bjsrc0+r6uc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjt1r1+3vbm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80584

msbeadsley wrote in post #80501:
James had been running around with Moony as *Prongs*, not as James. 
It would have been hard for Prongs to stop Snape: no hands.


melpomene wrote in post #80563:
Just try to imagine what would have happend to poor Lupin (reminder--
sirius' FRIEND) if anything had happened to Snape. Even if you 
discount the legal problems, what would it have done to a 16yo mental 
state to have been set up to eat a classmate by 
one of his closest friends?



Now Bohcoo:
Thank you both for your insightful replies. I agree with both of you:

msbbeadsley, I had not considered that James would have had to have 
pulled Snape back as a human so he would have his hands. (And, thanks 
for the chuckle, by the way. You have a humorous way of saying 
things...) As a human he most certainly would have been in danger 
from Werewolf Lupin  -- and from Bat! Snape.

melpomene, you also make a chilling point about the consequences of 
The Prank. It is the horrific nature of the consequences that makes 
me (want to) believe that Sirius thought or knew that Snape could 
transform -- if not into a bat, then into something that could stay 
away from Werewolf! Lupin's jaws. Otherwise, what Sirius did was so 
heartlessly evil it cannot be seen as anything other than cold-
blooded attempted murder. And I just can't see Sirius in that dark a 
light. 

(Sorry about the bat droppings -- it just sprang to mind along with 
the Bat image...)


:)

Bohcoo

 





From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Sep 12 18:05:27 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 18:05:27 -0000
Subject: On giving JKR a break (Was - photo vs. painting in magical world)
In-Reply-To: <bjsli4+5ia6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjt1t7+ga4k@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80585

Aussie, trying vainly to stop my JKR-baiting, wrote:
>>Give her a break ... You have to take some things with a grain of 
salt. eg: If the Dursleys never took Harry anywhere growing up, how 
did he learn to swim for the 2nd Tri-Wizard task? Answer: I don't 
know and I don't care! JKR lets us explore another part of the 
wizarding world by taking us underwater.>> 

But I don't want to give her a break! I'm having too much fun.
If we all gave her a break, then we'd patiently sit back and wait for 
the next book to come out, and we'd accept everything she wrote 
without question, and there wouldn't be any need for discussion 
groups. JKR has too much respect for her audience to create a book 
which doesn't intitate debate. She's presented me with a world, and I 
want to unravel every bit of it so that I can experience as much of 
it as possible - and if, during that unravelling, I come across 
something which isn't immediately clear to me, I pounce (think of me, 
if you will, as a grumpy cat at a ball of wool with suspicious lumps 
in it). I pounce with huge enjoyment. I imagine it gives me a petty 
sense of triumph too, in a sad sort of way. But this sort of nit-
picking adds to the pleasure I personally get from the texts, and 
judging by the plethora of Flint-spotters on list, I'm not alone in 
that. Perhaps I came across as a bit harsh on JKR, which wasn't my 
intention at all, as my tongue was firmly in my cheek during the 
writing of that post. 

NB - children at most British state primary schools are taught basic 
swimming. Not that Harry needed it, he had the Gillyweed to enable 
him to swim underwater. ;p   

Kirstini, still hopefully angling to catch the eye of a LOON.




From Koinonia2 at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 12 18:05:34 2003
From: Koinonia2 at hotmail.com (koinonia02)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 18:05:34 -0000
Subject: Mistaken identity and ages
In-Reply-To: <bjst2c+l27i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjt1te+p84d@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80586

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hermionegallo" Message 80568
 
 
> "K": (snipped)original message 80562
> During *The Pensieve* Bertha is about sixteen.

> GoF/Ch 19 "Listen, I 
> knew Bertha Jorkins," said Sirius grimly. "She was at Hogwarts 
>when I was, a few years above your dad and me." 

>James/Sirius/Snape would have been about thirteen. Possibly 
>fourteen. The Pensieve would have happened before The Prank. The 
>guys are in year six (?) at the time of the Prank and Bertha is no 
>longer at Hogwarts. 

 
> hg:
> Maybe we should remember that LUCIUS MALFOY is three years older 
than the Marauders.

"K":

Oh, I haven't forgotten Malfoy. 

Let's try this age stuff again. I admit that I hate trying to figure 
out the age of a character and usually leave that to others. Let's 
say Snape is in his 4th year at Hogwarts when Florence is kissed. He 
would be around 14 years old. Bertha would probably be in her 7th 
year. Lucius would be gone by that time. Malfoy would no longer be 
at Hogwarts as he is 5 - 6 years older than Snape. Malfoy is 41 in 
OoP. Snape is 35/36 at the end of GoF. I know some say Snape is 
35/36 at the beginning of SS and that would make a difference but 
until we know for sure I'm sticking with Lucius being older than 
Snape.

Now of course it could still be Malfoy kissing Florence if this 
scene took place when Snape was in his first or second year. Guess 
we'll just have to wait and see. 

 
"K"
> > ~~Have any of the Hogwarts professors had spouses?
> > Good question - yes, a few of them but that information is sort 
of 
> > restricted - you'll find out why....~~

 
 hg:
> This is JK in an interview?  Which one?  It's certainly a 
provokative statement, isn't it?


Comic Relief - March 2001 - Live Chat 
Why can't she just tell us who had spouses ;-)

"K"





From RSFJenny19 at aol.com  Fri Sep 12 18:11:36 2003
From: RSFJenny19 at aol.com (RSFJenny19 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 14:11:36 EDT
Subject: TBAY: the arrival of SILK GOWNS
Message-ID: <37.3dd621f3.2c936658@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80587

The sun glinted like diamonds across the calm waters of Theory Bay, leaving 
behind little reminder of Hurricane Jo, almost some three months past now.  
Here and there, wreckage lay immersed, forgotten, in shallow waters. Captain 
Jenny watched them carefully as she guided the sleek, sturdy sailboat toward the 
docks, sails billowing.  She did not intend to join that wreckage, though she 
knew well enough that even powerful vessels can fall to the unexpected.  This 
ship, she was certain, had been built with canon sufficient to ride out any 
storm, and its hull strong enough to withstand attacks from others.  It appeared 
deceptively simple, this sailboat, to the untrained eye.  Only when looked at 
closely were all the intricate details truly appreciated.

Jenny glanced around her as they prepared to dock, eyeing her crew, all 
decked out, as she was, in various bold-colored silk gowns and looking quite 
confident in their vessel.  They were bound to catch the eyes of many, she was 
certain, and that would lead to questions.

Sure enough, a small crowd soon appeared on the dock, some to examine the 
ship, and others to eye the attire with skepticism.

"SILK GOWNS," one of the crowd Jenny recognized as a skeptic spoke. "And just 
what does this mean?"

Jenny smiled.  It was the moment she had savored.

"SILK GOWNS is the belief in the Suspiciously Insane Longbottoms, the Key is 
the Gum Or Wrappers Neville Saves."

"Our ship," she continued, "is dedicated to Frank and Alice Longbottom.  As 
you are likely aware, both are currently considered insane, and reside in St. 
Mungo's. Frank and Alice were Aurors and members of the original Order of the 
Phoenix. They defied Voldemort three times during his reign and were tortured 
into insanity by Bellatrix Lestrange and Co. after his downfall. They have one 
son, Neville, who was born at the end of July the same year as Harry, and 
could have been the one prophecied about with the ability to defeat Lord 
Voldemort. Neville is raised by his paternal grandmother. 


"A worthy cause, perhaps," continued the skeptic, "but why a cause at all?"

"Frank and Alice Longbottom are being kept from recovering at St. Mungo's," 
Jenny stated confidently.  "Despite having been there for 14 years now, they do 
not appear to be recouperating in any fashion, which is contradictory with 
canon references to other patients of the long-term ward(3a). This points to 
foul play."

The skeptic raised her eyebrows in challenge.

Taking a deep breath, Jenny continued.

"My crew and I believe someone is using something to keep the Longbottoms 
from recovering. We know that Alice has given Neville countless Droobles Blowing 
Gum wrappers throughout the years(2). Therefore, the gum is the only thing we 
know the Longbottoms have been in contact with regularly throughout their stay 
at St. Mungo's. This makes it the primary object of suspicion. But there were 
no bluebell-colored bubbles(2d) in canon at the long-term ward, leaving us 
with two options that are most likely to explain their absence: 
1. The Longbottoms don't actually chew the gum, and it is the wrappers that 
are the tool that affects them.
2. The gum is tampered with and whatever is in it affects its "special 
effect", so it doesn't create the bubbles.
Note also that Neville, whom we know has touched the wrappers, and Healer 
Strout, who has also likely come in contact with wrappers during her tenure with 
the Longbottoms, appear to have memory issues. Neville has a notoriously poor 
memory, and Healer Strout, who would have needed to score high on her NEWTs in 
Herbology to become a Healer, failed to recognize Devil's Snare when she 
delivered the present to Bode(3b)."

Gaining momentum, Jenny added, " we believe there are three possible 
suspects; Lucius Malfoy, Uncle Algie or Mrs. Longbottom."

The crowd around SILK GOWNS had grown since Jenny had begun, and another 
person spoke.

"Yeah, but how could any of them have done it, the Longbottoms are in a 
hospital!"

"The killing of Broderick Bode emphasized that outside factors can influence 
a patient's well-being at St. Mungo's," Jenny reminded them, "and we have 
discovered several options that could be possible, supported by canon.  These 
options aren't necessarily exclusive of each other, either."

Seeing she had their attention, Jenny jumped in.

"Option A: Lucius Malfoy, a generous contributer to St. Mungo's(4a), may 
contribute more than money to St. Mungo's.
Notice that Broderick Bode, along with his Devil's Snare potted plant, 
receives a calendar of hippogriffs(3b). A connection can be made between Malfoy and 
the hippogriff calendar due to Malfoy's vendetta against Buckbeak(4f). This 
could be a symbolic reference to Malfoy's ability to influence the fate of 
Buckbeak (though thwarted by Harry, in Buckbeak's case), and serve as a reminder 
that he is able to determine Bode's fate as well. If Malfoy were in a habit of 
sending gifts to St. Mungo's of various forms, certainly one of those gifts 
could be endless supplies of Droobles Blowing Gum for Frank and Alice Longbottom. 

"Option B: Lucius Malfoy's contributions are bribes.
It is a corrupt Fudge, other corrupt St. Mungos officials, or the actual 
tampering with the Longbottoms been being done by a nurse, doctor, or orderly. 
If it is the latter, it could be easier to stop. Locate the person (or few 
people) who've been tampering with the Longbottoms. High marks on the OWLs and 
NEWTs are necessary to train as a Healer, and Hermione recognized Devil?s Snare 
in her first year. Busy or not, an aggressive plant like that should be 
instantly recognized by somebody who is supposed to know these things. The Healer 
could have been bought off.
If, however, this is a case of corruption from the top down, it gets uglier 
real quick. After seeing the way the Ministry is run, it is believable that 
there could be major corruption in the top levels of management at St. Mungos. 

"Option C: Alice and Frank are under the Imperius Curse.
Alice is aware of what she is doing, and that she is actively trying to send 
Neville a message. There are two possibilities here: that her brain is addled 
right now, and it is probably taking all the willpower she can muster to pass 
him these gum wrappers, or that she is not really as crazy as we've been led 
to believe, but her primary problem is a lack of ability to communicate (for 
some reason). In other words, that she can still think clearly to some degree 
(at least some of the time) but isn't able to communicate any of her thoughts or 
feelings properly. 
The first scenario, that most of her brain is incapable of doing what she 
tells it to do, but there is a small voice far in the back somewhere that knows 
the truth and is SCREAMING loudly enough to give her the ability to get those 
gum wrappers to her son, is reminiscent of the way Harry describes being under 
the Imperius curse(canon from GoF needed). Also, the way Alice is 
described(2b) is reminiscent of Barty Crouch Sr's appearance at the end of GoF. Harry and 
both of the Crouches have proven that you can fight the Imperius Curse in 
GoF(7). Alice be able to at least fight back against whatever is affecting her 
just enough to try to let somebody, anybody, know what?s happening to her and 
Frank. 

"Option D: As a relative of Frank and Alice, for Uncle Algie to send gum to 
them on a regular basis would not be looked upon with suspicion. Uncle Algie 
has been mentioned several times in the book by Neville, though we have never 
met him. He spent years trying to force some magic out of Neville(8a), bought 
Neville his toad(8b), Trevor, and also bought him his Mimbulus Mimbletonia(8c). 
While arguments can be made for and against Algie's liking of Neville, all are 
based on differing interpretation of the same canon(8). Was Great Uncle Algie 
the old man who was going to visit Broderick Bode the first day the Weasleys 
and Harry went to St. Mungo's? The Devil's Snare that killed Bode could also 
have a connection to Uncle Algie, who seems interested in plant life(8c).

"Option E: The person who went to visit Bode(3d) may have been a DE keeping 
an eye on Bode's recovery. Logically, someone could be keeping tabs on the 
Longbottoms as well, to ensure the gum/wrappers is doing the job. 

"Option F: Severus Snape is making a potion for Lucius Malfoy that is used to 
"poison" the gum(6). 

"Option G: Lucius Malfoy is making a potion that is used to "poison" the 
gum(4d). 

"Option H: Mrs. Longbottom is giving the bubblegum (with potion) to Alice and 
Frank so that they stay in their non-recovered condition as a way of 
protecting them. If they recover then they may be in more danger if indeed they know 
"something". Also, they would probably want to get in to the fight again. 
People can do off things when trying to protect loved ones, and parents are not 
perfect as hard as they try! 

"Option I: Strout is under the Imperius Curse. That is why she allows gifts 
sent to the patients on her ward through, no matter how odd those gifts seem. 
Someone with her background should not be letting hazardous plants get near her 
debilitated patients(3b). 

"Option J: The message in the empty wrappers is just that - they are empty. 
Candy could be part of the healing process at St. Mungo's, just as an 
emotionally unsettling encounter with Dementors can be fixed with just some chocolate. 
Part of the therapy for the Longbottoms could be to give them gum, but they've 
just been given empty wrappers instead of the gum itself. That's why it's 
important for us to know that Neville received empty wrappers when there were no 
bubbles around in the room."

A long silence greeted Jenny as she finished, out of breath.

"But...why would anyone want to do this to them?" a young boy asked in 
disbelief at the possibilites.

Jenny sighed.

"We don't know," she said simply. 

"What do the Longbottoms know that is so significant it is worth the risk of 
keeping them in their incapacitated state? Why not just kill them? Killing 
Bode proved they are capable of doing so and making it appear unsuspicious. We 
know that Bellatrix and Co. tortured the Longbottoms for information about 
Voldemort's whereabouts(1a). What is it that led them to believe the Longbottoms 
had such information? And, given that the Longbottom's testimony of the event 
was "unreliable"(1c), how can we be sure that is the true reason they were 
tortured? Malfoy was probably not involved in Longbottom's torture. They were some 
of the first to come back to the good side after LV's downfall. To get caught, 
or even named, as one who tortured the Longbottoms would rip their story that 
they'd been bewitched to shreds(4c)," Jenny explained.

"The question of why has been a nagging problem as we built the ship, and 
though the vessel sails fine without it, we know an answer would make our ship 
invincible," she continued with a note of longing.

"So say one of those comes true," the skeptic pushed her way back to the 
front of the crowd. "What could possibly come of it?"

"Hopefully, the Longbottoms will recover," Jenny answered happily, thinking 
with joy about their possible reunion with Neville.

"We have possible solutions, of course," Jenny added hastily, "they aren't 
necessarily exclusive of each other, but here goes:

"Solution A: Lucius Malfoy is currently in Azkaban (although we don't know 
for certain that his name has been publicly mentioned in connection with the 
kerfuffle at the Ministry). If he is, indeed, discredited, he may no longer be 
able to pay off whomever he's been paying to keep the Longbottoms insane. So, 
there is a chance they won't need to be rescued. 

"Solution B: Neville, Frank and Alice's son, stands a chance at accomplishing 
this, for it is he who has the wrappers, and therefore, the clues. 

"Solution C: Perhaps one of the great things about Neville's Mimbulus 
Mimbletonia will be it's function as a cure (in the form of a potion, wouldn't that 
be ironic??) to whatever is doing this to them.

"Solution D: Luna will make the discovery that saves the Longbottoms. Note 
her penchant for decoding, her suspicious nature, her inclusion in Ravenclaw 
house, and that she does not need outside confirmation to believe something. She 
is the antithesis of Hermione; though Hermione takes Ancient Runes classes, 
Luna is reading ancient runes upside down on the Hogwarts express for another 
reason entirely(9a), viewing things from a different perspective, and Luna will 
believe (probably) anything, whereas Hermione only believes information gained 
from what she deems a reliable source (books, people she respects)(9b). 

"Solution E: Luna's discovery (above) will be connected to the gum wrappers.

"Solution F: Who do we know that is named for candy? Cornelius Fudge, of 
course! Alice is in no condition to tell anyone that the gum is doctored and that 
the source is Fudge. Her abilities are limited, so she does the best she can. 
The wrappers, then, are both the smoking gun and the message. Luna, a new 
factor, and a puzzle-solver, will finally make that connection--she's a "true 
believer" in weird things, and could very well make the leap between "Fudge" candy 
and "gum" candy. She's been taught to mistrust Fudge, anyway, and would be 
happy to help get him thrown out of office. We already know that Fudge is in 
love with his office, and if he believed that the Longbottoms could damage his 
position, for any reason, he'd be happy to feed them something that would keep 
him out of the way. Lucius Malfoy has had a lot of access to him, and if Fudge 
mentioned that he had "reservations" about the Longbottoms, Malfoy would be 
sure to supply him with something that would protect Fudge's position, and bring 
Fudge under his control. Malfoy could always threaten to reveal Fudge's role 
in keeping the Longbottom's in the hospital. 

"Solution G: Neville tells the gang, which now includes Ginny and Luna, that 
Alice has stopped giving him the gum wrappers. Hermione questions this, and 
this is how they start to figure out that someone has been hindering the 
Longbottom's recovery."

Jenny looked around, trying to guage the reactions of the crowd.  

"It's all here, really," she confirmed, and swept her hand over the detailed 
canon.

  
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~

CANON

(all page references are US editions unless otherwise noted, and paperback 
references will have pb next to them.) 

1. The Longbottoms:
A. "'Yes, they were talking about Neville's parents,' said Dumbledore. '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.'
'So they're dead?' said Harry quietly.
B. 'No,' said Dumbledore, his voice full of a bitterness Harry had never 
heard there before. 'They are insane. They are both in St. Mungo's Hospital for 
Magical Maladies and Injuries. I believe Neville visits them, with his 
grandmother, during the holidays. They do not recognize him.'
Harry sat there, horror-struck. He had never known...never, in four years, 
bothered to find out...
C. 'The Longbottoms were very popular,' said Dumbledore. "The attacks on them 
came after Voldemort's fall from power, just when everyone thought they were 
safe. Those attacks caused a wave of fury such as I have never known. The 
Ministry was under great pressure to catch those who had done it. Unfortunately, 
the Longbottoms' evidence was - given their condition - none too 
reliable.'"(GoF, Ch. 30 p.602pb)
D. "'The four of you stand accused of capturing an Auror - Frank Longbottom - 
and subjecting him to the Cruciatus Curse, believing him to have knowledge of 
the present whereabouts of your exiled master, He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named-'" 
"'You are further accused,' bellowed Mr. Crouch, 'of using the Cruciatus 
Curse on Frank Longbottoms' wife, when he would not give you information.'"(GOF, 
Ch30, p.595pb) 

2. The Longbottoms and Droobles Best Blowing Gum: 
A."'My son and his wife,' she said, turning haughtily to Harry, Ron, 
Hermione, and Ginny, 'were tortured into insanity by You-Know-Who's followers.'
'They were Aurors, you know, and very well respected within the wizarding 
community,' Mrs. Longbottom went on. 'Highly gifted, the pair of them.'
....
B. Her face was thin and worn now, her eyes seemed overlarge, and her hiar, 
which had turned white, was wispy and dead-looking. She did not seem to want to 
speak, or perhaps she was not able to, but she made timid motions toward 
Neville, holding something in her outstretched hand.
'Again?' said Mrs. Longbottom, sounding slightly weary. 'Very well, Alice 
dear, very well - Neville, take it, whatever it is....'
But Neville had already stretched out his hand, into which his mother dropped 
an empty Droobles Blowing Gum wrapper.
'very nice dear,' said Neville's grandmother in a falsely cheery voice, 
patting his mother on the shoulder.
But Neville said quietly, 'thanks, Mum.'
His mother tottered away, back up the ward, humming to herself.
....
C. 'Well, we'd better get back,' sighed Mrs. Longbottom, drawing on long 
green gloves. 'Very nice to have met you all. Neville, put that wrapper in the 
bin, she must have given you enough of them to paper your bedroom by now....'
But as they left, Harry was sure he saw Neville slip the wrapper into his 
pocket."(OotP, Ch23 p.514-5)
D. "...along yet another wall were 'Special Effects' sweets: Droobles Best 
Blowing Gum (which filled a room with bluebell-colored bubbles that refused to 
pop for days),...."(PoA, Ch10, p.197) 

3. Broderick Bode:
A. "'This is our long-term resident ward,' she informed Harry, Ron, hermione, 
and Ginny in a low voice. 'For permanent spell damage, you know. Of course, 
with intensive remedial potions and charms and a bit of luck, we can produce 
some improvement.... Gilderoy does seem to be getting back some sense of 
himself, and we've seen a real inprovement in Mr. Bode, he seems to be regaining the 
power of speech very well, though he isn't speaking any language we recognize 
yet....'"(OotP, Ch 23, p.511)
B. "'And look, Broderick, you've been sent a potted plant and a lovely 
calendar with a different fancy hippogriff for each month, they'll brighten things 
up, won't they?' said the Healer, bustling along to the membling man, setting a 
rather ugly plant with long, swaying tentacles on the bedside cabinet and 
fixing the calendar to the wall with her wand." (OotP, Ch 23, P.512)
C. "St. Mungo's Hospital promised a full inquiry last night after Ministry of 
Magic worker Broderick Bode, 49, was discovered dead in his bed, strangled by 
a potted-plant. Healers called to teh scene were unable to revive Mr. Bode, 
who had been injured in a workplace accident some weeks prior to his death.
Healer Miriam Strout, who was in charge of Mr. Bode's ward at the time of the 
incident, has been suspended on full pay and was unavailable for comment 
yesterday, but a spokeswizard for the hospital said in a statement, 'St. Mungo's 
deeply regrets the death of Mr.Bode, whose health was improving steadily prior 
to this tragic accident.
'We have strict guidelines on the decorations permitted on our wards but it 
appears that Healer Strout, busy over the Christmas period, overlooked the 
dangers of the plant on Mr. Bode's bedside table. As his speech and mobility 
improved, healer Strout encouraged mr. Bode to look after the plant himself, 
unaware that it was not an innocent Flitterbloom, but a cutting of Devil's Sanre, 
which, when touched by the convalescent Mr. Bode, throttled him instantly.
'St. Mungo's is as yet unable to account for the presence of the plant on the 
ward and asks any witch or wizard with information to come forward.'"(OotP, 
Ch 25, p.546) 
D. "A very old, stooped wizard with a hearing trumpet had shuffled to the 
front of the queue now.
'I'm here to see Broderick Bode!' he wheezed.
'Ward forty-nine, but I'm afraid you're wasting your time,' said the witch 
dismissively. 'He's completely addled, you know, still thinks he's a teapo
t....Next!'"(OotP, Ch 22, p.486) 


4. Lucius Malfoy:
A. "Fudge, who wasn't listening, said, 'Lucius has just given a very generous 
contribution to St. Mungo's Hospital for Magical Maladies and Injuries, 
Arthur. He's here as my guest.'"(GOF, Ch 8, p.101pb)
B. "'Malfoy was cleared!' said Fudge, visibly affronted. 'A very old family - 
donations to excellent causes - '"(GoF, Ch36 p.706pb) 
C. "'I've heard of his family,' said Ron darkly. 'They were some of the first 
to come back to our side after You-Know-Who disappeared. Said they'd been 
bewitched. My dad doesn't believe it. He says Malfoy's father didn't need an 
excuse to go over to the Dark Side.'"(SS/PS, Ch6, p.100pb)
D. "I have a few - ah - items at home that might embarass me, if the Ministry 
were to call....'"
"'- and as you see, certain of these poisons might make it appear - '"(CoS, 
Ch4, p.51pb)
"'Father's got some very valuable Dark Arts stuff. But luckily, we've got our 
own secret chamber under the drawing-room floor - '"(COS, Ch12, p.224pb)
E. "'Malfoy's been giving generously to all sorts of things for years.... 
Gets him in with the right people...then he can ask favors... delay laws he 
doesn't want passed... Oh, he's very well connected, Lucius Malfoy....'"(OotP, Ch 
9, p.155) 
F. "'Father's not very happy about my injury - '
'Keep talking, Malfoy, and I'll give you a real injury,' snarled Ron.
' - he's complained to the school governors. And to the Ministry of Magic. 
Father's got a lot of influence, you know.'"(PoA, Ch 7, p.125pb) 

5. Neville Longbottom
"Neville struggled frantically, his fists flailing, trying desperately to get 
at Malfoy who looked, for a moment, extremely shocked."(OotP, Ch24 p.361) 

6. Severus Snape
A. "'I dont expect you will really understand the beauty of the softly 
simmering cauldron with its shimmering fumes, the delicate power of liquids that 
creep through human veins, bewitching the mind, ensnaring the senses....I can 
teach you how to bottle fame, brew glory, even stopper death -'"(SS/PS, Ch 8, 
p.137pb)
B. "'Tell me, how is Lucius Malfoy these days? I expect he's delighted his 
lapdog's working at Hogwarts, isn't he?'"(OotP, Ch 24, p.520) 

7. The Imperius Curse
A. "It was the most wonderful feeling. Harry felt a floating sensation as 
every thought and worry in his head was wiped gently away, leaving nothing but a 
vague, untraceable happiness. he stood there feeling immensely relaxed, only 
dimly aware of everyone watching him.
And then he heard Mad-Eye Moody's voice, echoing in some distant chamber of 
his empty brain:Jump onto the desk...jump onto the desk....
Harry bent his knees obediently, preparing to spring.
Jump onto the desk....
Why, though? Another voice had awoken in the back of his brain. Stupid thing 
to do, really, said the voice.
Jump onto the desk....
No, I don't think I will, thanks, said the other voice, a little more 
firmly...no, I don't really want to....
Jump! NOW!
The next thing Harry felt was considerable pain. He had both jumped and tried 
to prevent himself from jumping - the result was that he'd smashed headlong 
into the desk, knocking it over, and, by the feeling in his legs, fractured 
both his kneecaps.
'Now, that's more like it!' growled Moody's voice, and suddenly, Harry felt 
the empty, echoing feeling in his head disappear. (GoF, Ch 15, P.232pb)
B. "'But Winky didn't know that I was growing stronger. I was starting to 
fight my father's Imperius Curse. There were times when I was almost myself 
again. There were brief periods when I seemed outside his control. It happened, 
there, in the Top Box. It was like waking froma deep sleep.'
....
'The sound of their voices awoke me. My mind was clearer than it had been in 
years."(GoF, Ch 35, p.686pb)
C. "'After awile he began to fight the Imperius Curse just as I had done. 
There were periods when he knew what was happening.'"(GoF, Ch 35, p.689pb)
D. "And Harry felt, for the third time in his life, the sensation that his 
mind had been wiped of all thought....Ah, it was bliss, not to think, it was as 
though he were floating, dreaming...just answer no...say no...just answer no...
I will not, said a stronger voice, in the back of his head, I won't answer....
Just answer no....
I won't do it, I won't say it....
Just answer no....
'I WON'T!'
And these words burst from Harry's mouth; they echoed through the graveyard, 
and the dream state was lifted as suddenly as though cold water had been 
thrown over him - back rushed the aches that the Cruciatus Curse had left all over 
his body - back rushed the realization of where he was, and what he was 
facing...."(GoF, Ch 34, p.661-2pb)


8. Uncle Algie
A."'My Great Uncle Algie kept trying to catch me off my guard and force some 
magic out of me - he pushed me off the end of Blackpool pier once, I nearly 
drowned - but nothing happened until I was eight. Great Uncle Algie came round 
for dinner, and he was hanging me out of an upstairs window by the ankles when 
my Great Auntie Enid offered him a meringue and he accidentally let go. But I 
bounced - all the way down the garden and into the road.They were all really 
pleased, Gran was crying, she was so happy.'" (SS/PS, Ch 7, p.125pb)
B."'Great Uncle Algie was so pleased he bought me my toad.'"(SS/PS, Ch 7, 
p.125pb)
C."'It's really, really rare,' said Neville, beaming. 'I don't know if 
there's one in the greenhouse at Hogwarts, even. I can't wait to show it to 
Professor Sprout. My great-uncle Algie got it for me in Assyria. I'm going to see if I 
can breed from it.'" (OotP, Ch 10, p.186) 

9. Luna Lovegood
A."...and an article on ancient runes, which at least explained why Luna had 
been reading The Quibbler upside down. According to the magazine, if you 
turned the runes on their heads they revealed a spell to make your enemy's ears 
turn into kumquats." (OotP, Ch 10, p.193)
B. "'There are plenty of eyewitness accounts, just because you're so 
narrow-minded you need to have everything shoved under your nose before you - '" 
(OotP, Ch 16, p.345)


10. The Prophecy
"'Sibyll's prophecy could have applied to two wizard boys, both born at the 
end of July that year, both of whom had parents in the Order of the Phoenix, 
both sets of parents having narrowly escaped Voldemort three times. One, of 
course, was you. The other was Neville Longbottom. (OotP, Ch 37, p.842) 

*Note, they are not dead, only the people who are clearly dead will 
definitely not come back, per JKR. 



Contributers to SILK GOWNS, as written above, are:

RSFJenny, Peg, Sally, Brief Chronicles, Lilian, Entropy, Fran, and Wendy

Check out SILK GOWNS at our website 
http://www.geocities.com/rsfjenny/HP/silkgowns


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Sep 12 18:21:32 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 18:21:32 -0000
Subject: Mistaken identity - part three
In-Reply-To: <bjsmtp+krvk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjt2rc+nq4v@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80588

Doriane:

>>We know that Bertha was the gossiping kind. We also know that 
Sirius was extremely good-looking, so it's not that wild an 
assumption that Bertha would try and attract his attention, like half 
the girls in the castle. So imagine Bertha coming up to Sirius, right 
after the kissing scene, which admittedly took place a little after 
the grey-pants scene :
<snip big dialogue>
Does it sound credible ?>>

No, sorry. As someone else on this thread has just pointed out, 
Bertha was about two or three years *older* than MWPPSL. If she was 
sixteen at the time, they would not be of an age to sit their OWLS, 
so it couldn't have been after the grey pants incident. This is the 
problem I've always had with Florence theories, particularly the 
Snape variant - if Harry and Ron have very little interest in girls 
age 13-4, *Snape* at the same age is not likely to be more socially 
developed than they are. OoP just confirmed it for me. And for the 
same reason, I don't see any reason why Bertha would try and attract 
the attention of a boy 2-3 years younger than herself, no matter how 
good looking he was. 
I liked the dialogue, though.
Kirstini




From eberte at vaeye.com  Fri Sep 12 18:30:59 2003
From: eberte at vaeye.com (ellejir)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 18:30:59 -0000
Subject: Are we having fun?
In-Reply-To: <bjslrb+kcj6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjt3d3+e64h@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80589

Wanda wrote:

> <snip> Are WE having fun anymore? Speaking for myself, I have to
> say no.  For me, the fun died on June 21, when OotP was released.
> And so much of the discussion of that  book, and speculation of
> what it will lead to, make me think that very few readers are
> having fun anymore.  Instead, I read worries and foreboding about
> how much horror Harry is going to have to endure until we finally
> make it to the end of book 7.  Nobody seems to expect anything but
> anguish and pain, with maybe a happy ending, but very possibly just
> a merciful release to look forward to. <snip>

Elle (me):
I do not think that your view of OoP and the direction that the HP 
series is heading is universally held.  A fair number of people 
enjoyed reading OoP (myself included) and some people on the list 
have stated that it is their *favorite* book in the series. The 
things that you hate about OoP are the very things that may make it 
more interesting to another reader (i.e. the darker tone and Harry's 
more fragile emotional state.)  IMHO, the first two books in the 
series seem relatively spare and child-like (*yikes*! did I say 
that??!) when compared to the last three, GoF and OoP especially. I 
really enjoyed reading OoP and expect to enjoy the last two books as 
well. No matter how much "horror" Harry has to endure, I am sure that 
JKR will handle it with imagination and wit.  So, in answer to your 
question Wanda, *yes* I am still having fun with the series.

Elle  (who reserves the right to change her mind about the above 
statement if JKR kills off either Harry or Hermione)    
  





From sydenmill at msn.com  Fri Sep 12 18:38:56 2003
From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 18:38:56 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Trust of Snape
In-Reply-To: <bjsv34+f72a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjt3s0+iv56@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80590

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "feetmadeofclay" 
<feetmadeofclay at y...> wrote:

Golly ("feetmadeofclay") wrote in post #80503 (regarding Snape): 
DD is the type of man to take a risk and give a person a second 
chance to prove himself.  I always suspected he gave him a job at 
Hogwarts to protect him and make leaving LV easier.  
 
But as a spy he could very well have turned out to be triple agent- 
no matter what he did what he was 16. 
Golly

Now Bohcoo:
Wasn't it a very dangerous thing for Dumbledore to have given Snape a 
residental Professor position with Harry, The Boy Who Lived, around 
unless he was beyond a shadow of a doubt that Snape wasn't a spy for 
Voldemort?

I would love to hear your theories as to what Snape could have done 
to have earned this depth of trust from Dumbledore? 

Do you think this trust is misplaced? Do you really believe Snape is 
a triple spy?

Do you think Snape is only safe on the grounds of Hogwarts and in 
places like Grimmauld Place? Do you think he could ever even go in to 
Hogsmeade?

If one of the Death Eaters came on Hogwarts grounds, (a likely 
occurrence since many of them have children in school there) could 
they harm Snape if his cover with Voldemort is blown?

Thanks for sharing your viewpoints!
Bohcoo






From cathio2002 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 18:40:56 2003
From: cathio2002 at yahoo.com (Buttercup)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 11:40:56 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Did Harry ever shed tears ?
In-Reply-To: <bjss7d+afuk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030912184056.74554.qmail@web21010.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80591


 "samnanya" wrote:

> > > Does anyone remember an instance where Harry
> actually shed tears 
> in 
> > > any of the books ? Even DD did, but no memory of
> Harry doing so.
> > > 
Buttercup writes:

Harry does cry in OotP when he's sitting by the lake,
thinking of Sirius.  JKR doesn't go into any details,
but it's insinuated. On page 856 (US edition) "He got
up and returned to the castle, wiping his face on his
sleeve as he went."

I'm positive Harry wasn't wiping dirt off his face.

=====
Buttercup

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From RSFJenny19 at aol.com  Fri Sep 12 18:41:25 2003
From: RSFJenny19 at aol.com (Jenny)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 18:41:25 -0000
Subject: TBAY: The arrival of SILK GOWNS (reformatted)
Message-ID: <bjt40l+3dcn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80592

erm, it looked pretty unreadable, so I reformatted it...hope it looks 
better this time...


The sun glinted like diamonds across the calm waters of Theory Bay, 
leaving behind little reminder of Hurricane Jo, almost some three 
months past now.  Here and there, wreckage lay immersed, forgotten, 
in shallow waters. Captain Jenny watched them carefully as she guided 
the sleek, sturdy sailboat toward the docks, sails billowing.  She 
did not intend to join that wreckage, though she knew well enough 
that even powerful vessels can fall to the unexpected.  This ship, 
she was certain, had been built with canon sufficient to ride out any 
storm, and its hull strong enough to withstand attacks from others.  
It appeared deceptively simple, this sailboat, to the untrained eye.  
Only when looked at closely were all the intricate details truly 
appreciated.
 
Jenny glanced around her as they prepared to dock, eyeing her crew, 
all decked out, as she was, in various bold-colored silk gowns and 
looking quite confident in their vessel.  They were bound to catch 
the eyes of many, she was certain, and that would lead to questions.
 
Sure enough, a small crowd soon appeared on the dock, some to examine 
the ship, and others to eye the attire with skepticism.
 
"SILK GOWNS," one of the crowd Jenny recognized as a skeptic 
spoke. "And just what does this mean?"
 
Jenny smiled.  It was the moment she had savored.
 
"SILK GOWNS is the belief in the Suspiciously Insane Longbottoms, the 
Key is the Gum Or Wrappers Neville Saves."
 
"Our ship," she continued, "is dedicated to Frank and Alice 
Longbottom.  As you are likely aware, both are currently considered 
insane, and reside in St. Mungo's. Frank and Alice were Aurors and 
members of the original Order of the Phoenix. They defied Voldemort 
three times during his reign and were tortured into insanity by 
Bellatrix Lestrange and Co. after his downfall. They have one son, 
Neville, who was born at the end of July the same year as Harry, and 
could have been the one prophecied about with the ability to defeat 
Lord Voldemort. Neville is raised by his paternal grandmother. 

 
"A worthy cause, perhaps," continued the skeptic, "but why a cause at 
all?"
 
"Frank and Alice Longbottom are being kept from recovering at St. 
Mungo's," Jenny stated confidently.  "Despite having been there for 
14 years now, they do not appear to be recouperating in any fashion, 
which is contradictory with canon references to other patients of the 
long-term ward(3a). This points to foul play."
 
The skeptic raised her eyebrows in challenge.
 
Taking a deep breath, Jenny continued.
 
"My crew and I believe someone is using something to keep the 
Longbottoms from recovering. We know that Alice has given Neville 
countless Droobles Blowing Gum wrappers throughout the years(2). 
Therefore, the gum is the only thing we know the Longbottoms have 
been in contact with regularly throughout their stay at St. Mungo's. 
This makes it the primary object of suspicion. But there were no 
bluebell-colored bubbles(2d) in canon at the long-term ward, leaving 
us with two options that are most likely to explain their absence: 
1. The Longbottoms don't actually chew the gum, and it is the 
wrappers that are the tool that affects them.
2. The gum is tampered with and whatever is in it affects 
its "special effect", so it doesn't create the bubbles.
Note also that Neville, whom we know has touched the wrappers, and 
Healer Strout, who has also likely come in contact with wrappers 
during her tenure with the Longbottoms, appear to have memory issues. 
Neville has a notoriously poor memory, and Healer Strout, who would 
have needed to score high on her NEWTs in Herbology to become a 
Healer, failed to recognize Devil's Snare when she delivered the 
present to Bode(3b)."
 
Gaining momentum, Jenny added, " we believe there are three possible 
suspects; Lucius Malfoy, Uncle Algie or Mrs. Longbottom."
 
The crowd around SILK GOWNS had grown since Jenny had begun, and 
another person spoke.
 
"Yeah, but how could any of them have done it, the Longbottoms are in 
a hospital!"

"The killing of Broderick Bode emphasized that outside factors can 
influence a patient's well-being at St. Mungo's," Jenny reminded 
them, "and we have discovered several options that could be possible, 
supported by canon.  These options aren't necessarily exclusive of 
each other, either."
 
Seeing she had their attention, Jenny jumped in.
 
"Option A: Lucius Malfoy, a generous contributer to St. Mungo's(4a), 
may contribute more than money to St. Mungo's.
Notice that Broderick Bode, along with his Devil's Snare potted 
plant, receives a calendar of hippogriffs(3b). A connection can be 
made between Malfoy and the hippogriff calendar due to Malfoy's 
vendetta against Buckbeak(4f). This could be a symbolic reference to 
Malfoy's ability to influence the fate of Buckbeak (though thwarted 
by Harry, in Buckbeak's case), and serve as a reminder that he is 
able to determine Bode's fate as well. If Malfoy were in a habit of 
sending gifts to St. Mungo's of various forms, certainly one of those 
gifts could be endless supplies of Droobles Blowing Gum for Frank and 
Alice Longbottom. 

"Option B: Lucius Malfoy's contributions are bribes.
It is a corrupt Fudge, other corrupt St. Mungos officials, or the 
actual tampering with the Longbottoms been being done by a nurse, 
doctor, or orderly. 
If it is the latter, it could be easier to stop. Locate the person 
(or few people) who've been tampering with the Longbottoms. High 
marks on the OWLs and NEWTs are necessary to train as a Healer, and 
Hermione recognized Devil's Snare in her first year. Busy or not,
an 
aggressive plant like that should be instantly recognized by somebody 
who is supposed to know these things. The Healer could have been 
bought off.
If, however, this is a case of corruption from the top down, it gets 
uglier real quick. After seeing the way the Ministry is run, it is 
believable that there could be major corruption in the top levels of 
management at St. Mungos. 

"Option C: Alice and Frank are under the Imperius Curse.
Alice is aware of what she is doing, and that she is actively trying 
to send Neville a message. There are two possibilities here: that her 
brain is addled right now, and it is probably taking all the 
willpower she can muster to pass him these gum wrappers, or that she 
is not really as crazy as we've been led to believe, but her primary 
problem is a lack of ability to communicate (for some reason). In 
other words, that she can still think clearly to some degree (at 
least some of the time) but isn't able to communicate any of her 
thoughts or feelings properly. 
The first scenario, that most of her brain is incapable of doing what 
she tells it to do, but there is a small voice far in the back 
somewhere that knows the truth and is SCREAMING loudly enough to give 
her the ability to get those gum wrappers to her son, is reminiscent 
of the way Harry describes being under the Imperius curse(canon from 
GoF needed). Also, the way Alice is described(2b) is reminiscent of 
Barty Crouch Sr's appearance at the end of GoF. Harry and both of the 
Crouches have proven that you can fight the Imperius Curse in GoF(7). 
Alice be able to at least fight back against whatever is affecting 
her just enough to try to let somebody, anybody, know what's 
happening to her and Frank. 

"Option D: As a relative of Frank and Alice, for Uncle Algie to send 
gum to them on a regular basis would not be looked upon with 
suspicion. Uncle Algie has been mentioned several times in the book 
by Neville, though we have never met him. He spent years trying to 
force some magic out of Neville(8a), bought Neville his toad(8b), 
Trevor, and also bought him his Mimbulus Mimbletonia(8c). While 
arguments can be made for and against Algie's liking of Neville, all 
are based on differing interpretation of the same canon(8). Was Great 
Uncle Algie the old man who was going to visit Broderick Bode the 
first day the Weasleys and Harry went to St. Mungo's? The Devil's 
Snare that killed Bode could also have a connection to Uncle Algie, 
who seems interested in plant life(8c).

"Option E: The person who went to visit Bode(3d) may have been a DE 
keeping an eye on Bode's recovery. Logically, someone could be 
keeping tabs on the Longbottoms as well, to ensure the gum/wrappers 
is doing the job. 

"Option F: Severus Snape is making a potion for Lucius Malfoy that is 
used to "poison" the gum(6). 

"Option G: Lucius Malfoy is making a potion that is used to "poison" 
the gum(4d). 

"Option H: Mrs. Longbottom is giving the bubblegum (with potion) to 
Alice and Frank so that they stay in their non-recovered condition as 
a way of protecting them. If they recover then they may be in more 
danger if indeed they know "something". Also, they would probably 
want to get in to the fight again. People can do off things when 
trying to protect loved ones, and parents are not perfect as hard as 
they try! 

"Option I: Strout is under the Imperius Curse. That is why she allows 
gifts sent to the patients on her ward through, no matter how odd 
those gifts seem. Someone with her background should not be letting 
hazardous plants get near her debilitated patients(3b). 

"Option J: The message in the empty wrappers is just that - they are 
empty. Candy could be part of the healing process at St. Mungo's, 
just as an emotionally unsettling encounter with Dementors can be 
fixed with just some chocolate. Part of the therapy for the 
Longbottoms could be to give them gum, but they've just been given 
empty wrappers instead of the gum itself. That's why it's important 
for us to know that Neville received empty wrappers when there were 
no bubbles around in the room."
 
A long silence greeted Jenny as she finished, out of breath.
 
"But...why would anyone want to do this to them?" a young boy asked 
in disbelief at the possibilites.
 
Jenny sighed.
 
"We don't know," she said simply. 
 
"What do the Longbottoms know that is so significant it is worth the 
risk of keeping them in their incapacitated state? Why not just kill 
them? Killing Bode proved they are capable of doing so and making it 
appear unsuspicious. We know that Bellatrix and Co. tortured the 
Longbottoms for information about Voldemort's whereabouts(1a). What 
is it that led them to believe the Longbottoms had such information? 
And, given that the Longbottom's testimony of the event 
was "unreliable"(1c), how can we be sure that is the true reason they 
were tortured? Malfoy was probably not involved in Longbottom's 
torture. They were some of the first to come back to the good side 
after LV's downfall. To get caught, or even named, as one who 
tortured the Longbottoms would rip their story that they'd been 
bewitched to shreds(4c)," Jenny explained.
 
"The question of why has been a nagging problem as we built the ship, 
and though the vessel sails fine without it, we know an answer would 
make our ship invincible," she continued with a note of longing.
 
"So say one of those comes true," the skeptic pushed her way back to 
the front of the crowd. "What could possibly come of it?"
 
"Hopefully, the Longbottoms will recover," Jenny answered happily, 
thinking with joy about their possible reunion with Neville.
 
"We have possible solutions, of course," Jenny added hastily, "they 
aren't necessarily exclusive of each other, but here goes:

"Solution A: Lucius Malfoy is currently in Azkaban (although we don't 
know for certain that his name has been publicly mentioned in 
connection with the kerfuffle at the Ministry). If he is, indeed, 
discredited, he may no longer be able to pay off whomever he's been 
paying to keep the Longbottoms insane. So, there is a chance they 
won't need to be rescued. 

"Solution B: Neville, Frank and Alice's son, stands a chance at 
accomplishing this, for it is he who has the wrappers, and therefore, 
the clues. 

"Solution C: Perhaps one of the great things about Neville's Mimbulus 
Mimbletonia will be it's function as a cure (in the form of a potion, 
wouldn't that be ironic??) to whatever is doing this to them.

"Solution D: Luna will make the discovery that saves the Longbottoms. 
Note her penchant for decoding, her suspicious nature, her inclusion 
in Ravenclaw house, and that she does not need outside confirmation 
to believe something. She is the antithesis of Hermione; though 
Hermione takes Ancient Runes classes, Luna is reading ancient runes 
upside down on the Hogwarts express for another reason entirely(9a), 
viewing things from a different perspective, and Luna will believe 
(probably) anything, whereas Hermione only believes information 
gained from what she deems a reliable source (books, people she 
respects)(9b). 

"Solution E: Luna's discovery (above) will be connected to the gum 
wrappers.

"Solution F: Who do we know that is named for candy? Cornelius Fudge, 
of course! Alice is in no condition to tell anyone that the gum is 
doctored and that the source is Fudge. Her abilities are limited, so 
she does the best she can. The wrappers, then, are both the smoking 
gun and the message. Luna, a new factor, and a puzzle-solver, will 
finally make that connection--she's a "true believer" in weird 
things, and could very well make the leap between "Fudge" candy 
and "gum" candy. She's been taught to mistrust Fudge, anyway, and 
would be happy to help get him thrown out of office. We already know 
that Fudge is in love with his office, and if he believed that the 
Longbottoms could damage his position, for any reason, he'd be happy 
to feed them something that would keep him out of the way. Lucius 
Malfoy has had a lot of access to him, and if Fudge mentioned that he 
had "reservations" about the Longbottoms, Malfoy would be sure to 
supply him with something that would protect Fudge's position, and 
bring Fudge under his control. Malfoy could always threaten to reveal 
Fudge's role in keeping the Longbottom's in the hospital. 

"Solution G: Neville tells the gang, which now includes Ginny and 
Luna, that Alice has stopped giving him the gum wrappers. Hermione 
questions this, and this is how they start to figure out that someone 
has been hindering the Longbottom's recovery."
 
Jenny looked around, trying to guage the reactions of the crowd.  
 
"It's all here, really," she confirmed, and swept her hand over the 
detailed canon.

  ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
~-~-~-~-~-~
 
CANON

(all page references are US editions unless otherwise noted, and 
paperback references will have pb next to them.) 

1. The Longbottoms:
A. "'Yes, they were talking about Neville's parents,' said 
Dumbledore. '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.'
'So they're dead?' said Harry quietly.
B. 'No,' said Dumbledore, his voice full of a bitterness Harry had 
never heard there before. 'They are insane. They are both in St. 
Mungo's Hospital for Magical Maladies and Injuries. I believe Neville 
visits them, with his grandmother, during the holidays. They do not 
recognize him.'
Harry sat there, horror-struck. He had never known...never, in four 
years, bothered to find out...
C. 'The Longbottoms were very popular,' said Dumbledore. "The attacks 
on them came after Voldemort's fall from power, just when everyone 
thought they were safe. Those attacks caused a wave of fury such as I 
have never known. The Ministry was under great pressure to catch 
those who had done it. Unfortunately, the Longbottoms' evidence was - 
given their condition - none too reliable.'"(GoF, Ch. 30 p.602pb)
D. "'The four of you stand accused of capturing an Auror - Frank 
Longbottom - and subjecting him to the Cruciatus Curse, believing him 
to have knowledge of the present whereabouts of your exiled master, 
He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named-'" 
"'You are further accused,' bellowed Mr. Crouch, 'of using the 
Cruciatus Curse on Frank Longbottoms' wife, when he would not give 
you information.'"(GOF, Ch30, p.595pb) 

2. The Longbottoms and Droobles Best Blowing Gum: 
A."'My son and his wife,' she said, turning haughtily to Harry, Ron, 
Hermione, and Ginny, 'were tortured into insanity by You-Know-Who's 
followers.'
'They were Aurors, you know, and very well respected within the 
wizarding community,' Mrs. Longbottom went on. 'Highly gifted, the 
pair of them.'
....
B. Her face was thin and worn now, her eyes seemed overlarge, and her 
hiar, which had turned white, was wispy and dead-looking. She did not 
seem to want to speak, or perhaps she was not able to, but she made 
timid motions toward Neville, holding something in her outstretched 
hand.
'Again?' said Mrs. Longbottom, sounding slightly weary. 'Very well, 
Alice dear, very well - Neville, take it, whatever it is....'
But Neville had already stretched out his hand, into which his mother 
dropped an empty Droobles Blowing Gum wrapper.
'very nice dear,' said Neville's grandmother in a falsely cheery 
voice, patting his mother on the shoulder.
But Neville said quietly, 'thanks, Mum.'
His mother tottered away, back up the ward, humming to herself.
....
C. 'Well, we'd better get back,' sighed Mrs. Longbottom, drawing on 
long green gloves. 'Very nice to have met you all. Neville, put that 
wrapper in the bin, she must have given you enough of them to paper 
your bedroom by now....'
But as they left, Harry was sure he saw Neville slip the wrapper into 
his pocket."(OotP, Ch23 p.514-5)
D. "...along yet another wall were 'Special Effects' sweets: Droobles 
Best Blowing Gum (which filled a room with bluebell-colored bubbles 
that refused to pop for days),...."(PoA, Ch10, p.197) 

3. Broderick Bode:
A. "'This is our long-term resident ward,' she informed Harry, Ron, 
hermione, and Ginny in a low voice. 'For permanent spell damage, you 
know. Of course, with intensive remedial potions and charms and a bit 
of luck, we can produce some improvement.... Gilderoy does seem to be 
getting back some sense of himself, and we've seen a real inprovement 
in Mr. Bode, he seems to be regaining the power of speech very well, 
though he isn't speaking any language we recognize yet....'"(OotP, Ch 
23, p.511)
B. "'And look, Broderick, you've been sent a potted plant and a 
lovely calendar with a different fancy hippogriff for each month, 
they'll brighten things up, won't they?' said the Healer, bustling 
along to the membling man, setting a rather ugly plant with long, 
swaying tentacles on the bedside cabinet and fixing the calendar to 
the wall with her wand." (OotP, Ch 23, P.512)
C. "St. Mungo's Hospital promised a full inquiry last night after 
Ministry of Magic worker Broderick Bode, 49, was discovered dead in 
his bed, strangled by a potted-plant. Healers called to teh scene 
were unable to revive Mr. Bode, who had been injured in a workplace 
accident some weeks prior to his death.
Healer Miriam Strout, who was in charge of Mr. Bode's ward at the 
time of the incident, has been suspended on full pay and was 
unavailable for comment yesterday, but a spokeswizard for the 
hospital said in a statement, 'St. Mungo's deeply regrets the death 
of Mr.Bode, whose health was improving steadily prior to this tragic 
accident.
'We have strict guidelines on the decorations permitted on our wards 
but it appears that Healer Strout, busy over the Christmas period, 
overlooked the dangers of the plant on Mr. Bode's bedside table. As 
his speech and mobility improved, healer Strout encouraged mr. Bode 
to look after the plant himself, unaware that it was not an innocent 
Flitterbloom, but a cutting of Devil's Sanre, which, when touched by 
the convalescent Mr. Bode, throttled him instantly.
'St. Mungo's is as yet unable to account for the presence of the 
plant on the ward and asks any witch or wizard with information to 
come forward.'"(OotP, Ch 25, p.546) 
D. "A very old, stooped wizard with a hearing trumpet had shuffled to 
the front of the queue now.
'I'm here to see Broderick Bode!' he wheezed.
'Ward forty-nine, but I'm afraid you're wasting your time,' said the 
witch dismissively. 'He's completely addled, you know, still thinks 
he's a teapot....Next!'"(OotP, Ch 22, p.486) 


4. Lucius Malfoy:
A. "Fudge, who wasn't listening, said, 'Lucius has just given a very 
generous contribution to St. Mungo's Hospital for Magical Maladies 
and Injuries, Arthur. He's here as my guest.'"(GOF, Ch 8, p.101pb)
B. "'Malfoy was cleared!' said Fudge, visibly affronted. 'A very old 
family - donations to excellent causes - '"(GoF, Ch36 p.706pb) 
C. "'I've heard of his family,' said Ron darkly. 'They were some of 
the first to come back to our side after You-Know-Who disappeared. 
Said they'd been bewitched. My dad doesn't believe it. He says 
Malfoy's father didn't need an excuse to go over to the Dark 
Side.'"(SS/PS, Ch6, p.100pb)
D. "I have a few - ah - items at home that might embarass me, if the 
Ministry were to call....'"
"'- and as you see, certain of these poisons might make it appear -
 '"(CoS, Ch4, p.51pb)
"'Father's got some very valuable Dark Arts stuff. But luckily, we've 
got our own secret chamber under the drawing-room floor - '"(COS, 
Ch12, p.224pb)
E. "'Malfoy's been giving generously to all sorts of things for 
years.... Gets him in with the right people...then he can ask 
favors... delay laws he doesn't want passed... Oh, he's very well 
connected, Lucius Malfoy....'"(OotP, Ch 9, p.155) 
F. "'Father's not very happy about my injury - '
'Keep talking, Malfoy, and I'll give you a real injury,' snarled Ron.
' - he's complained to the school governors. And to the Ministry of 
Magic. Father's got a lot of influence, you know.'"(PoA, Ch 7, 
p.125pb) 

5. Neville Longbottom
"Neville struggled frantically, his fists flailing, trying 
desperately to get at Malfoy who looked, for a moment, extremely 
shocked."(OotP, Ch24 p.361) 

6. Severus Snape
A. "'I dont expect you will really understand the beauty of the 
softly simmering cauldron with its shimmering fumes, the delicate 
power of liquids that creep through human veins, bewitching the mind, 
ensnaring the senses....I can teach you how to bottle fame, brew 
glory, even stopper death -'"(SS/PS, Ch 8, p.137pb)
B. "'Tell me, how is Lucius Malfoy these days? I expect he's 
delighted his lapdog's working at Hogwarts, isn't he?'"(OotP, Ch 24, 
p.520) 

7. The Imperius Curse
A. "It was the most wonderful feeling. Harry felt a floating 
sensation as every thought and worry in his head was wiped gently 
away, leaving nothing but a vague, untraceable happiness. he stood 
there feeling immensely relaxed, only dimly aware of everyone 
watching him.
And then he heard Mad-Eye Moody's voice, echoing in some distant 
chamber of his empty brain:Jump onto the desk...jump onto the desk....
Harry bent his knees obediently, preparing to spring.
Jump onto the desk....
Why, though? Another voice had awoken in the back of his brain. 
Stupid thing to do, really, said the voice.
Jump onto the desk....
No, I don't think I will, thanks, said the other voice, a little more 
firmly...no, I don't really want to....
Jump! NOW!
The next thing Harry felt was considerable pain. He had both jumped 
and tried to prevent himself from jumping - the result was that he'd 
smashed headlong into the desk, knocking it over, and, by the feeling 
in his legs, fractured both his kneecaps.
'Now, that's more like it!' growled Moody's voice, and suddenly, 
Harry felt the empty, echoing feeling in his head disappear. (GoF, Ch 
15, P.232pb)
B. "'But Winky didn't know that I was growing stronger. I was 
starting to fight my father's Imperius Curse. There were times when I 
was almost myself again. There were brief periods when I seemed 
outside his control. It happened, there, in the Top Box. It was like 
waking froma deep sleep.'
....
'The sound of their voices awoke me. My mind was clearer than it had 
been in years."(GoF, Ch 35, p.686pb)
C. "'After awile he began to fight the Imperius Curse just as I had 
done. There were periods when he knew what was happening.'"(GoF, Ch 
35, p.689pb)
D. "And Harry felt, for the third time in his life, the sensation 
that his mind had been wiped of all thought....Ah, it was bliss, not 
to think, it was as though he were floating, dreaming...just answer 
no...say no...just answer no...
I will not, said a stronger voice, in the back of his head, I won't 
answer....
Just answer no....
I won't do it, I won't say it....
Just answer no....
'I WON'T!'
And these words burst from Harry's mouth; they echoed through the 
graveyard, and the dream state was lifted as suddenly as though cold 
water had been thrown over him - back rushed the aches that the 
Cruciatus Curse had left all over his body - back rushed the 
realization of where he was, and what he was facing...."(GoF, Ch 34, 
p.661-2pb)


8. Uncle Algie
A."'My Great Uncle Algie kept trying to catch me off my guard and 
force some magic out of me - he pushed me off the end of Blackpool 
pier once, I nearly drowned - but nothing happened until I was eight. 
Great Uncle Algie came round for dinner, and he was hanging me out of 
an upstairs window by the ankles when my Great Auntie Enid offered 
him a meringue and he accidentally let go. But I bounced - all the 
way down the garden and into the road.They were all really pleased, 
Gran was crying, she was so happy.'" (SS/PS, Ch 7, p.125pb)
B."'Great Uncle Algie was so pleased he bought me my toad.'"(SS/PS, 
Ch 7, p.125pb)
C."'It's really, really rare,' said Neville, beaming. 'I don't know 
if there's one in the greenhouse at Hogwarts, even. I can't wait to 
show it to Professor Sprout. My great-uncle Algie got it for me in 
Assyria. I'm going to see if I can breed from it.'" (OotP, Ch 10, 
p.186) 

9. Luna Lovegood
A."...and an article on ancient runes, which at least explained why 
Luna had been reading The Quibbler upside down. According to the 
magazine, if you turned the runes on their heads they revealed a 
spell to make your enemy's ears turn into kumquats." (OotP, Ch 10, 
p.193)
B. "'There are plenty of eyewitness accounts, just because you're so 
narrow-minded you need to have everything shoved under your nose 
before you - '" (OotP, Ch 16, p.345)


10. The Prophecy
"'Sibyll's prophecy could have applied to two wizard boys, both born 
at the end of July that year, both of whom had parents in the Order 
of the Phoenix, both sets of parents having narrowly escaped 
Voldemort three times. One, of course, was you. The other was Neville 
Longbottom. (OotP, Ch 37, p.842) 

*Note, they are not dead, only the people who are clearly dead will 
definitely not come back, per JKR. 
 
 
 
Contributers to SILK GOWNS, as written above, are:
 
RSFJenny, Peg, Sally, Brief Chronicles, Lilian, Entropy, Fran, and 
Wendy

Check out SILK GOWNS at our website 
http://www.geocities.com/rsfjenny/HP/silkgowns






From jeanico at securenet.net  Fri Sep 12 18:43:29 2003
From: jeanico at securenet.net (jeanico2000)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 18:43:29 -0000
Subject: Did Harry ever shed tears ?
In-Reply-To: <20030912184056.74554.qmail@web21010.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjt44h+eeed@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80593

Harry also shed tears in book 3 after an episode with Lupin and the 
boggart. He hid his face so that Lupin would not realize he was 
wiping tears from his eyes.
Nicole




From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Fri Sep 12 18:44:43 2003
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 18:44:43 -0000
Subject: Are we having fun?
In-Reply-To: <bjsrni+ga3f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjt46r+gbv9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80594

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Wanda Sherratt" 
<wsherratt3338 at r...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Potterfanme" <fc26det at a...> 
> wrote:
> > Now Susan:
> > 
> > Wanda, a few days ago I read a post that you did where you said 
> that 
> > you have not and will not reread OOP because it was so dark and 
> > disappointing for you that you didn't feel you could.  (if I 
> > misunderstood please forgive me.)  I felt the same way when I 
> first 
> > finished with it.  I was so wrapped up with who was going to die, 
> and 
> > what DD was going to finally tell Harry that I read it so quickly 
> to 
> > get to these areas that I missed a lot.  I felt like someone was 
> > sitting on my chest when I finished the book.  I was angry with 
> JKR 
> > for having killed off Sirius (who at that time was my favorite 
> > character) and I was confused with the sudden change in the 
*feel* 
> of 
> > the Harry Potter world.
> > 
> reread her books and find something you 
> > missed each time. (SNIP) 
> > 
> > I am asking you to reread OOP cover to cover.  I am hoping that 
> you 
> > will find that OOP is not as dark and bleak as it was the first 
> time 
> > you read it.  Personally, I think the story is growing with Harry 
> at 
> > an appropriate level.  Life is that way.  As we age we acquire 
> more 
> > responsibility and have to deal with what comes.  Sometimes this 
> is 
> > good and sometimes this is bad.  Part of growing is dealing with 
> the 
> > bad and conquering it on our own.
> > 
> > Susan--who for some reason was touched by Wanda's feelings about 
> OOP.
> 
> Well, thank you - that's a very kind and sensitive post!  But you 
> know, it's not like I've resolved never to read OotP again.  Every 
> few days I think to myself "I guess I should reread OotP again," 
but 
> it's sort of the way kids talk about homework at the end of a long 
> holiday.  (Glumly) "Well, I guess I'd better get started on that 
> math..." (deep sigh)  That's how I feel about it - reluctant and 
> almost repulsed.  Then I think to myself, "No. I'm a grownup, 
mother 
> of three children - I don't have to do homework anymore.  I don't 
> have to read a book I don't like."  And I don't think it's my 
fault, 
> either.  Maybe I'll give it a try someday, or maybe I'll just wait 
> until the next book comes out and see if the magic works again.  
> 
> Wanda

Wanda,
A suggestion. I, too, found OOP rough going many times. But, alas, 
Harry is sort of running in my blood. Can't shake him. So, here's 
what I did to make OOP more accessible. I listen to it. Jim Dale is 
great to listen to, and I hear the English version with Stephen Fry 
is fabulous too. You are too right, you never have to read OOP again 
and nor should you if it's a chore, but listening helps me get 
perspective. Maybe you'd like it too.
Jennifer




From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 19:06:09 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 19:06:09 -0000
Subject: Mistaken identity and ages
In-Reply-To: <bjt1te+p84d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjt5f1+dg14@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80595

80586 reply:

>  
> > hg said:
> > Maybe we should remember that LUCIUS MALFOY is three years older 
> than the Marauders.
> 
> "K" said:
> 
> Oh, I haven't forgotten Malfoy. 
> 
> Let's try this age stuff again. I admit that I hate trying to 
figure 
> out the age of a character and usually leave that to others. Let's 
> say Snape is in his 4th year at Hogwarts when Florence is kissed. 
He  would be around 14 years old. Bertha would probably be in her 7th 
> year. Lucius would be gone by that time. Malfoy would no longer be 
> at Hogwarts as he is 5 - 6 years older than Snape. Malfoy is 41 in 
> OoP. Snape is 35/36 at the end of GoF. I know some say Snape is 
> 35/36 at the beginning of SS and that would make a difference but 
> until we know for sure I'm sticking with Lucius being older than 
> Snape.
> 
> Now of course it could still be Malfoy kissing Florence if this 
> scene took place when Snape was in his first or second year. Guess 
> we'll just have to wait and see. 
> 


hg again:
OK, I thought the Marauders and Snape were all 38 in OoP.  That would 
put them at 23 when Harry was born.  And some folks have been 
wondering about the Weasleys and their friendship with the Potters: 
that would have arisen w/ their involvement in the Order.  We'll have 
to check HP Lexicon again.
hg.







From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 19:07:01 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 19:07:01 -0000
Subject: The Hogwarts librarian
In-Reply-To: <20030910040916.99010.qmail@web20502.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjt5gl+e7eg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80596

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Rania Melhem <dunknegg at y...> wrote:

> sbursztynski <greatraven at h...> wrote:
> Is it only me who is just a bit irritated by the cliched 
> presentation  of Madam Pince the librarian?  ...edited...


> Rania Melhem replied:
>
> As a librarian, I totally agree with you. I am very irritated by 
> Madam Pince's description by JKR. I dont know why she is depicted so 
> horribly. And she never seems to help any of the Hogwarts students 
> find information. 
>
> Rania

bboy_mn:

There is a reason why stereotypes and cliches exist; because there is
some truth to them.

True a modern Librarian is a whole new breed; but it wasn't that long
ago that the model of a librarian as the town spinster and a strick
discipliarian wasn't that far off.

You also have to look at this from a kids point of view. Because
libraries need to be quiet calm places where people can concentrate,
loud talking, laughing, and running wild aren't allowed. So, while the
kids are having fun and raising hell, the librarian is trying to
restrain them. In a sense, she/he spoils all the fun. Again, that is
from a kids perspective.

So Madam Pince is without a doubt an 'old school' librarian. I
seriously doubt that she has a degree in Library Sciences, and
therefore does not take what one could call a 'modern' approach to
Library Sciences. Her job is to guard the books and maintain order in
the Library, all things that to a kid are counter to having fun. 

Let's also remember that this isn't a modern lending library. This is
a research library with many books that are probably centuries old.
This library also contains many books that are dangerous both in the
sense that they contain dangerous information, and in the sense that
the books themselves are physically dangerous having been cursed,
jinxed, and/or poisoned. 

The contents of THIS library are far more dangerous and valuable than
the average modern lending library, and therefore need a much firmer
hand to control them. 

Just a thought.

bboy_mn






From severusbook4 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 19:14:07 2003
From: severusbook4 at yahoo.com (severusbook4)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 19:14:07 -0000
Subject: Are we having fun?
In-Reply-To: <bjsq4o+ae05@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjt5tv+7qqv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80597

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Potterfanme" <fc26det at a...> 
wrote:
> ---> 
> Now Susan:
> 
>  I was so wrapped up with who was going to die, and 
> what DD was going to finally tell Harry that I read it so quickly 
to 
> get to these areas that I missed a lot.  I felt like someone was 
> sitting on my chest when I finished the book.  I was angry with 
JKR 
> for having killed off Sirius (who at that time was my favorite 
> character) and I was confused with the sudden change in the *feel* 
of 
> the Harry Potter world.
> 
> Then I went on a few HP sites, found this one, and started to read 
> the posts talking about the happy moments.  Frankly, I thought 
some 
> of the posters here were totally delusional. <grin>  I realised 
that 
> I had obviously missed something somewhere.  I took a deep breath 
and 
> reread OOP *looking* for anything that wasn't depressing.
> 
> You know what?  It was a totally different experience.  I had 
missed 
> so much.  This is one of the things I love about JKR's writing 
> style.  You can read and reread her books and find something you 
> missed each time.  
> 
> I am asking you to reread OOP cover to cover.  I am hoping that 
you 
> will find that OOP is not as dark and bleak as it was the first 
time 
> you read it.  Personally, I think the story is growing with Harry 
at 
> an appropriate level.  Life is that way.  As we age we acquire 
more 
> responsibility and have to deal with what comes.  Sometimes this 
is 
> good and sometimes this is bad.  Part of growing is dealing with 
the 
> bad and conquering it on our own.
> 
> Susan--who for some reason was touched by Wanda's feelings about 
OOP.

Sevvie here:

I have always been somewhat a book worm, and have to say I 
completely enjoyed OotP.  It pulls you in, and you feel what Harry 
feels, his anger, frustrations, wants, and fears.  This I must 
commend JKR for being able to do, as you read the book, you become 
Harry, I think this is great, some thing only Anne Rice has been 
able to do for me before.  I must also admit that this book could be 
rather intense for some of the younger readers out there, but I 
think they can handle it (have you watched some of their cartoons? 
Scary stuff!).  I will also join in the anger if JKR kills either 
Harry or Hermione in the next 2 books.  These are one thing my 
daughter and I both agree on completely, are the HP books.

Sevvie "gotta love the gothic stuff" Snape




From tammy at mauswerks.net  Fri Sep 12 19:29:17 2003
From: tammy at mauswerks.net (Tammy Rizzo)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 15:29:17 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] The mystery of Voldemort's wand
In-Reply-To: <bjr8el+f5ga@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F61E64D.26497.9E46A09@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 80598

On 12 Sep 2003 at 1:44, oiramertip wrote:

> Does anyone know where did Voldemort's wand come from when Wormtail
> had it in the cemetary in GF? If Voldemort was so weak after being
> destroyed from trying to kill Harry, he could certainly not have
> hidden or moved it himself. If a Death Eater got there first before
> Hagrid, he could have taken the wand and tried to kill Harry, but it
> does not appear to have happened.....

How's this for a scenario?  It seems True, to me:

Pettigrew leads Voldemort to the Potters (easier than just telling him where to find 
them, and allows Peter to feel superior to James by giving him the opportunity to 
actually gloat a bit, perhaps), but then hangs back behind Voldy when it all comes 
down to it.  He watches from the shadows as Voldy murders James and Lily, and 
sees Voldy's AK backfire.  He snags Voldemort's wand and Apparates out of there 
bfore all hell breaks loose.  Later, when Sirius catches up to him on the Muggle 
street, he's still got Voldy's wand in his pocket when he morphs into Scabbers.  Being 
a rat for nigh on a dozen years doesn't give him much chance to dump the wand, so 
he STILL has it when Lupin and Black force him into his own shape in the Shrieking 
Shack.  Since he escapes from them as Scabbers once again, and since he then 
goes to Voldemort's side, he had darned well better have his Master's wand to 
present to him to buy some mercy from Voldemort.  "But look, see, here's your wand, 
I saved it for you, don't kill me!"

I dunno, but it makes sense to me.

***
Tammy
tammy at mauswerks.net






From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 19:27:13 2003
From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 19:27:13 -0000
Subject: Hermione's House Elf Hats: Question
In-Reply-To: <1ab.19ff6df3.2c935a9e@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bjt6mh+4deu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80599

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, CareALotsClouds at a... wrote:
<snip>
> I think its a plot hole ;)

me (Richard) thinks ...

I don't see Hermione's attempts to give the Hogwarts house elves 
those hats as a plot hole, but as emblematic of her failure to fully 
appreciate the issues of house elf servitude.  She thinks *SHE* can 
free them, being a Hogwarts student and prefect, but in fact cannot, 
as evidenced by the fact that Dobby takes all these items yet knows 
he remains Dumbledore's servant ... though a paid servant, not a 
slave, such as most house elves.

What Dobby says about the other house elves is that they refuse to 
clean Gryffindor Tower because they find these "gifts" insulting.  He 
does *NOT* say that they are afraid of them, or of being released 
from servitude by them.  Thus, Hermione, in failing to understand 
both house elf psychology and the rules of their servitude insults 
those she would set free, alienating both herself and the whole of 
Gryffindor from them, rather than doing anything helpful to those 
elves.  She did not take the time to understand the problem, due to 
her horror at what she believes to be terrible wrong.  She is simply 
wasting her time due to her dogmatic beliefs that these slaves should 
be free, happy to be free, and that the simple gift of clothes is 
sufficient.


Richard, who has seen lots of people (including himself) set out on 
wild goose chases, thanks to failures to understand.





From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 19:56:47 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 19:56:47 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore & Harry's security
In-Reply-To: <bjqrcv+7i5o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjt8dv+cuk1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80600

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "theredshoes86"
<LilDancinQT86 at a...> wrote:
> Dumbledore has said that he's watched Harry more closely than anyone
> else... 
>
> ...edited...
>
> So.... maybe... Dumbledore invisibly follows Harry around the
> school. Just my crazy idea... but it kinda makes sense right? 
> 
> "theredshoes86"

bboy_mn:
 
So, the busy headmaster of a large school, the Head of the Wizangamot
court, the Chief Warlock of the International Confederation of
Wizards, plus who knows how many other committees and councils, and
one of the most revered and sought after wizards of modern tmes has
nothing better to do than spend all his time following Harry Potter
around? I don't think so.

I'm not saying it never happens, because at times, I'm sure that's
exactly what he does. But when you consider that every hallway and
probably every room in the castle is lined with enchanted portraits, I
think Dumbledore has plenty of 'invisible' eyes keeping track of Harry.

Personally, I think Dumbledore spends bits and pieces of his free time
in his office watching Harry's movements in a very large crystal ball.
The enchanted portaits only report to Dumbledore when specific events
have occurred; really no need for them to report daily routine occurances.

Of course, I have nothing to back up the crystal ball theory, I just
know that's what I would do rather than run around the castle all day.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn





From sydenmill at msn.com  Fri Sep 12 20:18:19 2003
From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 20:18:19 -0000
Subject: Dudley Wearing Leather?
Message-ID: <bjt9mb+cni9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80601



All quotes from OOP, American Edition:


It was a hot, summer day/evening:

page 1: "The hottest day of the summer was drawing to a close."

page 2:  "He was not, perhaps, very comfortable lying on the hot, 
hard earth..."

page 145:  "'Yes,' said Mrs. Figg. 'I felt them. Everything went 
cold, and this was a very warm summer's night, mark you.'"


But, why does Dudley have on a leather jacket on such a hot summer 
evening? It is mentioned more than once, so must be significant:
  
page 26:  "'What did he do to you, Diddy?' Aunt Petunia said in a 
quavering voice, now sponging sick from the front of Dudley's leather 
jacket."

page 38:  "Her hands found Dudley's massive leather-clad shoulders 
and clutched them."

If this has been noticed and commented on before, kindly point me to 
the post number so I can catch up.

Thankis!
Bohcoo








From sydenmill at msn.com  Fri Sep 12 20:25:45 2003
From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 20:25:45 -0000
Subject: Did Dumbledore Collect The Reward?
Message-ID: <bjta49+a74o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80602


All quotes from OOP, American Edition:
ch. 25, pg. 558:
"The poster ('By Order of the Ministry of Magic') offered a Thousand-
Galleon reward to any witch or wizard with information relating to 
the recapture of any of the convicts pictured."

ch. 36, pg. 817:
"'If you proceed downstairs into the Department of Mysteries, 
Cornelius,' said Dumbledore, '...you will find several escaped Death 
Eaters contained in the Death Chamber, bound by an Anti-Disapparation 
Jinx and awaiting your decision as to what to do with them.'"

Do you think Dumbledore collected the reward? 

Just wondering,
Bohcoo





From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Sep 12 20:30:55 2003
From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 20:30:55 -0000
Subject: Dudley Wearing Leather?
In-Reply-To: <bjt9mb+cni9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjtadv+bi51@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80603

Bohcoo:
>>why does Dudley have on a leather jacket on such a hot summer 
evening? It is mentioned more than once, so must be significant>>

The subject got me very excited, as I thought this was going to be 
another gay Dudley thread. No such luck. But still - 
I'd imagine it's only significant to Dudley's character development. 
Previously, we've only really heard of him in his Smeltings uniform, 
not exactly clothing of choice for the intimidation of small 
children, stick or no stick. She's re-making his image. I don't 
imagine that the weather would come much into Big D's choice of 
clothing, really. Besides, I thought it was mandatory for 15 year old 
gang leaders in 1995 (so vaguely pre-skate)to wear leather jackets. 
The hotter the tougher! He's a big lad, he can take it.

Kirstini, who wonders how *on earth* the Dursleys got Dudders to come 
with them to the Best-Kept Lawn competition. Betcha Petunia knows 
Imperio...





From sydenmill at msn.com  Fri Sep 12 20:32:16 2003
From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 20:32:16 -0000
Subject: O.W.L. Results
Message-ID: <bjtagg+8hnr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80604

POA, ch. 22, pg. 429-430:
"The exam results came out the last day of term... Percy got his top-
grade N.E.W.T.s; Fred and George had scraped a handful of O.W.L.s 
each."

OOP, ch. 31, pg. 709
"'Please, Professor,' said Hermoine, her hand in the air, 'when will 
we find out our results?'
'An owl will be sent to you some time in July,' said Professor 
McGonagal."

Wouldn't ya know they'd change procedure so we have to wait to see 
how the group did?

:)
Bohcoo 




From jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 20:33:57 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 20:33:57 -0000
Subject: Go Show Us Your Spell (a filk)
Message-ID: <bjtajl+qc8a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80605

This is a filk of the song "Go Into Your Dance" from the musical
"Forty-Second Street."


This is the seventh filk in the new filk musical "At 12 Grimmauld Place".

I dedicate this filk to Gail Bohacek
                                Go Show Us Your Spell

(SCENE:  Harry is at a disciplinary hearing by the Wizengamot. 
Despite Minister of Magic Cornelius Oswald Fudge's and his Senior
Undersecretary, Dolores Jane Umbridge's attempts to keep the hearing
focused on Harry's offenses against the Decree for the Reasonable
Restriction of Underage Sorcery, the head of the Department of Magical
Law Enforcement, Madam Amelia Susan Bones, appears more interested in
Harry's ability to conjure a Patronus.)

HARRY POTTER:
One! Two! Dementors!
Gave us a melancholy case of the blues,
I had a remedy at hand.
If I would save my cousin from their abuse,
Then I had to use my wand.

We would'a been singin' a sad and blue song,

MADAM BONES:
Go show us your spell.

HARRY POTTER:
Unless I'd learned how to sing that new song, 

MADAM BONES:
Go show us your spell.

It's a big deal; you're very young. 
If corporeal, it really must have stung.

HARRY POTTER: 
To put off sorrow until tomorrow,
I showed `em my spell;
I heard `em wailing their frightening chorus,
I showed `em my spell;
I cast it first in Forbidden Forest,
I showed `em my spell.

MADAM BONES:
You cast Patronus, I'd love a look, 
And there's a bonus; you might get off the hook!
A raw beginner can be a winner,
Just you give `em hell,
Take your wand and
Go show us your-  
(Madam Bones is interrupted by a tapping sound from Dolores Umbridge.)

DOLORES UMBRIDGE:
You cast Patronus, that you admit, 
And there's the onus; the crime that you did commit!
You are a minor, don't be a whiner,
Yes, you cast that spell 
Brake your wand and
Throw you in a cell. 
 
MADAM BONES (with a frosty look over at the source of the interruption):
A raw beginner can be a winner,
And all will be well,
Take your wand and
Go show us your-
Go show us your-

(The cacophony of tapping by Dolores Umbridge has become so loud 
that it disrupts any further proceedings of the disciplinary hearing, 
which is adjourned.  Harry subsequently learns that he has been
exonerated.)

-Haggridd




From june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk  Fri Sep 12 20:34:45 2003
From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 20:34:45 -0000
Subject: Dudley Wearing Leather?
In-Reply-To: <bjt9mb+cni9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjtal5+bccf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80606

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bohcoo" <sydenmill at m...> 
wrote:
> 
> 
> All quotes from OOP, American Edition:
> 
> 
> It was a hot, summer day/evening:
>> 
> But, why does Dudley have on a leather jacket on such a hot summer 
> evening? It is mentioned more than once, so must be significant:
>   
> page 26:  "'What did he do to you, Diddy?' Aunt Petunia said in a 
> quavering voice, now sponging sick from the front of Dudley's 
leather 
> jacket."
> 
> page 38:  "Her hands found Dudley's massive leather-clad shoulders 
> and clutched them."
> 
> If this has been noticed and commented on before, kindly point me 
to 
> the post number so I can catch up.
> 
> Thankis!
> Bohcoo

I don't know if it has been commented on either (have been on 
holiday for two weeks plus nearly two weeks to catch up with the 
postings).  I think the "leather jacket" is JKR's method of 
labelling Dudley as a juvenile delinquent (Rebel without a Cause 
perchance?). He probably had his shirt collar turned up too.

June




From nansense at cts.com  Fri Sep 12 20:45:10 2003
From: nansense at cts.com (zesca)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 20:45:10 -0000
Subject: The Hogwarts librarian
In-Reply-To: <bjt5gl+e7eg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjtb8m+4229@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80607


> > sbursztynski <greatraven at h...> wrote:
> > Is it only me who is just a bit irritated by the cliched 
> > presentation  of Madam Pince the librarian?  ...edited...
> 
> 
> > Rania Melhem replied:
> >
> > As a librarian, I totally agree with you. I am very irritated by 
> > Madam Pince's description by JKR. I dont know why she is depicted so 
> > horribly. And she never seems to help any of the Hogwarts students 
> > find information. 
> >
> > Rania
> 
> bboy_mn:
> 
> There is a reason why stereotypes and cliches exist; because there is
> some truth to them.
> 
> True a modern Librarian is a whole new breed; but it wasn't that long
> ago that the model of a librarian as the town spinster and a strick
> discipliarian wasn't that far off...[big chunk edited]...
> 
> The contents of THIS library are far more dangerous and valuable than
> the average modern lending library, and therefore need a much firmer
> hand to control them. 

madEYEmood:
and yet there are Madame Hooch and the divine Grubbly-Plank, presenter of 
dangerous creatures. both of them seem sensible and timelessly hip. 
perhaps both fit a different stereotype of the mannish female gym or science 
teacher.

i can't see why it's necessary for the librarian's firmness to be so firmly 
ensconced in a stereotype. and since the potter books are so wildly 
influential, it is a bit of a shame that the portrayal's a little corny/negative.




From nansense at cts.com  Fri Sep 12 20:48:16 2003
From: nansense at cts.com (zesca)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 20:48:16 -0000
Subject: On giving JKR a break (Was - photo vs. painting in magical world)
In-Reply-To: <bjt1t7+ga4k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjtbeg+4pv0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80608

 "Kirstini" <kirst_inn at y...> wrote:
> Aussie, trying vainly to stop my JKR-baiting, wrote:
> >>Give her a break ... You have to take some things with a grain of 
> salt. eg: If the Dursleys never took Harry anywhere growing up, how 
> did he learn to swim for the 2nd Tri-Wizard task? Answer: I don't 
> know and I don't care! JKR lets us explore another part of the 
> wizarding world by taking us underwater.>> 
> 
> But I don't want to give her a break! I'm having too much fun.
> If we all gave her a break, then we'd patiently sit back and wait
for 
> the next book to come out, and we'd accept everything she wrote 
> without question, and there wouldn't be any need for discussion 
> groups. 

madEYEmood wonders:
i will never understand why someone who joins a listserv dedicated to 
analysing a text to death and beyond bothers to contest the worth of
such an 
activity.

why oh why?




From odilefalaise at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 20:50:41 2003
From: odilefalaise at yahoo.com (Odile Falaise)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 13:50:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dudley Wearing Leather?
In-Reply-To: <bjt9mb+cni9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030912205041.97746.qmail@web13113.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80609

Bohcoo queried:
"But, why does Dudley have on a leather jacket on such a hot summer evening?"
 
Odile, former Goth, replies:
Because it's cool! (<--forgive the word choice, I beg you.)  When I was Dudley's age, several moons ago, I had this big black leather motorcycle jacket and Doc Martens that I wore winter, autumn, spring and - yes - summer.  Tank tops? Sandals? Pah. Give me long sleeves and rubber skirts - all black!  Mwahahahah!!  Heck, I had a friend who wore head-to-toe heavy velvet on the meltiest days of the year.  Why?  Cuz it was kewl.  So, based on personal experience, I would say that it's not unrealistic for Dudders to wear his leathers... just impractical.  I mean, if/since he's selling an image, the image (that of a tough guy) is much more important than his discomfort.  Silly Dudley.  ^_^ 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From eowynn_24 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 20:53:39 2003
From: eowynn_24 at yahoo.com (eowynn_24)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 13:53:39 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Are we having fun?
In-Reply-To: <bjt3d3+e64h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030912205339.159.qmail@web60209.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80610



ellejir <eberte at vaeye.com> wrote: 
Wanda wrote:

> <snip> Are WE having fun anymore? Speaking for myself, I have to
> say no.  For me, the fun died on June 21, when OotP was released.
> And so much of the discussion of that  book, and speculation of
> what it will lead to, make me think that very few readers are
> having fun anymore.  <snip>


>>Elle (me):
I do not think that your view of OoP and the direction >>that the HP 
series is heading is universally held.  A fair number of >>people 
enjoyed reading OoP (myself included) and some people on >>the list 
have stated that it is their *favorite* book in the >>series. The 
things that you hate about OoP are the very things that >>may make it 
more interesting to another reader (i.e. the darker tone >>and Harry's 
more fragile emotional state.)  <snip>   So, in answer to >>your 
question Wanda, *yes* I am still having fun with the >>series.

Elle  (who reserves the right to change her mind about >>the above 
statement if JKR kills off either Harry or Hermione)    
  
Eowynn:

I feel that I should respond to this post since I was one of the ones that stated it was fun. I still stand by that statement, I am sorry Wanda that the books have seemed to lose their innocence, but isn't that what happens when we get older and more aware of the world? I do agree with Elle, their are a fair number of posters who love OOP and are still having fun. However, when I stated that it was still fun, I wasn't so much relating to the stories them selves as fun, but more to the anticipation the "tug-of-war" being fun, for us (the readers) and JKR. It has to be fun knowing how many lives you are touching, watching the excitement worldwide enfold with every book (and now movie). The storytelling is still fun, the stories are "true". Harry was saved to kill LV, we have known that it would get harder for him since SS/PS, and with how GoF ended how could anyone not realize how dark the series was going to get. It is the beginning of the end, the start of the great wizard battle,
 war is never a light time. JKR has a very creative way of brining the issues of the RW into the WW she has created. I do believe that this will be the darkest of the series, and that we can already see the light at the end of the "tunnel". Wanda, I won't ask you to reread OOP, I will ask that you not give up on JKR and the WW, I enjoy your posts and I would miss them.

Eowynn 







---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From eowynn_24 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 20:59:02 2003
From: eowynn_24 at yahoo.com (eowynn_24)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 13:59:02 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] O.W.L. Results
In-Reply-To: <bjtagg+8hnr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030912205902.28955.qmail@web60203.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80611



bohcoo <sydenmill at msn.com> wrote:
>POA, ch. 22, pg. 429-430:
"The exam results came out the last day of term... Percy >got his top-
grade N.E.W.T.s; Fred and George had scraped a handful of >O.W.L.s 
each."

>OOP, ch. 31, pg. 709
"'Please, Professor,' said Hermoine, her hand in the air, >'when will 
we find out our results?'
>'An owl will be sent to you some time in July,' said Professor 
>McGonagal."

>Wouldn't ya know they'd change procedure so we have to wait to see 
>how the group did?

:)
Bohcoo 

Eowynn:

I noticed that as well. What is the deal, as if I didn't already have enough on my plate to be anxious about, she has to throw in the O.W.L.S as well. I don,t know about all of you but my heart can't take much more of this suspense:)

Eowynn







---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From sydenmill at msn.com  Fri Sep 12 21:00:33 2003
From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 21:00:33 -0000
Subject: The Thing About Thingy
Message-ID: <bjtc5h+aebi@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80612

All quotes from OOP, American edition:

ch. 2, pg. 38
"'Hang on,' said Uncle Vernon... 'Hang on. This Lord Voldything's 
back, you say?'"

ch. 38, pg. 845, Fudge speaking:
"'We believe that the dementors are currently taking direction from 
Lord -- Thingy.'"


Too many "things," don't ya think? Does anyone think it means 
anyTHING?

Grins,
Bohcoo
(With an afternoon of open time on her hands, can you tell?)




From eowynn_24 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 21:04:11 2003
From: eowynn_24 at yahoo.com (eowynn_24)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 14:04:11 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Did Dumbledore Collect The Reward?
In-Reply-To: <bjta49+a74o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030912210411.25115.qmail@web60207.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80613



bohcoo <sydenmill at msn.com> wrote:

All quotes from OOP, American Edition:
ch. 25, pg. 558:
"The poster ('By Order of the Ministry of Magic') offered a Thousand-
Galleon reward to any witch or wizard with information relating to 
the recapture of any of the convicts pictured."

ch. 36, pg. 817:
"'If you proceed downstairs into the Department of Mysteries, 
Cornelius,' said Dumbledore, '...you will find several escaped Death 
Eaters contained in the Death Chamber, bound by an Anti-Disapparation 
Jinx and awaiting your decision as to what to do with them.'"

Do you think Dumbledore collected the reward? 

Just wondering,
Bohcoo

Eowynn:

How cool would that be. Do you remember when Harry was trying to vision what the Hogwarts teachers would do during break and he pictured DD on some island in shorts with his long beard? I wonder what DD would do with the $ if he took it? Perhaps a second investor to Forge and Gred? Or perhaps supplies for the order? What do you think?

Eowynn (laughing at the thought of DD on a beach getting a tan:)








---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From tminton at deckerjones.com  Fri Sep 12 21:01:24 2003
From: tminton at deckerjones.com (Tonya Minton)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 16:01:24 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Are we having fun?
Message-ID: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE97DB@djmail.deckerjones.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80614

"Wanda Sherratt" wrote:

> Are WE having fun anymore?  Speaking for myself, I have to say no.  
> For me, the fun died on June 21, when OotP was released.  And so 
> much of the discussion of that book, and speculation of what it 
> will lead to, make me think that very few readers are having fun 
> anymore.  Instead, I read worries and foreboding about how much 
> horror Harry is going to have to endure until we finally make it to 
> the end of book 7.  Nobody seems to expect anything but anguish and 
> pain, with maybe a happy ending, but very possibly just a merciful 
> release to look forward to.  
 
 
Now Me (Tonya):
I want to say I am having a great time!!  I love the books and I love
that so far none of my predictions have come true.  JKR keeps me
guessing.  There is enough real life that I am hoping that Harry will
defeat the Dark Lord and his relationships with his friends will get
stronger.  He is learning and growing and living!!  I am very excited to
stay on the roller coaster ride that JKR is steering!!  I am sitting in
my big fluffy chair with my feet up and reading and my kids are reading.
I don't think that life gets any better then RIGHT NOW!!  Hear, hear to
JKR!!  She is one of my heroes!!  I only read the speculations that I
want to read so if I find one that I don't agree with then I don't read
it!!  I love listening to everyone's ideas here.  I have learned more
about the books by broadening my perspective.  I listen then go read
them again and new doors open!!  Thanks to everyone here for making
Harry Potter even better!!  OK I am done now!!  Sorry for getting up on
the soap box.
 
Happy Reading, Tonya


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Fri Sep 12 21:05:02 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 21:05:02 -0000
Subject: Are we having fun?
In-Reply-To: <bjsq4o+ae05@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjtcdu+nd55@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80615

Looking at those who are feeling let down by the darkness of OOTP, I 
think this is one of those "darkness hour is just before the dawn" 
scenarios.

How often in a story does the outlook seem completely bleak and then 
something turns up.....

A quote from a book which has for many years been one of my 
favourites: "To serve them all my days" by R F Delderfield which is 
about the life of a schoolmaster at a boarding school on Exmoor (the 
area in which I now live).

"So often had it happened that way, a sudden closing in of baleful 
influences that threatened to overwhelm him and then a single fissure 
that offered an escape route and, once exploited, presented a variety 
of alternative new courses...."

I also think of one of my other great favourites - LOTR. The darkest 
moment is perhaps in Volume 3 when Sam discovers that Frodo is avlive 
and in the hands of the Orcs of Cirith Ungol. At that moment, Sam 
hits bottom. "His fear of the orcs, forgotten for a while in his 
wrath an depression, now returned. As far as he could see, there was 
only one course for him to take: he must go on..... but his knees 
felt weak and he found that he was trembling." And later... "In that 
hour of trial, it was the love of his master that helped most to hold 
him firm; but also deep down in him lived still unconquered his plain 
hobbit-sense..."

Isn't this a parallel with Harry. On several occasions, he has felt 
that the only way to go is on... with his knees trembling; and often 
it is because the thought of his friends (and also their support) 
that has kept him firm.

I believe that heroes arise out of the moment - my mind went back a 
day or so ago to those folk who brought down the fourth hi-jacked 
airliner on 11th September 2001 (in Virginia?) because they weren't 
going to let the terrorists win knowing that the attack on the Twin 
Towers had already happened. They didn't look in their bathroom 
mirrors that morning and say "I am going to be a hero today". They 
set out on what was expected to be an ordinary working day. Harry is 
like this. He went through the trapdoor (as did HG and RW) because he 
saw it as the only way forward. It was necessary. I believe he 
realised the danger he was in. He may have only been 11 but children 
are often more perceptive than we are prepared to see; they will see 
through people and pick up on lack of sincerity etc. It has been 
interesting to talk to some of the young people in my church about HP 
and find myself surprised with how they can grasp the depth of 
something like OOTP when they are only 12 or 13.

OOTP may be dark but it is a pivotal book. I first found it 
depressing but after reading it five times, I appreciate it more and, 
every time, I find something I have missed. From hre the only way has 
got to be upwards if Voldemort isn't going to rule the wizarding 
world.




From MadameSSnape at aol.com  Fri Sep 12 21:07:10 2003
From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 17:07:10 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Did Harry ever shed tears ?  Phoenix animagus perhaps ?
Message-ID: <57.21f6d4aa.2c938f7e@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80616

In a message dated 9/12/2003 12:31:39 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
yswahl at stis.net writes:
Wouldnt it be interesting if Harry could be an animagus in the form 
form of a phoenix? Is this possible o cannonites and, if not, why
not? 
JKR has stated that Harry will NOT become an animagus, phoenix or otherwise.

Sherrie


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From eowynn_24 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 21:11:26 2003
From: eowynn_24 at yahoo.com (eowynn_24)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 14:11:26 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Thing About Thingy
In-Reply-To: <bjtc5h+aebi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030912211126.8664.qmail@web60209.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80617



bohcoo <sydenmill at msn.com> wrote:
All quotes from OOP, American edition:

ch. 2, pg. 38
"'Hang on,' said Uncle Vernon... 'Hang on. This Lord Voldything's 
back, you say?'"

ch. 38, pg. 845, Fudge speaking:
"'We believe that the dementors are currently taking direction from 
Lord -- Thingy.'"


Too many "things," don't ya think? Does anyone think it means 
anyTHING?

Grins,
Bohcoo
(With an afternoon of open time on her hands, can you tell?)

Eowynn:

Way too many "Things" to think about. The only "Thing" I think of when it comes to "Things" is an old horror movie called the "Swamp Thing". Please tell me we aren't leading up to that "Thing?" :)

Eowynn (I have to go now, it just occurred to me that i have someThing to do:)







---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 21:11:28 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 21:11:28 -0000
Subject: Gillyweed--Was Re: On giving JKR a break
In-Reply-To: <bjt1t7+ga4k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjtcq0+39bc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80618

Aussie wrote:
> Give her a break ... You have to take some things with a grain of 
> salt. eg: If the Dursleys never took Harry anywhere growing up, how 
> did he learn to swim for the 2nd Tri-Wizard task? Answer: I don't 
> know and I don't care! JKR lets us explore another part of the 
> wizarding world by taking us underwater.

GoF, The Egg and The Eye:

"That's it, isn't it?" Harry said excitedly. "The second task's to go 
and find the merpeople in the lake and...and..."

But he suddenly realized what he was saying, and he felt the 
excitement drain out of him as thought someone had just pulled a plug 
in his stomach.  He wasn't a very good swimmer; he'd never had much 
practice.  Dudley had had lessons in his youth, but Aunt Petunia and 
Uncle Vernon, no doubt hoping that Harry would drown one day, hadn't 
bothered to give him any.  A couple of lengths of this bath were all 
very well, but that lake was very large, and very deep ... and 
merpeople would surely live right at the bottom ...

And a second, shorter excerpt from the following chapter, The Second 
Task:

...Harry struck out once more, marveling at how far and fast his 
flipper-like feet propelled him through the water...

"marveling at how" -- It's all the gillyweed.

Sandy aka "msbeadsley"




From hypercolor99 at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 12 21:13:28 2003
From: hypercolor99 at hotmail.com (alice_loves_cats)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 21:13:28 -0000
Subject: Not Writers Block After All---Was Re: Are we having fun?
In-Reply-To: <bjt0mp+spu4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjtcto+ou08@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80619

msbeadsley wrote:

> This is SO *#$%@!!! frustrating.  (Oh, no, sorry, not you, Wanda.)  I 
> *know* I read, less than a week ago, a line in a post-OoP interview 
> with JKR where she responded to a comment about its length with a 
> statement about having written it through writer's block; now, of 
> course, that I want to cite it, all I can find is denials that she's 
> ever *had* writer's block.  It's occurred to me that (please let me 
> not have gone 'round the bend) what I know I read *was* really there 
> and has since been excised; no, I'm not being paranoid (not very, 
> really), I just thought, after I stopped being able to find the 
> quote, that she must have been being *ironic* and that the quote was 
> removed since it really didn't come off at all that way in print.  
> (If you know where that came from, I beg you, let me know!)

Alice:

In the Royal Albert Hall interview, when the interviewer commented on
the size (or length) of the book, JKR said something like: And all
with writer's block, too! She then proceeded to say later in the same
interview that she HADN'T actually had writer's block at all. This
leads me to think she was joking at the beginning, or sarcastically
referring to some of the claims the press had made about her supposed
block. 

You can find the interview transcript at several locations, none of
which I can cite at the moment - just do a search, you'll get there.

Love, Alice




From andie at knownet.net  Fri Sep 12 21:13:33 2003
From: andie at knownet.net (grindieloe)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 21:13:33 -0000
Subject: Did Harry ever shed tears ?  
In-Reply-To: <bjsjfm+5dht@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjtctt+gt8s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80620

> > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" <yswahl at s...> 
wrote:
> > > My pensieve sprung a leak and a couple of stray thoughts snuck  
out ...
> > > 
> > > Does anyone remember an instance where Harry actually shed 
tears in 
> > > any of the books ?  


I know you guys have mentioned Dumbldore looking away, and Harry's 
possible tears during the boggart scene with Lupin.  Also, the 
interrupted possible crying scene with Mrs. Weasley in GoF, and the 
wiping of his face on his sleeves after Sirius in OoP.  However, I 
haven't seen one other possible crying scene mentioned in this 
thread.  It may be a stretch, but when Hagrid gives Harry his photo 
album in SS and Harry doesn't say anything... but Hagrid 
understands.  I took this to mean that Harry could have been crying.  
Possibly a stretch, but another possibility to add... :)

And yes, I agree there has to be some connection to Harry's tears and 
Phoenix tears... :)

Andrea




From sydenmill at msn.com  Fri Sep 12 21:15:23 2003
From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 21:15:23 -0000
Subject: Little Flint -- a Flintlette
Message-ID: <bjtd1b+rvgr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80621



Harry and Ron had jumped out of bed, thrown on their dressing gowns 
over their pajamas and had gone straight to Dumbledore's office. When 
joined by the rest of the Weasleys, they all took a portkey to 
Sirius's.

OOP, ch. 22, pg. 476, Ginny:
"She looked around at her brothers; they were of course still in 
their pajamas. 'Sirius, can you lend us cloaks or anything?'"

OOP, ch. ch. 22, pg. 481
"Their trunks arrived from Hogwarts while they were eating lunch, so 
they could dress as Muggles for the trip to St. Mungos. Everyone 
except Harry was riotously happy and talkative as they changed out of 
their ROBES into jeans and sweatshirts."


Of course, "robes" is incorrect here -- it should say, "nightclothes" 
or "pajamas" or something besides robes. 

I am rereading the series, looking very carefully for overlooked 
clues and keep stumbling across little things like these. Sigh. Sure 
hope Book 6 comes along soon. . .

Does everyone think all-l-l-l the questions and mysteries we have 
about Harry Potter will be resolved by the end of the series?

Bohcoo






From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Sep 12 21:22:57 2003
From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?udder=5Fpen=5Fdragon?=)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 22:22:57 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Not Writers Block After All---Was Re: Are we having fun?
In-Reply-To: <bjtcto+ou08@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030912212257.14728.qmail@web60209.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80622



alice_loves_cats <hypercolor99 at hotmail.com> wrote:
msbeadsley wrote:

> This is SO *#$%@!!! frustrating.  (Oh, no, sorry, not you, Wanda.)  I 
> *know* I read, less than a week ago, a line in a post-OoP interview 
> with JKR where she responded to a comment about its length with a 
> statement about having written it through writer's block; now, of 
> course, that I want to cite it, all I can find is denials that she's 
> ever *had* writer's block.  It's occurred to me that (please let me 
> not have gone 'round the bend) what I know I read *was* really there 
> and has since been excised; no, I'm not being paranoid (not very, 
> really), I just thought, after I stopped being able to find the 
> quote, that she must have been being *ironic* and that the quote was 
> removed since it really didn't come off at all that way in print.  
> (If you know where that came from, I beg you, let me know!)

Alice:

In the Royal Albert Hall interview, when the interviewer commented on
the size (or length) of the book, JKR said something like: And all
with writer's block, too! She then proceeded to say later in the same
interview that she HADN'T actually had writer's block at all. This
leads me to think she was joking at the beginning, or sarcastically
referring to some of the claims the press had made about her supposed
block. 

You can find the interview transcript at several locations, none of
which I can cite at the moment - just do a search, you'll get there.

Love, Alice

U_P_D

Also prior to the A.Hall in an interview with Jeremy Paxman, JKR said somthing like: "I wrote x hundred pages, got married, had a baby and all with writers block, not bad."  Obviously no writers block.

Udder pen Dragon



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
________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. 



---------------------------------
Want to chat instantly with your online friends??Get the FREE Yahoo!Messenger

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From entropymail at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 21:26:41 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 21:26:41 -0000
Subject: Did Harry ever shed tears ?  Phoenix animagus perhaps ?
In-Reply-To: <57.21f6d4aa.2c938f7e@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bjtdmh+usqs@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80623

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, MadameSSnape at a... wrote:
> In a message dated 9/12/2003 12:31:39 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
> yswahl at s... writes:
> Wouldnt it be interesting if Harry could be an animagus in the form 
> form of a phoenix? Is this possible o cannonites and, if not, why
> not? 
> JKR has stated that Harry will NOT become an animagus, phoenix or
otherwise.

Now Entropy:

Harry may not be an animagus/phoenix, but I can't help but feel
there's something to Fawkes' rebirth(s) that relates to some kind of
link between Harry and Dumbledore.  It's a clue to their relationship. 

There are so many references made by Dumbledore regarding death (when
speaking of his friend, Nicholas Flamel, who created the Sorcerer's
Stone, or when speaking of Voldemort's fear of death -- DD knows
"there are worse things than death").  

Likewise, there are many, many references (especially in OOP) to
Dumbledore's advancing age, and of Harry's noticing that Dumbledore is
looking tired, older, etc.

Dumbledore is probably the most powerful wizard alive. Has Voldemort 
 inadvertently imparted powers equal to Dumbledore's upon Harry, in a
metaphorical "rebirth" of DD and his powers? Or, was Harry born with
the majority of the powers he now possesses? Perhaps another "rebirth"
of the aging wizard Dumbledore?

I don't know what it is (and I don't know, for that matter, whether it
is going to work into the plot of the series as a literal connection
or simply a symbolic one), but I am convinced that this triad of
Dumbledore, Fawkes, and Harry is quite significant, and Harry will,
one way or another, succeed DD by the end of the series.

:: Entropy ::




From hypercolor99 at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 12 21:32:25 2003
From: hypercolor99 at hotmail.com (alice_loves_cats)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 21:32:25 -0000
Subject: All things resolved?  WAS Little Flint -- a Flintlette
In-Reply-To: <bjtd1b+rvgr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjte19+tsce@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80624

Bohcoo wrote:

> Does everyone think all-l-l-l the questions and mysteries we have 
> about Harry Potter will be resolved by the end of the series?

Alice:

Absolutely not. We are only left to hope that our pet theory or
favourite question will at least be dealt with in some form. But many
things, I fear, we will never know.

All the more reason for this list to flourish after "it's all over",
with all seven books out. 

I have a standing bet with someone that JKR will NOT continue the
series after Book Seven. If she doesn't do so within 10 years of the
release of no. 7, my friend buys me a book of my choice. If JKR does,
I buy my friend one. If you believe what JKR says about not
continuing, this may be a good way to top up your stock of books in
years to come. Think ahead, guys, and make that bet! You will find
many people out there who are sure that JKR will go on with Harry for
the sake of the money in it. 

:-)

Love, Alice




From navarro198 at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 12 21:36:06 2003
From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 21:36:06 -0000
Subject: Not Writers Block After All---Was Re: Are we having fun?
In-Reply-To: <bjtcto+ou08@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjte86+aaql@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80625

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "alice_loves_cats" 
<hypercolor99 at h...> wrote:
> Alice:
> 
> In the Royal Albert Hall interview, <snip> 
> You can find the interview transcript at several locations, none of
> which I can cite at the moment - just do a search, you'll get 
there.
> 
> Love, Alice

Here's the website:
http://www.msn.co.uk/liveevents/harrypotter/transcript/Default.asp?
Ath=f

It's a handy reference.

Ravenclaw Bookworm




From dwoodward at towson.edu  Fri Sep 12 22:10:23 2003
From: dwoodward at towson.edu (Deirdre F Woodward)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 18:10:23 -0400
Subject: What I Liked Best About Order of the Pheonix
References: <1063400714.10243.84549.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <008e01c3797a$aada2560$79092244@parkvl01.md.comcast.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 80626

Hi All!

After reading many posts about OOP, I've decided to list and share what I
think is absolute genius about OOP.

Why, you ask?  Because I'm sick, it's raining, and I've got nothing better
to do.  But also because most of the conversations have been about the last
quarter of the book -- from Umbridge's downfall through the MOM and Sirius's
death -- and I personally feel that what comes *before* this last part is
_much much_ better than the end.

Genius One:  Harry's moods.
I *loved* watching Harry swing all over the mood meter.  His thoughts,
reactions, apologies, doubts, surges of confidence, secretiveness,
generosity, unfocused anger and determined courage all added up to a
convincing portrait of a 15 year old wizard.  Kudos to you JKR!

Genius Two:  D. J. Umbridge.
What an amazing character.  Although I still don't fully understand *why*
she sicked dementors on Harry at the start of the story, all other apects of
her character added up to the perfect foil for Hogwarts and all we love
within.  The monstrosity of her pinkness and meanness is exquisite.  Her
quill, her kittens on a plate, her insidiously growing power -- pure evil.
More evil than Voldemore, I wager, because Doloros Umbridge isn't after
anything *for herself*.  She's evil without a cause.  Oh sure, she's worried
about the MoM, she wants purebloods to be in control and all others to be
dead, but really, those are just props to give structure to her evilness.
Drop her in the middle of a pure blood world and she'd still wreak havoc,
because she's pure evil.

Umbridge is also our clue that JKR is a frustrated magician.  Misdirection
is the heart and soul of any magician, and JKR, by focusing our attention on
Umbridge, bought time for Voldemort to continue to grow without us sticking
our nose in and asking "What's he up to"?

Genius Three:  George and Fred Weasley
WOW.  I can't say any more that that (but of course I will).

George and Fred Weasley were by far the best thing OOP had to offer.  From
the moment I met George and Fred Weasley back on Platform 9 3/4, I knew they
were my favorite characters, but in OOP the twins were in banner mode.

The teasing of Ron about being a prefect.  The testing process they went
through with their candies.  The *names* and *purpose* of the candies (these
two boys are *brilliant* businessmen).  The pranks on Umbridge.  The SWAMP!
Their final confrontation with Umbridge and how they ripped sure victory
from her teeth.  And their final exhortation to Peeves, of all people
(people?), and his acknowledgement of their lofty place in the halls of
prankdom.

These boys have the best one-liners, observations, and comedic minds of any
characters in literature that I've met in a long time.  Ingatius J. Reilly,
Jim Dixon, Fred and George Weasley -- that's my short list of all-time
funniest literary characters.

Genius Four:  Ron the Prefect
Making Ron a prefect is such a wonderful thing to do.  I finally believed
that Ron was out from under Harry's shadow and become his own person.

I look forward to Independent!Ron in books 6 and 7, and I most
wholeheartedly look forward to Free!Fred and Free!George Weasley.  With them
on the side of good, evil doesn't stand a chance.

Deirdre





From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 22:11:56 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 22:11:56 -0000
Subject: what makes a hero?
In-Reply-To: <bjt0eo+r5k5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjtgbc+i06p@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80627

> Kneasy wrote:
> 
> For heroism - a big hand for Ron! Having seen what happened to 
chess 
> pieces that were taken, he deliberately sacrifices himself, 
resigned 
> to injury or worse, so that his friends can go on.
> 
> By contrast, once Harry encounters Quirrell!Voldy, the whole thing 
> runs 
> on rails. Harry has no choices; it all has an inevitability. 
Retreat 
> is impossible, he has no means of attack. All he can do is lie, 
> prevaricate, hoping some deus ex machina will intervene. A species 
of 
> bravery, maybe. But the action of a hero? I don't think so.
> 
> "hermionegallo"
> 
> I would suggest that the word 'hero' can mean a lot of different 
> things. Although the modern use of the word is looser, in the 
> strictest sense, a hero is someone with outstanding qualities who 
is 
> able defeat terrifying enemies, often WITH supernatural or divine 
> help. Like Achilles, Odysseus, Perseus, Jason.
> 
> Plenty of heroes must act with their backs to the wall, so to 
speak, 
> but they are still considered heroes. Examples that come to mind 
> include the Alamo, Geronimo, various congressional medal of honor 
> winners, etc.
> 
> Bravery, courage, and fortitude are virtues. 
> 
> I would also suggest that Harry's heroic act is the choice to go 
> after the stone in the first place. He realizes the danger and acts 
> despite seemingly overwhelming odds. 
> 
> I will also say categorically that none of this detracts from Ron's 
> or Hermione's courage in accompanying him.

Laura:

is it possible that there's a difference between the literary 
term "hero" and the way we use it in common, real-life parlance?  The 
literary hero has a pretty strict definition and set of criteria, as 
I understand it.  But we use it a lot more loosely and casually in 
conversation.  




From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Fri Sep 12 22:12:18 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 22:12:18 -0000
Subject: Are we having fun?
In-Reply-To: <bjslrb+kcj6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjtgc2+sr01@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80628

Wanda Said:
> Are WE having fun anymore?

Boy, do we have some great posters! Well said, Wanda.

For my part, I'm really torn. I really loved SS/PS; what a wonderful 
fantasy/mystery. And then to get to revisit that world in CoS, plus 
get another mystery to solve, was just great! In fact, CoS is still
my 
favorite, because it was so self-contained and fun. Go Harry!

So, like many of us, I read the first two books in quick succession
as 
just "fun" reads. And fun they were! But I didn't think too much, 
because the ride was so *very* enjoyable.

With GoF, the series changed for me. Where before I had been happily 
oblivious to the long-term plot (and some would say I still am!), GoF 
intentionally turned our and Harry's focus to the big plot. Yes,
there 
was much to distract & entertain us--GoF had it all--but I now *knew* 
to pay attention to more than just the short-term mystery at the
heart 
of each book. Of course, GoF was brilliant, too, but HP was now more 
than just a fun roller coaster ride. I cared and worried.

Then came the long wait for OoP. And I thought about the GoF ending  
and what might happen next, and joined groups like this where 
everything got dissected and the future was guessed at many times 
over.

And I waited. And then the little spoilers started coming out.
Someone 
JKR loves will die! There's a hall and a door that are important!

And when I got the book, I raced through it with unreasonable 
expectations. And was disappointed. There were so many long-term plot 
points I wanted resolved. But instead JKR gave us more questions,
more 
uncertainty. And a main character in transition.

And the other books had each had a big, self-contained mystery to 
absorb us. They had more fun times and rollicking adventures. They
had 
Harry's strong bonds with H/R and DD. Not OoP.

But OoP needed to accomplish quite a bit for JKR, and I think worked 
well as a pivot despite a few flaws (see Ravenclaw Black's heartfelt 
post of Aug 15 at 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/77317). But I 
think that's how we have to see it. Why is there so much discussion 
now? Because she left us in a state of flux on almost everything. She 
had to.

It's been said by many here, but Harry does need to grow up. And that 
means seeing the dangers for what they are. And understanding that no 
one's perfect, even DD and Sirius.

So, OoP is my least favorite to read for *fun*. But it has largely 
tied together the first 4 and set up the two-book endgame that we now 
know must come.

So I call OoP some much-needed medicine that actually tasted pretty 
good, just not as good as the candy she gave us in 1-3. And here's to 
5&6!

-Remnant




From featheringstonehaugh at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 22:14:52 2003
From: featheringstonehaugh at yahoo.com (A Featheringstonehaugh)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 15:14:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: relationships/ages of characters
In-Reply-To: <1063400714.10243.84549.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030912221452.8960.qmail@web60202.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80629

 
hg wrote:
> "And some folks have been wondering about the Weasleys and their friendship with the >  Potters: that would have arisen w/ their involvement in the Order.
 
 
AF:  But do we know that the Weasleys and the Potters were friends or indeed, were A & M even in the Order before this latest activation ?  Remember:  in the OoP, when  Moody showed Harry the old photo of the members of the Order, he remarked that it was taken before Arthur and Molly had joined.  Perhaps the Weasleys joined between the time of the photo and V's disappearance or it could be that the W's hadn't joined the last time at all, out of fear for the safety of their (then) very young children. I just can't recall if their  earlier participation had ever been confirmed.  

 



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Fri Sep 12 22:37:32 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 22:37:32 -0000
Subject: Not Writers Block After All---Was Re: Are we having fun?
In-Reply-To: <bjtcto+ou08@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjthrc+7d04@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80630

The day before OOTP was published, JKR did an interview with Jeremy 
Paxman on "Newsnight" which, for non-UK folk is a fairly prestigious 
news programme every weekday at 10.00pm on BBC2.  

The full transcript can be found at: 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/uk/newsid_3004000/3004878.stm

In it, Jo Rowling says that she did not have writer's block for OOTP -
she did have some during COS.




From deemarie1a at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 22:41:54 2003
From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 22:41:54 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Trust of Snape
In-Reply-To: <bjt3s0+iv56@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjti3i+chjg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80631

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bohcoo" <sydenmill at m...> wrote:
> I would love to hear your theories as to what Snape could have done 
> to have earned this depth of trust from Dumbledore? 
> 
> 
> Thanks for sharing your viewpoints!
> Bohcoo

D says -

Now I have no canon to back this up, but I think the reason DD trusts 
Snape is that he recruited Snape to be the spy.  DD knows there is a 
spy in the Potter camp (at least IMO this is the reference I get from 
Sirius).  The spy has been passing LV information for at least a year.

DD knows Snape is heavily into the Dark Arts.  He knew more Dark 
Magic that many 6th years.  He must have been into Occulmency (sorry 
about the spelling).  DD probably taught Snape to be a superb 
Occulmens.  Then, he sent him to the DE's to be a spy.  

I cannot see LV tolerating a spy in his camp.  When he talked about 
the 3 missing DE's in GoF, I do not think Snape was one of them.  
Certainly Karkarof was and Barty Crouch, JR.  But I believe one of 
the three was Bagman.  He did say one of them would be eliminated and 
Karkarof and Bagman are both missing at the beginning of OotP.

Would LV tolerate Snape with his plans for the DoM if he knew Snape 
was a spy for DD?  Not likely.  I think Snape is deeply embedded in 
LV's network and will play a very important role in the future.

As I said, I have no canon to back me up.  But I thought this might 
be an interesting theory.

D




From deemarie1a at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 22:49:48 2003
From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 22:49:48 -0000
Subject: Dudley Wearing Leather?
In-Reply-To: <bjtal5+bccf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjtiic+ljhq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80632

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "junediamanti" 
<june.diamanti at b...> wrote:
> 
> I don't know if it has been commented on either (have been on 
> holiday for two weeks plus nearly two weeks to catch up with the 
> postings).  I think the "leather jacket" is JKR's method of 
> labelling Dudley as a juvenile delinquent (Rebel without a Cause 
> perchance?). He probably had his shirt collar turned up too.
> 
> June

D says -

Maybe I'm just nit picking, but in the US, even in the northeast, the 
month of August is just plain swealtering.  Yet in the Potterverse, 
there are a few instances of the characters putting on coats.  Even 
August nights can be swealteringly hot.  Didn't Harry and his friends 
put their coats on when they were running from the DE's in GoF?

And, yeah, I know I'm skirting off topic, but even in the movies, you 
see all those people bundled up before September 1.  

I think I need an opinion of one of our Brittish friends to explain 
that to me.  Any takers?

D




From eberte at vaeye.com  Fri Sep 12 22:51:24 2003
From: eberte at vaeye.com (ellejir)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 22:51:24 -0000
Subject: Did Harry ever shed tears ?  
In-Reply-To: <bjsjfm+5dht@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjtilc+rkbi@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80633

Nicholas wrote:

> What I would like to know is why JKR is so circumspect about Harry 
> having a cry. I suppose she's made Harry too stoic to cry in front 
> of others, if he can help it, but why does she have to keep her 
> faithful readers at arms length? When he was by the lake in OoP,
> how hard did he cry? How long? Did he make any noise? Did he feel 
> foolish, or better for it? I feel cheated for not having these 
> details. I think we get too much of Harry's agony, misery and pain. 
> What about a bit of contrast? 
>
 
Elle (Me):
I think that this is just another example of the story being told 
from Harry's point of view.  Harry is a pre-teen/teenage boy and it 
is *not* really cool for boys this age to cry (in UK *or* America.)  
Harry *does* cry because he is human and he has good reason to cry; 
however, we do not get a blubber-fest because boys this age *do* tend 
to hide their tears to attempt to preserve their own dignity. Think 
about Cho who is criticized constantly by the other characters for 
crying all the time (and !horrors! in front of others!)  
IMO, the scene with Harry crying by the lake at the end of OoP was 
very poignant.  He cannot find comfort in any of his friends or 
mentors. Significantly, JKR isolated him even from the readers by not 
letting us directly view his grief and tears. I believe that is the 
way Harry would want it. (I mean, that is the way he would want it if 
he was *real*.  Of course I know that Harry is not *real*.  At least, 
*usually* I remember that...)

Elle 




From prongs at marauders-map.net  Fri Sep 12 23:05:54 2003
From: prongs at marauders-map.net (Silver Stag)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 19:05:54 -0400
Subject: The Hogwarts librarian
Message-ID: <001601c37982$6bc83c60$0201a8c0@bettysue>

No: HPFGUIDX 80634

sbursztynski <greatraven at h...> wrote:
Is it only me who is just a bit irritated by the cliched
presentation  of Madam Pince the librarian?  ...edited...

Rania Melhem replied:
As a librarian, I totally agree with you. I am very irritated by
Madam Pince's description by JKR. I dont know why she is depicted so horribly. And she never seems to help any of the Hogwarts students find information.
Now silver Stag/Betty:
Actually, there's a bit of cannon that contradicts that Madam Pince doesn't help the students.

Goblet of fire. chapter 26
"So Harry, thinking that he would soon have had enough of the library to last him a lifetime, buried himself once more among the dusty volumes, looking for any spell that might enable a human to survive without oxygen. However, though he, Ron, and Hermione searched through their lunchtimes, evenings, and whole weekends - though Harry asked Professor McGonagall for a note of permission to use the Restricted Section, and even asked the irritable, vulture-like librarian. Madam Pince, for help - they found nothing whatsoever that would enable Harry to spend an hour underwater and live to tell the tale."
I'm guessing that we don't see Madam Pince helping Harry because it's one of those minute details, daily routine things that aren't mentioned, like the personal bathing habbits or lack thereof that were discussed a week or two ago.  Plus, I can't imagine Madam Pince not helping Hermione, with all the time she spends in the library.

Betty.

Sailing on SAD DENIAL
Sirius' Awful Death Didn't End Neatly: It's A Lie!
 (coined by Tabouli)

and cuddling a STUFFED BEAR
Sirius: True Unselfish Friend For Ever! Deserves Better End And Revival!
(coined by TerryLJ)

SILK GOWNS: Suspiciously Insane Longbottoms, the Key is the Gum Or Wrappers that Neville Saves. (coined by RSFJenny)

Weasley can save anything, He never leaves a single ring, That's why Gryffindors  all sing: Weasley is our King.
Weasley is our King, Weasley is our King, He didn't let the Quaffle in, Weasley is our King. . .


Visit my website for more Harry Potter quotes.  OOTP will be done as soon as I can find the time.
http://www.marauders-map.net


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk  Fri Sep 12 23:08:57 2003
From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 23:08:57 -0000
Subject: Dudley Wearing Leather?
In-Reply-To: <bjtiic+ljhq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjtjm9+4c14@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80635

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Donna" <deemarie1a at y...> 
wrote:
> 
> > > D says -
> 
> Maybe I'm just nit picking, but in the US, even in the northeast, 
the 
> month of August is just plain swealtering.  Yet in the 
Potterverse, 
> there are a few instances of the characters putting on coats.  
Even 
> August nights can be swealteringly hot.  Didn't Harry and his 
friends 
> put their coats on when they were running from the DE's in GoF?
> 
> And, yeah, I know I'm skirting off topic, but even in the movies, 
you 
> see all those people bundled up before September 1.  
> 
> I think I need an opinion of one of our Brittish friends to 
explain 
> that to me.  Any takers?
> 
> D

A personal and grumpy opinion of Brit weather:

Came home to Newcastle in the North East of England on 1.9.03 from 
Turkey (45 in the shade) - beautifully bronzed, laid back, floppy 
etc.  Immediately put on central heating and fire on arrival home.  
Freezing.  Tan now almost gone. IMHO UK is in its own climate loop.  
In a week or so, will be wearing sweaters, socks and boots.  It's 
like summer ends by order on 31.8.03.  OK - the books always start 
in Little Whinging which is supposed to be in Surrey in the south 
east of England - a more temperate climate(!?).  On the other hand, 
Hogwarts is maybe in Scotland which makes my part of the world 
positively tropical...

To sum up, as a lifelong resident I have never found the clothing 
surprising in the books.

June

Just a week away from the Aegean and feeling it badly.





From liliana at worldonline.nl  Fri Sep 12 23:12:08 2003
From: liliana at worldonline.nl (laylalast)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 23:12:08 -0000
Subject: Mistaken identity - part three
In-Reply-To: <bjseo8+bcp9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjtjs8+mla4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80636

>Kirstini:

God, Lilian, I'm really, really sorry to do this to you when you've 
put in so much work, but I'm afraid I have to yellow flag you:

Lilian:

Ha! A challenge! Shouts: `Stand and fight, you mangy cur!' <bg> just 
had to slip that in.

On a more serious note: really no need to feel sorry, I'm rather 
relieved that I'm not yellow flagged all over as a I put it all 
together at top speed at the last moment. But there had to be a snag 
somewhere.

>Kirstini:

The only reason we know that Florence exists at all is because Bertha 
Jorkins names her to Dumbledore. "I saw him kissing Florence", she 
says. This presumes that she knows who Florence is. If she has seen 
and identified Florence, she's not going to tell Sirius "I saw him 
kissing a girl with red hair" if she knows the name of this girl. 
Therefore we can't deduce at all what Florence looks like from this 
tiny bit of information.

Lilian:

Uhm no, my deduction was more the other way around. I did not deduce 
that Florence has red hair on this information. I believe (still) 
that the Florence scene witnessed by Bertha leads to the Prank. As it 
is obviously not Lily, as indeed stated by Bertha ?mind you, at that 
moment!- So I started thinking whether Bertha could have mistaken 
Florence for someone else who is connected to both MWPP and Snape? 
Bang! Lily with her red hair! That is how I actually deduced Florence 
red hair. 

As to the identification part, I may not have explained that too 
well. IMO it is not canon at all that Bertha has identified Florence 
at the moment she saw her kissing. She has identified Florence by the 
time that she tells Dumbledore about it. Bertha either:

1) did not get to see the face of the girl. All she has then, at 
first, a piece of gossip about Snape kissing a girl with red hair. 
And what a piece of gossip that is ? Snape kissing! 
The kissing happened on Thursday and on Thursday she already tells 
Sirius. All the pensieve scene tells us that she was hexed after 
Thursday when she teased "he" (IMO Snape) that she had seen him 
kissing. It is possible (and that is my take on it) that Snape hexed 
her while shouting: `don't you dare tell anyone that I was kissing 
Florence!'. Only then learns Bertha -accidentally in fact- that the 
girl is Florence. And when she complains to Dumbledore about the 
hexing she gets the name of the girl right in her kissing-story.  

2) she really mistook her for Lily. Following events are the same as 
under 1). What can I say to that? These things happen. Only here the 
consequences were rather nasty.

3) she identified her as Florence and then Del's conversation comes 
in ?post 80555(thanks for this, Del!). Bertha designs on Sirius are 
not necessary though, he is just one of the first people she runs 
into. Sirius simply did not wait until she told him the name or even 
withheld it on purpose to let him draw the wrong conclusions (big 
revelation coming in my mind right now? maybe she did! To get even 
with Snape for hexing her! Oh, oh, all those possibilities
<g>) 
> Kirstini:
Also, I don't really think that Sirius would be *that* bothered, 
Prank-causing-bothered, by Snape/Lily, even if he was sexist enough 
to view Snape as "moving in on James' patch" - "I think it means she 
thinks you're a bit conceited, mate." He's *amused* by Lily's 
rejection of James, as teenage boys always are when this sort of 
thing happens to their friends, really.
Lilian:
Difficult one that. To try and convince someone of your different 
point of view. But let's give it a try.
The reasons given by Sirius for the Prank:
POA pg 261: `It served him right,' he sneered. `Sneaking around, 
trying to find out what we were up to 
 hoping he could get us 
expelled 
'

Not very serious reasons IMO to stage the Prank, but that is what 
Sirius states. In GOF and OOtP he adds Snape's looks and interest in 
the Dark Arts to that ? Snape stealing Lily under James nose might 
just be the additional drive for Sirius to take care of Snape for 
once and for all. 
And Sirius and James were inseparable (`you'd have thought they were 
brothers!' POA pg 152), Sirius was even prepared to lure Voldemort to 
him by becoming secretkeeper ?not on second thoughts though (LOL)-. 
Sirius apparently just doesn't need much to act rashly (Molly's 
statement: OotP pg 85).

>Kirstini:

Finally - if he's going out with a Weasley the entire time, 
particularly such a sympathetic one, I don't quite understand where 
Snape gets the motivation to join and remain in the DEs for this sort 
of time period.

Lilian:

Whoa! Hold it a moment! I didn't say that Snape was going out with 
Florence the whole time. The Prank caused the Weasley-Snape going 
together to come to an end. And the rift between them was never 
solved until years later, when Florence found out from Lily (who was 
in the Order, just like Remus) that Remus was indeed a werewolf. The 
thread "Snape the iconoclast" is the explanation for me as to why 
Snape became, or was driven to become, a DE. On top of that I placed 
the rift between Florence and Snape and the school believing James to 
be Snape's rescuer, but then for the wrong reasons.

And then on to the age of Bertha at the time of the kissing scene:

>"K":
I think it's important to remember the age of Bertha at the time she 
was snooping as we will see later.

GoF/Ch 30 Instantly, a figure rose out of it, a plump, scowling girl 
of about sixteen...

Lilian:

This is what Harry sees, he sees a girl who HE guesses is about 
sixteen. That does not set it as canon that Bertha was actually 
sixteen at the moment. She might have been younger, she might have 
been older. When I was 16 I was constantly mistaken for 18. By the 
time I was really 18, and thus a legal adult, I had to prove that 
time and time again as everybody then thought I was 16. 
So Bertha may very well have been 17-18 and sitting her NEWTS and 
MWPP-S-L-F two classes lower, sitting their OWLS at their 15-16th.

Oh, and just a minor teaser: the DADA OWL that Harry takes is on a 
Thursday
. Same day perhaps 21-22 years ago? (Don't tell me: 
Transfiguration is NOT on the same day - that's why I call it a 
teaser)

Lilian






From andie at knownet.net  Fri Sep 12 23:14:41 2003
From: andie at knownet.net (grindieloe)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 23:14:41 -0000
Subject: relationships/ages of characters
In-Reply-To: <20030912221452.8960.qmail@web60202.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjtk11+tkba@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80637

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, A Featheringstonehaugh 
<featheringstonehaugh at y...> wrote:
>  
> hg wrote:
> > "And some folks have been wondering about the Weasleys and their 
friendship with the >  Potters: that would have arisen w/ their 
involvement in the Order.
>  
>  
> AF:  But do we know that the Weasleys and the Potters were friends 
or indeed, were A & M even in the Order before this latest 
activation ?  Remember:  in the OoP, when  Moody showed Harry the old 
photo of the members of the Order, he remarked that it was taken 
before Arthur and Molly had joined.  Perhaps the Weasleys joined 
between the time of the photo and V's disappearance or it could be 
that the W's hadn't joined the last time at all, out of fear for the 
safety of their (then) very young children. I just can't recall if 
their  earlier participation had ever been confirmed.  
> 
>  


Somehow I remember after Molly's boggart, when Lupin is trying to 
comfort her, him saying something like she wasn't in the order last 
time and doesn't understand that things are different this time 
around. The order is much better prepared according to Lupin, and 
therefore, she shouldn't worry about anyone being in danger.  This 
would lead me to believe that Molly and Arthur were not in the order 
at all during WWWI - Wizarding World War I. 

Andrea :)
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From liliana at worldonline.nl  Fri Sep 12 23:19:54 2003
From: liliana at worldonline.nl (laylalast)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 23:19:54 -0000
Subject: Mistaken identity - long
In-Reply-To: <bjsqnt+8qmo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjtkaq+2oup@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80638

"K" I'm not going to answer to your reply entirely as some points are 
about our POV's. And that's ok offcourse, it's what this list is all 
about. But some points I would like to add something to, so here goes.

>"K":
I think it's important to remember the age of Bertha at the time she 
was snooping as we will see later.

GoF/Ch 30 Instantly, a figure rose out of it, a plump, scowling girl 
of about sixteen...

Lilian:

This is what Harry sees, he sees a girl who he guesses is about 
sixteen. That does not set in canon that Bertha was actually sixteen 
at the moment. She might have been younger, she might have been 
older. When I was sixteen I was constantly mistaken for 18. By the 
time I was really 18, and thus a legal adult, I had to prove that 
time and time again. So Bertha may very well have been 17 and sitting 
her NEWTS and MWPP-S-L-F two classes lower, sitting their OWLS.

>"K":
James did have his eye on Lily but she wasn't paying him much 
attention. Maybe James was the one and he had to make sure Lily 
didn't hear about it if he ever wanted to have a chance with her.

Lilian:
But then it would have been James who set the Prank, not Sirius. And 
would James be so sure that Lily was going to believe Snape on this? 
Snape called her a `filthy little mudblood' after all.

>"K":
Now this is where the story gets interesting. As you said, if there 
is a child, surely JKR would have given some clues. Maybe she did. 

Post 77832 greatlit2003 the stringly, pallid kid
<snips rest>

Lilian:
Oh, yeah, definitely a possibility also. But what I meant by JKR 
giving clues is that she already started doing so before OotP. 

>"K":
Even if Snape is related to Lucius, can he give orders to Dobby? I 
don't remember.

Lilian:
OotP tells us that Kreacher could take orders from Narcissa because 
she belonged to the family. And she is a cousin of Sirius, as I 
believe Snape to be a cousin of Lucius. Kreacher could only not fully 
betray the Order. And Dobby could only warn Harry in a circumstantial 
way, as he could not fully betray his direct family either.

>"K"
<snip> 
Ginny does not seem to be able to see a thestral.
<snip>
I'm also not sure if Ginny would be of the right age.

Lilian:
Neither could Harry a thestral until after he had witnessed Cedric's 
death. Ginny as a baby would have experienced her mother's death just 
as Harry did his mother's death. Not consciously.

As to Ginny's age, just before the rescue mission goes of to the MOM 
Ginny argues with Harry that she is three years older than Harry when 
he first took on LV. She will certainly know Harry's birthday from 
Ron, so she knows that he is still fifteen in June. From that I 
deduct that Ginny is fourteen. 
Snape turned back to DD's side when he and Florence got together 
again, Ginny was born at least nine months, but probably more, later. 
So if Snape turns sides at the time that Harry is born, then Ginny 
being a year younger fits.

Lilian, who is now really off to bed




From liliana at worldonline.nl  Fri Sep 12 23:25:20 2003
From: liliana at worldonline.nl (laylalast)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 23:25:20 -0000
Subject: Mistaken identity - part one
In-Reply-To: <bjsfmh+ekhq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjtkl0+anmm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80639


> Lilian wrote:
> 
> > Curious (oh, and BTW, do you notice that JKR 
> > said 'them'. Not her ? not him either, but that's
> > another discussion 
> > entirely ? but THEM. Plural, two persons at least). Very curious 
> > indeed.
> 
> A minor comment from me:
> 
> Just on this point of JKR's usage: She routinely & everywhere uses 
forms of "they" as the gender-neutral 3rd person singular pronoun, 
even when it's very clear from 
> context that she must have a particular gender or even a particular 
individual in mind. 
> 
> So I don't think we can build the argument on the pronoun.
> 
> (My first post, btw, and lest everyone think I'm a hopeless 
niggler, I should explain that I teach the history of the English 
language and I'm consititutionally incapable of not noticing drifts 
in usage)
> 
> Carin

Lilian:
Thanks Carin, for setting me right and enlightening me on this. Being 
Dutch does still mean that I do not always get the finer nuances. But 
a tiny part of me keeps hoping that JKR might have said that on 
purpose. Who knows?

And now I'm really, really off to bed.




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 23:34:09 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 23:34:09 -0000
Subject: FF:  Flight of (the) Fancy 4; Sirius's Death-Journal cont'd
In-Reply-To: <bjnnvl+af5l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjtl5h+nmkm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80640

Sirius Black, death-journal entry dated deathday plus four

Here I am again.  Still.  There was something...something about the 
veil.  A voice close by, as if I'd accidently fallen asleep in one of 
those old, deep wing-backed chairs only to be awakened by a woman's 
voice next to my ear.  And it said...it said, "You can't go back, if 
you try--"  And that's all it said.  But there was music, too, 
playing as the voice spoke to me.  Was it one of those old Stubby 
Boardman songs, that one about the green-eyed little girl?  The one 
who turned out to have magic and grew up and found love only to die 
and leave a child behind?  Wait a minute.  That's Lily's *life*.  But 
that can't be right.  Stubby never wrote a song about Lily.  Did he?  
No, of course not, that's ridiculous.  How can I remember a song* 
that never existed?  I can even hear the base line: da-da-da, da-da-
da-da-da...

It has to be connected with the magic I thought must exist here.  If 
I can manifest images, like the flash I caught of that brightly 
colored bird, then there must be sound--, and maybe the other senses, 
too.  Ah--no, was that *Lily's* voice I heard telling me I can't go--
*there's* that base line again!  Lily?  Are you here?  Is James with 
you?  Do you know how sorry I am?

Are you there?  I can still hear the music, faintly.  What were you 
trying to tell me?  "You can't go back."  Well, I suspected that.  
But there was more, "if you try--"  What, if you try to go back?  I 
already have tried, and...well, that was a little like dying all over 
again, consciousness fading.  Is that what you were trying to tell me?

So, if there's magic here, and it can't reach back behind the veil, 
what's it for?  Amusement value?  Spirit therapy?  Penance?  Bugger 
that.  All I want is out of here.  There *has* to be a way.  Where is 
this side of that bloody veil...the music is going...so am I...

 S.B.

 [Sandy, aka msbeadsley]
 *Post # 80403, FILK: Green-Eyed Lily




From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 23:34:15 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 23:34:15 -0000
Subject: What's Arthur been up to (was Re: relationships/ages of characters)
In-Reply-To: <20030912221452.8960.qmail@web60202.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjtl5n+p53c@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80641

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, A Featheringstonehaugh 
<featheringstonehaugh at y...> wrote:
>  
> hg wrote:
> > "And some folks have been wondering about the Weasleys and their 
friendship with the Potters: that would have arisen w/ their 
involvement in the Order.
>  
>  
> AF:  But do we know that the Weasleys and the Potters were friends 
or indeed, were A & M even in the Order before this latest 
activation ?  Remember:  in the OoP, when  Moody showed Harry the old 
photo of the members of the Order, he remarked that it was taken 
before Arthur and Molly had joined.  Perhaps the Weasleys joined 
between the time of the photo and V's disappearance or it could be 
that the W's hadn't joined the last time at all, out of fear for the 
safety of their (then) very young children. I just can't recall if 
their  earlier participation had ever been confirmed.  
> 

hg replying to AF:
Oh, that's a really good point, I missed that comment by Moody 
entirely.  I even scouted around that section looking for stuff.

You know, I've been thinking that Arthur always has been doing some 
behind-the-scenes work, whether through the Order proper or 
independently for Dumbledore.  And that reason, in fact, was why I 
assumed that Molly and Arthur weren't in the photo.  (Maybe starting 
long before they joined the Order, perhaps.)  It's only assumption on 
my part, I wholly recognize, but it may explain why there's such a 
gap between Charlie's and Percy's births -- and it may lead to some 
understanding as to why the Longbottoms have been kept quiet all 
these years (and not simply killed), because I don't believe they are 
only suffering the ill-effects of Cruciatus.  Was there some "secret 
operation" going on that Arthur and/or Molly were privy to, and that 
the Longbottoms were working on?  Something ten years or so prior to 
Harry's birth?  

Arthur knows everyone in the Ministry and everything that's going on; 
he's well-connected and respected.  He was one of those called upon 
at the QWC when the Dark Mark appeared, and he seems to have more 
authority than his position dictates.  It seems to me that his job 
has been the perfect outpost for what he's really up to.  For Malfoy 
to assume that Arthur lacks ambition or ability (or for Percy to harp 
on those issues, for that matter) has got to cut him deep; but he 
can't say anything.  It's the only way I can accept the reality of 
the Percy-abandoning-the-Weasleys scenario.  If Arthur weren't able 
to provide Percy with an explanation as to why they've lived so 
modestly all these years, why he hadn't been more ambitious, that 
might be motivation enough for Percy to abandon his family as he does.

Then again, I can see Arthur NOT letting that confrontation go w/ a 
simple argument, but recognizing that Percy's older and now can be 
(and needs to be) brought in on more of what's been going on, and 
Arthur using that explanation to help him understand their family's 
life to date.  Either way, it seems clear that something happened 
with Percy: it was either right before the third Triwizard task, or 
it was after that argument with Arthur; but something happened that 
changed him.
hg.






From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Sat Sep 13 00:05:28 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 00:05:28 -0000
Subject: Harry a Hero?  Was: The magic power of love.
In-Reply-To: <bjsd57+hoae@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjtn08+8pdp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80642

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Doriane" <delwynmarch at y...> 
wrote:
> In Harry's case, he doesn't want Ginny to be dead both because 
> it'd be a sad thing of course, but also because it would mean he's 
> failed in trying to save her.

Do you think he'd have gone to the Chamber of Secrets and risk his
life to save Parvati Patil (just an example...)?

Ginny is a girl he knows and likes, but views her as a little
girl. Being 12 he is probably quite embarassed that she has a
crush on him so he avoids her. Boys this age don't care for
girls romantically yet. But she is part of his "adoptive" family,
his best friend's sister and, I strongly suspect, set up for
a future romantic relationship with him (sigh, I think Hermione
is so much more suitable...).

> If I may say so, you have no idea what kind of environment I grew 
up 
> in. In fact I grew up thinking and feeling like I had to take care 
of 
> myself emotionally

I did too. I had a very miserable childhood, to be frank. But I'll
take mine any time over what Harry has to go through...

I am sorry you had it so rough.

> And now that I think of it, I'm not sure I'd have done much 
> differently than Harry... Ouch !! I'm bringing my whole point down 
> myself !!

:-)

> Do you notice the pattern here ? Harry is afraid of not doing well 
in 
> school or in competition, because he knows others can be just as 
good 
> as he is.

No, he constantly thinks he is less good than what he really is. He
has low self esteem and blames himself for everything
(not surprising in a kid raised in an abusive environment).

> But when it comes to saving the world, he's not afraid of 
> taking on the whole task on his own, because he's intimately 
> convinced that he's the best there is,

No, because he feels that the task is alloted to him in view of
his direct involvement/impact as the main protagonist and target
of Voldemort. He also does not want others to get hurt.

> Look how reticent he was about bringing Neville, Luna and Ginny 
> along to the DoM : he knew they weren't as good as he for the job, 
so 
> why bother ?

He did not want them coming because he did not want them to
risk their life for an endeavour that was intensely personal. He went
there to rescue his godfather. He knew he could well be killed.
It is perfectly understandable that he does not want people who
are not involved and whom he does not know as well to come with him.
He does muse on the fact that they are not very good for the job -
because then they may become a liability. He really does not want
others to get hurt.

> But I am aware, of course, that he knows he's the only one who 
could 
> defeat LV. That's bound to distort anyone's self-image.

He did not know that when he went to the MoM.

> Only when it comes to saving-the-world. He doesn't mind asking for 
> help from Hermione where school or competition is concerned.

It is true that he trusts his two best friends. It's adults that
he avoids asking for help.

> ?? He did have the power to kill him. Or at least he *thought* so, 
> though we know he couldn't have killed Sirius with magic (what 
spell 
> to use ?) But he chose not to.

I don't think he had the power to kill him, or rather, he did not
have the mental makeup to become a killer (as is shown in his
duel with Bellatrix later on).

> > and he wanted - for once - to let the authorities handle the 
> > punishment.
> 
> And get Sirius officially cleared of all charges ! *That* was the 
> main reason he wanted to hand Peter to the authorities for.

What is the difference? He was looking for adult authorities to
mete out justice. They failed miserably.

> He didn't intend to ask for help. Quite the opposite actually. He 
> intended to demonstrate to the authorities that they had been wrong 
> all along but that thanks to him and his friends, they were now 
able 
> to correct their mistake. That's not asking for help.

Why do you present his desire for justice as an attempt to show off?
I saw no indication of that. He just saw proof that the godfather
he thought as murderer was innocent and of course wanted to set
things right for him. What decent person wouldn't?

> Hermione does that too, but somehow she doesn't strike me as being 
> presented as a hero.

Hermione is my favorite character in the series and I admire her
greatly. But her strength is analytical and the quest for equality
and justice, not heroically saving the world. And she is not
usually in danger for her life and sanity the way Harry constantly
is - unless she chooses to help him.

> why Harry and not Hermione, not Neville, 
> not Luna or Ginny ? They are all doing exactly the same, more or 
> less.

No. They are none of them facing the same threats, both external
and internal. They did not lose their parents to a murderer who
tried to kill them as babies. They have not faced the same
challenges as he has and when they did, they did not do as well
as him.

>As for the "being faced with challenges that noone else had", 
> remember how it was when you were a kid and a teen : deep inside, 
you 
> were convinced that noone, ever, had been through the trials you 
were 
> facing.

Yes, but that is definitely true for Harry, it's not a subjective
evaluation of a teen. Even Dumbledore says that.

> I'll state it once again : I don't see that his DADA skills are so 
> exceptional. So he practiced the Patronus Charm for months and he 
> finally managed it ? Not such a big deal.

No? He practiced it at age 13 in front of a dementor (ok, a boggart
dementor). He had to keep his head and make himself feel happy enough
to produce a complicated spell when faced with a being whose
very presence drains one of all happy feelings and (in his case)
causes him to lose consciousness fairly quickly. I think this is
quite remarkable. His DA students 2-3 years older than he had been
when he studied with Lupin, and only Hermione and Cho managed the
spell - when they were *not* facing a dementor. I think it is
quite an achievement.

>So he practiced additional 
> charms and hexes with Hermione for the Triwizard Tournament, so 
that 
> now he knows more than the other kids ? Again, what's the deal 
here ?

That he was able to apply them creatively under extreme pressure
situations. Isn't that what defence is all about? It's not what
you know but how well you use it when you need it.

> > lots of courage
> 
> In the heat of fire, yes. But when it comes to planned events, he's 
> just as afraid as anyone : he was almost fainting with fear before 
> the first task of the Tournament.

Courage is the ability to overcome your fear and proceed anyway -
not the inability to feel fear.

> No, but he *was* lucky that Fawkes was there to turn the Basilisk 
> blind. He *was* lucky that his sword went through the roof of the 
> mouth of the Basilisk as he intended it too, *and* that he wasn't 
> killed instantly while doing it. *And* also that the Basilisk tooth 
> tore off. Though I'll admit I would never in a million years have 
> thought of using it to destroy the Diary :-)

The point there and pretty much throughout the series is that while
he has luck, the only reason that things work out for him is
because he is ready to fight and continue when seemingly all hope
is lost. Faced with a basilisk, a junior Voldemort and no wand,
99 out 100 people would have just given up.

> As I said earlier, he *knew* he was going to manage it, and he'd 
> practiced the spell a hundred times, and he couldn't feel the 
> Dementors' influence from where he was, and he had a very strong 
> motivation to succeed this time, so it wasn't such a hard thing to 
do 
> anymore.

My suspicion is that the strength of a Patronus reflects the power
of the wizard who produced it. His Patronus scared away 100
dementors. Only a very powerfull wizard could have done that,
regardless of the circumstances.

>Now if he'd managed to scare them off the first time around, 
> then I'd have been convinced that this boy is something special 
> indeed.

And the story would not be half as convincing. It would make no
sense that a kid who could not overcome a single boggart-dementor
during private sessions with a teacher, will suddenly scare away
100 of the real things.

> > win the Triwizard tournament,
> 
> He did get a lot of help on that one, and Cedric did just as well 
as 
> he did.

All champions got a lot of help - it was very clear that Karkaroff
and Madame forgot-her-name helped their students, and Cedric
got help from Harry and Moody (and perhaps others we don't know).
The other champions were 3 years older also.

> > survive Voldemort or the DE's in the MoM.
> 
> The others managed that too.

They all fell pretty quickly, and they weren't the target in the
first place.

> Cedric : he did just as well as Harry, but he had no luck, LV 
didn't 
> need him. Had LV decided to kill Harry first, he could not have 
done 
> anything to prevent it.

Voldemort could not kill Harry until after he got his body back
with the protection of Harry applied to him as well.
Actually we don't know that he can do so now, do we.

>Cedric literally didn't see his death coming, 
> so what could he do to prevent it ?

Nothing, but how would he have fared in a duel situation? My
guess is not so well. I doubt he could have survived. We'd never
know of course...

> Oh, but I *do* have a lot of respect for Voldemort. He made morally 
> wrong choices, but other than that he's admirable. So much work, so 
> much endurance, so much determination... But of course, if I got a 
> chance to rid the world of him, I'd do it right away. Whaddayamean, 
> he's not for real ??? ;-)

Well, the story would not be so interesting if Voldemort was a
laughable vilain, now would it... :-)

> I do too. I'm just annoyed that he's given so much more respect 
than 
> any other character in the books, when so many other characters 
> deserve at least as much respect as he does, and could be just as 
> good heroes as Harry, if they were the ones the bad stuff was 
> happening to.

As I said, my favorite character is actually Hermione, not Harry.
They all have their strong points. But it's Harry who has to deal
with the bad stuff, not the others...

Salit





From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 13 00:07:15 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 00:07:15 -0000
Subject: Are we having fun?
In-Reply-To: <bjtcdu+nd55@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjtn3j+m1lb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80643

> I also think of one of my other great favourites - LOTR. The 
> darkest moment is perhaps in Volume 3 when Sam discovers that Frodo 
> is alive and in the hands of the Orcs of Cirith Ungol. At that 
> moment, Sam hits bottom. "His fear of the orcs, forgotten for a 
> while in his wrath an depression, now returned. As far as he could 
> see, there was only one course for him to take: he must go on <snip>

Another parallel with J.R.R. Tolkien has occurred to me that has made 
me a bit more hopeful (that and the part of the interview--thanks to 
those who pointed out where I saw the "writer's block" comment--where 
JKR says that after OoP *at least* one thing lightens Harry's load:  
he's believed by the WW).

Tolkien started out with The Hobbit, which was a light-hearted romp 
with some darker moments.  I have read that he knew when he wrote 
LOTR much later that some fans of The Hobbit were likely going to 
recoil at the serious grittiness of the later, greater saga.  I am 
hoping you're right and that a large part of what makes OoP seem so 
unrelievedly bleak *now* is that the story cannot be seen in 
perspective within the larger whole.

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley" who, if the series continues darkening 
through its end, is going to spend an awful lot of time writing 
scathing analyses of how the series tanked after Book 4




From meltowne at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 13 00:49:49 2003
From: meltowne at yahoo.com (meltowne)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 00:49:49 -0000
Subject: The Hogwarts librarian
In-Reply-To: <bjofcv+n564@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjtpjd+7i8k@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80644

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Matt" <hpfanmatt at g...> wrote:
> Well, I don't know, I've never thought that Madam Pince was 
portrayed
> as all that horrible, particularly given that we're seeing her 
through
> the eyes of a kid who spends next to no time in the library, and is
> usually breaking some rule or other when he *is* there.  Although I
> was just the opposite kind of child (along those two parameters), it
> is easy for me to see how Harry would be intimidated by Madam 
Pince.  
> 
> As for her hewing to stereotype, the same could be said of many of 
the
> books' more minor characters (I am thinking of Filch, Binns,
> Trelawney, Pomfrey, even McGonagall).  

That's exactly what I was thinking - these books are largely from 
Harry's point of view.  All of the characters are based on how Harry 
sees them, and what he understands of their jobs.  Until recently, 
Harry never bothered to wonder where all the food came from - so he 
never knew about all the house elves working in the kitchen.  Perhaps 
if the story was from Hermione's perspective, we might have a 
different view of Mrs Pince.  We assume that she works all those 
hours in the library, but we don't really know for sure - is the 
library available during all class hours?  Do the house elves help 
with some of the work?  even some of the students?

This is not a library like in the Muggle world - I doubt she has to 
do much of the behind-the-scenes work ordinary librarians do.  She is 
there to oversee the collection, and assist students as needed.

Melinda




From phoenixfeder2002 at yahoo.de  Fri Sep 12 08:59:37 2003
From: phoenixfeder2002 at yahoo.de (=?iso-8859-1?q?Diana=20Fischer?=)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 10:59:37 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: another CoS weird Hagrid tidbit
In-Reply-To: <bjrl49+15h7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030912085937.79254.qmail@web41504.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80645


HunterGreen <patientx3 at aol.com> wrote:
<snip>
> That, and I find it odd that they 
both know each other's names. Now Tom might have made a point of 
knowing Hagrid's name (obviously knowing about Hagrid's interest in 
monsters became useful to him), but why would Hagrid know his name? 
At this point Tom is 16 and Hagrid is 13 or 14 and (assumingly) they 
are in different houses (I'm assuming that Tom is in Slytherin, and 
that Hagrid wasn't), it just seems odd that they would know each 
other. 
On a similar note, I wonder if Hagrid knows that Tom later became VD? 
(if he did, I wonder if that would be cause to protest his expulsion 
from using magic?). >>>


I guess Hagrid knows Riddle because he is a prefect and top of the classes.  That would explain it. To this comes they have to meet before because Riddle did know about Aragog. This implied Riddle was at first nice and understandable; what after that changed?

"Diana Fischer"




From charleneaholt at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Sep 12 10:57:59 2003
From: charleneaholt at yahoo.co.uk (charleneaholt)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 10:57:59 -0000
Subject: Did Harry ever shed tears ?  Phoenix animagus perhaps ?
In-Reply-To: <20030912053241.81319.qmail@web60203.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjs8rn+2k6u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80646

"samnanya" <yswahl at s...> asked:
> Does anyone remember an instance where Harry actually shed tears 
in any of the books? >

Kewpie <kewpiebb99 at y...> wrote:
> We see Harry shed tears way back in Book One. It was right after 
Dumbledore told him that it was Lily's love that saved his life.
(US paperback P. 299) "Dumbledore now became very interested in a 
bird out on the windowsill, which gave Harry time to dry his eyes 
on the sheet."

Then in OOtP, US P. 856, after Harry alienated himself from others 
and sat by the lake thinking about Sirius: "The sun had fallen 
before he realized that he was cold. He got up and returned to the 
castle, wiping his face on his sleeve as he went." >

Eowynn:
> There is one more that I can remember. It is when Lupin is teaching 
Harry the patronus charm. Lupin had been distracted by something or 
other and Harry bent low pretending he was tying his shoe, and dried 
his tears. >

Charlene says:
  There's also the bit at the end of GoF where Harry's in the 
Hospital Wing. I don't have the book to hand but it said something 
about Harry fighting back tears and wishing 'Ron would look away'. 
Then Mrs Weasley gives him a big hug. Aww bless. 





From ChaseWildstar at charter.net  Fri Sep 12 13:16:32 2003
From: ChaseWildstar at charter.net (ChaseWildstar)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 09:16:32 -0400
Subject: Snape the Traitor or is there one other
References: <bjrdui+pup5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000701c37930$15e55cd0$6401a8c0@mac>

No: HPFGUIDX 80647

Dragonetti <kozmoz47 at y...> wrote:
> > When Voldemort returns in his speech to his Death Eaters he says
> that one of their numbers, he believes, left him forever and adds he
> shall be killed of course. We most assume that the particular ex-
> Death Eater is Snape; even take it as a given. <snip>

Ahh, but do you remember book 4, the Professor from Durmstrang? He's one who
left their numbers for good, as he turned on his fellow Death eaters, so he
could get out of Azkaban.

"ChaseWildstar"




From hansiregi at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 18:54:04 2003
From: hansiregi at yahoo.com (hansiregi)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 18:54:04 -0000
Subject: Did Harry ever shed tears ?
In-Reply-To: <bjss7d+afuk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjt4oc+s6ld@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80648

Sue B:
> > Harry is going to get more and more stressed out until he 
can finally cry (hopefully before someone tells him that big boys 
don't). His anger would have been a lot less in OoP if he'd been 
able to have that cry at the end of GoF. And now he's lost Sirius 
and still he hasn't been able to let out his grief in a great howl. 
Pity, that, but probably essential to the plot. >>>


I sincerely hope that by the end of the series Harry can overcome his 
stoicism and British stiff-upper-lipness and have a bloody good cry.

"hansiregi" 




From fc26det at aol.com  Sat Sep 13 01:44:32 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 01:44:32 -0000
Subject: What's Arthur been up to (was Re: relationships/ages of characters)
In-Reply-To: <bjtl5n+p53c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjtsq0+cqo4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80649

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hermionegallo" 
<hermionegallo at y...> wrote:
(huge snip-sorry)
  It seems to me that his job 
> has been the perfect outpost for what he's really up to.  For 
Malfoy 
> to assume that Arthur lacks ambition or ability (or for Percy to 
harp 
> on those issues, for that matter) has got to cut him deep; but he 
> can't say anything.  It's the only way I can accept the reality of 
> the Percy-abandoning-the-Weasleys scenario.  If Arthur weren't able 
> to provide Percy with an explanation as to why they've lived so 
> modestly all these years, why he hadn't been more ambitious, that 
> might be motivation enough for Percy to abandon his family as he 
does.
> 
> Then again, I can see Arthur NOT letting that confrontation go w/ a 
> simple argument, but recognizing that Percy's older and now can be 
> (and needs to be) brought in on more of what's been going on, and 
> Arthur using that explanation to help him understand their family's 
> life to date.  Either way, it seems clear that something happened 
> with Percy: it was either right before the third Triwizard task, or 
> it was after that argument with Arthur; but something happened that 
> changed him.
> hg.

Now Susan:

You know, I think I have to disagree with it being clear that 
something has happened to Percy to change him.  The comments that Ron 
and the Twins make about his ambitions and his being apt to turn in 
members of his own family make me feel that he is advancing each year 
in a normal way for someone with that type of disposition.

However, since he is a Weasley, it does go against *family traits* 
for him to be acting this way.  I have wondered if anyone overheard 
these assessments of Percy by his brothers would play on them.

Now so far as Arthur goes, something that caught me when I was 
rereading COS was a comment that Lucius made:

"Clearly," said Mr. Malfoy, his pale eyes straying to Mr. and Mrs. 
Granger, who were watching apprehensively. "The company you keep, 
Weasley...and I thought your family could sink no lower-" p.51 COS uk 
edition.

Lucius does not say that *Arthur* could sink no lower....he says his 
*family* could sink no lower.  He already knows that Arthur is 
working with Muggle relations.  So what is he talking about?  I 
wonder if this has anything to do with the Weasley's lack of money.  
They are apparently frugal people.  This has me quite baffled.
Susan




From feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca  Fri Sep 12 19:03:01 2003
From: feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca (feetmadeofclay)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 19:03:01 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Trust of Snape
In-Reply-To: <bjt3s0+iv56@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjt595+8u8c@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80650


> Golly ("feetmadeofclay") wrote in post #80503 (regarding Snape): 
> DD is the type of man to take a risk and give a person a second 
> chance to prove himself.  I always suspected he gave him a job at 
> Hogwarts to protect him and make leaving LV easier.  
>  
> But as a spy he could very well have turned out to be triple agent- 
> no matter what he did what he was 16. 

Now Bohcoo <sydenmill at m...>:
> Wasn't it a very dangerous thing for Dumbledore to have given Snape 
> a residental Professor position with Harry, The Boy Who Lived, 
> around unless he was beyond a shadow of a doubt that Snape wasn't a 
> spy for Voldemort?

Golly: Not really - he's had years with Snape on board.  I think DD 
trusts Snape for good reason.  We are led to believe that DD 
understands people well and he's a good reader of others.   

OK so he missed Moody and Quirrell and we still don't know what to 
think about Lockhart (ie whether he had any choice or had to take 
anyone who volunteered) but we are led to believe he's a good leader 
and part of being a good judge of character.  

> I would love to hear your theories as to what Snape could have done 
> to have earned this depth of trust from Dumbledore? 
> 
> Do you think this trust is misplaced? Do you really believe Snape 
> is a triple spy?

Golly: No.  I believe that was a possibility DD faced when Snape 
first came on board.  Giving him a second chance was a risk.  That is 
always a possibility with a turncoat. 

Since the series began, Snape has done nothing in the way of helping 
LV.  He's proven himself I think. He can always betray DD but as for 
now I trust him.  When you trust someone, betrayal is always a 
possibility.

I personally wonder why LM trusts Snape, if he does.  That for me is 
the weak link. I think he shows too much loyalty to DD to be a proper 
spy for DD.

> Do you think Snape is only safe on the grounds of Hogwarts and in 
> places like Grimmauld Place? Do you think he could ever even go in 
> to Hogsmeade?

GOLLY: No. I think in the turbulant aftermath of the first war, you 
wouldn't want to be a former deatheater.  DD protected Snape by 
showing confidence in his loyalty to good and putting him on staff.  
After the post war turmoil blew over, I think that being under DD's 
wing protects him the way it protects any of the students.  LV fears 
DD.  

It is possible that noone can die while on Hogwart's grounds.  I 
don't think anyone ever has that we've seen.  

> If one of the Death Eaters came on Hogwarts grounds, (a likely 
> occurrence since many of them have children in school there) could 
> they harm Snape if his cover with Voldemort is blown?

Golly: well likely or not is up for debate.  So far no one has ever 
tried except Sirius and Moody.  

I'm not sure he has cover or realistic cover.  We just don't know 
enough for me to speculate. He's helped Harry and DD an awful lot and 
done very little that I can see in the way of helping LV.  He wasn't 
involved with Moody in the plot to ressurect LV.

Legimancy is perhaps at work but I just don't know enough about it or 
about LV's powers.  I would like to assume that LV could overpower 
Snape.  Everything is too nebulous for me at the moment.

Golly 





From yodamarie78 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 20:40:18 2003
From: yodamarie78 at yahoo.com (Sara Butler)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 13:40:18 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups]Re: Not Writers Block After All---Was Re: Are we having fun?
In-Reply-To: <bjt0mp+spu4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030912204018.80002.qmail@web11704.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80652

Wanda wrote:

> Having fun?  Are WE having fun anymore?  Speaking for myself, I have to 
say no.  For me, the fun died on June 21, when OotP was released.  And so 
much of the discussion of that book, and speculation of what it will lead 
to, make me think that very few readers are having fun anymore. >>>


Yoda (Me):

I loved OotP, I think that the dark tone was very appropriate.  When I 
was trying to contemplate what might happen after reading GOF, I remember thinking that the next book would have to be darker and Harry would 
probably be changed significantly by the the events in GOF, and I hoped 
that JKR would be up to the task of writing it that way.  I'm in the same 
mind as people who feel that the first two books are in no way on the same level with the later books.  To be fair they are better than a lot of other books, but it's kind of like re-reading Anne Rice's Vampire Chronicles, Interview with the Vampire is the book you have to get through to get to 
the good stuff.  


msbeadsley wrote:

> The first four books had a lovely "flow" to them; reading them was effortless.  Even when bad things happened to Harry, the narrative voice 
had a certain resilence to it that reassured us; in OoP that seemed to me 
to be sadly lacking.  (Snip) >>>

IMO, a better written book would have communicated every bit of what Harry 
was going through and left it Harry's without making it mine (which I'd 
have resisted going in except that the first four books built up such a 
great level of trust in me that I failed to mount defenses).

I hope that I am responding to what you really meant to say, when I say 
that I think that the level of empathy inspired by OotP shows what a good writer JKR is.  I think that the best books are the ones that suck you 
in and cause you to live the events along with the characters.  Harry went 
through a very tramatic experience and then came back to find that the 
general public did not believe him.  He has had his sense of security 
taken from him after being spirited away from Hogwarts and betrayed by 
someone he trusted (fake Moody).  So it makes sense that if we are to appreciate what he is going through our sense of security will be removed 
too.  I was so impressed with OotP because of the character development involved, and finding out what a cool person Ginny really is, and the fact 
that it reads like a well written novel, I like it because you can't speed through it.  

Yoda, Who, as a former English Major, really enjoys the discussion and 
portions of the speculation.

 




From morgan.cole at nf.sympatico.ca  Fri Sep 12 20:44:44 2003
From: morgan.cole at nf.sympatico.ca (T.J.)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 20:44:44 -0000
Subject: Dudley Wearing Leather?
In-Reply-To: <bjt9mb+cni9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjtb7s+bfa2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80653

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bohcoo" <sydenmill at m...> wrote:
> 
>[snip] 
> > 
> But, why does Dudley have on a leather jacket on such a hot summer 
> evening? It is mentioned more than once, so must be significant >>>

Dudley wears a leather jacket on a hot summer evening because he's 
Young, Dumb, and Ugly.  That's the title of a Weird Al Yankovic song 
which contains the memorable line, "We wear black leather in the 
hottest of weather/ You can't imagine the smell."  I think of it 
every time I stroll around town on a hot summer day and view the 
youths out for a swagger.  Mind now, I live in Canada, Weird Al lives 
in the US, and Dudley lives in Britain, but I wonder if perhaps 
Young, Dumb, and Ugly, with its attendant fashion sense, transcends 
national boundaries (at least in the Western world?)

tj





From mev532 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 21:03:16 2003
From: mev532 at yahoo.com (Mev532)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 21:03:16 -0000
Subject: Snape's Sacrifice (Was - RE: Dumbledore's Trust of Snape)
In-Reply-To: <bjt3s0+iv56@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjtcak+8jd7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80654

Bohcoo:
> Wasn't it a very dangerous thing for Dumbledore to have given 
> Snape a residental Professor position with Harry, The Boy Who 
> Lived, around unless he was beyond a shadow of a doubt that 
> Snape wasn't a spy for Voldemort?
> 
> I would love to hear your theories as to what Snape could have 
> done to have earned this depth of trust from Dumbledore? 
> 
> Do you think this trust is misplaced? Do you really believe 
> Snape is a triple spy?
> 
> Do you think Snape is only safe on the grounds of Hogwarts and 
> in places like Grimmauld Place? Do you think he could ever even 
> go in to Hogsmeade?
> 
> If one of the Death Eaters came on Hogwarts grounds, (a likely 
> occurrence since many of them have children in school there) 
> could they harm Snape if his cover with Voldemort is blown?


A few of the previous posts have given explanations about how Snape 
proved himself by being a spy for DD or something about earning 
trust. I think the only thing we know for certain about DD's trust 
is that a startling life altering moment from the past will be 
dramatically revealed in one of the next books. Events like those of 
Neville's parents are the forces that shape characters in this 
series and I expect nothing less startling to explain DD's complete 
unwavering trust in Snape.

Ahh, but you asked for predictions. 

Ok, so here goes. 

I believe that Snape made a sacrifice so large for the order, and 
for DD, that DD finds it impossible to doubt his sincerity. What do 
I guess it was? Legilimency is all about emotional control so I 
think the only way Snape could fool LV, the second most powerful 
wizard in the entire world, was to agree to some sort of enchantment 
or process that would purge him forever of the emotions that might 
allow him to be truly happy, leaving only emotions like hatred, 
emotions that could be used as a mental shield and that LV would not 
find suspicious. The only times Snape seems happy is when people 
like Malfoy are rewarded (which I believe he really hates but acts 
this way to play the part, or perhaps he gets a grim satisfaction at 
playing his role so well, the kind of satisfaction you might acquire 
from enduring torture without submitting) and when he punishes 
people (which LV would not find suspicious from any of his death 
eaters). True, he advised Harry to purge his mind of ALL emotion to 
defend himself, but maybe that is simply an easier method or perhaps 
that method would form a barrier that would be obvious to an 
aggressor (thus unsuitable for a spy), or perhaps we simply don't 
know enough about Occlumancy yet.  
 
So, Snape has doomed himself to a purgatory or hellish existence for 
life so that hopefully the most terrible dark wizard ever seen could 
be defeated. 

I think this theory is properly dramatic, helps explain Snape's 
seeming constant misery, and I feel would inspire undying trust in 
anyone.  I don't have many of the books with me right now so I can't 
try to find textual evidence but I would love to hear other peoples 
opinions, criticisms, or theories.  Perhaps I forgot about a moment 
Snape IS truly happy or something of that nature. Thanks for reading.

Big HP Fan Dave





From eberte at vaeye.com  Sat Sep 13 02:06:40 2003
From: eberte at vaeye.com (ellejir)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 02:06:40 -0000
Subject: What I Liked Best About Order of the Pheonix
In-Reply-To: <008e01c3797a$aada2560$79092244@parkvl01.md.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <bjtu3g+62gc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80655

Deirdre wrote:

> After reading many posts about OOP, I've decided to list and share 
what I think is absolute genius about OOP. <big snip>
> 
> Genius Four:  Ron the Prefect
> Making Ron a prefect is such a wonderful thing to do.  I finally
> believed that Ron was out from under Harry's shadow and become his
> own person. <snip>> 

Elle (Me):
This has been a point of controversy on the list, but I must say that 
I *really* liked the fact that Ron became the Gryffindor prefect 
too.  I think that I was as shocked as Hermione was to realize that 
Harry did not get the badge.  I agree that becoming a prefect *has* 
helped Ron to emerge from Harry's shadow.  Ron was really due to have 
some glory and I am glad that he is finally getting his share.  
Conversely, by not getting the prefect badge, Harry was forced to 
deal with feelings of jealousy towards Ron--a new twist on an old 
theme in their friendship.  

Elle (who finds herself more impressed with Ron on the latest re-read 
of the series and is considering becoming a card-carrying member of 
CRAB) 





From kneazle255 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 12 23:02:47 2003
From: kneazle255 at yahoo.com (kneazle255)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 23:02:47 -0000
Subject: what makes a hero?
In-Reply-To: <bjtgbc+i06p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjtjan+tj75@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80656

hermionegallo:
> I would suggest that the word 'hero' can mean a lot of different 
things. Although the modern use of the word is looser, in the 
strictest sense, a hero is someone with outstanding qualities who 
is able defeat terrifying enemies, often WITH supernatural or divine 
help. Like Achilles, Odysseus, Perseus, Jason.
I will also say categorically that none of this detracts from Ron's 
or Hermione's courage in accompanying him. > >

Laura:
> Is it possible that there's a difference between the literary 
term "hero" and the way we use it in common, real-life parlance?  The 
literary hero has a pretty strict definition and set of criteria, as 
I understand it.  But we use it a lot more loosely and casually in 
conversation. >>>


kneazle255:

I agree with you Laura, there a difference. 

I like HG's point that having a lot of help does not exclude one form 
being a hero.

And I believe Harry is a hero as defined as "someone who risks his 
life to save others and could stop anytime he wants to but keeps 
going anyway." He does that twice(?) in the books (CoS and the 2nd 
Task on GoF. He attempts to save Sirius from Lord Thingy at the 
Ministry as well. I am not sure about PoA. That one is too 
confuzzling.)









From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 13 02:10:58 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 02:10:58 -0000
Subject: another CoS weird Hagrid tidbit
In-Reply-To: <20030912085937.79254.qmail@web41504.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjtubi+53dq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80657

HunterGreen wrote:
> That, and I find it odd that they both know each other's names. Now 
> Tom might have made a point of knowing Hagrid's name (obviously 
> knowing about Hagrid's interest in monsters became useful to him), 
> but why would Hagrid know his name?  At this point Tom is 16 and 
> Hagrid is 13 or 14 and (assumingly) they are in different houses 
>(I'm assuming that Tom is in Slytherin, and that Hagrid wasn't), it 
> just seems odd that they would know each other. 

> On a similar note, I wonder if Hagrid knows that Tom later became 
> VD? (if he did, I wonder if that would be cause to protest his 
> expulsion from using magic?). >>>

I think that not only did Tom Riddle make a point of knowing Hagrid's 
name, but he ingratiated himself to him. If he suspected that Hagrid 
was a half-giant (not outside the realm of possibility, IMO), he 
might well have thought not only Hagrid-as-scapegoat but Hagrid-who-
trusts-me could well be useful (as an envoy to the giants, hmmm?  Who 
knows how early he was scheming?)

As for Hagrid knowing that Tom became VD (lovely, that), what else 
could he expect by way of being exonerated?  He became a teacher 
after CoS, after all; and it's not like he could pick up his 
education where it ended, is it?  I'm not sure the "no magic" rule is 
precisely still in effect. (Ollivander did seem to think so in GoF, 
though, didn't he?  About Hagrid not using the pieces of 
his "snapped" wand?) The prohibition may now be due to Hagrid's not 
having completed his years of study rather than a lingering condition 
of the expulsion itself.  I'm glad you brought it up; something like 
this has been teasing at me off and on.

Diana Fischer wrote:
> I guess Hagrid knows Riddle because he is a prefect and top of the 
> classes.  That would explain it. To this comes they have to meet 
> before because Riddle did know about Aragog. This implied Riddle 
> was at first nice and understandable; what after that changed?

I think Tom Riddle was "nice" the way some carnivorous plants 
are "nice" on the outside; he lured people in so he could use/eat 
them later.

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley" who has decided to call Umbridge "She Who 
Must Be AK'd"




From wsherratt3338 at rogers.com  Sat Sep 13 02:16:34 2003
From: wsherratt3338 at rogers.com (Wanda Sherratt)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 02:16:34 -0000
Subject: Rowling/writer's block (WAS: Are we having fun?)
In-Reply-To: <bjtn3j+m1lb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjtum2+funn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80658

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> 
> Another parallel with J.R.R. Tolkien has occurred to me that has 
made 
> me a bit more hopeful (that and the part of the interview--thanks 
to 
> those who pointed out where I saw the "writer's block" comment--
where 
> JKR says that after OoP *at least* one thing lightens Harry's 
load:  
> he's believed by the WW).

Well, to be quite honest, I don't believe Rowling when she says she 
didn't have writer's block for OotP.  I think she's lying - and if 
people can argue convincingly that Dumbledore is a liar, I think I'm 
entitled to say the same about Rowling!  It's not as if she has no 
reason to lie about such a thing.  One of her most noticeable 
characteristics is that she is quite a control freak - of course 
she's going to pretend that everything is fine and under control, 
and that despite the bizarre book she just turned out, "Everything 
is for the best in the best of all possible worlds."  Sure, she'll 
admit to having had writer's block when writing CoS - now, years 
later, when the book is obviously a success and her admission 
doesn't mean anything.  But I knew she was having writer's block 
more than a year ago, when the deadline for publication kept being 
extended season by season.  And I'll say more: OotP has "nervous 
breakdown" written all over it.  I think she was in the impossible 
situation of *having* to produce a book and feeling unable to do so, 
and this tortured hulk is the result of all that strain.  Maybe 
she's over it, and maybe she's not.  I'll know when the next book 
comes out - or if it DOESN'T come out, just like OotP for several 
years.

Wanda





From nanstey at iastate.edu  Sat Sep 13 00:29:05 2003
From: nanstey at iastate.edu (nanstey2001)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 00:29:05 -0000
Subject: Strong contrasts and Fred and Georges names
Message-ID: <bjtoch+6p1l@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80659

I just wanted to add my two cents on the extreme contrasts of the
book.  On the one hand, it has some of the saddest, darkest moments in
the series; the Death of Sirius, Harry's loneliness and confusion at
being cut out of the loop, Umbridge's cruelty towards harry and his
friends, and the long hard night with Mr. Weasley being in the
hospital.  On the other side, there are some the the most
rip-roaringly funny moments as well (Thank you, Fred and George!) The
Fireworks, the snacks, ispiring the whole school to take up the fight
gainst Umbridge, Pansy Parkinson sprouting antlers (I laughed like a
manac after reading that line).  I wonder if this extreme contrast was
intensional on Rowlings part, or if it just happened to come out of
the writing, a subconscious parallel to Harry's mood swings? 

Also, I couln't help but notice that Fred and Gorge's names start with
the same first letters as the name s of the Prewetts, Gideon and
Fabian.  Is it possible there's soemthing to this, or is it just
coincidence?  Mrs. Weasley wasn't in the order at the time, but just
the same, could she have been inspired by it?

- nanstey





From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 13 02:49:23 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 02:49:23 -0000
Subject: The Prank -- A New Thought
In-Reply-To: <bjt1r1+3vbm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bju0jj+idhj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80660

msbeadsley wrote:
> > James had been running around with Moony as *Prongs*, not as 
> > James. It would have been hard for Prongs to stop Snape: no hands.

bohcoo wrote:
> msbeadsley, I had not considered that James would have had to have 
> pulled Snape back as a human so he would have his hands. (And, 
> thanks for the chuckle, by the way. You have a humorous way of 
> saying things...) 

I had to revisit this after your comment (you're welcome/thanks) 
because I read what I had written and flashed on James-as-Prongs 
trying to prevent Snape from encountering Moony and got this vision 
of the stag, head lowered, doing some fancy footwork and *Snape-
herding*.  LOL!

Sandy aka "msbeadsley"




From siskiou at earthlink.net  Sat Sep 13 02:47:42 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 19:47:42 -0700
Subject: [HPforGrownups] What about Ron (Was Re: Are we having fun? )
In-Reply-To: <bjt6t4+68qg@eGroups.com>
References: <bjt6t4+68qg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5384377015.20030912194742@earthlink.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 80661



Hi,

Friday, September 12, 2003, 12:30:44 PM, feetmadeofclay wrote:

> What about Ron?  He hasn't been ready to fight for 5 books? No one 
> will be upset or angry if he ends up dying?  

> Is Ron just acceptable fish food?

Not for me! If Ron dies, a lot of the joy of the HP books
will be gone for me.
He's my favorite HP character, but if Harry or Hermione die,
I'd feel the same.
Their friendship is what drew me into the books to begin
with.

I'd finish reading the series, just to get closure, but I'd
probably never feel like re-reading the series.

I get very attached to a lot of the book characters, and it
would be too painful for me to live through everything
with them again.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net

Visit our two pet bunnies: http://home.earthlink.net/~siskiou/





From elfundeb at comcast.net  Sat Sep 13 03:29:12 2003
From: elfundeb at comcast.net (elfundeb2)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 03:29:12 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Choice of Ron as Prefect (WAS: What I Liked Best About OOP
In-Reply-To: <bjtu3g+62gc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bju2u8+d9al@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80662

Elle wrote:

> This has been a point of controversy on the list, but I must say 
that 
> I *really* liked the fact that Ron became the Gryffindor prefect 
> too.  I think that I was as shocked as Hermione was to realize that 
> Harry did not get the badge.  I agree that becoming a prefect *has* 
> helped Ron to emerge from Harry's shadow.  

I think Dumbledore's choice of Ron over Harry was inspired, and very 
much in character for him. Dumbledore, of all people, does not seem 
to make his staff decisions based on one's accomplishments or 
*merit*. Just think of Snape, Trelawney and Hagrid. As Hagrid says, 
he gives people chances. And a chance is exactly what Ron needed 
most -- because that's not how it works in the Weasley family; Molly 
scolds and withholds the reward until the child brings home the 
prize. 

Dumbledore's motivational methods proved to be much better for Ron 
than Molly's harping on her childrens' failures.  Being chosen as 
prefect was the catalyst that set in motion Ron's eventual success at 
Quidditch, a success which I think represents far more than becoming 
a sports hero; it's a breakthrough for him because it's the first 
time he had faith in himself.   Without the prefect's badge, Ron 
would not have gotten a new broom.  And without the broom he 
persuaded Molly to buy him as his prefect reward, he would not have 
taken the step of trying out for Keeper.  It's the first time, in 
fact, that Ron manages to overcome his fear of failure sufficiently 
to do something for himself. 

Sure, he's an absolute failure at first (at being a prefect and at 
Quidditch), but that's because of his absolute lack of self-
confidence.  Dumbledore had no illusions that Ron would be an instant 
success. Certainly he could not have expected Ron to stand up to his 
older brothers, just as he cannot have expected Hagrid to be a great 
teacher straight out of the box. But Dumbledore very clearly believes 
that people learn best from experience, and that failure is a great 
teacher and motivator. If he didn't think so, Hagrid would be long 
gone from the CoMC job. It took Hagrid years to develop confidence 
and competence, and he's still riding the learning curve. I think Ron 
did quite a bit better than that.  

Ron was really due to have 
> some glory and I am glad that he is finally getting his share.  
> Conversely, by not getting the prefect badge, Harry was forced to 
> deal with feelings of jealousy towards Ron--a new twist on an old 
> theme in their friendship.  

What I thought was much more important than Ron getting glory was the 
fact that he was able to learn from his failures because Angelina 
refused to give up on him.  And when he got that moment of glory, he 
learned quickly how fleeting a reward it is.  I really loved how 
quickly he flattened down his carefully ruffled hair and stopped 
focusing on his moment in the sun as soon as he learned about Grawp.  
I think JKR is really good about those little details.

> Elle (who finds herself more impressed with Ron on the latest re-
read 
> of the series and is considering becoming a card-carrying member of 
> CRAB)

Debbie, who's polishing up a C.R.A.B. badge for Elle right now




From DMCourt11 at cs.com  Sat Sep 13 04:38:15 2003
From: DMCourt11 at cs.com (bookraptor11)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 04:38:15 -0000
Subject: Not Writers Block After All---Was Re: Are we having fun?
In-Reply-To: <bjtcto+ou08@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bju6vn+bq74@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80663

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "alice_loves_cats" 
<hypercolor99 at h...> wrote:
> Alice:
> 
> In the Royal Albert Hall interview, when the interviewer commented 
on
> the size (or length) of the book, JKR said something like: And all
> with writer's block, too! She then proceeded to say later in the 
same
> interview that she HADN'T actually had writer's block at all. This
> leads me to think she was joking at the beginning, or sarcastically
> referring to some of the claims the press had made about her 
supposed
> block. 
> Love, Alice

Donna:

I remember when OOP was coming out I watched an interview where JKR 
said that she's started to write another book, unrelated to HP,  
between the writing of GOF and OOP. She didn't mention anything of 
what it's about, if it's an adult book, or if she's finished it. I 
was sure it was in the RAH interview, but when I re-read the 
transcript just now, it isn't there. Does anyone else remember this?

Donna, who is convinced she's not imagining this.




From annemehr at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 13 05:21:32 2003
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 05:21:32 -0000
Subject: Not Writers Block After All---Was Re: Are we having fun?
In-Reply-To: <bjt0mp+spu4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bju9gs+s2m3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80664

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...>
wrote:
<snip> The first four books had a 
> lovely "flow" to them; reading them was effortless.  Even when bad 
> things happened to Harry, the narrative voice (not to be confused 
> with the viewpoint character's:  the point of view is Harry's; the 
> narrative voice is *the author's*) had a certain resilence to it that 
> reassured us; in OoP that seemed to me to be sadly lacking.[...]  
> I want to know that Harry feels punished and frustrated and feel him 
> feeling it, but I don't want it presented in a way that leads me to 
> internalize that, myself; life does enough of that in real life, 
> thank you.  IMO, a better written book would have communicated every 
> bit of what Harry was going through and left it Harry's without 
> making it mine[...]

Annemehr:
But, usually that's just the sign of a good book, that you can
internalize it, isn't it?  And you're not alone, I felt Harry's hurts
myself, too.  To tell the truth, I'm on my third (and much slower)
reading, and I keep tearing up -- for many of them, not just for Harry.

msbeadsley:
> Come to think of it, if it had that effect on me (as someone old 
> enough to be a grandmother): what happens when a fairly young child 
> ends up plunging happily into OoP, expecting that narrative buffer 
> between reader and viewpoint character, and ends up staring bleakly 
> into the void?  Should the fifth book come with a PG-13, or is that 
> element simply going to escape very young readers?

Annemehr:
Well, my 8yo seems to have only taken it as a series of interesting
events.  Not much different for my just-turned-11yo, either, as far as
I can tell (the 13yo is pretty close with a lot of her feelings).  In
fact, of my whole family (extended, too), I seem to be the one who
takes it the most to heart (much like many in this group -- that's why
I'm here).

Of course, it helps me that OoP just felt so *true* to me -- often
painful, certainly, but right.  Harry *had* to be affected by what's
happened to him.

It helps that I *think* this is his nadir; his dark night of the soul.
 It also helps that I want a book with evil in it to have
*consequences* to the evil.  People are damaged; yet they find they
still have reason to live.  This last point, even Harry has had the
chance to see through Neville, Susan Bones and Luna.  I hope that he
will find this is true also for himself.

I don't think I have been really reading these as "children's books"
since I finished PoA, even when I went back to the first two.


> Sandy aka "msbeadsley" who is considering using her soapbox as 
> kindling for a nice, warm bonfire

You want to hold on to that soapbox!  I'm looking forward to lots more
posts from you!

And Wanda, I have thought about it, and I may be having less fun (not
no fun) at this point, but I am still very intensely interested in the
story, and still thinking it's all worthwhile.  It's just that the
stakes have been raised -- it feels more serious.

Annemehr





From greatraven at hotmail.com  Sat Sep 13 05:22:44 2003
From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 05:22:44 -0000
Subject: The Hogwarts librarian
In-Reply-To: <001601c37982$6bc83c60$0201a8c0@bettysue>
Message-ID: <bju9j4+e1sm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80665

--
> Actually, there's a bit of cannon that contradicts that Madam Pince 
doesn't help the students.
> 
> Goblet of fire. chapter 26
> "So Harry, thinking that he would soon have had enough of the 
library to last him a lifetime, buried himself once more among the 
dusty volumes, looking for any spell that might enable a human to 
survive without oxygen. However, though he, Ron, and Hermione
searched 
through their lunchtimes, evenings, and whole weekends - though Harry 
asked Professor McGonagall for a note of permission to use the 
Restricted Section, and even asked the irritable, vulture-like 
librarian. Madam Pince, for help - they found nothing whatsoever that 
would enable Harry to spend an hour underwater and live to tell the 
tale."
> I'm guessing that we don't see Madam Pince helping Harry because 
it's one of those minute details, daily routine things that aren't 
mentioned, like the personal bathing habbits or lack thereof that
were 
discussed a week or two ago.  Plus, I can't imagine Madam Pince not 
helping Hermione, with all the time she spends in the library.

> Betty.


"And even asked... for help" suggests, to me at least, that they 
normally don't, probably because she is "irritable and vulture-like" 
and tends to glare at kids who actually use her "precious books" - 
can't recall which book that was in, but it was either GoF or OoP. 
It's not so much a case of whether or not she helps on request, but 
the  negative - and very cliched - "library dragon" portayal. 
Compare/contrast this with the warm (perhaps equally cliched, but at 
least positive) portrayal of the school nurse. What is it with these 
children's writers, anyway? I know there have been a few library 
dragon types in the past, before it became a proper profession with 
qualifications and training in working with library users - I once 
replaced one who'd been at the school for 20 years and had left 
negative signs up - "No this, that or the other! Don't..." etc. (I 
replaced them with a "Welcome to your library" sign and "Please
finish 
your lunch before you come in".) But they're long gone. Most of us 
love kids and adore teaching them to be skilled researchers and 
saying, "Have I got a book for you!" and looking through library 
displays, thinking, "Hey, such-and-such a student will LOVE this one!"

It's time writers caught up with the facts, that's all I mean. As for 
Hermione, not sure how *I'd* feel if an otherwise good student
started 
ripping pages out of books! (COS) ;-)

Sue B, who never expected so much response to this thread!(g)




From greatraven at hotmail.com  Sat Sep 13 05:33:09 2003
From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 05:33:09 -0000
Subject: Did Harry ever shed tears ?
In-Reply-To: <bjt4oc+s6ld@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjua6l+sjte@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80666

--
> 
> I sincerely hope that by the end of the series Harry can overcome 
his 
> stoicism and British stiff-upper-lipness and have a bloody good cry.
> 
> "hansiregi"


So do I, but I don't think he's had the chance, that's all. Other 
characters cry. Even DD sheds one tear at the end of OoP (but I 
understand *his* feeling he can't afford it most of the time. He's
the 
leader).

I wonder if Sirius might have survived if Harry had been able to let 
it all out at the end of GoF, i.e. less strees, therefore less anger, 
therefore less frustration, more inclination to listen and try to 
learn this Occlumency,etc Just a thought.Sue B




From greatraven at hotmail.com  Sat Sep 13 05:55:09 2003
From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 05:55:09 -0000
Subject: Mistaken identity thread - confusion
Message-ID: <bjubft+qph2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80667

Sorry, I'm coming in in the  middle of a long involved discussion, so 
forgive me if I've completely missed the point. Bercause of this, 
rather than reply to any of the posts I thought I'd start
afresh...Can 
someone please explain to this confused person how they got all this 
stuff about Snape and Lily and red-haired girls called Florence from
a 
single line in GoF that didn't mention names  (other than Florence's) 
or hair colours? And 
what's this about Ginny's mother - I thought it was the very much 
alive Mrs Weasley?

The girl in the Pensieve was Bertha - we know that. She was several 
years older than the Marauders and Snape, and presumably is talking 
about someone in her own year. Sirius remembers her, but that's all
we 
know. Probably James, etc. were only in first or second year at the 
time.

IMO, this scene was included just to show the sort of person Bertha 
was and if you asked JKR who was Florence or who was kissing her she 
probably couldn't tell you. Come on, guys, sometimes a cigar is just
a 
cigar!:-). Sue B(the confused)




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 13 06:20:16 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 06:20:16 -0000
Subject: Are we having fun NOW?  How about NOW?
In-Reply-To: <20030912204018.80002.qmail@web11704.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjucv1+tpvl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80668

Wanda wrote:
> >
> > Having fun?  Are WE having fun anymore?  Speaking for myself, I 
> > have to say no.  For me, the fun died on June 21, when OotP was 
> > released.  And so much of the discussion of that book, and 
> > speculation of what it will lead to, make me think that very few 
> > readers are having fun anymore. >>>

Yoda wrote:
> I loved OotP, I think that the dark tone was very appropriate.  
> When I was trying to contemplate what might happen after reading 
> GOF, I remember thinking that the next book would have to be darker 
> and Harry would probably be changed significantly by the the events 
> in GOF, and I hoped that JKR would be up to the task of writing it 
> that way.  I'm in the same mind as people who feel that the first 
> two books are in no way on the same level with the later books.  To 
> be fair they are better than a lot of other books, but it's kind of 
> like re-reading Anne Rice's Vampire Chronicles, Interview with the 
> Vampire is the book you have to get through to get to the good 
> stuff.  

Me:  
That's interesting.  I wonder if there's a general correlation, with 
people who really liked OoP thinking of PS/SS and CoS as just sort of 
background. Comments?

And I've read most of Rice's vampire stories and still love 
Interview. I retain a great fondness for both Interview and PS/SS as 
the introductory volumes in well-crafted, absorbing fantasy worlds.  
I also like Louis as he starts out in Rice's saga, as well as having 
been utterly charmed by the degree of whimsy in the first two HP 
books.

Yoda:
> I hope that I am responding to what you really meant to say, when I 
> say that I think that the level of empathy inspired by OotP shows 
> what a good writer JKR is.  I think that the best books are the 
> ones that suck you in and cause you to live the events along with 
> the characters.

Me:
I actually found myself getting thrown *out* of the story by the 
appalling things happening to Harry.  When I thought about it, what 
occurred to me was that something I hadn't even been aware of before 
was missing: that very subtly sympathetic tone in the narrative voice 
which had lulled my subconscious into a continued suspension of 
disbelief. I had to claw my way back into the story repeatedly.

Empathy is one thing. This felt like having an injured friend try to 
bloody my nose and break my collarbone so I'd truly understand what 
he was going through.

Yoda:
> Harry went through a very tramatic experience and then came back to 
> find that the general public did not believe him.  He has had his 
> sense of security taken from him after being spirited away from 
> Hogwarts and betrayed by someone he trusted (fake Moody).  So it 
> makes sense that if we are to appreciate what he is going through 
> our sense of security will be removed too.

Me:
Harry was absolutely entitled to be hurt, angry, frightened, 
frustrated, disillusioned, and insecure. I really *wanted* to have 
empathy for him. It just didn't work for me; IMO, it was so over the 
top that I was busy having my *own* reactions to what was happening 
to him that how *he* felt...well, how *did* he feel?  Perhaps I need 
to force myself to read it through continuously a third time. :-)  
The narrative voice wasn't there reassuring me that the *author* 
cared; something I wouldn't even have known was *there* if I hadn't 
missed it so much in Book 5.  I think JKR got too busy setting the 
stage for the next two books in the series and left Harry, and us, 
twisting in the wind.  Just IMO, of course.  Or maybe JKR withdrew 
from Harry along with Dumbledore?  It's something else that's 
occurred to me.  (Since I can't chalk it up to writer's block; dang, 
and I was *so* fond of that theory.)

Yoda:
> I was so impressed with OotP because of the character development 
> involved, and finding out what a cool person Ginny really is, and 
> the fact that it reads like a well written novel, I like it because 
> you can't speed through it.  

Me:
I'm sorry, but I'm confused.  "Reads like a well written novel" 
and "you can't speed through it" don't necessarily jibe, IMO. Isn't a 
truly well written novel one you can read at whatever pace suits 
you?  With your speed merely determining the level of detail you 
catch?  Although the character development is, IMO, one major saving 
grace in the book.

All in all, I feel somewhat as if OoP was a mostly unpleasant, large 
expository *lump* which had good bits, mostly concerning characters, 
labeled "insert comic relief here" or "insert ray of hope there."

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley" really wishing for a wand and two minutes 
alone with "She Who Must Be AK'd"




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sat Sep 13 06:51:23 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 06:51:23 -0000
Subject: Dudley Wearing Leather?
In-Reply-To: <bjtjm9+4c14@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjuepb+70kr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80669

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "junediamanti" 
<june.diamanti at b...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Donna" <deemarie1a at y...> 
> wrote:
> > 
> > > > D says -
> > 
> > Maybe I'm just nit picking, but in the US, even in the northeast, 
> the 
> > month of August is just plain swealtering.  Yet in the 
> Potterverse, 
> > there are a few instances of the characters putting on coats.  
> Even 
> > August nights can be swealteringly hot.  Didn't Harry and his 
> friends 
> > put their coats on when they were running from the DE's in GoF?
> > 
> > And, yeah, I know I'm skirting off topic, but even in the movies, 
> you 
> > see all those people bundled up before September 1.  
> > 
> > I think I need an opinion of one of our Brittish friends to 
> explain 
> > that to me.  Any takers?
> > 
> > D
> 

June:
> A personal and grumpy opinion of Brit weather:
> 
> Came home to Newcastle in the North East of England on 1.9.03 from 
> Turkey (45 in the shade) - beautifully bronzed, laid back, floppy 
> etc.  Immediately put on central heating and fire on arrival home.  
> Freezing.  Tan now almost gone. IMHO UK is in its own climate 
loop.  
> In a week or so, will be wearing sweaters, socks and boots.  It's 
> like summer ends by order on 31.8.03.  OK - the books always start 
> in Little Whinging which is supposed to be in Surrey in the south 
> east of England - a more temperate climate(!?).  On the other hand, 
> Hogwarts is maybe in Scotland which makes my part of the world 
> positively tropical...
> 
> To sum up, as a lifelong resident I have never found the clothing 
> surprising in the books.
> 


Geoff:
The east side of the UK has a reputation for being chilly and windy. 
I live in Porlock in West Somerset in the Exmoor National Park on the 
south side of the Bristol Channel. All through August and up to now, 
we have had good weather; temperatures in early August were 
exceptionally high into the high 20s and early 30s in the first part 
of the month. Now, we are still pretty warm during the day but it 
gets very cool first thing in the morning and during the evening.

Yesterday for example I was out walking on the moors with my family 
and I was in shorts without a top for most of the day - temperature 
about 23. By the evening, I'm into a jumper. If Hogwarts is in 
Scotland, they'd certainly have cold nights though.




From CareALotsClouds at aol.com  Sat Sep 13 07:03:48 2003
From: CareALotsClouds at aol.com (CareALotsClouds at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 03:03:48 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione's House Elf Hats: Question
Message-ID: <50.22000a00.2c941b54@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80670

In a message dated 12/09/03 20:29:38 GMT Daylight Time, 
darkmatter30 at yahoo.com writes:


> She is simply 
> wasting her time due to her dogmatic beliefs that these slaves should 
> be free, happy to be free, and that the simple gift of clothes is 
> sufficient.
> 

I do not think she is wasting her time and I think that is very harsh.  I 
think she has the general idea and I hope she goes further with them.  Of course, 
I dont think Hermione is correct to free house elves if they do not want to 
be.  What I do think she should do with SPEW is give elves rights, they do not 
have any.
For example:

* It should be illegal to torture or harm any elf in any way.
(E.g. Lucius tortured Dobby horribly, but it was perfectly legal to do so.)
* If elves are unhappy they should be able to quit.
* Killing a house elf should be considered a crimanal offense.
(So no beheading house elves that are too old to serve you Black)

If Hermione aims for these sort of things, she will get somewhere.  She is 
fighting for Elfish welfare which is what these are.

I say bless her, she is lovingly sweet and I think she will realise she is 
aiming too high and go for something a bit more realistic.

Nic xx
Who thinks Hermione is wonderful.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Sat Sep 13 07:46:47 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 07:46:47 -0000
Subject: Are we having fun?
In-Reply-To: <bjt3d3+e64h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjui17+9f3q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80671

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ellejir" <eberte at v...> wrote:
> Wanda wrote:
> 
> > <snip> Are WE having fun anymore? Speaking for myself, I have to
> > say no.  For me, the fun died on June 21, when OotP was released.
> 
> Elle (me):
> I do not think that your view of OoP and the direction that the HP 
> series is heading is universally held.  A fair number of people 
> enjoyed reading OoP (myself included) and some people on the list 
> have stated that it is their *favorite* book in the series.

Count me on as one who loved OoP. I liked the added depth, the
complexity of characters and emotions, how it became so much harder
to tell good from bad. It did not have as tight a plot as previous
books - rather a series of events. Its climax was not as spellbinding
as the one of GoF. But I loved the added psychological dimensions
and that Harry is finally beginning to act out his feelings. It's
high time he finally did that.

I have a feeling that the coming two books will be both darker
and more uplifting. The Wizard World crisis will deepen, casting
shadow over everything the characters go through. People will die,
get betrayed, etc. But I think Harry will pull out and grow
to the task appointed to him. He will not be as emotionally fragile.

Salit





From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk  Sat Sep 13 07:49:52 2003
From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?udder=5Fpen=5Fdragon?=)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 08:49:52 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Not Writers Block After All---Was Re: Are we having fun?
In-Reply-To: <bju6vn+bq74@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030913074952.62104.qmail@web60201.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80672



bookraptor11 <DMCourt11 at cs.com> wrote:
--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "alice_loves_cats" 
<hypercolor99 at h...> wrote:
> Alice:
> 
> In the Royal Albert Hall interview, when the interviewer commented 
on
> the size (or length) of the book, JKR said something like: And all
> with writer's block, too! She then proceeded to say later in the 
same
> interview that she HADN'T actually had writer's block at all. This
> leads me to think she was joking at the beginning, or sarcastically
> referring to some of the claims the press had made about her 
supposed
> block. 
> Love, Alice

Donna:

I remember when OOP was coming out I watched an interview where JKR 
said that she's started to write another book, unrelated to HP,  
between the writing of GOF and OOP. She didn't mention anything of 
what it's about, if it's an adult book, or if she's finished it. I 
was sure it was in the RAH interview, but when I re-read the 
transcript just now, it isn't there. Does anyone else remember this?

Donna, who is convinced she's not imagining this.

U_P_D

It was in the BBC 2 interview with Jeremy Paxman. Hope this helps.

Udder pen Dragon



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. 



---------------------------------
Want to chat instantly with your online friends??Get the FREE Yahoo!Messenger

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk  Sat Sep 13 07:54:46 2003
From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?udder=5Fpen=5Fdragon?=)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 08:54:46 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Rowling/writer's block (WAS: Are we having fun?)
In-Reply-To: <bjtum2+funn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030913075446.96097.qmail@web60202.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80673



Wanda Sherratt <wsherratt3338 at rogers.com> wrote:
--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> 
> Another parallel with J.R.R. Tolkien has occurred to me that has 
made 
> me a bit more hopeful (that and the part of the interview--thanks 
to 
> those who pointed out where I saw the "writer's block" comment--
where 
> JKR says that after OoP *at least* one thing lightens Harry's 
load:  
> he's believed by the WW).

Well, to be quite honest, I don't believe Rowling when she says she 
didn't have writer's block for OotP.  I think she's lying - and if 
people can argue convincingly that Dumbledore is a liar, I think I'm 
entitled to say the same about Rowling!  It's not as if she has no 
reason to lie about such a thing.  One of her most noticeable 
characteristics is that she is quite a control freak - of course 
she's going to pretend that everything is fine and under control, 
and that despite the bizarre book she just turned out, "Everything 
is for the best in the best of all possible worlds."  Sure, she'll 
admit to having had writer's block when writing CoS - now, years 
later, when the book is obviously a success and her admission 
doesn't mean anything.  But I knew she was having writer's block 
more than a year ago, when the deadline for publication kept being 
extended season by season.  And I'll say more: OotP has "nervous 
breakdown" written all over it.  I think she was in the impossible 
situation of *having* to produce a book and feeling unable to do so, 
and this tortured hulk is the result of all that strain.  Maybe 
she's over it, and maybe she's not.  I'll know when the next book 
comes out - or if it DOESN'T come out, just like OotP for several 
years.

Wanda

U_P_D

Sorry Wanda. Read the BBC 2 interview with Jerrmy Paxman. JKR said that she had writers block whilst writing GOF. also she ex[lains why tOOTP took so long.

Udder pen Dragon




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. 



---------------------------------
Want to chat instantly with your online friends??Get the FREE Yahoo!Messenger

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk  Sat Sep 13 08:01:16 2003
From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?udder=5Fpen=5Fdragon?=)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 09:01:16 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] relationships/ages of characters
In-Reply-To: <20030912221452.8960.qmail@web60202.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20030913080116.76976.qmail@web60209.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80674



A Featheringstonehaugh <featheringstonehaugh at yahoo.com> wrote:

hg wrote:
> "And some folks have been wondering about the Weasleys and their friendship with the >  Potters: that would have arisen w/ their involvement in the Order.


AF:  But do we know that the Weasleys and the Potters were friends or indeed, were A & M even in the Order before this latest activation ?  Remember:  in the OoP, when  Moody showed Harry the old photo of the members of the Order, he remarked that it was taken before Arthur and Molly had joined.  Perhaps the Weasleys joined between the time of the photo and V's disappearance or it could be that the W's hadn't joined the last time at all, out of fear for the safety of their (then) very young children. I just can't recall if their  earlier participation had ever been confirmed.  

U_P_D

At the end of GOF Dumbledor said to Molly "I believe I can count on you and Arthur?" They were Possibly being recruited for the OOTP then.

Udder pen Dragon





---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



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. 



---------------------------------
Want to chat instantly with your online friends??Get the FREE Yahoo!Messenger

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au  Sat Sep 13 08:28:51 2003
From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 08:28:51 -0000
Subject: Mistaken identity thread - confusion
In-Reply-To: <bjubft+qph2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjukg3+4lkt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80675

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sbursztynski" 
<greatraven at h...> wrote:
> Sorry, ...Can someone please explain to this confused person 
> how they got all this stuff about Snape and Lily and red-haired 
>  girls called Florence from a single line in GoF that didn't 
> mention names  (other than Florence's) or hair colours? And 
> what's this about Ginny's mother - I thought it was the very much 
> alive Mrs Weasley?

Mistaken ID in a nutshell
 a) Lucius Malfoy missed Arthur and Bill Weasley, but knew "all 
Weasleys have red hair" (*theory: so Aurthur's younger sis?)
 b) The motive for Sirius' prank against Snape (*theory) may have 
been a mistaken identity with another red head kissing Snape.
 c) Bertha gossiped and got hexed for it (*theory) so the hexer may 
have been Sirius who she gossipped to.
 d) LOLLYPOPs fans saw Snape didn't like Lily for being a mud-blood, 
but a Weasly would be pure blood. At least there is still a love 
interest in Severus's life.
 e) Ginny would have been born just before Harry was attacked, so if 
(*theory) Auther's sister was killed after Ginny was born, Molly 
would have taken her in willingly. Death Eaters were still strong, so 
Severus wouldn't have owned up to a love child with a Weasley.
 f) Snape must have had some reason for not going to the sorting 
ceremony when Ginny met the hat. 
 
Advantage of this theory is:
- LOLLYPOPpers are allowed for.
- The Sorting Hat wanted unity between the Hogwarts houses .. now we 
may find a strong member of DA, Ginny, is from Slytherin blood.

Problem: 
- Snape showed no emotion when Ginny was taken by the Basalisk
- Snape? Romantic? I'd rather get a mental picture of Hagrid and 
Maxime ... lol

aussie




From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Sat Sep 13 08:41:09 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 08:41:09 -0000
Subject: What about Ron (Was Re: Are we having fun? )
In-Reply-To: <bjt6t4+68qg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjul75+6lfb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80676

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "feetmadeofclay" 
<feetmadeofclay at y...> wrote:
> Sevvie Snape <severusbook4 at y...> wrote:
> > I will also join in the anger if JKR kills either 
> > Harry or Hermione in the next 2 books.  These are one thing my 
> > daughter and I both agree on completely, are the HP books.
> 
> 
> What about Ron?  He hasn't been ready to fight for 5 books? No one 
> will be upset or angry if he ends up dying?  
> 
> Is Ron just acceptable fish food?
> 
> Golly

  Jeff:
   I don't think so. Ron is important to me as well. He's a bit more 
than just the side-kick that everyone else seems to think. Ron might 
be a bit thick, but he's not that expendable. I do fear that he might 
give his life for Harry, just as he was willing to do in SS/PS. And I 
don't think Harry would be happy without his "wheezy". :)


  Jeff
    




From kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 13 08:50:33 2003
From: kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com (Kewpie)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 08:50:33 -0000
Subject: Snape has NO emotion? Was Re: Mistaken identity thread - confusion
In-Reply-To: <bjukg3+4lkt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjulop+kl4m@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80677

Aussie wrote:

> Problem: 
> - Snape showed no emotion when Ginny was taken by the Basalisk


Then how do you interpret the following passage:
CoS US paperback p.295
***********************************
"A student has been taken by the monster. Right into the Chamber 
itself." (McGonagall)
Professor Flitwick let out a squeal. Professor Sprout clapped her 
hands over her mouth. Snape gripped the back of a chair very hard and 
said, "How can you be sure?"
***********************************
I don't know how anyone could have read the above passage and 
concluded that Snape having absolutely NO emotion of any kind 
regarding Ginny being taken by down to the Chamber. Why on earth 
would JKR bother to put such reactions details of Snape (and have him 
asked a question) followed other teachers's in the same paragraph if 
he was meant to show "no emotion"? It's just a little bit in-denial 
in dismissing something that's written on the page (maybe it's just 
too subtle, I guess readers can interpret anyway they wanted 
according to their like/dislike toward the character).

Well I do not see this this as any prove to the theory where Ginny 
might have been related to Snape, because in my opinion Snape, no 
matter how harsh he was toward the students in his teaching method, 
he does not want any of them dead. I believe he would have react the 
same way if it were any other student, not just Ginny. 

Joan




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sat Sep 13 08:53:31 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 08:53:31 -0000
Subject: Are we having fun?
In-Reply-To: <bjtn3j+m1lb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjulub+bcq8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80678

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> > I also think of one of my other great favourites - LOTR. The 
> > darkest moment is perhaps in Volume 3 when Sam discovers that 
Frodo 
> > is alive and in the hands of the Orcs of Cirith Ungol. At that 
> > moment, Sam hits bottom. "His fear of the orcs, forgotten for a 
> > while in his wrath an depression, now returned. As far as he 
could 
> > see, there was only one course for him to take: he must go on 
<snip>
> 



Sandy:
> Another parallel with J.R.R. Tolkien has occurred to me that has 
made 
> me a bit more hopeful (that and the part of the interview--thanks 
to 
> those who pointed out where I saw the "writer's block" comment--
where 
> JKR says that after OoP *at least* one thing lightens Harry's 
load:  
> he's believed by the WW).
> 
> Tolkien started out with The Hobbit, which was a light-hearted romp 
> with some darker moments.  I have read that he knew when he wrote 
> LOTR much later that some fans of The Hobbit were likely going to 
> recoil at the serious grittiness of the later, greater saga.  I am 
> hoping you're right and that a large part of what makes OoP seem so 
> unrelievedly bleak *now* is that the story cannot be seen in 
> perspective within the larger whole.
> 


Geoff:
There is also here a "non-parallel" with Tolkien. I first read LOTR 
shortly after publication and when I finally got round to 
reading "The Hobbit", I really didn't like it and frankly I never 
have.

It probably arises from the long gestation periods of Tolkien's 
books. "The Hobbit" arose from reading to his sons, particularly 
Christopher, and JRRT himself has said that he started it somehwere 
bewtween 1930-1935 (probably towards the end of that era) and it hit 
the bookshops in 1937. He started the "New Hobbit" which 
transmogrified into LOTR in 1937 and finished it in 1950 with 
publication not occurring until 1954. The earlier book was intended 
as a children's book and as a stand-alone. When he got into LOTR, he 
began to link it to the themes of "the Silmarillion" which existed in 
sections for twenty tears by then. As a result, the book swung 
completely away form its children's sequel status to what it became. 
This explains why the first chapter of FOTR is such an odd one - 
written in the same jokey sort of style as its predecessor. It nearly 
put me off the book originally. I just feel that the ambience is 
totally different. 

JKR, on the other hand, has written to a relatively tight time frame. 
The increasing darkness mirrors Harry's progression from a sheltered 
(in the wrong sense!) pre-teen to a mid-teenager who has a lot of 
experience under his belt which is unknown to the average youth of 
that age - whether this is due to heroics or foolishness is not 
relevant. He has had a steep learning curve (Frodo and Sam's has been 
steeper in time terms) but obviously the sun is not going to shine 
for him all the time. Look at our own experiences. Do many of us not 
see our childhood days in pleasant, sunny places? Bet they weren't 
all of the time! I think in the real world, Harry would then put 
these events into a broader perspective as he got through them and 
through his teens.

Just as an aside, did anyone notice that the 30th anniversary of 
Tolkien's death occurred 11 days ago?




From greatraven at hotmail.com  Sat Sep 13 09:03:41 2003
From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 09:03:41 -0000
Subject: Third in command, was: Mistaken identity thread - confusion
In-Reply-To: <bjukg3+4lkt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjumhd+cg1e@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80679

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Hagrid" <aussie_lol at y...> w
> Mistaken ID in a nutshell
>  
> Severus wouldn't have owned up to a love child with a Weasley.
>  f) Snape must have had some reason for not going to the sorting 
> ceremony when Ginny met the hat. 
>  
> Advantage of this theory is:
> - LOLLYPOPpers are allowed for.
> - The Sorting Hat wanted unity between the Hogwarts houses .. now
we 
> may find a strong member of DA, Ginny, is from Slytherin blood.
> 
> Problem: 
> - Snape showed no emotion when Ginny was taken by the Basalisk
> - Snape? Romantic? I'd rather get a mental picture of Hagrid and 
> Maxime ... lol
> 
> aussie

LOL! Thanks for the explanation. Well, I thought Snape was not at the 
sorting ceremony because he was waiting for Harry and Ron to turn up, 
which also supports a theory I have that Snape is third in command at 
Hogwarts. DD had to make the speech (he IS the headmaster) and 
McGonagall had to organise the first-years and the ceremony, which
she 
does every year. But who always seems to be around, along with DD and 
McGonagall in important scenes? Even if all he does is sneer
something 
about how typical Potter it is to break rules? Snape! So I can
imagine 
Minerva saying, "Look, Harry and Ron haven't turned up and I'm a bit 
worried, could you just keep an eye out for them and I'll be around 
after the ceremony?" Whatever the Gryffindors think of Snape, there's 
no evidence the staff have any problems with him (except maybe when 
he's too partial to his House Quidditch team!). As for Hagrid and 
Olympe, I was a bit disappointed that led nowhere, but she IS a 
Headmistress and lives in France, what's she going to do, move to 
Hagrid's cabin? Or make him Beauxbatons Gamekeeper. Sue B




From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Sat Sep 13 09:26:09 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 09:26:09 -0000
Subject: The Hogwarts librarian
In-Reply-To: <bju9j4+e1sm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjunrh+87os@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80680

Sue B wrote:
 "And even asked... for help" suggests, to me at least, that they 
> normally don't, probably because she is "irritable and vulture-like" 
> and tends to glare at kids who actually use her "precious books" - 
> can't recall which book that was in, but it was either GoF or OoP.

I seem to recall that you voted for the librarian from UU (Unseen 
University) as a substitute (I assume a substitue you would like). 
However, he himself has some very similar thoughts in the matter - he 
also dislikes students that come and read and disturb his precious 
books and so on (it is funny when Terry Pratchett describes it, 
though).

Some librarians are like that. When you are in charge of books 500 
years old, you get a little paranoic about who reads them: are they 
treating them correctly? Aren't they passing pages a little too fast? 
What if they forget just how old that book is and rip a page?

Madam Pince is in charge of a library that has existed undisturbed for 
around 1000 years. There are surely books from the founders times, 
which is enough to make one cranky and fearful of bunches of 11 
year-olds running around the place with dirty fingers and no knowledge 
of the respect or cautiousness these books require. You can try and 
explain a twelve year old that some of those books *are* delicate and 
need to be treated with extreme caution, if you want. Odds are high 
most of them will either ignore you or forget almost inmediately, 
though. So maybe Pince goes for quantity: keeps reminding them to be 
careful. In Harry's eyes, however, that turns her into the "dragon" 
cliche (which I had never heard of, by the way), but gets results - 
Harry is very careful with the books, most of the time, and there are 
no records of any destruction save the page ripped by Hermione.

> It's not so much a case of whether or not she helps on request, but 
> the  negative - and very cliched - "library dragon" portayal. 
> Compare/contrast this with the warm (perhaps equally cliched, but at 
> least positive) portrayal of the school nurse. 

Here you mention two cliches: librarian and nurse. As someone mentioned 
in the thread, those two characters aren't so much cliched as 
unidimentional, since they're very secondary to the books. But going 
back to the subject of cliches, I have to point out that, more often 
than not, I've seen the nurse portrayed as an ugly woman that knows no 
medicine and likes to see her patients suffer. I had one just like her 
at school - and so did (in a fashion) Roald Dahl (check "boy"). As I 
mentioned above, however, I have not encountered either cliche before. 
I can see how both fit the character though, and I can give you 
explanaitions for both, without having to feel all offended because 
they have personalities, even if undeveloped ones.

Pince, as I said, is perfectly reasonable for someone keeping a library 
with books older than any of the people in the castle. The nurse, on 
the other hand, is a good nurse that treats patients in no-nonsense 
sort of way, curt and efficient, that speaks of much practice (practice 
she gets easily at Hogwarts, were incidents are common). Neither is 
portrayed in the caricatur-esque manner of cliches, though - Harry does 
not go out of his way to see Pince as a dragon, and not asking for her 
help is perfectly in character for him and his cronic misstrust of 
adults, or even people in general (notice Crouch!Moody's comment of 
Harry not asking whole Gryffindor for help with the tasks).

> What is it with these children's writers, anyway?

Now who's using cliches? JKR writes books that get put in the 
"Children's book" New York Times bestseller list (created because she 
hogged the regular one), and she's a "children's writter"? There have 
been big discussion in this list about the books being for children or 
not. The fact that we are all adults here should clue you that this 
isn't a modern version of "run, Spot, run". So this is, in essence, the 
wrong question to ask. Why did JKR decide to picture Pince like this?

I think that the answer to that question is: because it makes sense. It 
is a believable persona in believable situations and circunstances. 
Yes, a nice, friendly librarian might fit too, but not everyone is 
sunny-faced. The fact that there are people Harry doesn't like in the 
school adds realism to the books. If it hadn't been the librarian, but 
the nurse, we'd now have a thread of angry nurses complaining they are 
not like that. Or caretakers. Or Headmasters (I have encountered a lot 
of "dragon headmasters", unlike the other cliches - mainly because all 
children fear "going to the headmaster", which in turn is permeated 
into books).

> I know there have been a few library 
> dragon types in the past, before it became a proper profession with 
> qualifications and training in working with library users

This is another reason for such a librarian at Hogwarts, in fact. There 
are no "professions" in the WW, since there are no Universities. How 
Pince managed to be the librarian was probably by being assigned as a 
helper to the precious one and learning from him or her everything she 
needed. In the muggle world, you say that could produce dragons (I 
wouldn't know, but I'll take your word) and that "good" librarians are 
the result of "proper profession with qualifications and training". 
Since there is no such thing, it is logical then that Pince would be 
like she is. Not to mention that even if there had been a place to 
properly learn, she's probably old enough to come from a culture were 
being an ogre librarian was much prefered.

> Most of us 
> love kids and adore teaching them to be skilled researchers and 
> saying, "Have I got a book for you!" and looking through library 
> displays, thinking, "Hey, such-and-such a student will LOVE this 
> one!"

Again, another good point: most of you like teaching and children. 
There are bad apples. Pince could be one - as I say, if everyone was 
friendly and happy at Hogwarts castle, it wouldn't only be unreal and 
unbelievable, but sickeningly sweet too. One thing HP has over many 
other similar (and not so similar) books is that, for all its fantasy 
and magic, it feels real. So the quota of bad-homoured people gave the 
title to the librarian, more's the pity. But as I said above, it had to 
be *someone* - for equilibrium's sake, if nothing else.

> It's time writers caught up with the facts, that's all I mean.

Facts like what? That people born in the twenties would be dragon-like, 
as you have said? Wizards live long, so Pince could be old enough to be 
the age of that horrible librarian that you once substituted. That all 
librarian aren't like you? That keepers of priceless books tend to 
hoard them and protect them from careless readers?

And again, you are throwing a cliche yourself with "writers". I have 
read many authors, and I've never come across the dragon librarian 
cliche, except in mild forms like the UU librarian and madam Pince (and 
in my eyes, they hardly count).

Yes, JKR could've designed Pince other ways. An incompetent slob 
(always drinking and belching and drunk). A perfect indexer that could 
find anything in minutes. A nice old lady that would bring you cookies 
while you read (but incompetent to find anything herself due to failing 
sight). There are many personas that could fit. JKR chose one that fits 
- that doesn't make her a children writter, or a cliche writter. Just 
one that puts characters in settings, and is not afraid of reminding 
readers that not everybody is cheerful and a people person.

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf





From catlady at wicca.net  Sat Sep 13 10:05:09 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 10:05:09 -0000
Subject: Weasley "hypocrisy" /  Greengrass /  Dialects
Message-ID: <bjuq4l+51fb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80681

Yaira wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/80428 :

<< The only evidence I've seen of one of [the Weasleys] having a
relationship with someone who wasn't fullblood was Fleur Delacour, 
and I'm not sure if that even counts because the part of her that's
not wizard is veela, which is first of all a good thing (beauty and
all), and second of all a veela is still a magical entity. >>

I agree that being part-Veela doesn't prevent a person from being
pure-blood. But I don't agree that we don't see a Weasley having a
relationship with a Muggle-born: Percy's relationship with Penelope
Clearwater turned out to have been a big deal in CoS, and we know 
that Penelope was Muggle-born because 1) she was Petrified, and 2)
everyone said that it was Muggle-borns who were being attacked. In
addition, I take it you're not a Ron/Hermione shipper.

Vinnia Chrysshallie wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/80465 :

<< 5. Mrs Greengrass [may have been one of Lily's school friends].
There is a student called Daphne Greengrass. She took her Charm OWL
with Hermione (OoP p628 UK) >>

JKR's handwritten list of students in Harry's year contained a
Greengrass (or Greingrass or Graingrass) named Queenie (or Amelie) 
who was a Slytherin. Would one of Lily's friends have a Slythie
daughter? (I like to think that daddy Greengrass is a landscape
architect.)

This is the URL for the handwritten list:
http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/hpforgrownups/lst?.dir=/Harry+Potter+%26+Me&.src=gr&.order=&.view=t&.done=http%3a//briefcase.yahoo.com/
but here is an easier way to click on it: http://tinyurl.com/kk8t

Richard Darkmatter wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/80477 :

<< With even more patience, lots of work, etc., you could probably 
map the origins of most older, and many younger characters, with only
the dialectic and pronunciation clues from a few lines of speech. In
particular, I'd like to see someone place Hogsmeade, so we could know
almost precise where Hogwarts is located. >>

I strongly hold a theory that Hogsmeade cannot be placed by the
dialect of its inhabitants because, Hogsmeade being the only
all-wizarding village in Britain, people move there from all of
wizarding Britain whenever they find that living among Muggles makes
them crazy, or that their wizarding business needs walk-in customers.

In addition, I suspect that JKR depicting the wizarding folk with
Muggle-familiar regional and class dialects is the same kind of
literary fiction as the translation of Lysistrata that gave the
Spartans Texas accents and some other city Boston accents. I mean,
some of these pure-bloods live in such isolation from Muggles that
they don't know about trousers, never mind fellytones. Their
dialect(s) would have evolved/drifted on its own (not as part of the
local Muggle dialect) as long as they've been so isolated. I suppose
that really the Malfoys' dialect, table manners, etc, are as different
from the Finch-Fletchleys as their clothing styles, but a truly
accurate depiction of the Malfoys would have only confused us readers.
Maybe we would have thought they were barbarians in blue paint.




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Sat Sep 13 10:06:51 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (B Arrowsmith)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 11:06:51 +0100
Subject: TBAY the arrival of SILK GOWNS
Message-ID: <FED39664-E5D1-11D7-9E80-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80682

Kneasy sat on the beach, Butterbeer spillages decorating his grubby 
shirt-front.

"Huh! Another one!" he muttered as  the SILK GOWNS  negotiated the 
treacherous reefs off-shore.
"Can't  say as I'm impressed." He sniffed. "The very  idea that 
somebody could keep the Longbottoms drugged for  years an'  years 
without anybody gettin' suspicious. In a hospital too! It's about  as 
likely as your dad bein' a bad 'un." Here  he  gave snot be-decked 
Snape!Minor an affectionate pat.

"Nah, they got it all back to front. Droobles Gum got beneficial 
properties, that's why the Healers is perscribing it. Ma Longbottom 
gives the wrappers to Nevvy to show she's takin' her medicine."

He lurched to his feet.
"Come on, the George's still open. Time for a refill."




From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 13 10:42:14 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 10:42:14 -0000
Subject: What's Arthur been up to (was Re: relationships/ages of characters)
In-Reply-To: <bjtsq0+cqo4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjusa6+bnnk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80683

from hg's original post "What's Arthur been up to"
"Either way, it seems clear that something happened 
with Percy: it was either right before the third Triwizard task, or 
it was after that argument with Arthur; but something happened that 
changed him.
 hg."

Susan (Potterfanme) replied
 "You know, I think I have to disagree with it being clear that 
 something has happened to Percy to change him."

hg again:
I know, it's pretty unpopular around here to see Percy as acting out 
of character, but I stand by it in my flame-proof vest.  I can't 
assume that his brothers' comments necessarily prove that he's 
ambitious to the extent of abandoning his family.  I think we know JK 
well enough now that the simplest explanation isn't always the 
correct one.  And I'll be prepared to accept whatever outcome there 
is for Percy in books 6 and 7 (yes, even the simplest one).

Let's consider my reply to Susan here an extention of my original 
post, "What's Arthur been up to," otherwise it will quickly spiral 
down into "Percy really is a git," and I said some things in my 
original post to which I'm eagerly looking for replies.
as always, respectfully, 
hg.




From Elvishooked at hotmail.com  Sat Sep 13 11:10:12 2003
From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 11:10:12 -0000
Subject: Deaths at Hogwarts? (Was: Dumbledore's Trust of Snape)
In-Reply-To: <bjt595+8u8c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjutuk+39ee@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80684

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "feetmadeofclay" 
<feetmadeofclay at y...> wrote:

It is possible that noone can die while on Hogwart's grounds. I 
don't think anyone ever has that we've seen.

Inge:
What about Mourning Myrtle? She died on Hogwart's grounds, didn't 
she? Can't remember anyone else though. 








From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Sat Sep 13 11:11:47 2003
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 11:11:47 -0000
Subject: Deaths at Hogwarts? (Was: Dumbledore's Trust of Snape)
In-Reply-To: <bjutuk+39ee@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjuu1j+s3jq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80685

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Inge" <Elvishooked at h...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "feetmadeofclay" 
> <feetmadeofclay at y...> wrote:
> 
> It is possible that noone can die while on Hogwart's grounds. I 
> don't think anyone ever has that we've seen.
> 
> Inge:
> What about Mourning Myrtle? She died on Hogwart's grounds, didn't 
> she? Can't remember anyone else though.

Barty Crouch also died on Hogwarts grounds.

Hickengruendler




From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 13 11:29:01 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 11:29:01 -0000
Subject: What's Arthur been up to (was Re: relationships/ages of characters)
In-Reply-To: <bjusa6+bnnk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjuv1t+8gec@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80686

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hermionegallo" 
<hermionegallo at y...> wrote:
from hg's original post "What's Arthur been up to"
"Either way, it seems clear that something happened 
with Percy: it was either right before the third Triwizard task, or 
it was after that argument with Arthur; but something happened that 
changed him."

Susan (Potterfanme) replied
"You know, I think I have to disagree with it being clear that 
something has happened to Percy to change him."

hg again:
I know, it's pretty unpopular around here to see Percy as acting out 
of character, but I stand by it in my flame-proof vest.  I can't 
assume that his brothers' comments necessarily prove that he's 
ambitious to the extent of abandoning his family.  I think we know JK 
well enough now that the simplest explanation isn't always the 
correct one.  And I'll be prepared to accept whatever outcome there 
is for Percy in books 6 and 7 (yes, even the simplest one).
 
Let's consider my reply to Susan here an extention of my original 
post, "What's Arthur been up to," otherwise it will quickly spiral 
down into "Percy really is a git," and I said some things in my 
original post to which I'm eagerly looking for replies.
as always, respectfully, hg.

Kneazle255:
I am conflicted regarding Percy in OoTP.

Percy right from the start has been an priggish git. He has, however, 
consistently shown concern for other members of his family. And for 
Harry.  That's canon up thru the 2nd Task in GoF. And he has to have 
the scoop on Harry's previous encounters with Voldemort (SS and CoS). 
Ron and Ginny were both deeply involved in all that. 

Here's my issue. Everyone in OoTP acts like V's return is a massive 
shock. Everyone outside the trio, the Weasleys, and the Order act 
like V is back from the grave. But he is not. He just found a way to 
get a body back. He never was really gone.

The return shouldn't be such a big shock for Percy. He knew Voldemort 
was never really dead and gone. And I have a hard time believing that 
Percy would suddenly stop caring for his siblings, although I can see 
how a late teenage rebellion could color his relationship with his 
parents.

So what is up with him?

I hope Harry gets to hear an explanation form Percy in Book 6!







From entropymail at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 13 12:15:46 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 12:15:46 -0000
Subject: Hermione's House Elf Hats: Question
In-Reply-To: <50.22000a00.2c941b54@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bjv1pi+51cp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80687

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, CareALotsClouds at a... wrote:
> In a message dated 12/09/03 20:29:38 GMT Daylight Time, 
> darkmatter30 at y... writes:
> 
> 
> > She is simply 
> > wasting her time due to her dogmatic beliefs that these slaves should 
> > be free, happy to be free, and that the simple gift of clothes is 
> > sufficient.
<snip>

So, the general consensus is that Hernione is doing her best with the
situation, but is just unaware that the clothes must be given by the
house-elves' master? How can this be? 

Wouldn't our studious Hermione, after all we know about her, have
researched the topic for days upon days, until there was nothing more
to research? Surely, even a cursory questioning would have told her
that the house-elves can't be freed by the students handing out
clothes (after all, don't the house-elves pick up after the students
in their dorm rooms every day?). At the very least, Harry must have
told her the story of how he tricked Lucius Malfoy into freeing Dobby!

What's going on?

:: Entropy ::




From Elvishooked at hotmail.com  Sat Sep 13 12:36:33 2003
From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 12:36:33 -0000
Subject: Deaths at Hogwarts? (Was: Dumbledore's Trust of Snape)
In-Reply-To: <bjt595+8u8c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjv30h+h08r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80688

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "feetmadeofclay" 
<feetmadeofclay at y...> wrote:

It is possible that noone can die while on Hogwart's grounds. I 
don't think anyone ever has that we've seen.

Inge:
What about Mourning Myrtle? She died on Hogwart's grounds, didn't 
she? Can't remember anyone else though. 








From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 13 12:59:46 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 12:59:46 -0000
Subject: relationships/ages of characters
In-Reply-To: <20030912221452.8960.qmail@web60202.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bjv4c2+rcn8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80689

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, A Featheringstonehaugh 
<featheringstonehaugh at y...> wrote:
>  
> hg wrote:
> > "And some folks have been wondering about the Weasleys and their 
friendship with the >  Potters: that would have arisen w/ their 
involvement in the Order.
>  
>  
> AF:  But do we know that the Weasleys and the Potters were friends 
or indeed, were A & M even in the Order before this latest 
activation ?  Remember:  in the OoP, when  Moody showed Harry the old 
photo of the members of the Order, he remarked that it was taken 
before Arthur and Molly had joined.  

hg again:
I just looked it up, and Moody makes no such comment about the 
Weasleys.  I didn't remember it being there because it wasn't there! 

page 177 hb:  Lupin says, "...we're much better off than we were last 
time, you weren't in the Order then, you don't understand, last time 
we were outnumbered twenty to one by the Death Eaters and they were 
picking us off one by one..."

But in GoF Arthur is one of the first people Dumbledore calls upon to 
join up (quote something like "I can count on you and Arthur" to 
Molly).  I think they were certainly involved, but differently.
hg.





From deemarie1a at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 13 13:04:48 2003
From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 13:04:48 -0000
Subject: The Hogwarts librarian
In-Reply-To: <bju9j4+e1sm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjv4lg+f116@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80690

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sbursztynski" 
<greatraven at h...> wrote:
 
> Compare/contrast this with the warm (perhaps equally cliched, but 
at 
> least positive) portrayal of the school nurse. 

> Sue B, who never expected so much response to this thread!(g)

D says - 

Now I am not trying to be mean, so please forgive me, but...

Madame Pomfrey is far from Warm.  She is brusk to the point of being 
rude.  She is a dragon as far as protecting her patients is concerned.
She doesn't like visitors seeing her patients.  She wants her 
patients to have complete bed rest.

She is even quite brusk with her patients.  Note how she takes care 
of Harry every time he is in the hospital wing.  She never wants him 
to leave that bed.  

At least that is how I read Madam Poppy Pomfrey, but that is just my 
opinion.  And we all are entitled to our opinions on this list.  By 
the way, Madame Pince is quite what I pictured her to be.  It seems 
to me that JKR presents most of the teachers and staff at Hogwarts to 
be a bit off putting.  Not warm and fuzzy.  As far as I can tell, and 
again just my opinion, the only two teachers who seem approachable 
are Professors Flitwick and DD.  (Yes, I said DD)

D - perhaps I am projecting my US experiences on these characters.  
Perhaps I cannot see the UK experience.  





From deemarie1a at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 13 13:14:34 2003
From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 13:14:34 -0000
Subject: Dudley Wearing Leather?
In-Reply-To: <bjuepb+70kr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjv57q+msch@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80691

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" 
<gbannister10 at a...> wrote:
> Geoff:
> The east side of the UK has a reputation for being chilly and 
windy. 
> I live in Porlock in West Somerset in the Exmoor National Park on 
the 
> south side of the Bristol Channel. All through August and up to 
now, 
> we have had good weather; temperatures in early August were 
> exceptionally high into the high 20s and early 30s in the first 
part 
> of the month. Now, we are still pretty warm during the day but it 
> gets very cool first thing in the morning and during the evening.
> 
> Yesterday for example I was out walking on the moors with my family 
> and I was in shorts without a top for most of the day - temperature 
> about 23. By the evening, I'm into a jumper. If Hogwarts is in 
> Scotland, they'd certainly have cold nights though.

D says -

Whoa!  We are definately in danger of being OT here!  I understand 
that this year, Europe has been experiencing the worst heat wave in 
quite a few years.  Sounded pretty much like our normal southwest 
weather here in the US.

My point was, that being an American, I just don't get the idea of 
sweaters and coats in August, whether it is daytime or evening.  It 
is my fondest desire to visit the UK one day, to experience 
everything your lovely country has to offer.

Now to get back on topic, Dudley is being very "Marlon Brando".  It's 
COOL to wear a leather jacket.  It is also very sterotypical.  The 
tough bad dude wears leather.  It is also another way to contrast the 
treatment of Harry and Dudley.  Harry gets the old hand-me-downs 
while Dudley gets the top of the line stuff.  Leather jackets are 
very expensive.  And I just don't see Harry getting that when Dudley 
grows larger.

D




From deemarie1a at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 13 13:22:03 2003
From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 13:22:03 -0000
Subject: Deaths at Hogwarts? (Was: Dumbledore's Trust of Snape)
In-Reply-To: <bjutuk+39ee@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjv5ls+8j0l@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80692

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Inge" <Elvishooked at h...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "feetmadeofclay" 
> <feetmadeofclay at y...> wrote:
> 
> It is possible that noone can die while on Hogwart's grounds. I 
> don't think anyone ever has that we've seen.
> 
> Inge:
> What about Mourning Myrtle? She died on Hogwart's grounds, didn't 
> she? Can't remember anyone else though.

D says -

Professor Binns!






From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Sat Sep 13 13:57:39 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 13:57:39 -0000
Subject: Hermione's House Elf Hats: Question
In-Reply-To: <bjv1pi+51cp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjv7oj+ltje@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80693

Entropy wrote:
> So, the general consensus is that Hernione is doing her best with the
> situation, but is just unaware that the clothes must be given by the
> house-elves' master? How can this be? 

Ummm... the situation is not as clear cut. We really don't have canon 
to tell if students are considered masters of the Hogwarts elves or 
not. After all, they're perfect elves, by elf's standards: they do all 
the work, with most students never even wondering how it is that the 
work gets done (never mind who's the one doing it). The only way to 
even *see* an elf is to go to the kitchens, so good they are at 
cleaning and doing household work.

The one clue that could tell us about who's master to the elves is the 
fact that anyone asking for food while in the kitchen will be served by 
the elves - but then, I have the feeling that elves are happy and 
fullfilled by serving others and by making sure everyone has what they 
need (which isn't that bad a philosophy of life). So, in essence, we 
don't know if Hermione has the power to dismiss elves (not that it 
minds - see later).

Let's examine, then, the concept of "giving the boot". As Catlady has 
oft mentioned, the concept probably comes from the folklore stories 
about little creatures helping honest merchants (my country's version 
is a shoemaker, I've no idea about the possible variations), which help 
the merchant survive bad times and re-float his shop by doing huge 
amounts of work. The merchant eventually spies on those creatures and 
notices they're naked, or wearing ragged clothes, and has his wife make 
them appropiate clothes (he does tiny shoes), and lets them were the 
little creatures can find it, as thanks. However, when the little 
creatures find the clothes, they are offended and leave.

This extrapolates to house elves in a close fashion: they do the work 
for nothing, and if you give them clothes, they leave. However, we have 
the problem of the exact mechanism. Is it enough to drop a piece of 
clothing and ten minutes later to be picked up by the elf? Doubtful. In 
every case it has been mentioned, there is intent in one of the two 
parties - either the elf chooses to see it as a given cloth, or the 
owner decides it is. And this is my theory: a clothing must be, but it 
must be an intended clothing, or the elf can interpret it as such. 
Thus, a child could play "pass the sock-ball" with the family elf 
without problem, but the moment an elf is unhappy, it's a good time to 
start watching where you drop the clothes.

Back to Hermione. She's trying to trick the house elves into being 
free, so the intent is there - and the elves are intelligent enough to 
see it (and feel offended by it). Hoever, it seems clear that you have 
to hand the clothing, so Hermione's trick would, IMO, be useless even 
for an elf wanting to leave Hogwarts. The question is, however, if 
Hermione is aware of this.
 
> Wouldn't our studious Hermione, after all we know about her, have
> researched the topic for days upon days, until there was nothing more
> to research?

She has researched the topic, but we know that there is little to be 
found in the first place: Hogwarts, a History doesn't mention elves. 
Elves, like a perfect machinery, operate without ever entering the 
spotlight. Many other books might be written in similar light. There 
might be books about heouse elves, their customs and so on, but they 
might not be at Hogwarts (doubtful, I know).

A much more feasible explanaition is that Hermione has found such books 
and, having been written by wizards, she has dismissed them as biased, 
and thus she is trying her own theories. This is, right now, the worst 
problem for Hermione. She is so entrenched in her own view of the 
house-elves that she refuses to listen to any other view point. If a 
book tells her that the elves generally dislike the clothing (true) she 
probably inmediately ignores it (plenty of canon about her ignoring 
inconvenient or contrary evidence to her thoughts on this issue). House 
elves probably don't write books, but even if they did, Hermione would 
discrad those that spoke about how fine it is to work for wizards and 
how horrible to be liberated as mindwashed.

So any literature she has found is probably being ignored, as she is 
ignoring everything else except her own twisted perception: that elves 
*have* to be freed because they are slaves (nevermind that they don't 
want)

> Surely, even a cursory questioning would have told her
> that the house-elves can't be freed by the students handing out
> clothes (after all, don't the house-elves pick up after the students
> in their dorm rooms every day?). 

I'm not sure asking around Hogwarts would give you information on who 
is their owner - not very many know they are there, much less how the 
system operates.

> At the very least, Harry must have told her the story of how he 
> tricked Lucius Malfoy into freeing Dobby!
> 
> What's going on?
> 
> :: Entropy ::

Cursory questioning, again, gets her answers she doesn't want to listen 
to. I think Hermione has long since crossed the line into fanatical 
defense of her own viewpoint. One charasteristic of this is refusal to 
listen to arguments against your own, so she is no longer listening. 
She understands that clothing can liberate the elves, so she uses 
clothing and hides it so the elves will be free, even if they don't 
want to. She doesn't need to be sure about wether she's a master that 
can liberate them: in her eyes, it is worth the attempt (and when Dobby 
starts collecting her hats, she grows in the certainty that the elves 
are being liberated).

Yes, I think logic does indeed tip us off to the fact that elves need 
to be handed the piece of clothing, but unfortunately, Hermione seems 
to have abandoned logic in her SPEW crusade.

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf





From sollecks970 at aol.com  Sat Sep 13 14:47:01 2003
From: sollecks970 at aol.com (fawkes970)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 14:47:01 -0000
Subject: hermoine+ the boggart
Message-ID: <bjval5+tfm5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80694

<snip>Which scene - Hermione/Boggart? In the trunk? At the end of 
PoA? Are 
you suggesting that she lies about Boggat!McGonagall? It's not 
hugely 
clear to me, but I'm going to proceed as if all these variable are 
true. 
Firstly - I don't believe that Hermione is able to laugh at herself 
to a convincing degree to be able to create this lie, which exploits 
an often sniggered-at facet of her character. Particularly not if 
she 
has just had a traumatic experience.

fawkes:
I think heremoine would definately lie about her boggart. shes lied 
before ever since the first book when she takes the balme and lies 
about what happened with the troll to all of her teachers, so that 
was first year when she was most into shcool, and after that i think 
she realizes things are more important then school and would lie 
about that and because peopel think of her as such a school oriented 
person she would concoct this(weve seen how clever she is as well) 
that her boggart is rrelaed to school




From sollecks970 at aol.com  Sat Sep 13 14:51:10 2003
From: sollecks970 at aol.com (fawkes970)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 14:51:10 -0000
Subject: new thought on students at hogawrts
Message-ID: <bjvasu+ui4k@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80695

Okay so i was reading the POA yesterday(for the thousandth time) and 
i came across a passage about the Griffindor vs. Slytherin final 
match. They were tlaking about how all the students and teachers 
were in the crowd and how 3/4 were all wearing red. but then down at 
the Slytherin post, there were said to be 100 students(and snape). 
this is just to further prove the theory about 5girl/5boy per grade. 
Just thought id let you all know
fawkes(pat)




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 13 15:12:28 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 15:12:28 -0000
Subject: The Prank -- A New Thought
In-Reply-To: <bju0jj+idhj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjvc4s+rifd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80696

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> msbeadsley wrote:
> > > James had been running around with Moony as *Prongs*, not as 
> > > James. It would have been hard for Prongs to stop Snape: no 
hands.
> 
> bohcoo wrote:
> > msbeadsley, I had not considered that James would have had to 
have 
> > pulled Snape back as a human so he would have his hands. (And, 
> > thanks for the chuckle, by the way. You have a humorous way of 
> > saying things...) 
> 
> I had to revisit this after your comment (you're welcome/thanks) 
> because I read what I had written and flashed on James-as-Prongs 
> trying to prevent Snape from encountering Moony and got this vision 
> of the stag, head lowered, doing some fancy footwork and *Snape-
> herding*.  LOL!
> 
> Sandy aka "msbeadsley"

Laura:

And don't think he wouldn't have enjoyed every minute of it!  <bg>




From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Sat Sep 13 15:33:25 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 15:33:25 -0000
Subject: new thought on students at hogawrts
In-Reply-To: <bjvasu+ui4k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjvdc5+rk3d@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80697

fawkes(pat) wrote:
> Okay so i was reading the POA yesterday(for the thousandth time) and 
> i came across a passage about the Griffindor vs. Slytherin final 
> match. They were tlaking about how all the students and teachers 
> were in the crowd and how 3/4 were all wearing red. but then down at 
> the Slytherin post, there were said to be 100 students(and snape). 
> this is just to further prove the theory about 5girl/5boy per grade. 
> Just thought id let you all know
> fawkes(pat)

Here, have a nice red flag for major canon violation. This passage you 
mention is one of the big arguments towards many-student Hogwarts. To 
quote:

"Three-quarters of the crowd were wearing scarlet rosettesm waving 
scarlet flags with the Gryffundor lion upon them or brandishing banners 
with slogans such as 'GO GRYFFINDOR!' and 'LIONS FOR THE CUP!' Behind 
the Slytherin Goalposts, however, *two hundred* people were wearing 
green; the silver serpent of Slytherin glittered on their flags [...]" 
(emphasis mine) (ch. 15, GoF, Br. Ed.).

There are 200 people in green, and they are a quarter of the total 
(assuming there are no neutrals, which there could be, pushing their 
percentage down to, for example, one fifth - see later). That makes the 
total number, without neutrals, at 800 students. Many more than the 
10*4*7 = 280 that you propose.

What is more, I find it hard to believe that *all* of the Hufflepuff 
and Ravenclaw were cheering Gryffindor (or that everyone went to the 
match). The neutrals could easily be argued to push the total number 
up. For example, if there are 1/20 neutrals, the segment of Slytherin 
would be just 4/20 of the total, or 1/5, which would make the 1000 
students JKR once said.

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf





From FilkMavenGB at hotmail.com  Sat Sep 13 17:19:24 2003
From: FilkMavenGB at hotmail.com (Gail Bohacek)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 13:19:24 -0400
Subject: (FILK) The Dementors
Message-ID: <BAY9-F7zGkq1MdZTj0L00004d64@hotmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80698

The Dementors

(A FILK by Gail Bohacek to the tune of _Till There Was You_ by the Beatles)

This song also comes from the musical, The Music Man, if you're into that 
sort of thing :)>


Midi is here: http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Studio/7779/beatle02.html


Dedicated to filk aficionado Kathy K


PoA Chapter 5

Harry:

There we were on the train
It had stopped and we were waiting
Then one of them came through the door
A Dementor

It stood there and it's hand,
Like something dead and decaying,
I saw it suddenly withdraw -
A Dementor

Then there was coldness and horrible screaming
They told me I slid off the chair to the ground and then

There was fog all around
Must have been hallucinating
As I laid there down on the floor
The Dementor

Then Remus Lupin pulled his wand out at it
They told me it turned and left without a sound and then

The lights were on again
And we all heard Lupin saying
What was that creature we just saw
A Dementor

A Dementor


-Gail B.

_________________________________________________________________
Get 10MB of e-mail storage! Sign up for Hotmail Extra Storage.  
http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es




From altered.earth at ntlworld.com  Sat Sep 13 17:31:12 2003
From: altered.earth at ntlworld.com (digger)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 18:31:12 +0100
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione's House Elf Hats: Question
In-Reply-To: <bjv7oj+ltje@eGroups.com>
References: <bjv7oj+ltje@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F635460.6010802@ntlworld.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80699


> 
> Yes, I think logic does indeed tip us off to the fact that elves need
> to be handed the piece of clothing, but unfortunately, Hermione seems
> to have abandoned logic in her SPEW crusade.
> 
> Hope that helps,
> 
> Grey Wolf

 From the dug-out, digger makes an occasional foray to write:

I see it thus: Hermione is a great example, or even an illustrative
archetype, of modern western muggle thinking. Her primary mode is
rational, logical intellectual, or left-brain dominant, divisive
thinking. She fails to understand that other folk have different moral
ideals from hers. Therefore she can imagine no greater good than being a
'free' individual, within the terms of her own moral upbringing. She has
no conception of the notion of selfless service to the greater good,
called Bhakti Yoga in the Hindu tradition, or that it can bring great
happiness and good not only to the self, but also to the world beyond
the personal, and that this is a Good Thing. I don't blame her for not
understanding this moral point of view, because this notion has all but
disapeared from western philosophy in the current 'me generation'.

I find it interesting that the wizarding world has not totally given up
the Bhakti concept yet, and that Dumbledore and the Order of the Phoenix
promotes this ideal of the greater good. One could see the current
battle between Voldemort/Pure Bloods and the Order of the Phoenix as
part of the fight to retain that selfless philosophical overview. This
world-view would naturally lead DD et al to ideas of non-exclusivity and
integration between magical and non-magical beings.

If this is starting to sound to you like a moral tale *de nous jours* 
then I agree ;-)

Meta-view: Hermione represents the intellectual self of the triad. Ron
represents the instinctive self. Harry, of course, represents the heart.

'digger'







From marika_thestral at yahoo.se  Sat Sep 13 17:47:43 2003
From: marika_thestral at yahoo.se (marika_thestral)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 17:47:43 -0000
Subject: The Hogwarts librarian
In-Reply-To: <bjunrh+87os@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjvl7v+1qjk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80700

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Grey Wolf" <greywolf1 at j...> 
wrote:
<snipped>
Why did JKR decide to picture Pince like this? I think that the 
answer to that question is: because it makes sense. It is a 
believable persona in believable situations and circunstances. 
Yes, a nice, friendly librarian might fit too, but not everyone is 
sunny-faced. The fact that there are people Harry doesn't like in the 
school adds realism to the books. If it hadn't been the librarian, 
but the nurse, we'd now have a thread of angry nurses complaining 
they are not like that. Or caretakers. 
 
I know there have been a few library dragon types in the past, before 
it became a proper profession with qualifications and training in 
working with library users. This is another reason for such a 
librarian at Hogwarts, in fact. There are no "professions" in the WW, 
since there are no Universities. 
 
Grey Wolf

Marika's comment:

Guess what, I'm a librarian, and I'm not even going to argue with you 
about this. Pince makes sense, considering the old fashioned ways at 
Hogwards in general (the importance of titles, discipline, the 
language, servants/house elves etc. - just making a statement here - 
no critisism). 

The vulture-like spinster is an old clich? not only for librarians, 
but also for nurses and elementary school teachers - for the reason 
that once these were basically the only jobs available for unmarried 
middle class women - and guess what... If a woman back then didn't 
get married there must have been something really wrong with her, 
like being ugly and/or rude. (Not my own opinion of course, just 
trying to think like the people who manifested this clich?.) 

Since I work at a medical library with a great reputation I get 
wonderful feedback everyday, so I'll never identify myself or my 
coworkers with a vulture-like person. But I did encounter a few 
librarians like her when I was a kid. I do smile reading about Pince 
while picturing the woman who told me that Nancy Drew stories and 
books written by Enid Blyton were bad for me. 

Marika, who enjoys her job a lot





From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com  Sat Sep 13 18:15:29 2003
From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 18:15:29 -0000
Subject: You Should Have Known Better (filk)
Message-ID: <bjvms1+d5nk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80701

You Should Have Known Better (OOP, Chap. 2)

To the tune of I Should Have Known Better by the Beatles

Dedicated, for reasons I trust are obvious, to Gail

Hear a MIDI at:

http://www.geocities.com/Yosemite/2729/index2.html

THE SCENE: Four Privet Drive. HARRY reads a draconian decree from 
Hopkirk, Malfalda of the Improper Use of Magic Office

HARRY (reading the letter)
"You should have known better
Than to cast a spell.
In a place where all the 
Muggles dwell
You rebelled
Hey, hey, hey,
You're expelled!

"Whoa, oh, you shoulda realized
There's a penalty
When you infringe Section One-Three.
Wand will be made debris "

And now this tells me they are coming, oh
They wanna break my wand in two, oh
There is no way I'm gonna wait
This lad the coup is gonna flew.

(As HARRY prepares to leave, a second owl flies in with a missive 
from Arthur Weasley)

HARRY (reading the letter)
"So, oh, you should stay localized
Behind the Dursely's door.
Retain your wand
Rely on Dumbledore
Stay indoors,
Hey, hey, hey,
Spell no more."

(HARRY decides to remain, but is angered that he is not being kept 
better informed)

Whoa, oh, does no one realize
What a Kiss can do?
Dudley's soul they would've chomped through.
Yes, it's true! They've no clue!  

And now Art tells me that I oughta, oh
Calm down, let Dumble works things through . oh
OK, for now I'll toe the line,
Bu that guy better write me too

You write me too
. 
You write me too
.

(HARRY of course, waits in vain for Dumbledore's response)

   - CMC

HARRY POTTER FILKS 
http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm







From sollecks970 at aol.com  Sat Sep 13 18:32:47 2003
From: sollecks970 at aol.com (fawkes970)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 18:32:47 -0000
Subject: new thought on students at hogawrts
In-Reply-To: <bjvdc5+rk3d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjvnsf+kaka@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80702

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Grey Wolf" <greywolf1 at j...> 
wrote:
> fawkes(pat) wrote:
> > Okay so i was reading the POA yesterday(for the thousandth time) 
and 
> > i came across a passage about the Griffindor vs. Slytherin final 
> > match. They were tlaking about how all the students and teachers 
> > were in the crowd and how 3/4 were all wearing red. but then 
down at 
> > the Slytherin post, there were said to be 100 students(and 
snape). 
> > this is just to further prove the theory about 5girl/5boy per 
grade. 
> > Just thought id let you all know
> > fawkes(pat)
> 
> Here, have a nice red flag for major canon violation. This passage 
you 
> mention is one of the big arguments towards many-student Hogwarts. 
To 
> quote:
> 
> "Three-quarters of the crowd were wearing scarlet rosettesm waving 
> scarlet flags with the Gryffundor lion upon them or brandishing 
banners 
> with slogans such as 'GO GRYFFINDOR!' and 'LIONS FOR THE CUP!' 
Behind 
> the Slytherin Goalposts, however, *two hundred* people were 
wearing 
> green; the silver serpent of Slytherin glittered on their flags 
[...]" 
> (emphasis mine) (ch. 15, GoF, Br. Ed.).
> 
> There are 200 people in green, and they are a quarter of the total 
> (assuming there are no neutrals, which there could be, pushing 
their 
> percentage down to, for example, one fifth - see later). That 
makes the 
> total number, without neutrals, at 800 students. Many more than 
the 
> 10*4*7 = 280 that you propose.
> 
> What is more, I find it hard to believe that *all* of the 
Hufflepuff 
> and Ravenclaw were cheering Gryffindor (or that everyone went to 
the 
> match). The neutrals could easily be argued to push the total 
number 
> up. For example, if there are 1/20 neutrals, the segment of 
Slytherin 
> would be just 4/20 of the total, or 1/5, which would make the 1000 
> students JKR once said.
> 
> Hope that helps,
> 
> Grey Wolf

fawkes:
1) i didnt use canon, so hears ur red flag back. 
2) i was simply proposing the idea that there is something out there 
showing the 10per year/house might not be correct. 
3) i dont agree with that theory of 5boys and 5 girls, so u were 
wrong in accusing me of contradicting myself by saying that(because 
i did not).
4) i didnt say there were 800: i said on an earlier post before i 
think it matters about how many magical children were born in each 
year. 
~as always, fawkes(pat)




From clio44a at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 13 18:41:54 2003
From: clio44a at yahoo.com (clio44a)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 18:41:54 -0000
Subject: Regulus Black, traitor to the Dark Lord (longish)
Message-ID: <bjvodi+bpct@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80703

Being currently on my second read of OotP I stumbled over something 
or rather someone I'm pondering for 2 days now. 

Regulus Black.

Sirius younger brother is introduced on page 104, Ch.6, OotP, British 
edition (the scene in front of the Black family tree). The part is a 
bit long for citing it here, but I will do my best to summarize it.

We learn that Sirius had a younger brother whom his parents preferred 
over Sirius. They supported him joining Lord Voldemort's circle. When 
Regulus was a Death Eater something happened which made him change 
his mind and led to his death. According to the tapestry in 12, 
Grimmauld Place, Regulus died about 15 years prior to the events in 
OotP.
 
Quoting Sirius: "No, he was murdered by Voldemort. Or on Voldemort's 
orders, more likely; I doubt Regulus was ever improtant enough to be 
killed by Voldemort in person. From what I found out after he died, 
he got in so far, than panicked about what he was being asked to do 
and tried to back out. Well, you don't just hand in your resignation 
to Voldemort. It's a lifetime of service or death."  



A few more facts, non-canonical, which can be looked up at any 
astronomy page on the web: 

Regulus is the Latin diminuitiv (sp?) of rex. So regulus means 
literally "little king".

Regulus, like Sirius, seems to be named after a star. The star 
Regulus is the alpha-Leonis, which means in astronomers' speak it is 
the brightest star in the constellation of Leo, the lion. Regulus is 
located at the chest of the lion and is therefore also called "The 
Heart of the Lion."


So far the facts. Now my ramblings.


Regulus being the "little king" is consistent with canon, where 
Sirius says about his parents they were (p 104):" ... convinced to be 
a Black made you practically royal ..." and that they  thought 
Regulus "... a much better son." 

What does that prove? Nothing besides JKR puts a lot of though into 
names. Nothing new here.


What I think is curious is that Regulus Black is tied to Leo. After 
all the lion is the Gryffindor mascot. Even better, Regulus is 
the "Heart of the Lion", the very symbol of bravery. Is this 
symbolism a coincedence? I think not. I think it is a big hint if 
there ever was one.


JKR links the Black family (except Sirius) tightly to pureblood-
racism and the Dark Arts. Snakes turn up as ornaments in the house. 
Together with Regulus becoming a Death Eater, we must assume he was a 
Slytherin. (Side note: Why was Sirius only blasted from the tapestry 
when he left home, not when he was sorted into Gryffindor?) So we 
have a Slytherin Death Eater, who is brave as a Gryffindor? Who in 
his heart is a lion? 


Curiously Sirius says about Regulus " ... he was soft enough to 
believe them ..." (the Black superiority stuff). This further 
supports the idea that Regulus in his heart never was a real Bad 
Wizard.
And in consequence he betrayed Lord Voldemort. An enormus feat which 
Sirius, who speaks very bitterly of his brother, doesn't acknowledge. 
We only know one other wizard who did so when Voldemort was in full 
power. Snape.


We are told by Dumbledore in GoF that Snape "rejoined our side before 
Lord Voldemort's downfall and turned spy for us, at great personal 
risk."(GoF, Ch.30) Snape's return from the Dark is usually placed a 
couple of months before Voldemort's "death" by the members of this 
list. Let's just stick to this. 

Regulus died ca. 15 years before Harry turns 15. It is save to assume 
that both Regulus and Snape turned away from their master roughly the 
same time. If they betrayed Lord Thingy on the same day or shortly 
after each other is irrelevant for the questions risen by this.


1. What happened before Voldemort attacked the Potters that not only 
one but two of his young and presumedly eager Death Eaters had a 
change of heart?  

We don't know, but whatever it was seems to have affected both of 
them. This is a strong point against the popular theory that Snape 
changed sides because of Lily. And it kind of proves Hagrid wrong, 
who said in PoA (Ch.10) " when a wizard goes over ter the Dark Side, 
there's nothin' and no one that matters to em anymore...."  



2. Did they know each other?

If Regulus was in Slytherin he must have known Snape, who was a few 
years older. Especially if Snape was his brother's sworn enemy. We 
don't know if they were in contact after Snape left school. We don't 
know if the Death Eaters know who else is in their little club. 

Possibility a: Snape and Regulus Black independantly decided to leave 
Lord Voldemort. 
If that is so it sheds a really bad light on Voldemorts leadership 
qualities. Are there even more traitors to his cause? And if even the 
Death Eaters begin to turn away from him, why did Peter Pettigrew go 
into the other direction?  

Possibility b: Snape and Regulus were partners in crime and decided 
together to leave the Dark Lord.  
In this case I expect to hear a lot more about Regulus Black in the 
next book. 



3. Why did Snape survive and Regulus did not?

Sirius says to be a Death Eater means "a lifetime of service or 
death." Yet Snape managed the unthinkable and became not only a 
traitor, but a spy. Is this really because of his Occlumency and 
acting skills, or did he maybe sell out Regulus to Voldemort in order 
to save his own skin when Voldemort suspected a traitor among his 
followers? Was Snape maybe even instrumental in Regulus death? Did 
Regulus really disobey his master, or did Snape only use him as a 
scapegoat to cover up his own betrayel?  


4. Who told Sirius about his brother's death? 

In my opinion he learned about it either from Dumbledore (who knew it 
from Snape) or from other prisoners in Azkaban. A lot of talking 
going on there for a high security prison, if you ask me. Who knows 
if all Sirius' facts are correct?




Glad this is off my mind. What do you think? Am I over-interpretating 
a character, who didn't even make an appearence?

I don't mean to steal anyone's ideas, but as far as I could research 
this was not discussed yet.


Clio, 
who really thought she would be clean of her addiction once she put 
away OotP. (Silly!)






From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 13 19:05:12 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 19:05:12 -0000
Subject: Rowling/writer's block (WAS: Are we having fun?)
In-Reply-To: <bjtum2+funn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjvpp8+m83g@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80704

Wanda Sherratt:
> Well, to be quite honest, I don't believe Rowling when she says she 
> didn't have writer's block for OotP.  I think she's lying - and if 
> people can argue convincingly that Dumbledore is a liar, I think 
> I'm entitled to say the same about Rowling!

Entitled?  Okay.  Likely to persuade anyone else?  That's different.  
(Likely to be pilloried here?  Another question entirely.) And I have 
not seen anyone argue convincingly that Dumbledore is a liar; anyway, 
*I* am not convinced. ;-)

Wanda:
> It's not as if she has no reason to lie about such a thing.  One  
> of her most noticeable characteristics is that she is quite a 
> control freak - of course she's going to pretend that everything is 
> fine and under control, and that despite the bizarre book she just 
> turned out, "Everything is for the best in the best of all possible 
> worlds."

Please go and (if you haven't) read the entire interview which can be 
found at:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/uk/newsid_3004000/3004878.stm
It did convince me that writer's block wasn't her problem. (BTW, what 
had happened was that I'd only read the earlier part of this 
interview, then tried to go back and found the Albert Hall one 
instead.)

> Sure, she'll admit to having had writer's block when writing CoS - 
> now, years later, when the book is obviously a success and her 
> admission doesn't mean anything.  But I knew she was having 
> writer's block more than a year ago, when the deadline for 
> publication kept being extended season by season.  And I'll say 
> more: OotP has "nervous breakdown" written all over it.  I think 
> she was in the impossible situation of *having* to produce a book 
> and feeling unable to do so, and this tortured hulk is the result 
> of all that strain.  Maybe she's over it, and maybe she's not.  
> I'll know when the next book comes out - or if it DOESN'T come out, 
> just like OotP for several years.

After reading the interview in its entirety, I am now thinking that 
what is easily perceived as OoP having "nervous breakdown written all 
over it" or writer's block is actually the opposite: JKR under 
pressure holds the reins of the narrative tighter. Given as much 
leeway as she allowed herself with OoP (as stated by the interview in 
that she flatly refused to strive for any deadline), she wandered 
into depths and tangled up traces she hadn't had *time* to do in the 
earlier books. Something certainly happened, and, IMO, it wasn't 
something good. I don't necessarily dislike the intense darkness in 
OoP.  But combined with its departure from the "one book, one 
mystery, (some) satisfaction guaranteed" formula, the IMO obvious 
deliberation with which JKR went about setting up for the final two 
books (a flaw in the overall series that so much of it was necessary 
in any one book, again IMO), and poor *Harry's* near nervous 
breakdown and torture and lack of hope, it's my least favorite of the 
books so far.  I shall approach the next with resolve and a certain 
caution I lacked with OoP.

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley" muttering "'nuff said already," leaning back 
with head on soap box to admire the Dog Star twinkling in the night 
sky and letting her mind go mercifully blank




From MadameSSnape at aol.com  Sat Sep 13 19:22:34 2003
From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 15:22:34 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Mistaken identity thread - confusion
Message-ID: <142.18e0a0c5.2c94c87a@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80705

In a message dated 9/13/2003 4:29:25 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au writes:
Problem: 
- Snape showed no emotion when Ginny was taken by the Basalisk
But he did, IIRC - both in book & TMTMNBN.  I don't have the book handy, but 
that's one of the things that stood out in my memory - Snape's reaction, 
because it surprised me so...  No, he doesn't rant, rave, or froth at the mouth 
demanding her immediate rescue - it's much more subtle than that.

Help?

Sherrie
(who's getting VERY impatient to get her OWN machine back...)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From jdr0918 at hotmail.com  Sat Sep 13 20:03:54 2003
From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 20:03:54 -0000
Subject: Regulus Black, traitor to the Dark Lord (longish)
In-Reply-To: <bjvodi+bpct@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjvt7a+stp3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80706

<<<"clio44a" wrote:...It is save to assume that both Regulus and 
Snape turned away from their master roughly the same time...If 
Regulus was in Slytherin he must have known Snape...Possibility b: 
Snape and Regulus were partners in crime and decided together to 
leave the Dark Lord. In this case I expect to hear a lot more about 
Regulus Black in the next book...Am I over-interpretating a 
character, who didn't even make an appearence?...>>>

The Sergeant Majorette says

Of all the overinterpreting that goes on around here, yours makes the 
most sense. After all, Sirius himself was mentioned ever-so-briefly 
in the first book, and doesn't make his appearance until the third. 
Also, how big a surprise was it to find out that "Mrs. Lestrange" is 
actually a Black? And that Arthur Weasley and Draco Malfoy are Black 
cousins? Fool-for-love!Snape doesn't do it for me; the fact that so 
many of my favorite characters are turning out to be Black relatives 
on the other hand, tickles me no end. Todo pa' la familia, as they 
say, which makes for drama which is as dark as it wants to be, yet 
totally G-rated.

--JDR






From sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 13 20:21:58 2003
From: sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com (sarcasticmuppet)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 20:21:58 -0000
Subject: Deaths at Hogwarts? (Was: Dumbledore's Trust of Snape)
In-Reply-To: <bjv5ls+8j0l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjvu96+kfhu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80707

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Donna" <deemarie1a at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Inge" <Elvishooked at h...> 
wrote:
> > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "feetmadeofclay" 
> > <feetmadeofclay at y...> wrote:
> > 
> > It is possible that noone can die while on Hogwart's grounds. I 
> > don't think anyone ever has that we've seen.
> > 
> > Inge:
> > What about Mourning Myrtle? She died on Hogwart's grounds, didn't 
> > she? Can't remember anyone else though.
> 
> D says -
> 
> Professor Binns!


Someone also said Barty Crouch Sr.  Don't remember who, sorry!  Also 
don't forget the numerous triwizard champions that died in their 
tasks before it was banned about a century previous (statistically, 
only about a third could have been at Hogwarts <as opposed to 
Durmstrang/Beauxbatons>, but still, some had to have).

--sarcasticmuppet--




From sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 13 20:31:22 2003
From: sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com (sarcasticmuppet)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 20:31:22 -0000
Subject: hermoine+ the boggart
In-Reply-To: <bjval5+tfm5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjvuqq+u1r6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80708

<snipage>
> fawkes:
> I think heremoine would definately lie about her boggart. shes lied 
> before ever since the first book when she takes the balme and lies 
> about what happened with the troll to all of her teachers, so that 
> was first year when she was most into shcool, and after that i 
think 
> she realizes things are more important then school and would lie 
> about that and because peopel think of her as such a school 
oriented 
> person she would concoct this(weve seen how clever she is as well) 
> that her boggart is rrelaed to school

I've always wondered why Hermione decided to lie to Mcgonogal.  She 
could have just said "I was in the bathroom and missed the 
announcement about the troll.  Harry and Ron noticed I was gone and 
went to look for me.  Fighting ensued."  It was honest, with the 
possible exception of excluding the fact that Harry and Ron ran her 
into the bathroom crying in the first place.
--sarcasticmuppet--




From sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 13 20:46:31 2003
From: sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com (sarcasticmuppet)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 20:46:31 -0000
Subject: Rowling/writer's block (WAS: Are we having fun?)
In-Reply-To: <bjvpp8+m83g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjvvn7+qq33@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80709

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> Wanda Sherratt:
> > Well, to be quite honest, I don't believe Rowling when she says 
she 
> > didn't have writer's block for OotP.  I think she's lying - and 
if 
> > people can argue convincingly that Dumbledore is a liar, I think 
> > I'm entitled to say the same about Rowling!
> 

I'm sorry, but until you write a nine-hundred page book within a 
three year period, IMHO, you aren't entitled.




From sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 13 22:03:22 2003
From: sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com (sarcasticmuppet)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 22:03:22 -0000
Subject: Rowling/writer's block (WAS: Are we having fun?)
In-Reply-To: <bjvvn7+qq33@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk047a+u4id@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80710

I apologize, I wasn't being too tactfull.  My point is that you can 
call Jo a liar all you want, it doesn't really matter.  Whether she 
had Writer's block or not, she still managed to write a 890 page book 
within about two and a half years (take away editing/publishing 
time).  That's pretty fast in my opinion.  Not to mention putting her 
stamp of approval on two movies, getting married, and having a baby 
also within that two and a half years.  I know I'd never be able to 
do anything like that.

--sarcasticmuppet--




From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Sat Sep 13 22:43:29 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 22:43:29 -0000
Subject: hermoine+ the boggart
In-Reply-To: <bjvuqq+u1r6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk06ih+vp58@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80711

sarcasticmuppet wrote:
> I've always wondered why Hermione decided to lie to Mcgonogal.  She 
> could have just said "I was in the bathroom and missed the 
> announcement about the troll.  Harry and Ron noticed I was gone and 
> went to look for me.  Fighting ensued."  It was honest, with the 
> possible exception of excluding the fact that Harry and Ron ran her 
> into the bathroom crying in the first place.
> --sarcasticmuppet--

I did a post on this subject quite some time ago (unfortunately, I 
don't keep the number, so I'm afraid chances of finding it in yahoomort 
are close to nill - sorry).

What it came down is: Hermione *knows* the boys are breaking rules. She 
owes them for saving her life, and thus decides to keep them out of 
trouble. The best way to do this is by shifting all possible blame onto 
her, so if things are so bad that someone is expelled, it is she the 
one fingered and thus can repay them for saving her life. She doesn't 
know how much trouble they are in, so just in case plays a strong hand 
with a stronger bluff to get them out of trouble.

This is coupled with the fact that Hermione doesn't know *why* those 
two found her in the first place. After all, to Hermione, they are just 
two boys that hate her and insult her and don't want anything to do 
with her ("It's no wonder no one can stand her. [...] She's a 
nightmare, honestly", ch. 10, PS, Br. Ed.). Hermione knows full well 
she isn't liked - so why would these two (in her eyes) annoying brats 
be in the bathroom? 

It cannot be to save her - they are idiots who don't care for her 
(again, in her eyes). So they have to be there in a stupid attempt to 
play "catch the troll". And if this is the case, and they foolishly let 
it be known, they could be in *major* trouble. Quick solution? Say it 
was her idea, thus getting the blame herself.

This theory does hinge on Hermione thinking the worst about Ron and 
Harry, which I think is very possible at that point in the books, and 
Hermione being pressed into answering and thus not able to come up with 
a more satisfactory solution, thus blurting out whatever is in her mind 
that would be enough to shift blame on to her.

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf 





From Malady579 at hotmail.com  Sat Sep 13 22:44:36 2003
From: Malady579 at hotmail.com (Melody)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 22:44:36 -0000
Subject: new thought on students at hogawrts
In-Reply-To: <bjvnsf+kaka@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk06kk+9jv4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80712

Fawkes(Pat) wrote:
>>Okay so i was reading the POA yesterday(for the thousandth time) and
>>i came across a passage about the Griffindor vs. Slytherin final
>>match. They were tlaking about how all the students and teachers
>>were in the crowd and how 3/4 were all wearing red. but then down at
>>the Slytherin post, there were said to be 100 students(and snape).
>>this is just to further prove the theory about 5girl/5boy per grade.
>>Just thought id let you all know


Grey Wolf quoted the passage:
>"Three-quarters of the crowd were wearing scarlet rosettesm waving 
>scarlet flags with the Gryffundor lion upon them or brandishing 
>banners with slogans such as 'GO GRYFFINDOR!' and 'LIONS FOR THE
>CUP!'  Behind the Slytherin Goalposts, however, *two hundred* people
>were wearing green; the silver serpent of Slytherin glittered on
>their flags [...]" 
>(emphasis mine) (ch. 15, GoF, Br. Ed.).


Fawkes(Pat) then wrote:
> 1) i didnt use canon, so hears ur red flag back. 

Actually Fawkes, you did.  You referred to a passage in PoA that
stated that there are 100 Slytherin fans wearing green.  You did use
canon.  Grey Wolf just provided the actual quote you referred too, so
he can point out that you quoted it wrong.  We all do it from time to
time.  We cannot memorize the whole book...though we try.  ::grin::


> 2) i was simply proposing the idea that there is something out there 
> showing the 10per year/house might not be correct. 

Yes, and Grey Wolf was pointing out that the basis for your idea was
not based on accurate canon.  That is all.


> 3) i dont agree with that theory of 5boys and 5 girls, so u were 
> wrong in accusing me of contradicting myself by saying that(because 
> i did not).

>From what I read of what you wrote above, you did say you support the
5boys/5girls theory.  Or rather, I assume you do since you found canon
for them that agrees with them and supports them.  


> 4) i didnt say there were 800: i said on an earlier post before i 
> think it matters about how many magical children were born in each 
> year. 

Grey Wolf was just expanding why he does not believe the quote you
referred to did not support the theory you seemed to be agreeing with.
 He then listed why that quote is not necessarily as open and shut as
it seems.  All the things he listed are a possibility when considering
how many students are at Hogwarts.  He was just trying to point out
another point of view.   


Melody




From dwoodward at towson.edu  Sat Sep 13 23:11:15 2003
From: dwoodward at towson.edu (Deirdre F Woodward)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 19:11:15 -0400
Subject: new thoughts on students at hogwarts/red flag/canon
References: <1063493092.10032.4008.m10@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <001601c37a4c$56393a00$79092244@parkvl01.md.comcast.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 80713

fawkes(pat) wrote:

>Okay so i was reading the POA yesterday(for >the thousandth time) and
>i came across a passage . . . there were said to >be 100 students(and
snape).
>this is just to further prove the theory about >5girl/5boy per grade.

Grey Wolf then wrote:
>Here, have a nice red flag for major canon >violation . . .  To
>quote: . . . "Behind
>the Slytherin Goalposts, however, *two >hundred* people were wearing green"
(GOF)

fawkes(pat) responded:
>1) i didnt use canon, so hears ur red flag back.

To all of which, I, Deirdre, respond:

Fawkes(pat):  canon is when you quote directly from the books, which is what
you did in your first post.  If you didn't quote directly from the book in
your first post, and were in fact just making things up, that's a different
story.

Grey:  Fawkes(pat) was quoting PoA, while you quoted GoF.  Apples and
oranges.

If in year three there's 100 people at one match cheering for Slytherin;
then, at a seperate match in year four there's 200 people at a match
cheering for Slytherin, even I, a total math failure, can deduce that the
number of students attending any match fluctuates, thus making it impossible
to deduce the number of students attending Hogwarts.

Deirdre




From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Sat Sep 13 23:55:47 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 23:55:47 -0000
Subject: new thoughts on students at hogwarts/red flag/canon
In-Reply-To: <001601c37a4c$56393a00$79092244@parkvl01.md.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <bk0aq3+mqch@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80714

Deirdre responded:
> Grey:  Fawkes(pat) was quoting PoA, while you quoted GoF.  Apples and
> oranges.

My wrong - I put down the wrong book after the quote. I could not be 
quoting a quidditch match in GoF because there aren't any. The quote 
about 3/4 and so on is from book 3, Prisoner of Azkaban, exactly from 
the same place Fawkes was supposedly quoting (the Gryffindor-Slytherin 
match at the end of the year).
 
fawkes wrote:
> 1) i didnt use canon, so hears ur red flag back.

You said: "i was reading the POA yesterday (...) and i came across a 
passage about the Griffindor vs. Slytherin final match. They were 
tlaking about how all the students and teachers were in the crowd and 
how 3/4 were all wearing red. but then down at the Slytherin post, 
there were said to be 100 students"

This is using canon - quoting from one of the books or interviews, 
stating this as canonical fact (something that is true in the books). I 
handed you a red flag because you quoted it wrong - the number is not 
100 but 200, changing the argument around completely and thus being a 
major canon violation since you try to build your post on wrong 
grounds.
 
> 2) i was simply proposing the idea that there is something out there 
> showing the 10per year/house might not be correct.

You said: "this is just to further prove the theory about 5girl/5boy 
per grade."

To me, this means that you're presenting canon that supports the 10 
pupils per year. I asumed you also meant per house, although that was 
not clarified.

> 3) i dont agree with that theory of 5boys and 5 girls, so u were 
> wrong in accusing me of contradicting myself by saying that(because 
> i did not).

I could not tell from your post what you believed in. You stated that, 
from the figures in that passage, you found evidence in favour of 
"small Hogwarts" as it is known (or the 10*4*7 number of students). I 
did not accuse you of contradicting yourself, nor did I touch any of 
your opinions. Just corrected your quote, which was wrong, and 
continued to expand the theory slightly.

> 4) i didnt say there were 800: i said on an earlier post before i 
> think it matters about how many magical children were born in each 
> year. 
> ~as always, fawkes(pat)

I have not read that previous post, and it is irrelevant to this 
thread. I agree you did not mention the 800 students - I did, because 
that is what I concluded from the canon you brought up - a minimum 
number of 800 students, with ample possibility for more by playing with 
slack numbers of neutral fans.

See, I believe that there are 1000 students at "big" Hogwarts. I defend 
the multiple campus theory presented first by Catlady, which states 
that Hogwart students are devided into four or more campus to keep the 
numbers small and their magical training hiden from muggle eyes, but 
that Hogwarts Castle in the main campus and in special occasions the 
students from other campuses go to it (Quidditch games, balls, etc.). 
It is a shaky theory at best, but does manage to explain where the 
missing students go.

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf





From lziner at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 14 00:32:33 2003
From: lziner at yahoo.com (lziner)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 00:32:33 -0000
Subject: Regulus/Sirius at school
Message-ID: <bk0cv1+t51q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80715

After reading post #807803 about Regulus Black, it mentioned that 
Sirius and Regulus may have been at Hogwarts together.  I can only 
wonder how they "got on " at school.  If Sirius was the height of 
cool (along with James), where was little bro Regulus in the pecking 
order?  OR is it possible he went to another school - Drumstrang - 
perhaps?

Just wondering if anyone had any thoughts on this.
Lziner





From lziner at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 14 00:38:19 2003
From: lziner at yahoo.com (lziner)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 00:38:19 -0000
Subject: Dudley Wearing Leather?
In-Reply-To: <bjv57q+msch@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk0d9r+p00a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80716

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Donna" <deemarie1a at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" 
> <gbannister10 at a...> wrote:
> > Geoff:
> > The east side of the UK has a reputation for being chilly and 
> windy. 
> > I live in Porlock in West Somerset in the Exmoor National Park on 
> the 
> > south side of the Bristol Channel. All through August and up to 
> now, 
> > we have had good weather; temperatures in early August were 
> > exceptionally high into the high 20s and early 30s in the first 
> part 
> > of the month. Now, we are still pretty warm during the day but it 
> > gets very cool first thing in the morning and during the evening.
> > 
> > Yesterday for example I was out walking on the moors with my 
family 
> > and I was in shorts without a top for most of the day - 
temperature 
> > about 23. By the evening, I'm into a jumper. If Hogwarts is in 
> > Scotland, they'd certainly have cold nights though.
> 
> D says -
> 
> Whoa!  We are definately in danger of being OT here!  I understand 
> that this year, Europe has been experiencing the worst heat wave in 
> quite a few years.  Sounded pretty much like our normal southwest 
> weather here in the US.
> 
> My point was, that being an American, I just don't get the idea of 
> sweaters and coats in August, whether it is daytime or evening.  It 
> is my fondest desire to visit the UK one day, to experience 
> everything your lovely country has to offer.
> 
> Now to get back on topic, Dudley is being very "Marlon Brando".  
It's 
> COOL to wear a leather jacket.  It is also very sterotypical.  The 
> tough bad dude wears leather.  It is also another way to contrast 
the 
> treatment of Harry and Dudley.  Harry gets the old hand-me-downs 
> while Dudley gets the top of the line stuff.  Leather jackets are 
> very expensive.  And I just don't see Harry getting that when 
Dudley 
> grows larger.
> 
> D


 OT but your last sentence made me smile and I thought that perhaps 
Harry can get some leather when he picks up Sirius' flying motorcycle 
(bg) - too cool! 
lz




From rusalka at ix.netcom.com  Sun Sep 14 01:20:39 2003
From: rusalka at ix.netcom.com (marinafrants)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 01:20:39 -0000
Subject: Regulus Black, traitor to the Dark Lord (longish)
In-Reply-To: <bjvodi+bpct@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk0fp7+55kn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80717

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "clio44a" <clio44a at y...> wrote:
> Possibility a: Snape and Regulus Black independantly decided to 
leave 
> Lord Voldemort. 
> If that is so it sheds a really bad light on Voldemorts leadership 
> qualities. Are there even more traitors to his cause? And if even 
the 
> Death Eaters begin to turn away from him, why did Peter Pettigrew 
go 
> into the other direction?  
> 
> Possibility b: Snape and Regulus were partners in crime and 
decided 
> together to leave the Dark Lord.  
> In this case I expect to hear a lot more about Regulus Black in 
the 
> next book. 

There's another possibility: Snape and Regulus were good friends 
(united in their hatred of Sirius, perhaps? <G>), and Regulus' 
murder inspired Snape to finally act on the scruples he was already 
having and make the break with Voldemort.  And having witnessed what 
happens to people who try to quit openly, Snape avoided that mistake 
and turned spy instead.

Either way, I also expect to hear more about Regulus.  There seems 
to be no reason to give Sirius a previously-unmentioned brother in 
OOP unless his existence is going to lead to some sort of important 
revelation in the later books.  And the person we're most likely to 
have important revelations about is Snape.  And maybe Wormtail.

Hmm... here's a thought: maybe Regulus found out when Wormtail 
changed sides, and turned on Voldemort because he thought *Sirius* 
was in danger?  Sirius may not think much of his little brother, but 
I bet he didn't want him murdered, and it's perfectly possible that 
Regulus didn't want Sirius murdered either, arrogant berk or not.

If that's the case, I wonder if the Black brothers could end up 
coming to some sort of reconciliation on the other side of the veil.

Marina
rusalka at ix.netcom.com





From profwildflower at mindspring.com  Sun Sep 14 02:01:22 2003
From: profwildflower at mindspring.com (whimsyflower)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 02:01:22 -0000
Subject: Clues in COS
Message-ID: <bk0i5i+7mm3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80718

       Tonight I read through the many, excellently thought-provoking posts
(eg: 79877, 79891, 79901. 79908. 79909, 79947, 79966, 80081, 80269, and 
80320, to highlight only a few) that considered the question of what big
clue(s) did JKR write into COS that "almost gave it away."   


        I read them with the prophecy echoing in the back of my brain.",,,and
either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the
other survives"  


       So here I am, in the COS, watching Riddle's outline become more firm
and clear as the life drained out of Ginny.  In this instance, one of them 
couldn't  live "fully" while the other survived.  Riddle said he could leave
the diary  because Ginny put so much of herself into the diary.  " I grew
stronger and stronger on a diet of her deepest fears, her darkest secrets.  I 
grew powerful"  (COS, Am ed, p 310)  By using the parts of Ginny she put into 
the diary, Riddle became strong enough to leave the diary.   After Harry 
plunged the basilisk fang into the diary and Riddle's memory died, Ginny 
came back to life.   Evidently the souls of witches and wizards can travel 
around a bit. 

      For a while now LV has been putting parts of himself into Harry,
first with the AK curse when Harry was one-year old (Parseltongue and what 
else?) and more recently with the thoughts or images he planted in Harry's 
brain in OOTP.   Maybe LV will put more into Harry in Books 6 & 7.  He's also
taken parts of Harry into himself, most noteably Harry's blood in LV's
rebirthing scene in GOF.  What if when LV goes to kill Harry in Book 7, what
dies is all the parts of LV in Harry?  

It probably won't be that simple, but I'd love to hear others'
thoughts.

Whimsy




From Barbara_Bowen at hotmail.com  Sun Sep 14 02:04:08 2003
From: Barbara_Bowen at hotmail.com (barbara_mbowen)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 02:04:08 -0000
Subject: Regulus Black, traitor to the Dark Lord (longish)
Message-ID: <bk0iao+p3uk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80719

 Marina wrote:  

<I wonder if the Black brothers could end up 
coming to some sort of reconciliation on the other side of the 
veil>

Assuming that Regulus is dead....I know it was done already, 
with Peter Petrigrew/Scabbers, but I still wonder if Reg is *really* 
dead.   Or why bring him up at all?   I agree that we will find out 
more in 6&7 about Sirius' little brother, the reformed DE.  But I 
would not be surprised to find that he is not dead at all.  After all, 
there was a whole lot of confusion fifteen years ago....   I still 
really like the idea that he's Stubby Boardman on the run from 
the whole WW.

Marmelades Mom




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 14 02:13:27 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 02:13:27 -0000
Subject: ESSAY: Little Things (aka House Elves) (May) Mean a Lot
Message-ID: <bk0is7+taf9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80721

Early in GoF, as Harry and the Weasleys are finding their seats in 
the stands at the QWC, Harry sees a house elf whose face is hidden 
and addresses it, "Dobby?"

The house elf looks up, revealing that it is not Dobby, but 
responds, "Did sir just call me Dobby?" Then this house elf, who has 
introduced herself as "Winky," goes on to say, "But I knows Dobby 
too, sir!" and, a little later, "But Dobby talks of you all the time, 
sir!"

"...all the time"...excuse me, but all *what* time?  Winky is a house 
elf attached to the household of Barty Crouch, Sr., an important 
Ministry official.  We find out at the end of this volume that she 
has been spending a lot of her time holding the other end of Barty 
Crouch, Jr.'s leash, a task given her by the senior BC.  BC Sr. has 
his (at minimum) nine-to-five Ministry gig going on, and it's just 
Junior and Winky alone in the house during the day. At this point 
Dobby has been free over a year but is not yet attached (is he?) to 
Hogwarts/Dumbledore; is Dobby dropping by the Crouch home daily for 
tea, or what? (If so, where was BC Jr. at these times?) Are house 
elves, like domestics around the world and throughout history, part 
of a network of gossip and information whose myriad connections are 
right under the obliviously up-tilted noses of the wealthy throughout 
the WW? Did Dobby and Winky originally encounter each other at 
earlier functions both Crouch and the Malfoys attended?  Or did that 
hobo of a Dobby just "make the rounds" of the other households with 
house elves, looking for paid work, and strike up an acquaintance 
with Winky?

Winky had a definite opinion about Dobby's new, unenslaved attitude, 
which strongly implies she knew him back when he was a Malfoy flunky. 
(Doesn't it?  And did she really like him better when he was getting 
kicked around the Malfoys' parlor?) And, you know, it really wasn't 
necessary to anything in GoF for Winky to have known Dobby prior to 
her release.  The whole QWC plotline would have worked just as well 
without; maybe better, if the contrast between Dobby and Winky had 
just been obvious and not underlined by her conversation about how 
inappropriate Dobby's behavior had become.  And Dobby could still 
very well have become Winky's protector in GoF (a fellow freebie, a 
newbie freebie to boot, after all) after she came to Hogwarts; 
everything else could have played out just the same, even Winky's 
opinion of that high falutin', out-of-control freed bad boy of a 
House Elf, Dobby.

House elves have been pushing great plot arcs along since Cos, 
haven't they?  When Dobby broke the rules to save Harry, incidently 
getting him warned by the Ministry, locked in his room, nearly killed 
playing Quidditch, and clued in about the Chamber's last opening (to 
SRO crowds and rave reviews)?  PoA is an elf-free zone (as opposed to 
a free-elf zone, Hermione's ambition), but then in GoF there is 
Winky, whose goof allows BC, Jr. to go off and set up the action for 
the whole rest of the book; not to mention Dobby's last-minute save 
of Harry's chances in the second event in the TWT.

Are house elves like the WW's equivalent to Illuminati, or what?  
Have they all covertly been on Albus Dumbledore's payroll from the 
beginning?

In OoP, Kreacher is vital to events leading to the final, climactic 
scene: the battle at the Ministry, where Sirius Black dies and leaves 
Harry (and some of the rest of us) completely devastated [not to 
mention the "he was slipping Sirius bad herbs" theory].  Also in OoP, 
Dobby enables the DA.  In GoF Hermione even starts a *civil rights 
organization* around freeing all House Elves.  (How *can* we all have 
been so blind?  It's *all about* the House Elves--who, from all we've 
seen, the wizarding world might actually be better off without). Will 
*they* turn out to be the ultimate representation of "magic at its 
deepest, its most impenetrable?" 

End of Essay.

What *I* really want is for someone to carefully describe Kreacher's 
actions in OoP to Dobby and then lock those two in a room together.  
Oh, and maybe Winky, too; it might do her good. (Now THERE'S an 
outline for a fanfic. Free to good home. Anyone?)

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley"




From RSFJenny19 at aol.com  Sun Sep 14 02:20:34 2003
From: RSFJenny19 at aol.com (RSFJenny19 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 22:20:34 EDT
Subject: FLINT?  When Hermione arrived at Grimmauld Place for Christmas
Message-ID: <1a8.1957b8b6.2c952a72@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80722

This has always bugged me about Hermione's Christmastime arrival to 12 
Grimmauld Place.  

Note the time sequence:

1. Harry has the nightmare and they go to Grimmauld Place and spend the night 
waiting to see if Arthur will live.

2. That morning (DAY 1), after the Weasley's take naps, they go to the 
Hospital.

3. They get back and Harry goes to his room and stays there through the next 
night (Ron's asleep in the room and Phinneas is "guarding" over him).

4. The next day(DAY 2), Hermione arrives midday.

Now note what Hermione says, 
"Dumbledore told me what had happened first thing this morning, but I had to 
wait for term to end officially before setting off."  

So Hermione spent an entire day(DAY 1) wondering where the heck they all were 
and DD told her "first thing" two days later(DAY 2)? Why would he not tell 
her the whole first day, but then tell her right away on the morning of the 
second day?

Or DD told her "first thing" the morning after it happened (DAY 1), which was 
not "this morning" but the previous day?

I go with the second explanation, which is a bit FLINTy to me.


~RSFJenny


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Sun Sep 14 02:28:14 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 02:28:14 -0000
Subject: Slut!Seamus and other slash pairs post moved to OT group
Message-ID: <bk0jnu+mu56@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80723


  Just wanted to let those who were discussing this earlier know that 
I've moved it to the OT group since it deals more with fanon rather 
than canon.



  Jeff




From gallico_cat at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 13 15:39:24 2003
From: gallico_cat at yahoo.com (gallico_cat)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 15:39:24 -0000
Subject: What about Ron (Was Re: Are we having fun? )
In-Reply-To: <bjul75+6lfb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjvdnc+517h@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80724

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "feetmadeofclay" 
<feetmadeofclay at y...> wrote: 
What about Ron?  He hasn't been ready to fight for 5 books? No one 
will be upset or angry if he ends up dying?  Is Ron just acceptable 
fish food?

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jeffl1965" <jeffl1965 at h...> 
wrote:
I don't think so. Ron is important to me as well. He's a bit more 
than just the side-kick that everyone else seems to think. Ron might 
be a bit thick, but he's not that expendable. I do fear that he might 
give his life for Harry, just as he was willing to do in SS/PS. And I 
 don't think Harry would be happy without his "wheezy". :)

This is me now:
Sometimes I have a hard time with Harry and Hermione, I mean, Harry's 
so unique, what with that adventure (I don't know what else to call 
it.) he had before he was even old enough to remember.  Hermione's so 
smart.  Ron's just a regular guy who is trying to grow into someone 
who is happy with himself and also keep up somewhat with his two best 
friends.  Sometimes when I really can't relate to Harry or Hermy <g>, 
I just sort of focus on where Ron is in the story and then I feel 
more like maybe I could be a part of everything after all.  That also 
helped me with the last book because Ron was getting some recognition 
and confidence at the same time that awful things were happening all 
over.

gal





From brightlywoven at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 13 17:58:18 2003
From: brightlywoven at yahoo.com (brightlywoven)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 17:58:18 -0000
Subject: A Touching take on Socks Was Re: Harry's Temper 
In-Reply-To: <bjs4d0+a8pf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bjvlrq+ikna@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80725

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Donna" <deemarie1a at y...> 
wrote:
> A side note - as to what DD sees in the mirror - Harry wasn't 
> entirely sure DD was telling him the truth, but just enough of the 
> truth of what he saw to satisfy Harry at the time.  Yes, he probably 
> saw himself with socks.  But I think he saw a grown up, healthy, 
> happy Harry giving him those socks.  Don't you think at the time that 
> that was the deepest, most despirate desire of DD's heart?


That was beautifully put.  I haven't been around here very long--so 
it may have been said before, but it's the first time I've heard 
that idea about what "socks" really means.

To Golly, even if he currently desired socks because of a drafty 
castlel, I doubt it was the deepest desire of his heart.  Do you 
really believe it is as simple as that?

Brightlywoven





From paulag5777 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 13 19:29:00 2003
From: paulag5777 at yahoo.com (Paula Gaon)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 12:29:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Veelas
Message-ID: <20030913192900.17479.qmail@web40008.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80726


I'm new to the group, so please excuse if this subject has been discussed.  But does anyone have a theory who/what the Veelas are?  They remind me of the Sirens of Greek Mythology, who lured sailors to crash on the rocks.  Also, Veelas seem to be by definition exclusively female.  So how could Fleur Delacoeur be anything but half Veela?  Wouldn't all Veelas be half-breeds?

Paula Griff paulag5777 at yahoo.com


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From nanstey at iastate.edu  Sat Sep 13 20:13:54 2003
From: nanstey at iastate.edu (nanstey2001)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 20:13:54 -0000
Subject: Rumors that have come true
Message-ID: <bjvtq2+4io5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80727

I'm a fairly recent poster to this board, and at the risk of sonding
like a jerk, I have to ask if anyne has any idea as to how many of the
rumors that have made the round on the internet that have actually
come true.  I heard on a while back that a rumor about Moody's eye
leaked out before the release of GoF, and that the fifth year DADA
teacher would be female, but I haven't really heard much else.  

"nanstey"




From harryingbg at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 13 20:24:13 2003
From: harryingbg at yahoo.com (harryingbg)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 20:24:13 -0000
Subject: Arthurian themes...
Message-ID: <bjvudd+sv2a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80728

Does anyone think that Arthur will finally kill Malfoy?  Mallory's 
King Arthur actually cleaves a particularly vicious Lucius in two, 
from the head down to his breast, with the sword Excalibur.  The 
Arthurian Lucius is a dictator, an elderly Emperor, who demands 
that Arthur recognize him as the greater Lord...if Arthur declines 
then Lucius will wage war on him.  Of course Arthur cannot 
accept this, so he challenges Lucius by saying that he, Arthur, is 
the true Lord. A matter of lands gained or lost, as I remember.  
This Lucius gathers all his wicked allies, along with fifty giants to 
be the front line, to go to war against Arthur.  Arthur, meanwhile, 
has terrible dreams of dragons and other beasts and of the 
great battle, and he is asks a Learned Philosopher the meaning 
of the dreams. and after a lengthy battle of wits and nerves and 
many deaths, comes this:

Thus the battle between King Arthur and Lucius the Emperor 
endured long.  Lucius had on his side many Saracens which 
were slain.  And thus the battle was great, and oftsides that one 
party was at a fordeal and anon at an afterdeal, which endured 
so long till at the last King Arthur espied where Lucius the 
Emperor fought, and did wonder with his own hands.  And anon 
he rode to him.  And either smote other fiercely, and at last 
Lucius smote Arthur thwart the visage, and gave him a large 
wound.  And when King Arthur felt himself hurt, anon he smote 
him again with Excalibur that it cleft his head, from the summit of 
his head, and stinted not till it came to his breast.  And then the 
emperor fell down dead and there ended his life.

Anyone think this is just coincidence?  I wonder...  as it is, it could 
be Harry and Voldemort, don't you think, as well as Arthur and 
Lucius?  

"harryingbg"




From furkin1712 at aol.com  Sat Sep 13 22:29:22 2003
From: furkin1712 at aol.com (furkin1712 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 18:29:22 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Weasley/Potter parent ages (Was - Lily's friends: the can...
Message-ID: <1d4.10d20ce4.2c94f442@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80729

Kirstini, who is mildly disgusted with herself, said:

So, no, Molly probably didn't go out with James. Unless she visited 
little Bill at school one year and developed a thing on the arrogant, 
bespectacled Head Boy...calling all Shippers. Take this thing off my 
hands, and quickly.

 



What if Lily went out with Bill and Mrs Weasley really really liked her? That 
could explain the fondness for Harry.

Blue Eyes

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From dbonett at adelphia.net  Sat Sep 13 23:27:31 2003
From: dbonett at adelphia.net (dtbonett)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 23:27:31 -0000
Subject: Rowling/writer's block (WAS: Are we having fun?)
In-Reply-To: <bk047a+u4id@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk0953+rc19@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80730

 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sarcasticmuppet"
<sarcasticmuppet at y...> wrote:
> I apologize, I wasn't being too tactfull.  My point is that you can 
> call Jo a liar all you want, it doesn't really matter.  Whether she 
> had Writer's block or not, she still managed to write a 890 page book 
> within about two and a half years (take away editing/publishing 
> time).  That's pretty fast in my opinion.  Not to mention putting her 
> stamp of approval on two movies, getting married, and having a baby 
> also within that two and a half years.  I know I'd never be able to 
> do anything like that.


Yes, OOP was written very fast, actually, considering the length AND
complexity.  We get used to people churning out those 'template' books
(ie. Danielle Steele, Jeffrey ARcher, etc.) and forget that to do
something completely original like this is a little more
time-consuming, if it is going to be quality work. Look how long it
took Tolkien to finish LOTR, about twenty years, all his friends had
given up.

Dorothy




From AllieS426 at aol.com  Sun Sep 14 01:40:25 2003
From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 01:40:25 -0000
Subject: Did Harry ever shed tears ?
In-Reply-To: <bjua6l+sjte@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk0gu9+9toq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80731

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sbursztynski" 
<greatraven at h...> wrote:

> I wonder if Sirius might have survived if Harry had been able to let 
> it all out at the end of GoF, i.e. less strees, therefore less anger, 
> therefore less frustration, more inclination to listen and try to 
> learn this Occlumency,etc Just a thought.

Nobody thinks Harry cried?  There was a line that made me think he 
cried *all day* when he was sitting by the lake.  I can't type it 
verbatim because I loaned my copy to someone, but it was along the 
lines of "and before Harry knew it, it had grown dark. He stood up, 
wiping his eyes, and walked back to the castle."  Maybe I didn't 
interpret that correctly and the crying (or lack of) thing is going 
to come up again later.

Allie





From dwoodward at towson.edu  Sun Sep 14 03:02:01 2003
From: dwoodward at towson.edu (Deirdre F Woodward)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 03:02:01 -0000
Subject: WINDOW SILLS
Message-ID: <bk0ln9+hgle@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80732

WINDOW SILLS:  Why I Never Doubted Our Wiley Snape is Loving Lily 
Still

BINBIITFP:  Because I Never Believed It In The First Place

I've just spent the better half of my life wandering through 
Hyperactive Alley (is that the right name?), gazing out at THEORY BAY 
marveling at the wonderful SHIPS.

Since I *love* a good ACRONYM (And Could, Really, One *Not* 
Yell "More!"?), I thought I'd check out what all the FUSS (Follow Us!
Save Snape!) was all about.  I found OUT (Oh! Utter Trash!).

Ok, I'm done having my FUN (Finding Unlikely Nuances).

On to serious BUSINESS (Better Unveil Significance Immediately. Elfs 
Smite Sarcasm).

For those who don't know, many TBAY theories revolve around Snape 
being in love with Lily, either now or when they attended Hogwarts 
together.  

Canon shows us that Snapes *hates* Harry and has hated him since 
Snape!he laid eyes on Harry!him.

The two don't add up.  Why would Snape hate the child of the woman he 
loves/-ed?  Can any of us imagine hating -- despising with the 
blackest of hatred -- the child of the person we love?  Without 
provocation?

Snape's feelings for Harry are predicated upon Snape's feelings 
towards Harry's father -- total hatred because Snape totally hates 
James.  

If Snape's transferring one of the two strongest of human emotions, 
hatred, from father to son, it stands to reason that he'd transfer 
the other of the two strongest of human emotions, love, from mother 
to son.

If the Snape!Theories are to hold, since the child of his most hated 
enemy and the child of his most treasured love are one and the same, 
Snape should have two very conflicting emotions towards Harry.  I 
haven't yet seen, in any of the books, a conflict of feelings from 
Snape to Harry.

Even if Snape loved Lily once but no longer does, you'd think there'd 
be at least a *nod* of recognition that Harry is the son of Lily.

And there isn't. There's been no hint at all that Snape sees Harry as 
anyone other than James's son.  No hint, other than the OoP Pensive 
scene, that Snape even knows Lily.  

If the Snape!Theories are, in fact, correct, and based on the Pensive 
scene, some of you might be hitting home runs with your speculation, 
I for one will be very disappointed.  I won't believe the character 
of Snape any more.

I guess THAT'S ALL.  (There. Hope All's Truly Seen As Lighthearted 
Laughs.)

Deirdre




From sollecks970 at aol.com  Sun Sep 14 03:08:11 2003
From: sollecks970 at aol.com (fawkes970)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 03:08:11 -0000
Subject: sorry-new theory on students.
Message-ID: <bk0m2r+r747@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80733

i did not notice the fact that i didnt write "is wrong" after the 
5boy/5girl per grade+house theory line. i must have mentally added 
it in and just read the line and added it as if i knew it was there 
at the end, even though i must have forgot to right it- sorry bout 
that, fawkes




From princessmelabela at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 14 03:27:58 2003
From: princessmelabela at yahoo.com (Melanie Black)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 20:27:58 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Did Harry ever shed tears ?
In-Reply-To: <bjtctt+gt8s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030914032758.32865.qmail@web20714.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80734

I know you guys have mentioned Dumbldore looking away, and Harry's 
possible tears during the boggart scene with Lupin.  Also, the 
interrupted possible crying scene with Mrs. Weasley in GoF, and the 
wiping of his face on his sleeves after Sirius in OoP.  However, I 
haven't seen one other possible crying scene mentioned in this 
thread.  It may be a stretch, but when Hagrid gives Harry his photo 
album in SS and Harry doesn't say anything... but Hagrid 
understands.  I took this to mean that Harry could have been crying.  
Possibly a stretch, but another possibility to add... :)

And yes, I agree there has to be some connection to Harry's tears and 
Phoenix tears... :)

Andrea
 
My reply:  I really think that on many levels tears can be quite healing for people.  When we are upset and have nowhere else to go, we tend to cry.  These tears heal us, they help us to get our feelings out.  I know I always feel better when I allow myself to have a good cry.
 
~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!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From princessmelabela at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 14 03:31:17 2003
From: princessmelabela at yahoo.com (Melanie Black)
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 20:31:17 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Did Harry ever shed tears ?
In-Reply-To: <bjtctt+gt8s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030914033117.93100.qmail@web20701.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80735

I know you guys have mentioned Dumbldore looking away, and Harry's 
possible tears during the boggart scene with Lupin.  Also, the 
interrupted possible crying scene with Mrs. Weasley in GoF, and the 
wiping of his face on his sleeves after Sirius in OoP.  However, I 
haven't seen one other possible crying scene mentioned in this 
thread.  It may be a stretch, but when Hagrid gives Harry his photo 
album in SS and Harry doesn't say anything... but Hagrid 
understands.  I took this to mean that Harry could have been crying.  
Possibly a stretch, but another possibility to add... :)

And yes, I agree there has to be some connection to Harry's tears and 
Phoenix tears... :)

Andrea
 
My reply:  I really think that on many levels tears can be quite healing for people.  When we are upset and have nowhere else to go, we tend to cry.  These tears heal us, they help us to get our feelings out.  I know I always feel better when I allow myself to have a good cry.
 
~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!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From linlou43 at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 14 03:57:11 2003
From: linlou43 at yahoo.com (linlou43)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 03:57:11 -0000
Subject: A perspective on  OOP 
In-Reply-To: <bjt5tv+7qqv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk0oun+a18j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80736

 Wanda wrote:
 
<Having fun?  Are WE having fun anymore?  Speaking for myself, I 
have to 
 say no.  For me, the fun died on June 21, when OotP was released.  
And so 
 much of the discussion of that book, and speculation of what it 
will lead 
 to, make me think that very few readers are having fun anymore. >

  
linlou:

  I'm really sorry, Wanda, that the series has lost its' magic for 
you. Isn't it amazing that we can feel that level of betrayal on 
behalf of fictional characters? I sympathize with you as I have felt 
that betrayal from several movies and television shows in the past.( 
I have a strong tendancy to become WAY too attached to fictional 
characters no matter what the medium.) However, I am in camp with 
those that love OOP, which is simply a difference of opinion- no 
more, no less. Read on for why I feel this way.

 
 Yoda :
 
< I loved OOP. I think that the dark tone was very appropriate. When 
I was trying to contemplate what might happen after reading GOF, I 
remember thinking that the next  book would be darker and Harry 
would  probably be changed significantly by the the events in GOF, 
and I hoped  that JKR would be up to the task of writing it that 
way. I'm in the same mind as people who feel that the first two 
books are in no way on the same level with the later books.  To be 
fair they are better than a lot of other books, but it's kind of 
like re-reading Anne Rice's Vampire Chronicles, Interview with the 
Vampire is the book you have to get through to get to the good 
stuff. >

linlou:

 I agree that the tone of OOP was appropriate, even, dare I say, 
expected (by me, myself and I anyway). I never even thought about 
whether JKR would be up to the task though. It simply never occured 
to me to question it. I don't, however, feel that the early books of 
the series are inferior to the latter, but that they are, instead, 
rather a different kind of book that do the job they were meant to 
do- entertain the audience more than ably, introduce the world and 
its' characters and create the suspension of disbelief that is 
necessary to the reader at the same time (not an easy feat in and of 
itself me-thinks). 


 msbeadsley wrote:
 
< IMO, a better written book would have communicated every bit of 
what Harry 
 was going through and left it Harry's without making it mine (which 
I'd 
 have resisted going in except that the first four books built up 
such a 
 great level of trust in me that I failed to mount defenses).>


  And Yoda replied:

 < I think that the best books are the ones that suck you in and 
cause you to live the events along with the characters. Harry went  
through a very tramatic experience and then came back to find that 
the  general public did not believe him.  He has had his sense of 
security  taken from him after being spirited away from Hogwarts and 
betrayed by  someone he trusted (fake Moody).  So it makes sense 
that if we are to appreciate what he is going through our sense of 
security will be removed too.>


And then in a later post msbeadsly added:

<All in all, I feel somewhat as if OoP was a mostly unpleasant, 
large 
 expository *lump* which had good bits, mostly concerning 
characters, 
 labeled "insert comic relief here" or "insert ray of hope there.">
 

linlou:

As I said above, I sympathize with the disappointment in OOP as I 
have some experiance with the sentiment. Msbeadsle, if I am reading 
your post correctly, in addition to not liking the tone of the book, 
you found the flow of it disjointed? It sounds like you found the 
insertions of "comic relief" and "rays of hope" to seem artificially 
placed. I respect that, but am afraid we will have to agree to 
disagree on this aspect of OOP.  I thought the book flowed well. In 
fact, my first read took me nine hours. (straight through except for 
the ride home and bathroom breaks-first four chapters in a 
restaurant next to the bookstore) I tried to go to bed but I 
couldn't put it down.

I said above that the first books in the series were different 
kinds of books than the latter installments that we have so far. I 
promised to explain that statement so here we go. 

First of all, I have read all the arguments in the last couple of 
days both from those who liked OOP and those who didn't. In some of 
the posts, the point was made that as Harry developed more and 
understood the world around him in a darker light, so must the 
temper of the books change in order to grow with him. In short, it 
would be unrealistic for the books to be all moonlight and roses. I 
understand that was not even what the disappointed readers were 
looking for per se but it seems that many felt the change to swift 
and sudden. IMO, it was neither swift nor sudden, but progressed 
naturally beginning all the way back with Prof. McGonagall refusing 
to listen about the stone being in danger in SS/PS. It is 
intermitant during the next two books but the stage is set for the 
disillusionment that really starts to take hold in the hospital 
scene at the end of POA. The reason that, (agian IMO) the shift in 
OOP seemed so sudden is because that theme was really not explored 
in GOF, so when it resurfaced in OOP as an overriding concern for 
Harry and co. the anger spawned by it seemed to come out of nowhere 
when in fact it had been simmering on Harry's back burner since the 
end of his first year.

But I'm getting off track. I was talking about the books being 
different types wasn't I? Sorry about that.

I'm a major book worm. In my school days, I was the kind of kid 
who's mother had to yell at her to put the book down and do her 
algebra homework. When my high school english teacher assigned the 
first chapter of a book we were going to analyze, I usually had the 
entire thing read by the next morning. My husband once picked on me 
because I was totally absorbed in the VCR instructions when I 
already knew how to work the thing. If it's written down, I'll read 
it. However, reading and enjoying can two different things 
(admitedly with me that is rarely the case) and what I enjoy reading 
depends on what I need from the book at the time. If I am looking 
for a romp to amuse me I will read a certain type of book. If I am 
looking for a trap door through the floor of reality I read another 
type. The beginning books of the Harry Potter series are variations, 
depending on the chapter, of fulfillment of these two possible needs 
of an audience. As such, they seem to be aimed at a certain target. 
I do have, however, a third category. This is the category that GOF 
begins to fall into and OOP is entirely in- reading to gain insight 
into ourselves and the world around us. I agree with Yoda in that I 
don't want to understand what Harry is feeling. I want more 
than that. I want to feel it right along with him. When I am able to 
do that, I can explore my own reactions and hopefully understand 
myself and my worldview better as a result.

Basically, I guess my point is an old one. We bring our own 
experiences and needs to every book we read. That's the beauty of  
reading. In movies and television the perspective is chosen for us.
With a book, the story is written as it is, but the reader guides 
the experience. Personally, I seem to have an innate talent to 
adjust my needs as a reader to the type of book I'm reading, and 
that's my good fortune. To those who need the book to fit their 
need, I understand the disillusionment caused by OOP. I hope my 
thoughts might help you see the book in a new light should you ever 
decide to give it another try.

 Oh yes, I almost forgot to add one thing. Yes I AM still having fun.

-linlou





From ninnamie at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 14 05:12:32 2003
From: ninnamie at yahoo.com (ninnamie)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 05:12:32 -0000
Subject: Do Ravenclaw/Hufflepuff have House Beasts?
In-Reply-To: <bjqc6l+eqi9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk0tc0+u265@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80737

<boyd.t.smythe at f...> wrote:

SNIP

> What about Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff? True, they've been far less 
> important houses to the story thus far, but will that last or are 
we 
> headed for the demystification of both houses and the discovery of 
> their "House Beasts"? And what would they be? And if they still 
exist, 
> then could play a part in the last books, particularly if there is 
an 
> attack on Hogwarts?

SNIP

Me:
I don't have the books with me right now, so I can't give page 
references, but JKR says (I think more than once) that Hufflepuff's 
beast is the Badger, and Ravenclaw's is (surprise!) the Raven.




From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Sep 14 05:43:48 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 05:43:48 -0000
Subject: Shoemaker'sElves/ RegulusAtSchool/ VeelaReproduction/hating child of beloved
Message-ID: <bk0v6l+5j1v@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80738

Grey Wolf wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/80693 :

<< Let's examine, then, the concept of "giving the boot". As 
Catlady has oft mentioned, the concept probably comes from the
folklore stories about little creatures helping honest merchants 
(my country's version is a shoemaker, I've no idea about the possible
variations), >>

Yes, the most common version in English is "The Shoemaker and the
Elves", and there is also one about a housewife and some brownies. I
vaguely recall also one about a tailor... 

<< which help the merchant survive bad times and re-float his shop by
doing huge amounts of work. The merchant eventually spies on those
creatures and notices they're naked, or wearing ragged clothes, and
has his wife make them appropiate clothes (he does tiny shoes), and
lets them were the little creatures can find it, as thanks. However,
when the little creatures find the clothes, they are offended and
leave. >> 

Nitpick: I don't recall any English-language version in which the
little creatures are *offended*. Usually, they are delighted by the
gift of clothes, dress up and admire themselves, and then decide not
to risk dirtying their beautiful new clothes by ever working again.

Lziner wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/80715 :

<< After reading post #807803 about Regulus Black, it mentioned that
Sirius and Regulus may have been at Hogwarts together. I can only
wonder how they "got on " at school. If Sirius was the height of cool
(along with James), where was little bro Regulus in the pecking
order? OR is it possible he went to another school - Drumstrang -
perhaps? >>

If Sirius was in Gryffindor and Regulus was in Slytherin, they
wouldn't have lived in the same House nor dined at the same table.
Being different years, they wouldn't have had classes together. Thus,
they would have had no more opportunity to pick on each other (ah,
"sibling rivalry", I remember it well) than any other Gryffie plus
Slythie pair. 

As good looks and self-confidence appear to run in the Black family
(Sirius, Bellatrix, and Narcissa even tho' she's blonde and not named
after a star), I imagine that Regulus was also handsome and popular,
the 'cool kid' of his year and of Slytherin House.

It is possible that those two brothers never actually *hated* each
other, in which case they may have liked each other in-between
quarrel, in which case big brother Sirius may have occasionally 
given little brother Regulus good advice about fashion, girls, how 
to get on the good side of certain teachers, etc.

Paula Gaon Griff wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/80726 :

<< But does anyone have a theory who/what the Veelas are? They 
remind me of the Sirens of Greek Mythology, who lured sailors to 
crash on the rocks. >>

The Veelas (usually spelled vila, which is the origin of the US
English phrase about someone "having the willies") are from Slavic
mythology/folklore. They are kind of like nature spirits, because 
they can bring good weather and good harvest to farmers who please
them, and bad weather and other disasters to farmers who displease
them. Various books say that they are the spirits of girls and young
women who died unmarried and/or childless, so they still have unused
fertility they can give to the crops. 

They appear as groups of beautiful young women, who dance in the 
woods and try to lure any man who walks alone in the woods to dance
with them, and then dance him to death or something. They take the
form of swans in order to fly, and upon arrival at their dancing-
place, they return to human form by taking off their swan skins. If 
a man steals a vila's swan skin, she has to marry him and keep his
house and bear his children, but if she ever gets a chance, she will
steal back her swan skin and escape. This is supposed to be the 
origin of the plots of Swan Lake and another ballet that I forget. 
(As well as reminding me of Irish tales about selkies and their seal
skins.)

The vila who live underwater, in streams and pools, come up to the
surface to lure both young men and children to come be hugged. When
the water vila is hugging and kissing a man or a child, she descends
underwater, thus drowning the human she pulled down with her. The
water vila are called 'nereids' in Greece ('nereid' is classical 
Greek for an ocean nymph and almost-modern English for a mermaid). I
can't remember whether it is water or land vila who are called
'rusalka' (plural: rusalki) in Bulgaria or someplace, from the name 
of the Greek holiday Rosalia, which IIRC has something to do with
putting roses on the family graves (more death). 

<< Also, Veelas seem to be by definition exclusively female. So how
could Fleur Delacoeur be anything but half Veela? Wouldn't all Veelas
be half-breeds? >>

If the vila really are the spirits of dead girls, new vila come 
from another place than procreation, and any children born to vila 
by procreation would be only part-Veela. I think JKR wouldn't get 
into something so weird as the vila being dead people (necrophilia?),
but Potterverse Veelas could still be an all-female species whose
children are not half-human. Maybe new Veelas grow on trees (that 
would fit with certain translators of Russian folktales into English,
who call them 'dryads') or maybe they give birth parthenogenically
like some species of anoles (a kind of lizard). Or they could be a
two-sexed species without humans knowing it: maybe the males are 
short and ugly and live underground and are considered to be dwarves
or kobolds or such. Or, if all Veela offspring were fathered by human
men, then the daughters could be Veelas, and the sons could be
part-Veela, and thus Fleur could be the child of a part-Veela man 
and a fully human woman.  

Deirdre Woodward wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/80732 :

<< The two don't add up. Why would Snape hate the child of the woman
he loves/-ed? >>

I don't believe that Snape loved Lily,but it seems reasonable 
enough to me that IF Snape DID love Lily, he could hate the child 
that caused her death. 




From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Sun Sep 14 06:43:36 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 06:43:36 -0000
Subject: hermoine+ the boggart
In-Reply-To: <bk06ih+vp58@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk12mo+eb1p@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80739

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Grey Wolf" <greywolf1 at j...> 
wrote:
> This is coupled with the fact that Hermione doesn't know *why* 
those 
> two found her in the first place. After all, to Hermione, they are 
just 
> two boys that hate her and insult her and don't want anything to 
do 
> with her ("It's no wonder no one can stand her.

Not really. It is clear from their first encounter on the train
that Hermione is fascinated by Harry and Ron and is trying to
get closer to them. Of course she first does it in the wrong way,
due to her lack of people skills - trying to impress them with
her academic abilities - which produces the above mentioned comment.
Note that her reaction to what Ron said was to shut herself up
in the bathroom and cry for hours. Hardly something one would do
if they heard a comment like that from someone they did not care
for. She defends them to McGonagal because she is gratefull to
them and because she likes them very much and maybe the encounter
with the troll taught her a lesson about the value of helping
other people even if it can hurt you - whether it's attacking
a troll or lying to a teacher.

Salit





From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Sun Sep 14 06:49:02 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 06:49:02 -0000
Subject: new thought on students at hogawrts
In-Reply-To: <bjvdc5+rk3d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk130u+nepj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80740

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Grey Wolf" <greywolf1 at j...> 
wrote:
> There are 200 people in green, and they are a quarter of the total 
> (assuming there are no neutrals, which there could be, pushing 
their 
> percentage down to, for example, one fifth - see later). That 
makes the 
> total number, without neutrals, at 800 students. Many more than 
the 
> 10*4*7 = 280 that you propose.

There is also a passage in OoP where Harry thinks to himself that
*30* students were listening attentively (I think it was in
the DADA or charms class - one of the required single-house
classes anyway) during one of the exchanges about Voldemort.
This furthers the supposition of some 200-odd per house: 30*7 = 210.
Sorry I don't remember where it was but I am sure I saw that.
Why we never hear of the others, I don't know.

Salit





From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Sun Sep 14 07:12:57 2003
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 17:12:57 +1000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: new thought on students at hogawrts
In-Reply-To: <bk130u+nepj@eGroups.com>
References: <bjvdc5+rk3d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F64A199.7903.AC93BC@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 80741

On 14 Sep 2003 at 6:49, slgazit wrote:

> There is also a passage in OoP where Harry thinks to himself that
> *30* students were listening attentively (I think it was in
> the DADA or charms class - one of the required single-house
> classes anyway) during one of the exchanges about Voldemort.
> This furthers the supposition of some 200-odd per house: 30*7 = 210.
> Sorry I don't remember where it was but I am sure I saw that.
> Why we never hear of the others, I don't know.

First DADA class, page 221 of the British Edition.

"'It was murder,' said Harry. He could feel himself shaking. He had 
hardly spoken to anyone about this, least of all thirty eagerly 
listening classmates.'"

Personally, I think think the evidence is for the small school of around 
280 - we've got contradictory information and while the above supports 
the large school theory, I can't see it as conclusive yet.

I'm rereading at the moment, looking for signs that the DADA class might 
now be a combined one (with all houses). So far, I can't find any 
conclusive proof that it isn't - but I also can't find any evidence that 
it is (only students from Gryffindor seem to be mentioned in it).

I've been looking just because this has implications for my floorplan! 
The next version will probably still be based on 70 students per house 
anyway, but I may need to change things.

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 june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk  Sun Sep 14 07:52:43 2003
From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 07:52:43 -0000
Subject: WINDOW SILLS
In-Reply-To: <bk0ln9+hgle@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk16ob+chtl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80742

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Deirdre F Woodward" 
<dwoodward at t...> wrote:
> WINDOW SILLS:  Why I Never Doubted Our Wiley Snape is Loving Lily 
> Still
> 
> BINBIITFP:  Because I Never Believed It In The First Place
> 
>> On to serious BUSINESS (Better Unveil Significance Immediately. 
Elfs 
> Smite Sarcasm).
> 
> For those who don't know, many TBAY theories revolve around Snape 
> being in love with Lily, either now or when they attended Hogwarts 
> together.  
> 
> Canon shows us that Snapes *hates* Harry and has hated him since 
> Snape!he laid eyes on Harry!him.
> 
> The two don't add up.  Why would Snape hate the child of the woman 
he 
> loves/-ed?  Can any of us imagine hating -- despising with the 
> blackest of hatred -- the child of the person we love?  Without 
> provocation?
> 
> Snape's feelings for Harry are predicated upon Snape's feelings 
> towards Harry's father -- total hatred because Snape totally hates 
> James.  
> 
> If Snape's transferring one of the two strongest of human 
emotions, 
> hatred, from father to son, it stands to reason that he'd transfer 
> the other of the two strongest of human emotions, love, from 
mother 
> to son.
> 
> If the Snape!Theories are to hold, since the child of his most 
hated 
> enemy and the child of his most treasured love are one and the 
same, 
> Snape should have two very conflicting emotions towards Harry.  I 
> haven't yet seen, in any of the books, a conflict of feelings from 
> Snape to Harry.
> 
> Even if Snape loved Lily once but no longer does, you'd think 
there'd 
> be at least a *nod* of recognition that Harry is the son of Lily.
> 
> And there isn't. There's been no hint at all that Snape sees Harry 
as 
> anyone other than James's son.  No hint, other than the OoP 
Pensive 
> scene, that Snape even knows Lily.  
> 
> If the Snape!Theories are, in fact, correct, and based on the 
Pensive 
> scene, some of you might be hitting home runs with your 
speculation, 
> I for one will be very disappointed.  I won't believe the 
character 
> of Snape any more.
> 
> I guess THAT'S ALL.  (There. Hope All's Truly Seen As Lighthearted 
> Laughs.)
> 
> Deirdre

June (sharpens quill and dips it into ink bottle)...

OK, here's where I nail my (grey) colours firmly to the mast of the 
Good Ship LOLLIPOPS.

I'm not going to re-hash the excellent inaugural arguments.  
However, the theory could do with a bit of dusting down in the light 
of OoP relevations and certain counter arguments that I have picked 
up since joining the board in June.

The counter arguments against Snape Loved Lily tend to be as follows:

1. What normal guy is going to carry a torch for 18 years or so, 
based on very little real action?

My point is that Snape cannot by any stretch of the imagination be 
considered "normal" - whatever that means.  We now know from OoP 
that he is no way "normal" and probably a profoundly damaged person -
 due to the fact of his upbringing which looks, to say the least, 
dysfunctional.  Lonely teenage boys who don't have many real friends 
and who feel worthless are going to elevate the crush into something 
major in their minds.

Want an example of a guy who really did create an epic love story on 
virtually no contact?  Ladies and gentlemen, I give you one Dante 
Alighieri, the author of the Divine Comedy.  Dante met Beatrice 
Portinari when he was nine and she was eight.  He could probably 
count on his fingers the number of times he had actual speaking 
contact with Beatrice in real life. Nevertheless his feelings for 
her inspired some of the greatest poetry in the history of 
literature.  Oh, and incidentally, she married someone else, died 
young shortly after her husband died... Given the right amount of 
brooding emotion, anyone can build a fairly big romance thing on 
very slender foundations.  Why not Snape?

2.   Snape couldn't have loved Lily in the light of what he called 
her in the pensieve scene. 

Well actually he could.  Two possibilities spring to mind here.  
Firstly - he loved her already at that point.  He was also well 
aware that James fancied her too.  Now I can't speak from the 
viewpoint of a messed up and decidedly introvert adolescent, but I 
doubt if having your decidedly unlovely pants exposed to your 
inamorata is ever going to be a memory you would cherish.  Lily was 
the very last person Snape wanted to see when he was being picked on 
by James and Sirius.  If you are that age, you want the girl you 
love to see you either hexing your rival into facial boils, 
successfully, or standing around making moody but trenchant remarks 
about his ancestry.  Remember this kid seems to have been major 
messed up - so I'm not in the least surprised that he shot his mouth 
off in the worst possible way.  How many of us have mouthed off in a 
way we bitterly regretted later?

The second possibility is that Snape had barely given Lily a thought 
until the pensieve incident and fell for her after the event.  Later 
on, he goes off to wherever kids like him go, and casts her in his 
mind as a kind of avenging angel. 

Remember, this event took place towards the end of their fifth year, 
James didn't start seeing Lily until year seven - that's plenty of 
time to develop a hopeless crush - where he no doubt played witty 
chat up lines in his head but never got anywhere.

3. Counter argument - come on this is an adult now.

Well actually, no.  James and Lily died when they were roughly 21 - 
22 max using the timeline in the Lexicon as a guide.  

They got engaged shortly after school - I'm repeatedly struck by how 
young everything happens in Canon.  Snape's pretty cut up about this 
but there's not a lot he can do, and anyway he's started on his new 
career as a Death Eater and that occupies his mind considerably.  

He has some two years in the DE when Voldemort sends him off to hang 
around the Hogs Head, or he is hanging around the Hogs Head anyway, 
when he strikes gold.  Yes - just to mess your mind up even more, I 
believe that Snape was the eavesdropper when Trelawney spoke the 
prophecy.  He only hears the first part which says 

"Tne one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches... born 
to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month 
dies.."

It is at this point that he gets the bum's rush from the Hogs Head.  
He has no way of knowing who the prophecy refers to and high tails 
it back to his boss.  Where he realises from LV's maniacal laughter 
just who the prophecy refers to.  He'd be perfectly OK about a plot 
to murder James - and in fact might volunteer for the job, but not 
Lily.  

This is the revelation point and it all fits Canon so far - this is 
when he switches sides.  He's not going to connive at the murder of 
the girl he loves and this is how Dumbledore knew that the Potters 
were a target, because Snape went to Dumbledore and confessed 
everything - except perhaps his feelings for Lily (which doesn't 
matter because Dumbledore would guess that anyway).

IMHO, it has to be Snape who overheard the prophecy and also who 
tipped off Dumbledore about the murder plans - this is indicated by 
Dumbledore's ongoing reticence to name names when he tells Harry 
about these matters. Why not just say, "Oh it was Bill Smith who 
tipped us off about your parents/who fingered your parents to 
Voldemort"?  Because it was someone Harry knows.  There's only one 
person Harry knows who could fit this - and Harry can't stand that 
person.  Harry and Snape's mutual dislike has already caused major 
problems.  I don't think Harry is going to be able to see Snape's 
role as excusable at all - so best not to say too much about this. 
The alternative is to say to an angry adolescent "Oh it was Snape 
who told Voldemort about the prophecy, but that's all right because 
shortly after he came to me and warned me that Voldemort was 
targeting your parents"  and Harry says "Oh, right."

3.  Snape hates Harry.

Once again, applying logic to Snape's emotional action is a 
fruitless exercise.  Here's why Snape hates Harry, despite his being 
the son of the only woman he ever loved:

Harry shows up at Hogwarts aged 11 and all the staff have heard he 
is coming and are quite excited about clapping eyes on "The Boy Who 
Lived" for the first time.  Even Snape, though he wonders how he'll 
be able to cope with a living reminder of Lily.  He's spent 10 years 
getting over her death.  

Incidentally, can you imagine how Snape reacted to Lily's death?  He 
would have been about 22 at the time - which is very young 
emotionally, even for a well-adjusted person. I personally think he 
might have had a major breakdown after this - the guilt must have 
been unendurable.  

So, Snape looks at Harry and what he sees brings him up short - no 
resemblance to Lily at all (he's not going to see the green eyes 
across the room and behind glasses) - no this is James 
reincarnated.  Later he might tell himself that he's being 
overhasty - but his later dealings with Harry indicate that he 
(Harry) is James all over again - sporting, reckless, rule 
breaking.  Snape knows that Lily sacrificed herself for Harry and as 
he sees it, Harry's recklessness makes a mockery of that sacrifice, 
and he may even blame Harry for his mother's death.  Snape's never 
going to be looking deeply into Harry's eyes after that.

The first time we see Snape really emotional in Canon is after the 
escape of Sirius when he goes completely off it.  At that point, 
Snape would have been of the opinion that Sirius betrayed Lily.  How 
would you have felt in that situation? I sure wouldn't be listening 
to Lupin's explanation of how it was all a case of mistaken 
identity - and that's why Snape attempts to set up what seems to us 
an utterly unspeakable action - the dementor's kiss for Sirius.  Nor 
is Snape going to stop and explain his viewpoint in the 
confrontation in the Shrieking Shack, along the lines of "But this 
bastard betrayed the woman I loved!"  

I suspect that Snape had hoped to punch Sirius Black's ticket from 
the moment he heard that Sirius had "betrayed" the Potters.  To some 
extent the belief that Sirius had done this must have soothed 
Snape's own conscience - he might have pointed Voldemort's murderous 
impulse at the Potters, but there's a worse traitor than him out 
there - Sirius.

Even when Dumbledore explains the full story about Sirius and 
Pettigrew, Snape is not particularly mollified.  He may well take 
the view that by refusing to be the Fidelius Secret Keeper, Black 
played the Potters straight into Voldemort's hands.  In his view, 
Black was guilty through inaction - which adds a certain resonance 
to his jibes at Sirius in OoP  - he's only too happy to point out 
that Sirius never takes risks, and he is implying that if Sirius had 
taken on the role of secret keeper, things might have turned out 
differently.

So there.

June






From florentinemaier at hotmail.com  Sun Sep 14 09:04:44 2003
From: florentinemaier at hotmail.com (Florentine Maier)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 09:04:44 -0000
Subject: FILK: Call him by his name
Message-ID: <bk1avc+nkbi@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80743

Call him by his name

(A FILK by Florentine Maier to the tune of "Like a Prayer" by Madonna)

Harry:
Life is a mystery, I'm standing all alone
When I call him by his name, the other people groan

Chorus (Albus Dumbledore, Remus Lupin, Sirius Black, Mad-Eye  Moody, 
Hermione) :
We call him by his name, to let the people know
We're not on our knees, we do not fear the foe.
We use the proper name, of Voldemort himself
Fears of the names increase fears of the things themself

Harry:
I hear his voice, it's like a serpent spying
I have no choice, I hear his voice
Feels like flying
I close my eyes, Oh God I think I'm falling
Out of the sky, I close my eyes
Heaven help me

Chorus:
We call him by his name, to let the people know
We're not on our knees, we do not fear the foe.
In the midnight hour you can feel his power
But just clear your mind, no need to fear the foe.

Harry:
Inside my head he's wispering softly to me
He's in control, I'm having visions
Of dark corridors
It's like a dream, no end and no beginning
I'm there with him, it's like a dream
Let the choir sing

Chorus:
We call him by his name, to let the people know
We're not on our knees, we do not fear the foe.
In the midnight hour you can feel his power
But just clear your mind, no need to fear the foe.

Harry:
Just like live TV coverage, his mind can take me there
Just like a muse to me, it is a mystery
Just like a dream, things are not what they seem
He's just too strong, no choice his mind can take me there

He's just too strong, he can take me there
It's like a dream to me 


(This is my first filk, so please don't be too strict.)
Florentine




From greatraven at hotmail.com  Sun Sep 14 09:09:35 2003
From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 09:09:35 -0000
Subject: Weasley/Potter parent ages (Was - Lily's friends: the can...
In-Reply-To: <1d4.10d20ce4.2c94f442@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bk1b8f+gpik@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80744

 
> 
> What if Lily went out with Bill and Mrs Weasley really really liked 
her? That 
> could explain the fondness for Harry.
> 
> Blue Eyes
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I don't think Bill can be much over 22, because in GoF, when he
visits 
Hogwarts, he says he left five years ago. If Lily was alive, she'd be 
in her 30s. So sorry - unlikely. Why don't we just assume she likes 
Harry because she's a nice lady and very motherly and feels sorry for 
the poor little thing, who has been such a good friend to her Ron?

Sue




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sun Sep 14 12:20:49 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 12:20:49 -0000
Subject: A perspective on  OOP
In-Reply-To: <bk0oun+a18j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk1mf1+7veu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80745

>  Yoda :
>  
> < I loved OOP. I think that the dark tone was very appropriate. 
When 
> I was trying to contemplate what might happen after reading GOF, I 
> remember thinking that the next  book would be darker and Harry 
> would  probably be changed significantly by the the events in GOF, 
> and I hoped  that JKR would be up to the task of writing it that 
> way. I'm in the same mind as people who feel that the first two 
> books are in no way on the same level with the later books.  To be 
> fair they are better than a lot of other books, but it's kind of 
> like re-reading Anne Rice's Vampire Chronicles, Interview with the 
> Vampire is the book you have to get through to get to the good 
> stuff. >
> 
> 

Geoff:
The point about the series is that they ramp up as they go because 
Harry is getting older and seeing things from a changing point of 
view and as the threat against him and the Wizarding world becomes 
more aggresive, so the story line becomes darker. The early books see 
Harry as a naive 11 year old, sheltered from the outside world 
because of the oppresive regime directed at him by the Dursleys. 
Hogwarts opens a new view of the world - friends, experiences all of 
which add to his development. The books become longer and darker as 
they progress because of this. COS is darker than PS - which despite 
Voldemort's attempts to kill Harry via the agency of Quirrell is 
still quite a "light" book showing young secondary pupils 
interacting. POA again darkens the horizons and, obviously, Harry's 
view is affected; he sees the world in darker tomes than when he was 
11. I think JKR has produced a tour de force in the way in which the 
shifts have occurred. I realise when, having read OOTP 5 times, I 
then look back to the early books that I "see" Harry as a very 
different person; it is analogous to children growing up. I look at 
pictures of my elder son, for example, at the age of 11 and now see 
him at 30 and he isn't the same - I wouldn't expect him to be the 
same unless something was drastically wrong. It's only when someone 
used to come along when they were younger who hadn't seen them for, 
say, several months and they would say "Goodness, hasn't he changed" 
that you realise this has happened; this I think is the case with 
Harry. He has changed gradually and subtly under our noses and it is 
only when we really sit back and have a good look at the early 
stories that we really see it.




From profwildflower at mindspring.com  Sun Sep 14 12:32:57 2003
From: profwildflower at mindspring.com (whimsyflower)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 12:32:57 -0000
Subject: Do Ravenclaw/Hufflepuff have House Beasts?
Message-ID: <bk1n5p+3teg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80746

In post 80737 ninnamie answers this question by explaining that
Hufflepuffs have the Badger and Ravenclaws have the Raven.  I wish 
Ravenclaw did have the Raven.  I think a Raven would make more sense, 
and a Raven is an important bird in Celtic lore.  But, sadly, JKR gave 
Ravenclaw an Eagle.  Go figure.
Whimsy




From sylviablundell at aol.com  Sun Sep 14 12:53:51 2003
From: sylviablundell at aol.com (sylviablundell2001)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 12:53:51 -0000
Subject: Veelas
Message-ID: <bk1ocv+7mti@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80747

In the ballet Giselle, doesn't she become a Vila because she dies 
after being betrayed by her faithless lover.
Sylvia (long time since I've seen this ballet, so could be wrong)




From silmariel at telefonica.net  Sun Sep 14 13:53:19 2003
From: silmariel at telefonica.net (Carolina)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 15:53:19 +0200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Arthurian themes...
In-Reply-To: <bjvudd+sv2a@eGroups.com>
References: <bjvudd+sv2a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <200309141553.20099.silmariel@telefonica.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 80748

harryingbg:
> And when King Arthur felt himself hurt, anon he smote
> him again with Excalibur that it cleft his head, from the summit
> of his head, and stinted not till it came to his breast.  And
> then the emperor fell down dead and there ended his life.
>
> Anyone think this is just coincidence?  I wonder...  as it is, it
> could be Harry and Voldemort, don't you think, as well as Arthur
> and Lucius?

Lucius reminds me of the Cornelius-Lucius pair of Popes,
and for Arthur, if we compare him with Weasley (and not with 
Harry)... I hope his own son won't kill him (Mordred-Gwydion).

Anyway, using the yahoo search funtion should return a lot of posts 
on Arthur or symbolism.

silmariel



From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Sun Sep 14 14:14:14 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 14:14:14 -0000
Subject: LV's Evil: "Gift for Spreading Discord and Enmity..." 
Message-ID: <bk1t3m+hf3a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80749

In post 80718, Whimsyflower was musing about the scene in COS where 
Riddle grows stronger as Ginny grows weaker. She related that to the 
prophecy and said:

"For a while now LV has been putting parts of himself into Harry,
first with the AK curse when Harry was one-year old (Parseltongue and 
what else?) and more recently with the thoughts or images he planted 
in Harry's brain in OOTP. Maybe LV will put more into Harry in Books 
6 & 7. He's also taken parts of Harry into himself, most noteably 
Harry's blood in LV's rebirthing scene in GOF. <snip> 

This idea has been rolling around in my head and I finally realized 
it could answer a question bothering me since reading OOTP:  How can 
I believe Lord Voldemort is a great villian and Evil Overlord when he 
comes across as a powerful-but-poor leader at best, and a fool at 
worst? (All IMO, of course).

Yet Dumbledore, Snape, the Weasley's and other powerful wizards speak 
of him with a certain awe, referring to the pure evil of the First 
War and the fear LV engendered in the hearts of all.  And in OOTP, 
even Dumbledore appears to show fear for the first time in his duel 
with Voldemort at the MOM.

Piecing all this together for myself, I ended up back at DD's speech 
at the feast in GOF and the title of my post--how does Voldemort 
spread discord and emnity to such a degree that even the best Wizards 
can quake before him?

Then it came to me, thanks to Whimsyflower's idea--Perhaps the 
Darkest Magic of all is what we see happening in OOTP, the dark, 
bleak world where our favorite characters are at odds with each 
other. We see Sirius slip down into a vortex of misery; we see Snape 
uncharacteristically fearful when discussing LV with Harry; we even 
see Dumbledore make mistakes and poor choices that indirectly 
contribute to Sirius's death. 

Perhaps Voldemort is The Ultimate Dementor, sucking all the good 
thoughts and memories of all who try to fight him, and he and his 
followers feed off them.  People like Umbridge, Fudge and Percy 
knowingly or unknowingly contribute to their power by thwarting the 
Power of Good and feeding the Power of Evil.

And Harry, with the most direct link to Voldemort, is the most 
affected, disturbed and distraught of them all. The Wizard World 
Harry has learned to count on and trust in is no more--Voldemort is 
slowly trying to take him and the world over, spreading a dark 
blanket of fear and evil, like poison, as he gains power.

The only way out will be the unity Dumbledore espouses in GOF, both 
in the hospital wing and at the feast (and through the sorting hat in 
OOTP). Otherwise, LV will be given a "second chance to destroy the 
world we have tried to rebuild...."

Jen Reese, who wasn't scared of LV after OOTP, but is quaking now...




From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com  Sun Sep 14 15:02:24 2003
From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 14 Sep 2003 15:02:24 -0000
Subject: Reminder - Weekly Chat 
Message-ID: <1063551744.27.93872.m13@yahoogroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80750


We would like to remind you of this upcoming event.

Weekly Chat 

Date: Sunday, September 14, 2003 
Time: 11:00AM - 7:00PM CDT (GMT-05:00) 

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 constancevigilance at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 14 15:50:34 2003
From: constancevigilance at yahoo.com (Susan Miller)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 15:50:34 -0000
Subject: Wizard children's filks, part 2
Message-ID: <bk22oa+o92i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80751

Some more pages from the Young Wizard's Songbook

Dedicated to Haggridd, thanks for the assistance

Twinkle, Twinkle Little Elf

Twinkle, Twinkle Little Elf
Winky drinky by herself.
Doesn't care too much for clothes
In a room that comes and goes.
Barty Crouch gave her the sack
Now she wants her master back.


Peter, Peter, Pumpkin Eater of Death

Rattus Rattus, animagus
Ran away and tried to dodge us.
Book 5 - many a Death Eater
Readers wonder, where was Peter?


Pop! Go the Weasleys

Around, around the Portable Swamp
The twins manuever easily.
Peeves, you must continue the romp ...
Pop! Go the Weasleys.

A galleon for a Headless Hat
Pay up, now, don't be measily.
Diagon Alley, 93
Pop! Go the Weasleys.


~ Constance Vigilance




From dfran at sbcglobal.net  Sun Sep 14 06:25:39 2003
From: dfran at sbcglobal.net (deedeee88)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 06:25:39 -0000
Subject: Hermione's House Elf Hats: Question
In-Reply-To: <bjsokv+1vo7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk11l3+74t5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80752

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "entropymail" 
<entropymail at y...> wrote:
> Just a quick question: 
> 
> I know I must be missing something, but why does Hermione leave the
> hats she's knitted for the house elves all around the Gryffindor
> common room? Don't the clothes have to be given to the elves by 
their
> master for them to be freed? In that case, wouldn't Dumbledore have 
to
> give them to the elves, or else they wouldn't count? What have I 
missed?


I always thought that Hermione's club "SPEW" would be approved by 
Dumbledore, given that Umbridge created a MOM "new rule" to prohibit 
any student group/club/team she did not approve of.

If Dumbledore approves of the groups activities then an elf picking up 
a hat would have DD's permission to do so..

For ex...

If Malfoy had been standing next to his father the day Dobby garnered 
his freedom... and Lucius handed the dairy to his son who in turn 
handed it to Dobby would dobby still be free?

Even though Hermione may not like that it's only Dobby who cleans the 
Gryphindor quarters(yes I *do* know she was not aware of this)...We 
garner a deep insight to houseleves here..

That they could obtain freedom anytime they CHOOSE to...this is more 
impowering than them being "given" their freedom by some 
benevolent "master".  Hermoine hiding the hats is not a good 
thing..she should leave them out and in the open. (With a sign 
saying, "Free hats to welcome heads" signed by president of SPEW and 
DD! LOL) It is the freedom to choose that makes all the difference. 
I'm waiting for Hermione to see this...I think most new/younger 
wizards would be quick to give a choice.. 

I would not be surprised at all if DD keeps a massive 
wardrobe/changing room of elf sized clothes if any elf should so 
desire to be free(why else would they avoid Hermione's creations so 
much--even risking DD's disapproval because they took her hat before 
clothes he already offered were refused--note that Dobby doesn't want 
to hammer coming down on his co-workers so cleans the areas himself 
and takes all the hats himself)..I doubt however that the elves would 
be so fast to leave the side of DD. This is why Dobby is important to 
the rest of houseelves...  He is free yet loyal to whom he 
chooses...Are there anymore house elves at Hogwarts besides Dobby and 
Winky who are already free? (I'd say, "absolutely"!)

I am still disappointed that we never got to see George and Fred in 
the kitchens with all the houseelves. (can picture them 
now...tempting Winky with fire whiskey--teehee)

Slavery is wrong, very wrong!  What happens when a slave is freed?
A great deal of things of course...

I'm watching muggle news closely...a coffee plantation in South 
America was just shut down and more than 1,000 slaves were 
freed...this is in the year 2003.

What happens to these people, their families, the community in which 
the slaves were kept.

In HP world...I suppose we should watch Hermione closely...she has 
to do more than watch house elves to understand them.

DeeDee





From diversity33 at hotmail.com  Sun Sep 14 08:26:58 2003
From: diversity33 at hotmail.com (Kath Lane)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 09:26:58 +0100
Subject: [HPforGrownups] What's Arthur been up to (was Re: relationships/ages of
 characters)
Message-ID: <BAY1-F5897lhwLTZ80a0000adc3@hotmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80753

><hermionegallo at y...> wrote:
>from hg's original post "What's Arthur been up to"
>"Either way, it seems clear that something happened
>with Percy: it was either right before the third Triwizard task, or
>it was after that argument with Arthur; but something happened that
>changed him."

There is a similar inconsistency with Fudge's attitude though --
in POA he says "You-know-you alone and friendless is one thing,
but give him his most faithful servant back and I dread to think
how soon he'll rise again" (approximately). But in GOF he totally
disbelieves in this return, even though he thinks the servant
(Sirius in his eyes) has escaped to assist Voldemort.

Probably it is just a JKR mistake instead of deep plot significance!

K

_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail messages direct to your mobile phone http://www.msn.co.uk/msnmobile





From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 14 17:15:31 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 17:15:31 -0000
Subject: seeking knowledge and keeping secrets-long
Message-ID: <bk27nj+puri@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80754

I just finished reading a collection of essays on HP called "Harry 
Potter's World", edited by Elizabeth Heilman.  One essay, called "The 
Seeker of Secrets:  Images of Learning, Knowing and Schooling" by a 
professor at Purdue named Charles Elster, caught my attention in 
particular. In the essay, Elster says

"Adults are depicted as routinely hiding knowledge from children.  
This situation begins with the Dursleys...Other adults...seem to want 
to 'protect' Harry from knowing the awful truth of Voldemort's 
intentions toward him.  [He then refers to the conversation between 
Molly and Arthur in the Leaky Cauldron in PoA.]...Professor 
Dumbledore, the headmaster of Hogwards School and the epitome of the 
powerful, good wizard, is an ambiguous figure in the Harry Potter 
books.  Although he is reputed to be very powerful...his approach to 
protection seems laissez-faire or devious.  He exists as the 
standoffish God who seems to have a plan for good people to prove 
they can vanquish evil.  He rarely helps directly, although he 
occasionally appears in order to provide information, as when Harry 
discovers the Mirror of Erised.  Dumbledore shares the secret 
knowledge that Harry seeks, but he does nothing to assist 
Harry...Harry is Adam to Dumbledore's God.  Like Adam (and 
Prometheus) he is destined to steal (rather than be given) essential 
knowledge.  And he avoids going to talk to Dumbledore when he 
suspects that Voldemort and his helpers are near...Important 
kmowledge, knowledge connected to the solution of mysteries and the 
accomplishment of the evil-foiling quest, is depicted in the Harry 
Potter books as hidden knowledge.  It is the hero's role to actively 
seek, uncover, and use secret knowledge despite interferences..." 

A few points:  first, this essay was published before OoP came out.  
Second, Elster does acknowledge that there are a few adults who 
willingly share (at least some) information with Harry; Remus, Fake!
Mad Eye and Sirius. (Even "yes, that is my job" Snape actually tells 
Harry things sometimes.) Third, Elster goes on to point out that 
Harry often has to obtain information by somewhat underground means-
eavesdropping, using the Invisibility Cloak, watching people's 
pensieve thoughts and so forth.  And when Harry tries to communicate 
what he's learned, he's often met with disbelief.

This whole line of discussion really struck me.  Why is it that 
adults would want to hide information from children (especially at a 
school, for Pete's sake!).  One of the things you always read in 
parenting manuals (at least the good ones) is that you should 
*always* answer a child's direct question.  Sure, you might not want 
to give a completely detailed answer (a 5 year old doesn't really 
want to know about the mechanics of sex when s/he asks where babies 
come from).  And sometimes you have to say, "I don't know,"  which 
seems to strike terror in the hearts of many adults.  But an honest 
admission that you don't know is more respectful than blowing the kid 
off or lying.

So when Harry asks DD a direct question about LV in PS/SS and DD 
refuses to answer, he's making a terrible mistake that sets him up to 
repeat it in the next 3 books, until both Harry and Sirius have paid 
the cost.  And don't even get me started about Molly and her constant 
infantilizing (is that a word?) of her children and Harry. 
McGonagall, Hagrid...These adults should know perfectly well that the 
kids are going to get information one way or another.  The choice 
isn't whether or not they'll find things out, but whether they'll 
find out the complete set of facts or have to rely on rumor, 
guesswork, overheard tidbits and each other to cobble together some 
information.  And we know how easy it is for kids to put what they 
think they know together and come to completely the wrong conclusion.

What is it about knowledge that makes grownups (both in HP and in the 
RW) so reluctant to share it?  Is it that knowledge is power and 
adults don't want to give up their power over children?  Is it 
laziness?  embarrassment?  inability to find the right words?  sheer 
stupidity?

Any thoughts on this?  I find it very disturbing.

Laura, who is happy to get back into literary analysis after way too 
many years...




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 14 17:27:33 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 17:27:33 -0000
Subject: WINDOW SILLS
In-Reply-To: <bk0ln9+hgle@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk28e5+fa4i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80755

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Deirdre F Woodward" 
<dwoodward at t...> wrote:
> Canon shows us that Snapes *hates* Harry and has hated him since 
> Snape!he laid eyes on Harry!him.
> The two don't add up.  Why would Snape hate the child of the woman 
> he loves/-ed?  Can any of us imagine hating -- despising with the 
> blackest of hatred -- the child of the person we love?  Without 
> provocation?
> 
> Snape's feelings for Harry are predicated upon Snape's feelings 
> towards Harry's father -- total hatred because Snape totally hates 
> James.  
> 
> If Snape's transferring one of the two strongest of human emotions, 
> hatred, from father to son, it stands to reason that he'd transfer 
> the other of the two strongest of human emotions, love, from mother 
> to son.
> 
> If the Snape!Theories are to hold, since the child of his most 
> hated enemy and the child of his most treasured love are one and 
> the same, Snape should have two very conflicting emotions towards 
> Harry.  I haven't yet seen, in any of the books, a conflict of 
> feelings from Snape to Harry.
> 
> Even if Snape loved Lily once but no longer does, you'd think 
> there'd be at least a *nod* of recognition that Harry is the son of 
> Lily.
> 
> And there isn't. There's been no hint at all that Snape sees Harry 
> as anyone other than James's son.  No hint, other than the OoP 
> Pensive scene, that Snape even knows Lily.  

Oh, I looove your acronyms (*so* clever, and a thing I am not good 
at), but your assessment of Snape-loves-Lily-so-he-can't-not-love-her-
son, well...  Spend a few days watching the news if you don't already 
and pay particular attention to instances of felony child abuse by 
boyfriends in the house.  There appears actually (according to people 
who actually study this stuff) to be a substantial minority incidence 
of biological imperative on the part of the new male to eliminate his 
retroactive rival's issue.  There's one part that has to do with 
ridding the gene pool of that rival's DNA, but mostly it seems to 
have to do with relieving the female of the need to spend resources 
on children not his; the male is in that case all about getting his 
*own* children on the female.  (Granted, things obviously never went 
so far (shudder) in the case of Snape/Lily.) And, while I tend to be 
a sucker for LOLLIPOPS, I will not be very disappointed or surprised 
if it turns out false. But I am very convinced that Snape-loves-Lily-
and-hates-her-son-with-James is completely RW possible. Besides, with 
Lily dead, Harry could be a constant reminder of the children Severus 
can never have with her as well.

Sandy aka "msbeadsley"




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 14 17:36:39 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 17:36:39 -0000
Subject: Did Harry ever shed tears ?
In-Reply-To: <20030914032758.32865.qmail@web20714.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bk28v7+11dqf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80756

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Melanie Black 
<princessmelabela at y...> wrote:
> I really think that on many levels tears can be quite healing for 
> people.  When we are upset and have nowhere else to go, we tend to 
> cry.  These tears heal us, they help us to get our feelings out.  I 
> know I always feel better when I allow myself to have a good cry.

There is actually neurological evidence (I *think* I read this in 
Daniel Goleman's "Emotional Intelligence" but my copy is out on loan) 
that a short period of crying affects the chemistry of the brain in 
such a way that the period following is calmer, happier.

Sandy aka "msbeadsley" who is being quite nerdy today




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 14 17:58:57 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 17:58:57 -0000
Subject: WINDOW SILLS
In-Reply-To: <bk16ob+chtl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk2a91+hq5l@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80757

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "junediamanti" 
<june.diamanti at b...> wrote:
> I doubt if having your decidedly unlovely pants exposed to your 
> inamorata is ever going to be a memory you would cherish.  Lily was 
> the very last person Snape wanted to see when he was being picked on
> by James and Sirius.  If you are that age, you want the girl you 
> love to see you either hexing your rival into facial boils, 
> successfully, or standing around making moody but trenchant remarks 
> about his ancestry.

Oh, oh, there's *canon* for this:  the first two instances in OoP 
where Cho is present and appears to be seeking Harry out!  The first 
is when he is covered with stinksap and thinks, I would *really* 
rather have her see me in a group of cool people I'd just amused with 
a joke; the second time is when Ron is there and becomes obstreperous 
about Cho's "Tornadoes" fan badge and Harry thinks, between Neville 
and Ron, am I "ever" going to have an interaction with Cho that 
doesn't have me wanting to bury my head? (It's Sunday morning and I 
am being too lazy to drag the actual canon (quotes) in here, but this 
is *real* close.)

The juxtaposition of Snape's Pensieve memory with these thoughts on 
Harry's part is, to me, actually a pretty good canon argument for 
LOLLIPOPS!

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley" taking a bow from soapbox




From greatelderone at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 14 17:59:57 2003
From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 17:59:57 -0000
Subject: seeking knowledge and keeping secrets-long
In-Reply-To: <bk27nj+puri@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk2aat+2r8c@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80758

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
> So when Harry asks DD a direct question about LV in PS/SS and DD 
> refuses to answer, he's making a terrible mistake that sets him up 
to 
> repeat it in the next 3 books, until both Harry and Sirius have 
paid 
> the cost.  

If Dumbledore had told Harry about the prophecy in PS/SS then 
Voldemort would have ripped the thing out of Harry's head instead of 
sneaking into the DoM and then would have immediately targeted Harry 
and tried to kill him. If anything holding the information from Harry 
only bought more time for Harry though at the cost of Sirius's life. 




From sydenmill at msn.com  Sun Sep 14 18:33:37 2003
From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 18:33:37 -0000
Subject: Did Dumbledore Collect The Reward?
In-Reply-To: <20030912210411.25115.qmail@web60207.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bk2ca1+ec4q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80759

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, eowynn_24 <eowynn_24 at y...> 
wrote: 

In her post #80613:
Eowynn:
 
> How cool would that be. Do you remember when Harry was trying to 
vision what the Hogwarts teachers would do during break and he 
pictured DD on some island in shorts with his long beard? I wonder 
what DD would do with the $ if he took it? Perhaps a second investor 
to Forge and Gred? Or perhaps supplies for the order? What do you 
think?
> 
> Eowynn (laughing at the thought of DD on a beach getting a tan:)



Bohcoo again:

This thought just came to me -- socks, Eowynn. I'll betcha he went 
out and finally found himself some nice socks!

Bohcoo (laughing at your image of DD getting a tan -- with robe-
marks!)





From editor at texas.net  Sun Sep 14 18:37:09 2003
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 13:37:09 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] WINDOW SILLS
References: <bk0ln9+hgle@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <002901c37aef$3859fda0$7f05a6d8@texas.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 80760

Dierdre:

> For those who don't know, many TBAY theories revolve around Snape
> being in love with Lily, either now or when they attended Hogwarts
> together.

Harumph. Many theories revolved around that before Theory Bay was born.
Young whippersnappers.

> Canon shows us that Snapes *hates* Harry and has hated him since
> Snape!he laid eyes on Harry!him.
>
> The two don't add up.  Why would Snape hate the child of the woman he
> loves/-ed?  Can any of us imagine hating -- despising with the
> blackest of hatred -- the child of the person we love?  Without
> provocation?
>
> Snape's feelings for Harry are predicated upon Snape's feelings
> towards Harry's father -- total hatred because Snape totally hates
> James.
>
> If Snape's transferring one of the two strongest of human emotions,
> hatred, from father to son, it stands to reason that he'd transfer
> the other of the two strongest of human emotions, love, from mother
> to son.
>
> If the Snape!Theories are to hold, since the child of his most hated
> enemy and the child of his most treasured love are one and the same,
> Snape should have two very conflicting emotions towards Harry.  I
> haven't yet seen, in any of the books, a conflict of feelings from
> Snape to Harry.

Ah, but you are using *reason* to analyze emotional reactions.

Here is my take.

Caveat: this is ONE aspect of why Snape hates Harry. There are many threads
in that particular tapestry. I will pull in references to others as needed.

There are fathers whose wives die in childbirth, who blame the child for
their wife's death and reject the child, emotionally or physically or both.
The child who is not only the son/daughter of the woman they loved, but
their own son or daughter. Remember Ebenezer Scrooge, rejected by his father
for this reason? This is a fairly common emotional reaction, when a man must
have a place to lay blame, other than himself. We may have seen, in Harry's
blaming Snape for Sirius' death, a parallel to what Snape lays at Harry's
door--blame assigned to others where one cannot bear to recognize that you
might share it.

For Harry caused Lily's death. She died trying to save him; if he hadn't
been there to save, Lily would be alive. There is much in this to blame
James for, as well, as the father of the child that caused Lily to die. So
if Snape indeed did love Lily, he's looking every day at the reason she's
dead. And if Snape was indeed the spy who warned the Potters, suggested
strongly in canon, his warning failed. If he loved Lily, that failure is a
blame factor that his psyche must sublimate onto another. Cause enough for
hate, even with no James in the equation.

[We may see Snape and Harry both coming to deal with their roles in the
deaths of those they loved, in the next books--for other parallels in their
characters have been carefully drawn.]

But James *is* in the equation, and Harry looks like him. A very great deal
like him, which must set off negative responses every time Snape lays eyes
on him. Except for his eyes, which are Lily's eyes. Lily's eyes, set in
James' face--a constant reminder that Lily chose James. A reminder of
rejection. Cause enough for hate, stemming from old bitterness, and totally
separable from any love borne for she who rejected. I think Snape must have
sublimated his reactions when Lily chose James; he would have focused all
the negative on James; but in any case, there would have been a powerful lot
of negative emotion in that particular situation, and Lily's eyes set in
James' face would call all of it up.

Add to that reminder of rejection, an echo of a fear I have thought Snape
may have had. I think that he either loved her in silence, or told her and
was gently turned away. In the latter case, he may have feared that Lily
told James that Snape had sought her. Proud man, he would have been totally
unable to ask her this; but would have let the possibility torture him.
Another possible cause to hate; layered atop the rest.

And there is the possibility that Lily, knowing Snape had loved her, had
asked him to watch out for her son. Bitter pill, given that this boy is a
physical manifestation of his rejection; but if he loved her, he would do
it--in as bitter and angry a manner as you can imagine. Which is exactly the
way he *does* protect Harry.

[Duly noted: even if Lily never asked Snape to protect Harry, Dumbledore
surely has; and being forced to act to protect one who caused the death of
one you loved, who reminds you by simply existing of a painful rejection, is
more than enough to make Snape bitter and cruel in his protection.]

> Even if Snape loved Lily once but no longer does, you'd think there'd
> be at least a *nod* of recognition that Harry is the son of Lily.
>
> And there isn't. There's been no hint at all that Snape sees Harry as
> anyone other than James's son.  No hint, other than the OoP Pensive
> scene, that Snape even knows Lily.

Or anyone else, with a few exceptions. All the focus has been on James; Lily
has rarely been mentioned, let alone discussed. I think this omission is a
plot element, and it may act to strengthen the theory as much as it can be
seen to weaken it.

If Lily were a subject for easy reference or conversation by Snape--he would
have made it. The lack of any, I interpret as Snape allowing himself to be
carried by his hatred of James out of a dangerous emotional area, into one
he can handle quite well. It's much easier to let the negatives carry the
day, and project hatred outward, than to have to deal with emotions that
hurt you, and project pain inward.

And I doubt he can avoid the latter, and the pain makes him hate all the
more.

He has said himself that sad emotional memories, memories one fears, are the
ones that can be used as weapons against one. As the "Need to Hate" thread
so brilliantly speculated, perhaps he has chosen to foster in himself, a
tendency already there, and has actively tried to hate Harry more than he
already would have. It not only may be difficult and emotionally painful for
Snape to deal with Harry on any level other than "James' son," it may be
dangerous for him to do so.

But my point is--if Snape did love Lily, it is *not* logical that Snape
should hate her son. But logic has never really carried the day in matters
of the heart, and it *is* a natural, and understandable, and tragic,
believable reaction.

~Amanda, once-premier Snapologist







From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 14 19:08:12 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 19:08:12 -0000
Subject: The good ship SILK GOWNS
Message-ID: <bk2eas+669t@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80761

"So, it's settled then, isn't it?"  said Captain Jenny, beaming 
around at everyone.   

HG scanned the dull looks on the faces of the sailors surrounding 
Captain Jenny; only one drunken skeptic had replied with more than a 
terse question ? and after doing so had fallen asleep.  It was clear 
her captain's words had sailed right over their heads, or that her 
captain's brilliance had dazzled them dumb.  HG had an inkling that 
this was going to be a tough crowd


Victory shone on Captain Jenny's face.  "Prime salacious idea!  
Option number one!  Bend!" she cried, waving a fist in the air.  
Then, just as suddenly, she straightened her gown, and quietly 
announced, "And now, tea." Captain Jenny's eyes twinkled as, humming 
to herself, she tottered off below deck.  As several onlookers 
scratched their heads and turned to leave, HG spoke up.  "She's a 
genius, you know.  Quite mad, of course, but pure genius."

"Sounds like complete gibber if you ask me," one skeptic called 
out.  "I think we've wasted enough time around here."

HG scrambled to keep the audience.  "It's quite simple, really!  And 
our clever captain wouldn't have been able to do it without most of 
you."  

Those who were leaving stopped at her words, and taking her 
opportunity, HG plunged onward.   "Without the Order of the Flying 
Hedgehog, none of us here aboard the good ship SILK GOWNS would be so 
Constantly Vigilant.  The LOLLIPOPS have taught us to scrutinize, you 
FEATHERBOAS have reminded us that this is an ugly war.  You're all 
brilliant in your own ways!"

Murmurs of ascent passed through the crowd.  HG continued 
quickly.  "I'm sure you'd all agree that the Longbottoms' situation 
seems suspect.  They've been stuck in St. Mungo's for twelve years, 
imprisoned in their own brains ? note the parallel to Sirius Black's 
twelve year incarceration!  We have seen in canon that the Cruciatus 
Curse causes pain that subsides when the curse is lifted; we have 
seen that the Imperius Curse can be fought over time.  But the 
Longbottoms have been imprisoned in a hospital, a place of healing 
and recovery, doing neither, for twelve long years.  We have a little 
ship, perhaps
" and here, HG patted the smooth, shining walnut hull 
of the sailboat, "but it's a strong one.  Our canons are small but 
many, and blowing together they provide quite the bang."

"Imprisoned, you say?  Isn't that a strong term?"

"Strong, yes, and most likely accurate.  Dumbledore himself has said 
there are far worse things than death.  Can you imagine being 
imprisoned in your own brain, watching your child grow up before your 
eyes, helpless to interact with him?   It seems plausible to us 
aboard the good ship SILK GOWNS that the Longbottoms aren't simply 
being kept quiet by insanity, but that there's also an Imperius curse 
on them.  Note how Alice is described in comparison to Barty Crouch, 
Sr. in GoF."

HG proceeded to quote canon, first, the description of Alice in 
OoP:  " `Her face was thin and worn now, her eyes seemed overlarge, 
and her hair, which had turned white, was wispy and dead-looking. She 
did not seem to want to speak, or perhaps she was not able to, but 
she made timid motions toward Neville, holding something in her 
outstretched 
hand
' "

HG continued: "Notice the similarity to the description of Barty 
Crouch, Sr. in GoF hardback American, p. 553:  `He was unshaven and 
gray with exhaustion.  His neat hair and mustache were both in need 
of a wash and a trim.  His strange appearance, however, was nothing 
to the way he was behaving.  Muttering and gesticulating, Mr. Crouch 
appeared to be talking to someone that he alone could see
 Mr. 
Crouch's eyes were bulging.  He stood staring at the tree, muttering 
soundlessly at it
He looked utterly mad.'"

A sailor cried out, "So Jenny thinks it's the gum that's doing all 
this to the Longbottoms?"

"Captain Jenny," corrected HG, "and she admits it as a possibility, 
yes."

The sailor continued, "Yeah, okay, Captain Jenny.  But Kneasy said 
before falling asleep that the gum was the cure, not the cause.  Your 
captain said nothing about that.  Don't you think she's sort of 
overlooking the obvious?

"Hardly!  In fact, my Captain did address this very issue, which our 
intoxicated friend didn't seem to hear.  Captain Jenny said 
that `candy could be part of the healing process at St. Mungo's, just 
as an emotionally unsettling encounter with Dementors can be fixed 
with just some chocolate. Part of the therapy for the Longbottoms 
could be to give them gum.'  Our Butterbeer swilling friend 
overlooked this seemingly minor detail: that Drooble's Best Blowing 
Gum leaves bluebell colored bubbles that continue to hover for days.  
If the Longbottoms were indeed chewing that much Droobles, Ward 49 
would be littered with the things.  Captain Jenny did say that the 
reason there are no bubbles may be because the Longbottoms may not be 
getting the therapy, but only empty wrappers."

Someone laughed and shouted, "You don't even know if there is any gum 
or not?"

HG remained dignified.  "As Captain Jenny said, maybe it's all just 
empty wrappers, to make it look as if they're getting their therapy.  
Maybe there's no gum, but some other poisoned confection that's 
passed off as Drooble's.  Maybe Alice isn't taking the gum to chew it 
but instead for the message that may be contained in the words.  Some 
confections are getting to Ward 49, perhaps, but if it is Drooble's, 
no one is chewing it ? or it's not Drooble's, but some tainted 
substance, and that's what's contributing to their incarceration."  

"So who's behind it, the Healer?  She was positively babying Lockhart 
and Bode!"  A couple of derisive chuckles passed through the crowd.

HG, unflinching, replied, "Aha!  You bring me to Healer Strout, who 
had to ace her Herbology N.E.W.T., who didn't recognize the 
difference between a Flitterbloom and Devil's Snare?   Either she's 
part of whoever is doing it ? or, she's affected too, by whatever's 
causing it.  And Neville's abysmal memory?  He has spent enough time 
in Ward 49 over the course of twelve years to be affected himself.  
Now it could be that Healer Strout and Neville have both had contact 
with the wrappers, which could have traces of the contaminating 
substance on them.  Or it could be something in the environment of 
the ward."

A sailor with his head bent low mumbled into his hand, "It's a closed 
ward."

"We've learned that the doors aren't imperturbable, from the Weasley 
twins, whose Extendable Ears easily wriggled under a doorway.  
Noxious fumes seep out from under cracks.  And a simple `Alohamora' 
opens the door to the `secure' closed Ward 49.  The closed ward is 
not escape proof, as Lockhart keeps wandering off."  

"But who would be doing this?"

"Again, as our steadfast Captain proposed, Lucius Malfoy is a 
generous contributor to St. Mungo's.  His word is gold around there, 
probably quite literally, as it is in the Ministry.  Fudge, as 
insecure as he is, relies heavily on advice and support (both 
financial and emotional) from Lucius Malfoy.  He is a primary 
suspect.  Other crew members have proposed that Uncle Algie or Gran 
are behind it, whether for altruistic reasons such as protecting the 
Longbottoms from getting re-engaged in the danger they were in 
before, or perhaps because of secret Death Eater affiliations.  And 
thanks to those of you on the MAGIC DISHWASHER, we can also speculate 
that Dumbledore himself needs to ensure that the Longbottoms keep mum 
about something."

"Okay, that's it ?" yelled a surly-looking sailor.  "Anybody got a 
yellow flag on them?  I think it's time to start pelting ?"

Another sailor held him back.  "Stop!  Stop!  There's some meat here, 
we have to admit it!"  Possibly, she was a MAGIC DISHWASHER crewman.

HG shouted over the swelling sound of voices.  "What's certain for 
sure is that something suspicious is going on in Ward 49, and that 
Alice is trying to communicate with her son.  Can we possibly agree 
on that?" 

A couple of sailors had broken from the group and were heading back 
to their ships, but many stayed.  A young boy spoke up, his face 
contorted in confusion. "But...I asked it before, and I'll ask it 
again: why would anyone want to do this to them?"

"My Captain said we don't know.  That's the tricky part of our 
theory.  What do the Longbottoms know that is so significant they 
need to be kept alive, but unable to communicate or act?  Killing 
Bode was simple enough, why not do the same with the Longbottoms?  
We've been told by Dumbledore that the Longbottoms "were tortured for 
information about Voldemort's whereabouts after he lost his powers" 
by the Lestranges.  But is that really the information the Lestranges 
were seeking?"

HG paused for effect before continuing.  "It's quite possible that 
the Longbottoms will come out of their long mental imprisonment.  If 
Malfoy is behind it financially (and as Fudge's puppeteer), it could 
be that the interference with the Longbottoms' health could stop with 
Malfoy's incarceration in Azkaban, and lead to their recovery.  Or, 
if the wrappers are indeed a message to be deciphered, Neville 
himself holds the clues to the resolution, and he's certainly 
motivated to help his parents.  (We've even wondered if his reason 
for having the Mimbulus Mimbletonia is because he's seeking a cure 
for his mum and dad.)  But remember our friend, Luna:  she's 
skeptical, intelligent, and will turn something upside down to 
decipher its meaning.  She doesn't accept pat, straightforward 
explanations, and will closely examine anything suspicious in 
nature.  If she were to see the Longbottoms and to see Alice give 
Neville a wrapper, she would take a new approach to the situation and 
very likely discover foul-play."

Several sailors scratched their chins, two were nodding, and a small 
faction were shaking their heads.

"Friends," said HG softly, "we didn't say we had all the answers, we 
didn't say we had the biggest canons, but small as they are, our 
canons are significant, and that's why we saw the need to set sail 
into Theory Bay, a community where the best vessels in the 
Potterverse dock, the most critical eyes zoom over the most seemingly 
inane details ? crew to crew, ship to ship, we can crack this thing!"

A cry rang out from below the deck: "HG!  Get down here!  We think 
we've got something!"

HG turned to face the crowd one last time.  "That's my captain, I've 
got to go.  This could be it, guys.  You know where to find us."  And 
with a swish of her gown, she'd disappeared below decks, leaving 
several curious sailors to try to eavesdrop through the portholes of 
the good ship SILK GOWNS.
 





From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Sun Sep 14 19:36:33 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 19:36:33 -0000
Subject: sorry-new theory on students.
In-Reply-To: <bk0m2r+r747@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk2g01+ivn0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80762

fawkes wrote:
> i did not notice the fact that i didnt write "is wrong" after the 
> 5boy/5girl per grade+house theory line. i must have mentally added 
> it in and just read the line and added it as if i knew it was there 
> at the end, even though i must have forgot to right it- sorry bout 
> that, fawkes

No harm done. You might want to double-check your posts before posting, 
though. It is impressive how much an argument can change by the 
omission of a word or two (like in this case, in which, it seems, you 
said the exact opposite of what you wanted).

I would, also, ask a favour of you. I have had trouble following your 
arguments in the last few posts, due to excessively colloquial 
language. I am not an English speaker (not as first language, I mean), 
and I have enough trouble following the formal English I was taught - 
your use of netspeak forced me at some points to read aloud to follow.

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf





From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Sun Sep 14 19:57:26 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 19:57:26 -0000
Subject: WINDOW SILLS
In-Reply-To: <bk0ln9+hgle@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk2h76+boo3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80763

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Deirdre F Woodward" <dwoodward at t...> 
wrote:
>> Even if Snape loved Lily once but no longer does, you'd think there'd 
> be at least a *nod* of recognition that Harry is the son of Lily.
> 
> And there isn't. There's been no hint at all that Snape sees Harry as 
> anyone other than James's son.  No hint, other than the OoP Pensive 
> scene, that Snape even knows Lily.  
> 

Spendid!
Does the old heart of ice good to  realise that the anti-SHIPping patrol is still  keeping 
a vigilant watch and opening fire at the first sign of the Snape!Lily tub.

IMO Snape is too coldly logical to drag Harry into an old lovers tiff, even assuming 
that it was an actual event in the first place.

Snape has a role to play, his demeanour towards Harry is part of the stage dressing. 
Yes, he probably hated James, but that is irrelevent too. Snape is now a busy little 
man, he has more important things to bother him. The fact that he could make a sort 
of peace with the instigator of the 'prank' at the end of GoF should show his emnity is 
unlikely to pass down the generations. 

Again, yes, Harry  is a pain in the  neck, but so what? He is to  just about 
everyone. Snape's been a master for 14 years, this cannot be a surprise. Teenagers 
often are unreasonably  stroppy.

If anyone cares to trawl back through the list, there are plenty of examples of good, 
sound, well reasoned posts that argue against Snape!Lily. Even done a couple of 
modest offerings myself. But still the romantics shuffle about, trying to justify  their 
position that  *it must  be*. No it mustn't. If it existed, where's the canon? None has  
been found, to my knowledge.

Kneasy
anti-romantic and proud of  it 

 




From sollecks970 at aol.com  Sun Sep 14 20:00:39 2003
From: sollecks970 at aol.com (fawkes970)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 20:00:39 -0000
Subject: A perspective on  OOP
In-Reply-To: <bk0oun+a18j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk2hd7+ench@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80764

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "linlou43" <linlou43 at y...> 
wrote:
>  Wanda wrote:
>  
> <Having fun?  Are WE having fun anymore?  Speaking for myself, I 
> have to 
>  say no.  For me, the fun died on June 21, when OotP was 
released.  
> And so 
>  much of the discussion of that book, and speculation of what it 
> will lead 
>  to, make me think that very few readers are having fun anymore. >
> 
>   
> linlou:
> 
>   I'm really sorry, Wanda, that the series has lost its' magic for 
> you. Isn't it amazing that we can feel that level of betrayal on 
> behalf of fictional characters? I sympathize with you as I have 
felt 
> that betrayal from several movies and television shows in the past.
( 
> I have a strong tendancy to become WAY too attached to fictional 
> characters no matter what the medium.) However, I am in camp with 
> those that love OOP, which is simply a difference of opinion- no 
> more, no less. Read on for why I feel this way.
> 
>  
>  Yoda :
>  
> < I loved OOP. I think that the dark tone was very appropriate. 
When 
> I was trying to contemplate what might happen after reading GOF, I 
> remember thinking that the next  book would be darker and Harry 
> would  probably be changed significantly by the the events in GOF, 
> and I hoped  that JKR would be up to the task of writing it that 
> way. I'm in the same mind as people who feel that the first two 
> books are in no way on the same level with the later books.  To be 
> fair they are better than a lot of other books, but it's kind of 
> like re-reading Anne Rice's Vampire Chronicles, Interview with the 
> Vampire is the book you have to get through to get to the good 
> stuff. >
> 
> linlou:
> 
>  I agree that the tone of OOP was appropriate, even, dare I say, 
> expected (by me, myself and I anyway). I never even thought about 
> whether JKR would be up to the task though. It simply never 
occured 
> to me to question it. I don't, however, feel that the early books 
of 
> the series are inferior to the latter, but that they are, instead, 
> rather a different kind of book that do the job they were meant to 
> do- entertain the audience more than ably, introduce the world and 
> its' characters and create the suspension of disbelief that is 
> necessary to the reader at the same time (not an easy feat in and 
of 
> itself me-thinks). 
> 
> 
>  msbeadsley wrote:
>  
> < IMO, a better written book would have communicated every bit of 
> what Harry 
>  was going through and left it Harry's without making it mine 
(which 
> I'd 
>  have resisted going in except that the first four books built up 
> such a 
>  great level of trust in me that I failed to mount defenses).>
> 
> 
>   And Yoda replied:
> 
>  < I think that the best books are the ones that suck you in and 
> cause you to live the events along with the characters. Harry 
went  
> through a very tramatic experience and then came back to find that 
> the  general public did not believe him.  He has had his sense of 
> security  taken from him after being spirited away from Hogwarts 
and 
> betrayed by  someone he trusted (fake Moody).  So it makes sense 
> that if we are to appreciate what he is going through our sense of 
> security will be removed too.>
> 
> 
> And then in a later post msbeadsly added:
> 
> <All in all, I feel somewhat as if OoP was a mostly unpleasant, 
> large 
>  expository *lump* which had good bits, mostly concerning 
> characters, 
>  labeled "insert comic relief here" or "insert ray of hope there.">
>  
> 
> linlou:
> 
> As I said above, I sympathize with the disappointment in OOP as I 
> have some experiance with the sentiment. Msbeadsle, if I am 
reading 
> your post correctly, in addition to not liking the tone of the 
book, 
> you found the flow of it disjointed? It sounds like you found the 
> insertions of "comic relief" and "rays of hope" to seem 
artificially 
> placed. I respect that, but am afraid we will have to agree to 
> disagree on this aspect of OOP.  I thought the book flowed well. 
In 
> fact, my first read took me nine hours. (straight through except 
for 
> the ride home and bathroom breaks-first four chapters in a 
> restaurant next to the bookstore) I tried to go to bed but I 
> couldn't put it down.
> 
> I said above that the first books in the series were different 
> kinds of books than the latter installments that we have so far. I 
> promised to explain that statement so here we go. 
> 
> First of all, I have read all the arguments in the last couple of 
> days both from those who liked OOP and those who didn't. In some 
of 
> the posts, the point was made that as Harry developed more and 
> understood the world around him in a darker light, so must the 
> temper of the books change in order to grow with him. In short, it 
> would be unrealistic for the books to be all moonlight and roses. 
I 
> understand that was not even what the disappointed readers were 
> looking for per se but it seems that many felt the change to swift 
> and sudden. IMO, it was neither swift nor sudden, but progressed 
> naturally beginning all the way back with Prof. McGonagall 
refusing 
> to listen about the stone being in danger in SS/PS. It is 
> intermitant during the next two books but the stage is set for the 
> disillusionment that really starts to take hold in the hospital 
> scene at the end of POA. The reason that, (agian IMO) the shift in 
> OOP seemed so sudden is because that theme was really not explored 
> in GOF, so when it resurfaced in OOP as an overriding concern for 
> Harry and co. the anger spawned by it seemed to come out of 
nowhere 
> when in fact it had been simmering on Harry's back burner since 
the 
> end of his first year.
> 
> But I'm getting off track. I was talking about the books being 
> different types wasn't I? Sorry about that.
> 
> I'm a major book worm. In my school days, I was the kind of kid 
> who's mother had to yell at her to put the book down and do her 
> algebra homework. When my high school english teacher assigned the 
> first chapter of a book we were going to analyze, I usually had 
the 
> entire thing read by the next morning. My husband once picked on 
me 
> because I was totally absorbed in the VCR instructions when I 
> already knew how to work the thing. If it's written down, I'll 
read 
> it. However, reading and enjoying can two different things 
> (admitedly with me that is rarely the case) and what I enjoy 
reading 
> depends on what I need from the book at the time. If I am looking 
> for a romp to amuse me I will read a certain type of book. If I am 
> looking for a trap door through the floor of reality I read 
another 
> type. The beginning books of the Harry Potter series are 
variations, 
> depending on the chapter, of fulfillment of these two possible 
needs 
> of an audience. As such, they seem to be aimed at a certain 
target. 
> I do have, however, a third category. This is the category that 
GOF 
> begins to fall into and OOP is entirely in- reading to gain 
insight 
> into ourselves and the world around us. I agree with Yoda in that 
I 
> don't want to understand what Harry is feeling. I want more 
> than that. I want to feel it right along with him. When I am able 
to 
> do that, I can explore my own reactions and hopefully understand 
> myself and my worldview better as a result.
> 
> Basically, I guess my point is an old one. We bring our own 
> experiences and needs to every book we read. That's the beauty of  
> reading. In movies and television the perspective is chosen for us.
> With a book, the story is written as it is, but the reader guides 
> the experience. Personally, I seem to have an innate talent to 
> adjust my needs as a reader to the type of book I'm reading, and 
> that's my good fortune. To those who need the book to fit their 
> need, I understand the disillusionment caused by OOP. I hope my 
> thoughts might help you see the book in a new light should you 
ever 
> decide to give it another try.
> 
>  Oh yes, I almost forgot to add one thing. Yes I AM still having 
fun.
> 
> -linlou


Fawkes:
I beleive that the first two books were more care-free and they were 
a lot less mature. However, once the third book came out and it 
showed how people have such complexities in their lives it brought 
out a more serious side to the HP saga.
Harry and Hermoine have both grown since the third book
(appropriately because they were the two who traveled back in time 
together and since then have grown a very close friendship). The 
fifth book shows a theme of darkness and betrayl because in OOTP 
such characters who are normally allies have been turned against 
eachother through the events of POA and GoF. 
Harry Hermoine Ron Sirius and others have the idea of Voldemort 
being back and the Death Eaters still amongst them. 
Meanwhile Cornelius and the MoM are all denying the return of 
Voldemort along with Daily Prophet staff.
Then there is Voldemort and his Death Eaters. Gathering up their 
army of Dementors and Giants, and releasing former Death Eaters from 
Azkaban show how this dark war has not ended, but that there was 
only a brief period in between two major battles of the war(i 
beleive firenze also made a comment about this in OOTP). 
The OOTP is just a more mature, involved book then the earlier book
(1+2), which doesnt make it less fun, just different. 




From scootingalong at bellsouth.net  Sun Sep 14 20:33:14 2003
From: scootingalong at bellsouth.net (scooting2win)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 20:33:14 -0000
Subject: Somethings not right
Message-ID: <bk2jaa+41s4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80765

I have been out for a little while (family reasons) and was 
rereading the books, like I've not read them 20 times a piece. But 
now something is bugging me about them. As we all know, the first 4 
books were written with amazing speed. The fourth book from what I 
understand Rowling lost the plot 1/2 way through it. She seemed to 
do pretty well for something she lost 1/2 way through (and long at 
that). So here is what I don't understand, in OoP, Rowling has Harry 
going through yet another difficult time. She throws in some pretty 
ugly people this time and adds some twist. She has always shown 
Harry as being Emotionally abused. Maybe it's something that parents 
see in the books. We see for 4 years Harry being belittled by his 
aunt and uncle, and treasured in the wizarding world. This book 
however, she slides off and has the Wizarding world belittleing him 
as well. Now what I am having a difficult time with is, she abuses 
Harry in this book. NOT emotionally, but physically. Umbridges pen! 
It sent one heck of a message to me, and for little kids reading 
this book as well. She basically is saying it's ok if someone hurts 
you, you don't have to tell an adult, you don't have to tell anyone, 
you can keep it a secret! Secrets are not good for small children to 
keep. Especially if the secret includes someone hurting them, or 
worse things then that. Maybe it's not what she intended but it's 
there none the less. Lori




From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Sun Sep 14 20:41:28 2003
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 20:41:28 -0000
Subject: Regulus/Sirius at school
In-Reply-To: <bk0cv1+t51q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk2jpo+g97j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80766

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lziner" <lziner at y...> wrote:
> After reading post #807803 about Regulus Black, it mentioned that 
> Sirius and Regulus may have been at Hogwarts together.  I can only 
> wonder how they "got on " at school.  If Sirius was the height of 
> cool (along with James), where was little bro Regulus in the 
pecking 
> order?  OR is it possible he went to another school - Drumstrang - 
> perhaps?
> 
> Just wondering if anyone had any thoughts on this.
> Lziner

Comment from CW:

I thought the post 807803 was thought-provoking too. Your comment, 
Lziner, also made me wonder about Barty Crouch Jr. He seemed to be in 
his early 30s when he is revealed at the end of GoF, and therefore 
about the right age to have been at school with Regulus and Snape 
(?). (BTW, I wonder what house he could have been in ? Surely not 
Slytherin, his father would have died of shame. Perhaps Ravenclaw, 
since he got a lot of OWLS and NEWTS apparently.)

I have always thought the pensieve scenes showing the young Crouch 
being committed to Azkaban to be slightly at odds with the mad nutter 
that he becomes in GoF. The hysterical panic of the teenage boy seems 
rather genuine, and has always made me wonder if he did, in fact, get 
caught up in something that he initially wanted to back out of, in 
the same way as possibly Regulus and Snape did. 

Even DD seems unsure as to whether he was really involved in the 
torturing of the Longbottoms. It seems he only became permanently 
twisted and evil subsequently, because his father sent him to jail, 
and then kept him under Imperius for so long. He went back to Voldie 
mainly to spite his father perhaps.

Although the torture incident occurred after the fall of Voldie, and 
the change of heart for both Regulas & Snape was before the fall, 
nevertheless, the teenage Crouch Jr could have been part of the young 
acolyte group who lost faith in Voldie for some reason, but didn't 
know how to get out safely, and then found himself caught up in 
subsequent events. It would explain his behaviour when caught much 
better.






From andie at knownet.net  Sun Sep 14 20:42:02 2003
From: andie at knownet.net (grindieloe)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 20:42:02 -0000
Subject: Did Harry ever shed tears ?
In-Reply-To: <bk28v7+11dqf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk2jqq+i86a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80767

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Melanie Black 
> <princessmelabela at y...> wrote:
> > I really think that on many levels tears can be quite healing for 
> > people.  When we are upset and have nowhere else to go, we tend 
to 
> > cry.  These tears heal us, they help us to get our feelings out.  
I 
> > know I always feel better when I allow myself to have a good cry.
> 
> There is actually neurological evidence (I *think* I read this in 
> Daniel Goleman's "Emotional Intelligence" but my copy is out on 
loan) 
> that a short period of crying affects the chemistry of the brain in 
> such a way that the period following is calmer, happier.
> 
> Sandy aka "msbeadsley" who is being quite nerdy today


I did my masters thesis on "emotional intelligence,"  have read 
Daniel Goleman's book many times, and you are correct.  This "release 
of emotion" does actually change the chemistry in our brains.  It's 
almost that the pain leaks out of our eyes.  

I hope that Harry will be able to experience this release of 
negativity in book 6.  While I do believe that Harry has cried in the 
past, I do not believe that he has let himself cry as he should.  His 
crying has been very guarded, and just a few tears... therefore, it 
doesn't give him quite the release that he needs.

Andrea




From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Sun Sep 14 20:51:10 2003
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 20:51:10 -0000
Subject: Regulus/Sirius at school
In-Reply-To: <bk0cv1+t51q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk2kbu+u3i8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80768

-- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lziner" <lziner at y...> wrote:
> After reading post #807803 about Regulus Black, it mentioned that 
> Sirius and Regulus may have been at Hogwarts together.  I can only 
> wonder how- they "got on " at school.  If Sirius was the height of 
> cool (along with James), where was little bro Regulus in the 
pecking 
> order?  OR is it possible he went to another school - Drumstrang - 
> perhaps?
> 
> Just wondering if anyone had any thoughts on this.
> Lziner

Comment from CW:

I thought the post 807803 was thought-provoking too. Your comment, 
Lziner, also made me wonder about Barty Crouch Jr. He seemed to be in 
his early 30s when he is revealed at the end of GoF, and therefore 
about the right age to have been at school with Regulus and Snape 
(?). (BTW, I wonder what house he could have been in ? Surely not 
Slytherin, his father would have died of shame. Perhaps Ravenclaw, 
since he got a lot of OWLS and NEWTS apparently.)

I have always thought the pensieve scenes showing the young Crouch 
being committed to Azkaban to be slightly at odds with the mad nutter 
that he becomes in GoF. The hysterical panic of the teenage boy seems 
rather genuine, and has always made me wonder if he did, in fact, get 
caught up in something that he initially wanted to back out of, in 
the same way as possibly Regulus and Snape did. 

Even DD seems unsure as to whether he was really involved in the 
torturing of the Longbottoms. It seems he only became permanently 
twisted and evil subsequently, because his father sent him to jail, 
and then kept him under Imperius for so long. He went back to Voldie 
mainly to spite his father perhaps.

Although the torture incident occurred after the fall of Voldie, and 
the change of heart for both Regulas & Snape was before the fall, 
nevertheless, the teenage Crouch Jr could have been part of the young 
acolyte group who lost faith in Voldie for some reason, but didn't 
know how to get out safely, and then found himself caught up in 
subsequent events. It would explain his behaviour when caught much 
better.






From elizabeth1603 at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 14 20:57:24 2003
From: elizabeth1603 at yahoo.com (elizabeth1603)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 20:57:24 -0000
Subject: Somethings not right
In-Reply-To: <bk2jaa+41s4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk2knk+oo28@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80769

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "scooting2win"  wrote:
 
>snip<
she abuses 
> Harry in this book. NOT emotionally, but physically. Umbridges pen! 
> It sent one heck of a message to me, and for little kids reading 
> this book as well. She basically is saying it's ok if someone hurts 
> you, you don't have to tell an adult, you don't have to tell 
anyone, 
> you can keep it a secret! Secrets are not good for small children 
to 
> keep. Especially if the secret includes someone hurting them, or 
> worse things then that. Maybe it's not what she intended but it's 
> there none the less. Lori

Lori, 

I completely agree with you. Now that I think about it, I could 
imagine a child's coming to that conclusion. That is part of the 
reason so many people believe these are not children's stories 
anymore. I think that if small children do read this book, they 
should read it with a parent who can explain that Harry does not 
always do what is best, and they could discuss the proper way to deal 
with these situations.

Elli




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Sun Sep 14 21:06:46 2003
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 07:06:46 +1000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Somethings not right
In-Reply-To: <bk2jaa+41s4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F656506.19014.3A815CE@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 80770

On 14 Sep 2003 at 20:33, scooting2win wrote:

> It sent one heck of a message to me, and for little kids reading 
> this book as well. She basically is saying it's ok if someone hurts 
> you, you don't have to tell an adult, you don't have to tell anyone, 
> you can keep it a secret! Secrets are not good for small children to 
> keep. Especially if the secret includes someone hurting them, or 
> worse things then that. Maybe it's not what she intended but it's 
> there none the less. Lori

I came away with exactly the opposite impression, which is interesting. 
Harry could have told someone and chose not to, and because he didn't, 
he continued to suffer.

Maybe nothing would have happened if he had told someone - the way the 
Wizarding World seems to work, I wouldn't be at all surprised, this is a 
place where horsewhipping of pupils seems to be a legal possibility and 
where they were hung from chains in the (recent?) past - but I don't 
think there's a message there that you shouldn't tell someone.

Books can't *always* have their protagonists doing the smart thing - 
even if there would be a decent object lesson in it for their readers. 
When that happens, the book becomes nothing but an object lesson - there 
is a place for books like that but the Harry Potter books are far more 
than that.

If Harry had gone for help, he would have seemed to me to be acting 
*totally* out of character - he's not the type of kid who does that, 
even when it'd be the sensible thing. That's true to life. I was 
seriously abused at school (by other students, generally not by teachers 
- at least I don't think so - some people think I was because I went to 
a school with physical punishment, but I happen to agree with that in 
some cases - though not the Umbridge extent) and I *should* have told 
someone. My life would have been much easier if I *had* told someone. I 
know that now. I know what the sensible thing to do was. But I didn't do 
it. Kids do not always do the smart thing - and Harry is such a kid.

I think the Harry Potter books do have lessons for kids in them - but I 
think we make a serious mistake if we assume that every incident has to 
be a lesson in what kids should do. The books are not primers on what 
kids should do in certain circumstances.

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 liliana at worldonline.nl  Sun Sep 14 21:27:39 2003
From: liliana at worldonline.nl (laylalast)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 21:27:39 -0000
Subject: Mistaken Identity (slight TBAY refs) long
In-Reply-To: <ba.464c10c4.2c932c3c@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bk2mgb+es9o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80771

eloiseherisson at a... wrote:
> A very interesting theory, Lilian, and definite TBAY material.
> But you know what? You've got to give your vessel a snazzy name 
and try to 
> recruit some crew and throw in some obscure acronyms.  And don't 
forget the 
> fish!  (CARP* are best)
>
Lilian:

Finally, time to answer your post!
Thanks for the advice, I immediately started working on the acronym. 
I forgot about the obscure though. Will MISTAKEN GIRLS do?

Mistaken
Identity
Subsequently
Triggers an
Aweful
Knot of
Events,
Next
Ginny's
Identity
Revealed as
Love-child of
Severus

> Eloise:
> I'm now going to throw a spanner in the works, but don't worry 
about that. 
> I'm sure you'll throw it back.

Lilian:
Rolls up sleeves and stands ready to catch.

> Eloise:
> Lilian:
> >- This is what the title of the post refers to and this is why I 
> >believe that Lily has red hair. No family relation with the 
Weasleys, 
> >no family relation with Dumbledore. A case of mistaken identity. 
> >Mistaken identity by Bertha, which sets off a course of 
incidents. 
> >Mistaken identity as a plot twist by JKR. -
> 
> ~Eloise:
> See, I find this element of the argument a bit circular. You 
believe, if I 
> understand correctly, that Lily has red hair because Florence has. 
But where 
> does canon state that Florence has red hair?
> 
> I'm not *quite* certain what you mean, actually. Do you meant you 
have come 
> to the conclusion that Lily's hair is red because that way she 
could have been 
> mistaken for the red-haired Florence (in which case it might be 
expressed that 
> Florence must have red hair because Lily's is)? Or do you mean 
that the 
> *literary* reason for Lily having red hair is in order for the 
mistaken identity 
> thing to take place?
> 

Lilian:
The last one, *literary* reason. I think that JKR gave Lily red hair 
not because JKR likes red hair but so that the confusion about who 
Snape was now actually kissing could take place. Red hair, all in 
all, is not frequently seen and is thus rather easily recognised. 
But if there are two girls with red hair.....
No, canon does not have it that Florence has red hair, that is what 
I came up with it when I thought of the red hair as a clue to a 
mistaken identity. Then I thought that that would mean that there 
was another girl with red hair, and as I already believed that what 
Bertha saw is a clue to the Prank, I (not JKR as of yet) theorized 
that Florence has red hair. And THEN I started thinking: who else do 
we know having red hair? The Weasley family.

I hope I have explained my train of thought better.

<snip>
> Lilian (quoting interview):
> 
> >"Q: Will Snape ever fall in love?
> >A: (laughs) Who would want Snape to be in love with them? 
<snips rest> 

> Eloise: 
> Not curious in the least to my mind. It's just normal, rather 
sloppy informal 
> English usage. 
<snip>

Lilian:
I admitted in another reply that being Dutch tripped me over this. 
Thank heavens it does not wash out the theory! Just one piece of 
canon less. Although it was putting all those JKR quotes together 
which made me mighty suspicious at first.
     
>Eloise, quoting me:
> Lilian: 
> >But, but, that would mean that Snape got himself involved with a 
> >WEASLEY, I can hear you all think. Yes, he did. Sorry, for the 
LOLLIPOPS-ers 
> >among us, but Snape himself ruled Lily out in OotP as 
> >she was `a filthy, little mud-blood' (don't like it anymore than 
you 
> >do, but he said so).   
> 
> 
> Eloise: 
> Mmm. You really think so? That he ruled her out? Is it not a case 
of 
> "Methinks the gentleman doth protest too much?". I have to admit 
that I never did 
> volunteer for service aboard the Good Ship LOLLIPOPS, but OoP made 
me think that 
> perhaps I was wrong <doffs cap in direction of Captain Tabouli>.
>

Lilian:
I'd better say it's a few things added together. 
1) At the time Snape was in Slytherin, which are not known for their 
love of 'mudbloods';
2) Snape called her a 'you know what' (was the final straw for me);
3) Snape has truly been a DE at first;
4) But that's rather my personal opinion, namely that I don't 
dislike LOLLIPOPS but thought Lily-Snape too obvious. 

I like having to dig deep for the true meaning to something. To 
throw in an example from OOtP: During Occlumency lessons Harry 
remembers the Dementors closing in on him - his father and mother 
waving at him from the mirror of Erised - something else. When 
Harry's mind clears and he can see Snape again, Snape is described 
as 'rather pale'. And off I go digging! Surface meaning: Snape sees 
James - nope, Snape sees James every time he sees Harry so why go 
pale now? Digging deeper: LOLLIPOPS - maybe, maybe, but can I dig 
deeper? What can Snape see in a flash? A red-haired woman! He is 
suddenly reminded of Florence, at a moment that he is not prepared - 
and becomes rather pale of shock.

<snips Dumbledore's trusting Snape, while adding that she does not 
think either that DD is infallible>

> Eloise:
>As for Ginny being his child?
> Well, I'm sorry, but I don't buy it.

Lilian:
Don't you even think of it. My theory is not for sale! (LOL)

> Eloise:
 His reaction when Ginny is taken into 
> the Chamber doesn't tally. Before he knows who it is that has been 
taken, he 
> grips the back of a chair very hard. But after he knows, his only 
recorded 
> reactions are to belittle Lockhart. There is no hint whatsoever 
that he himself 
> tries to do anything to secure her safety. You are right: he would 
have not to 
> care much about her. But then, why distance himself from her 
sorting, or refuse 
> to eat with her?

Lilian:
Ah, yes. That scene bothered me too, reason why I did not add it 
(yet) to my theory. But yesterday illumination struck me (still 
recovering from shock <g>). 
Remember, Snape was and will be again, and IMO has continued all the 
time to be, a SPY. And a good one at that. Occlumency alone does not 
make Snape, or anyone else for that matter, a good spy. It is also 
the ability to think fast and keep your act together. Snape can do 
this as is proven in OOtP when Harry gives him the coded message in 
front of Umbridge.
If you look at the scene from this perspective, Snape gripping a 
chair becomes downright suspicious. It's a display of emotion which 
you would not expect from a spy, let alone Snape.
So Snape needs, for a short moment, to brace himself for what is to 
come. And then is his usual nasty self again, which is displayed 
directly afterwards: tormenting Lockhart for his (Lockhart's) 
arrogance. Other explanations are valid as well, but this is simply 
mine. 

We have no evidence whatsoever of what Snape did after that scene. 
As Head of Slytherin he at least was going to inform those students 
that they would go home the following morning. After that, well? As 
Snape pointed out earlier to Lockhart, he, as Potions master, is the 
first one to deal with the Mandrake Restorative Draught. Perhaps he 
was dealing with the Draught. When all came back from the Chamber of 
Secrets, Ginny is send off to the Hospital wing, where Madam Pomfrey 
is just giving out Mandrake juice. I wonder whether Ginny was also 
send there because Snape would be there as well, so he could see for 
himself that she was still alive?
Maybe Snape did try something, we just never got to see it. Perhaps 
he even thought (oh horror!) that he could best leave it to Harry, 
who as parselmouth could get in the Chamber whereas Snape could not.

As too Snape's distancing himself from Ginny by not attending the 
sorting and eating afterwards. Well, I see it no so much as 
distancing but more as being troubled by memories of the past. You 
might say that it is not in line with what I said just now about his 
necessary calmness as spy, but that was a crisis-situation. Not so, 
however, at the beginning of the year. Harry and Ron's act just gave 
him a good excuse to stay away from the feast. Catching them gave 
Snape a good excuse to torment Harry, and Ron for a change, with 
possible expulsion. IMO, Snape never really expected them to be 
expelled, but he delighted in giving them a rough time. 

> Eloise:
> 
> Lilian:
> >And Dumbledore's patience with the man. Taking him in a 
> >fatherly way to the feast in COS, Snape's not wanting Lupin to 
teach 
> >in POA (no werewolf at the school where my kid is! ??"apart from 
> >Snape's other reasons-). Realising that it is not easy for any 
> >person, even Snape, to give up its child, distance itself from it.
>     
> 
> Eloise: 
> Dumbledore *is* patient. And he is trusting. And if you look for 
it there is 
> a lot of evidence of father/surrogate son interaction between 
Dumbldedore and 
> Snape. Snape is the wayward son, the prodigal brought back into 
the fold. He 
> is the difficult, challenging child. Dumbledore is the caring 
father figure 
> that OoP implies Snape lacked. They have a relationship of mutual 
trust, 
> dependence and profound disagreement. I don't think we need to 
bring Ginny in to 
> explain their relationship.

Lilian:

It?s that father/surrogate son interaction which I do not find 
satisfactory, even dangereous should that be the relation between 
them. Just leaves me to expect Snape to rebel against it and go over 
to LV again. After OOtP I think that Dumbledore taught Snape 
Occlumency so he could start to spy, and found out some of the 
disturbing facts of Snapes youth. Dumbledore is left with guilty 
feelings for never interfering at the time Snape was at Hogwarts, 
and (partly because of that) tries to spare Harry as far as he can. 
Leaving Harry not with the Dursleys is, unfortunately, not possible 
because of the blood protection.

And I don't want to offend you by being too nitpickish but I brought 
Dumbledore's trust in as another explanation for Ginny being Snape's 
child, not the other way around.
All in all, Dumbledore's trust is because of a multiple of reasons, 
a kid at the good side just one of the stronger ones.

And  matters like these are differences of how one looks at the HP 
stories. Ending the Mistaken Identity with Ginny as Snape?s child is 
something that kind of happened to me after I started thinking of 
Florence as a Weasley. An ideal place after all, to hide your child, 
is it not? In the line of: where do you hide a tree? In a forest. 
Where do you hide a shell? On the beach. Where do you hide a red-
haired child? In a whole family of red-haired people. Ron?s 
brothers: too old to connect it to Snape?s switching sides. Ron 
himself: too close to Harry to make me believe it. So that left me 
with Ginny, after which I started to look for canon which might 
contain clues.  And what happened then is what you replied to with 
this post.

To add a few final remarks to this: when pondering on Ginny as 
Snape?s child I concluded that that would be, to me, an interesting 
enough plot twist (well, not anymore now...<g>). For example: Snape 
might sacrifice himself for her, giving her the same protection 
Harry had from his mother (imagines gasps of horrified readers, 
exclaiming: What! Are they blood-related!). Not if it is someone who 
we hardly have seen yet, like the stringy pallid kid who could see 
the thestrals in OOtP. And I always felt that if Snape has had 
anything to do with love, there had to be ties to his Hogwarts past, 
particularly MWPP. This just makes it work for me.

Oh, before I forget. It?s really that annoying reply of JKR in the 
interview with Jeremy Paxman, that set me off on this track. Saying 
(in reply to a question about unusual pairings) that there is a 
relationship that is at the heart of it all, but it has only been 
skirted by fans... That?s been a downright challenge to me. No rest 
until I finally came up with something new. 

I admit that I may start having too high expectations, caused by 
digging deeper and deeper into HP through this forum. It?s a risk we 
all run.

Lilian, off to give her vessel a snazzy name and additional work on  
the theory after all these posts. 
BTW, it's probably silly ol' me, but what am I supposed to do with 
CARP's? Can't I bring a killer whale? I suddenly realised that after 
MISTAKEN GIRLS and previous posts relating Snape to the Malfoys and 
Agnes in St. Mungo's, Snape is by now in a towering rage and out for 
my blood. I'll look under my bed this evening.... 

If there are people who would like come aboard MISTAKEN GIRLS, 
please send me an email!




From keltobin at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 14 22:18:30 2003
From: keltobin at yahoo.com (Kelly)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 22:18:30 -0000
Subject: What's Arthur been up to (was Re: relationships/ages of characters)
In-Reply-To: <BAY1-F5897lhwLTZ80a0000adc3@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <bk2pfm+sbd7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80772


K Said:
> There is a similar inconsistency with Fudge's attitude though --
> in POA he says "You-know-you alone and friendless is one thing,
> but give him his most faithful servant back and I dread to think
> how soon he'll rise again" (approximately). But in GOF he totally
> disbelieves in this return, even though he thinks the servant
> (Sirius in his eyes) has escaped to assist Voldemort.
> 
> Probably it is just a JKR mistake instead of deep plot significance!

I think that it is less of a mistake and more of an example of 
denial.  It is not unheard of for politicians to blatently deny 
serious problems (i.e. the crime rate, state of the school systems, 
etc).  Over time, I can see Fudge believing his own propaganda.  
Until, of course, he sees Voldemort appear in the middle of the MOM.  
I can imagine his world did a bit of a crash at that point.

Kelly




From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Sep 14 22:23:17 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 22:23:17 -0000
Subject: Bill's age/Voldemort as Ultimate Dementor/Slavery/Secrecy
Message-ID: <bk2pom+cd9i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80773

Sue Great Raven wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/80744 :

<< I don't think Bill can be much over 22, because in GoF, when he
visits Hogwarts, he says he left five years ago. >>

No, he says "It's great being back here," said Bill, looking around
the chamber (Violet, the Fat Lady's friend, winked at him from her
frame). "Haven't seen this place for five years. Is that picture of
the mad knight still around? Sir Cadogan?" I understand that to mean
that he left school long ago, but visited there five years before 
GoF, which would be one year before PS/SS, when Percy would have been
in fourth year and the twins in second year.

Jen Reese wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/80749 :

<< Perhaps Voldemort is The Ultimate Dementor, sucking all the good
thoughts and memories of all who try to fight him, and he and his
followers feed off them. People like Umbridge, Fudge and Percy
knowingly or unknowingly contribute to their power by thwarting the
Power of Good and feeding the Power of Evil. >>

Presumably, the Death Eaters don't feed on stolen good thoughts, or
they would get hungrier as they get more successful (because the more
successful they get, the fewer good thoughts people have). Dementors
at Azkaban have that same problem, so if the wizards don't keep
sending them a supply of fresh food, they're easily tempted to 
leave Azkaban and hunt for their own fresh food. Thus, people like
Umbridge are not good for Dementors, because they reduce the amount 
of good thoughts available for Dementors to feed on. Can it be that
Death Eaters get nourishment from people's *bad* thoughts without
taking the bad thought away from the people? 

DeeDee wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/80752 :

<< I'm watching muggle news closely...a coffee plantation in South
America was just shut down and more than 1,000 slaves were
freed...this is in the year 2003. What happens to these people, their
families, the community in which the slaves were kept. >>

According to an article in SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, unless the freed
slaves get some training in money management, legal rights, and
self-esteem, they soon end up enslaved again. I quoted the article in
Message 37561. I found it again at     
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?colID=1&articleID=0005F839-CC90-1CC6-B4A8809EC588EEDF
(if the URL doesn't work, go to www.sciam.com, click on Magazine,
click on Past Issues, choose 2002, choose April)
"When I met Baldev in 1997, he was plowing. His master called him "my
halvaha," meaning "my bonded plowman." Two years later I met Baldev
again and learned that because of a windfall from a relative, he had
freed himself from debt. But he had not freed himself from bondage. 
He told me: 

After my wife received this money, we paid off our debt and were free
to do whatever we wanted. But I was worried all the time--what if one
of the children got sick? What if our crop failed? What if the
government wanted some money? Since we no longer belonged to the
landlord, we didn't get food every day as before. Finally, I went to
the landlord and asked him to take me back. I didn't have to borrow
any money, but he agreed to let me be his halvaha again. Now I don't
worry so much; I know what to do.

Lacking any preparation for freedom, Baldev reenrolled in slavery.
Without financial or emotional support, his accidental emancipation
didn't last. Although he may not bequeath any debt to his children,
his family is visibly worse off than unbonded villagers in the same
region."

Laura jwcpgh wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/80754 : 

<< What is it about knowledge that makes grownups (both in HP and in
the RW) so reluctant to share it? Is it that knowledge is power and
adults don't want to give up their power over children? Is it
laziness? embarrassment? inability to find the right words? sheer
stupidity? >>

Listie Lunalovegoodrules has a theory about why all the adults keep
information from Harry in the story. 

Scooting2win Lori wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/80765 :

<< Now what I am having a difficult time with is, she abuses
Harry in this book. NOT emotionally, but physically. Umbridges pen!
It sent one heck of a message to me, and for little kids reading
this book as well. She basically is saying it's ok if someone hurts
you, you don't have to tell an adult, you don't have to tell anyone,
you can keep it a secret! Secrets are not good for small children to
keep. Especially if the secret includes someone hurting them, or
worse things then that. Maybe it's not what she intended but it's
there none the less. >>

I *hope* anyone with long enough attention span to read OoP has good
enough memory and understanding to notice that the result of Harry
keeping secrets (and of Dumbledore keeping secrets) is that Sirius 
was killed. "Keeping secrets makes bad things happen" could almost be
the moral of OoP.




From jdr0918 at hotmail.com  Sun Sep 14 22:30:30 2003
From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 22:30:30 -0000
Subject: Veelas
In-Reply-To: <20030913192900.17479.qmail@web40008.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bk2q66+iqn7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80774

<<<In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Paula Gaon wrote:...does anyone 
have a theory who/what the Veelas are?...>>>

The Sergeant Majorette says

Check out message 60603; and yeah, they *are* related to the ballet 
willies...

--JDR




From cindysphynx at comcast.net  Sun Sep 14 22:52:37 2003
From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (Cindy C.)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 22:52:37 -0000
Subject: TBAY:  "I See London, I See France!"
Message-ID: <bk2rfl+8olm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80776

"That'll be *enough* out of you!"  Cindy growled, fixing George with
her watery, bloodshoot eyes.

George, his face flushed, had flung his upper body onto the bar, his
shoulders shaking with laughter.  "No . . . no . . . ," he sputtered,
gasping for breath.  "Wait -- wait, there's *more!*"  He lifted his
head slightly, tears of mirth slipping down his porcelain cheeks. 
"Not only did Hermione survive OoP without so much as a hair out of
place -?"

"*CAN IT*, George -?"

"-?but your ever-so-important Put Outer is about is pivotal as a book
of *matches* -?"

"I'm *warning* you, pal --"

"And your *tattoo!*  'Moody and Rookwood 4 Eva!'" George snorted. 
"How much does it cost to burn a tattoo off nowadays, anyway?"  George
tossed his head back, gales of laughter filling the bar. "What did you
use to *make* those predictions, anyway?  A crystal ball?  A Ouija
board?  A Magic 8 ball?"

"Go on, then.  Laugh it up," Cindy said with disgust.  "I didn't win
any of my OoP prediction bets, which means I don't have the money to
pay my bar tab.  So you lose, too!"

"Come on.  You must have gotten *something* right?"

"Nope.  I'm O for 78 on my predictions.  But that's not the worst
part," Cindy said evenly, gulping the lukewarm tap water in her
champagne glass.  "No, the worst part was the *Bang* deficit in OoP."

"Now why am I not surprised that you found OoP insufficiently Bangy?"
George asked, rolling his eyes.  "What seems to be the problem now?"

"Seriously, there's something in OoP that just doesn't work," Cindy
mused.  "It's just not *right.*  I mean, tell me, what is the pivotal
scene in OoP?"

"Oh, that's easy.  The Rumble in the Ministry of Magic."

Cindy threw him a scornful look.  "No, I mean the pivotal scene that
isn't *completely dreadful.*"

"Oh, OK.  That has to be the scene where James torments Snape,
culminating in a flash of Snape's underwear."  George rested his
elbows on the bar.  "Yep, that was a classic.  Snape endured the
Ultimate Humiliation in that scene."

"Ya think?"  Cindy said icily.  "You think that's the Ultimate
Humiliation for a person in Snape's position at Hogwarts as Designated
Victim?"

George nodded slowly.  "I see nothing wrong with it.  And JKR agrees
with me ?- she called that chapter 'Snape's Worst Memory.'  It's
supposed to be especially compelling, part of what makes Snape who he
is, what causes him to do the slow burn that is central to
SWEETGEORGANISM --"

Cindy scowled at him.  "Well, let's look at the way that scene
develops.  First, James sees Snape and disarms him.  That's not nice.
 Then he hits him with _Impedimenta_, knocking the wind out of Snape.
 That's even worse.  So that's a pretty aggressive start to a round of
spirited bullying, don't you think?"

"Yeah, it's a lot worse than any bullying we've seen at Hogwarts among
Harry's peers, anyway."

"Right.  But then JKR takes it *up* a notch, doesn't she?  She has
James use _Scourgify_, causing Snape to crawl on the ground, choking
on his own soapy froth.  So that's the worst thing yet."

"So?"

"Well, it's the next bit I have trouble with," Cindy said slowly,
groping around for a pretzel.  "This is supposed to be Snape's *worst*
memory.  We know about the Prank, when Snape was in mortal danger. 
This underwear scene is supposed to be the most horrid thing that ever
happened to Snape.  And what does JKR choose as the Ultimate Insult to
Snape?"  She reached for a tattered copy of OoP and began to read:

"James whirled about; a second flash of light later, Snape was hanging
upside down in the air, his robes falling over his head to reveal
skinny, pallid legs and a pair of graying underpants."

"What's wrong with that?" George asked, his eyes narrowed.

"Well, it's the *underpants,* frankly," Cindy said, closing the book
with a snap.  "Having others see your underwear isn't a lot of fun, I
guess, but it is hardly the worst thing that can ever happen to a
person.  Not by a long shot.  It's not even *close.*"

"Come *on!*" George retorted.  "Snape was humiliated in front of the
whole school."

"That's my point.  It wasn't nearly enough.  It was an instance -? and
there are several in OoP ?- where JKR chooses to write a scene of
drama and suspense, but she includes something rather childish or
lighthearted in the scene as well, which *ruins* it for me.  Underwear
is often considered a bit of a gag, really.  Mildly embarrassing, to
be sure, but hardly the climax of what is supposed to be Snape's worst
memory ever.  Worse than being a DE.  Worse than the Prank.  Worse
than whatever he did for Voldemort at the end of GoF.

"It's anti-climactic, that's all," Cindy finished.  "And Bangers can't
deal with things that are anti-climactic.  It upsets us." 

"Well, if you're so smart," George challenged, "what should JKR have
done instead of the underwear business?"

"Mmmm," Cindy said, rubbing her chin thoughtfully.  She glanced
quickly around the bar, as though checking to see if anyone were
listening, then lowered her voice to a hoarse whisper.  "What's
missing when you hang someone upside down so that others see their
underwear is the risk of *physical* pain, disfigurement, even death. 
When the victim is at your mercy and finds himself wondering whether
you'll stop or go too far before something really *serious* happens. 
*That's* the very worst kind of bullying -? the kind the victim never
forgets.  And never forgives.

"I mean, we have a very good example of that sort of drama and
suspense, and it is a favorite scene of mine -- the graveyard scene in
GoF.  Were there any comic elements in that scene?  Heck, no!  That's
why we were able to take it seriously -- because *JKR* took it seriously!"

"Yeah, well," George allowed.  "But if she did it your way, then she'd
be writing different books entirely."

"Yeah," Cindy said with a thin smile.  "Gripping, disturbing books
that are way too much for kids.  

"*Bangy* books, in other words."

**************************

Cindy





From sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 14 23:14:35 2003
From: sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com (sarcasticmuppet)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 23:14:35 -0000
Subject: seeking knowledge and keeping secrets-long
In-Reply-To: <bk2aat+2r8c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk2sor+54iv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80777

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "greatelderone" 
<greatelderone at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
> > So when Harry asks DD a direct question about LV in PS/SS and DD 
> > refuses to answer, he's making a terrible mistake that sets him 
up 
> to 
> > repeat it in the next 3 books, until both Harry and Sirius have 
> paid 
> > the cost.  
> 
> If Dumbledore had told Harry about the prophecy in PS/SS then 
> Voldemort would have ripped the thing out of Harry's head instead 
of 
> sneaking into the DoM and then would have immediately targeted 
Harry 
> and tried to kill him. If anything holding the information from 
Harry 
> only bought more time for Harry though at the cost of Sirius's life.

but if Harry knew exactly what Voldemort was up to should he rise 
again, he would have actually studied Occlumency, and Voldemort 
wouldn't have the prophecy, and Sirius would be alive.




From greatelderone at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 14 23:35:54 2003
From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 23:35:54 -0000
Subject: seeking knowledge and keeping secrets-long
In-Reply-To: <bk2sor+54iv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk2u0q+55sm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80778

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sarcasticmuppet" 
<sarcasticmuppet at y...> wrote:
> but if Harry knew exactly what Voldemort was up to should he rise 
> again, he would have actually studied Occlumency, and Voldemort 
> wouldn't have the prophecy, and Sirius would be alive.

Occlumency takes time to learn. Voldemort ripping the information 
out of Harry's head wouldn't take very long. So knowing about the 
prophecy before finding a way to resist Voldemort's legilimency is a 
sure fire way for Voldemort to learn of the prophecy's details and 
for Harry to become the prime target of the Death Eaters.




From sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 14 23:45:26 2003
From: sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com (sarcasticmuppet)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 23:45:26 -0000
Subject: Somethings not right
In-Reply-To: <bk2jaa+41s4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk2uim+9ult@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80779

<snipage>
Now what I am having a difficult time with is, she abuses 
> Harry in this book. NOT emotionally, but physically. Umbridges pen! 
> It sent one heck of a message to me, and for little kids reading 
> this book as well. She basically is saying it's ok if someone hurts 
> you, you don't have to tell an adult, you don't have to tell 
anyone, 
> you can keep it a secret! Secrets are not good for small children 
to 
> keep. Especially if the secret includes someone hurting them, or 
> worse things then that. Maybe it's not what she intended but it's 
> there none the less. Lori

Harry's reaction was reasonable considering his relationship with 
Dumbledore at the time.  When R&H find out about the pen, they flip 
out and tell him to go to Dumbledore.  Harry is having mixed feelings 
about going to Dumbledore about anything considering the cold-
shouldering he's been getting.  Should he have told someone?  
Probably, but Harry isn't the type to go tell adults things anyway.




From pokeypokey at comcast.net  Sun Sep 14 23:47:53 2003
From: pokeypokey at comcast.net (angelberri56)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 23:47:53 -0000
Subject: seeking knowledge and keeping secrets-long
In-Reply-To: <bk27nj+puri@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk2un9+4qrv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80780

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" 
<jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
>
> <snip>
> This whole line of discussion really struck me.  Why is it that 
> adults would want to hide information from children (especially 
at a 
> school, for Pete's sake!).  <snip>
> 
> So when Harry asks DD a direct question about LV in PS/SS 
and DD 
> refuses to answer, he's making a terrible mistake that sets 
him up to 
> repeat it in the next 3 books, until both Harry and Sirius have 
paid 
> the cost.  And don't even get me started about Molly and her 
constant 
> infantilizing (is that a word?) of her children and Harry. 
> McGonagall, Hagrid...These adults should know perfectly well 
that the 
> kids are going to get information one way or another.  The 
choice 
> isn't whether or not they'll find things out, but whether they'll 
> find out the complete set of facts or have to rely on rumor, 
> guesswork, overheard tidbits and each other to cobble 
together some 
> information.  And we know how easy it is for kids to put what 
they 
> think they know together and come to completely the wrong 
conclusion.
> 
> What is it about knowledge that makes grownups (both in HP 
and in the 
> RW) so reluctant to share it?  Is it that knowledge is power and 
> adults don't want to give up their power over children?  Is it 
> laziness?  embarrassment?  inability to find the right words?  
sheer 
> stupidity?


angelberri56: 

I can't really say why adults choose not to divulge certain 
information to kids... it's one of those mysteries of life... :>)  
(Either that or I just don't know!)

Yet, in HP, the only plausible reason i can think of for Harry 
finding out bits of information, instead of people just telling him, 
is because simply, Harry Potter is a book. More importantly, it is 
a story, and with all stories, the author chooses to let the reader 
discover the information in the author's own way. Basically, we 
are reading and discovering through Harry. If JKR just told us 
(Harry) straight out all we needed to know, well then it wouldn't 
be the teriffic book it is. Mystery books usually give you pieces of 
information along the way, leading you to solve the mystery just 
at the end. They build us up, making us want to read more. 

For example:

There's that one thread that has been pondered numerous 
times... why didn't Crouch/Moody just turn Harry's pillow or 
something into a portkey, why did he go through all that trouble to 
get Harry through the Tournament  just so he could touch the 
Cup?

Well, if Harry hadn't gone through the tournament, then we 
wouldn't really have a very interesting book on our hands, now 
would we?  *A story of a young wizard who goes to school, 
watches a wizard tournament at his school, and then is captured 
by Lord Voldemort...*    The whole plot has collapsed. 

So, what happens in books, we may not see as logical or 
sensible, but it is there for the purpose of pure enjoyment. 

-angelberri56 ,   who really hopes you followed what she was 
saying and are not asleep on your keyboard right now... 

- If anyone feels differently, please, I'd love to hear your opinion! 
Thanks!




From phoenixtears at fuse.net  Sun Sep 14 23:55:04 2003
From: phoenixtears at fuse.net (phoenixmum)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 23:55:04 -0000
Subject: Prophecy's value/ was Re: seeking knowledge and keeping secrets-long
In-Reply-To: <bk2u0q+55sm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk2v4o+f40h@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80781


> <sarcasticmuppet at y...> wrote:
> > but if Harry knew exactly what Voldemort was up to should he rise 
> > again, he would have actually studied Occlumency, and Voldemort 
> > wouldn't have the prophecy, and Sirius would be alive.
> 
> Occlumency takes time to learn. Voldemort ripping the information 
> out of Harry's head wouldn't take very long. So knowing about the 
> prophecy before finding a way to resist Voldemort's legilimency is 
a 
> sure fire way for Voldemort to learn of the prophecy's details and 
> for Harry to become the prime target of the Death Eaters.

Reply:  I thought the irony in OOtP was that Voldemort extended great 
effort to learn the "rest of the prophecy," but there really wasn't 
anything of value to learn (for LV anyway). LV doesn't know this, and 
may continue to seek it in other ways. But Harry has already been a 
target for LV, who has tried to kill him repeatedly, without LV 
knowing the complete prophecy. What part doesn't LV know? That's not 
clear to me.  (Maybe the part about "having powers the Dark Lord 
knows not.") But he already seems to know the essential part: that 
Harry/the prophesized child being the source of his downfall.

Phoenix 

PS: Agree  with the comment upthread about the moral of OOtP being 
that excessive secretkeeping causing bad things to happen.




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Mon Sep 15 00:14:44 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 00:14:44 -0000
Subject: LV's Evil: "Gift for Spreading Discord and Enmity..."
In-Reply-To: <bk1t3m+hf3a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk309k+gj12@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80782

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" <stevejjen at e...> 
wrote:
> 
> Perhaps Voldemort is The Ultimate Dementor, sucking all the good 
> thoughts and memories of all who try to fight him, and he and his 
> followers feed off them.  People like Umbridge, Fudge and Percy 
> knowingly or unknowingly contribute to their power by thwarting the 
> Power of Good and feeding the Power of Evil.
> 
> 

catlady's response:

Presumably, the Death Eaters don't feed on stolen good thoughts, or
they would get hungrier as they get more successful (because the more
successful they get, the fewer good thoughts people have). Dementors
at Azkaban have that same problem, so if the wizards don't keep
sending them a supply of fresh food, they're easily tempted to 
leave Azkaban and hunt for their own fresh food. Thus, people like
Umbridge are not good for Dementors, because they reduce the amount 
of good thoughts available for Dementors to feed on. Can it be that
Death Eaters get nourishment from people's *bad* thoughts without
taking the bad thought away from the people? 


Jen again:
I should have said Voldemort is *like* the Ultimate Dementor, because 
I was picturing him as performing Dark Magic in a way similar to the 
dementors, but that the result would be the spreading of "disord and 
enmity" by producing dark thoughts and feelings in others. So I 
didn't explain this thought right, talking about Voldemort "sucking 
the good thoughts and feelings."

Rather, as the dark magic penetrates the psyche of the Good, their 
power is diminished and thus, increases the Power of Evil. Jen




From greatelderone at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 00:26:17 2003
From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 00:26:17 -0000
Subject: Prophecy's value/ was Re: seeking knowledge and keeping secrets-long
In-Reply-To: <bk2v4o+f40h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk30v9+a9ts@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80783

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "phoenixmum" 
<phoenixtears at f...> wrote:
 
> Reply:  I thought the irony in OOtP was that Voldemort extended 
great 
> effort to learn the "rest of the prophecy," but there really 
wasn't 
> anything of value to learn (for LV anyway). LV doesn't know this, 
and 
> may continue to seek it in other ways. But Harry has already been 
a 
> target for LV, who has tried to kill him repeatedly, without LV 
> knowing the complete prophecy. What part doesn't LV know? 

That the only one he has had to fear is Harry and that while Harry 
lives Voldemort will not die at the hands of any other wizard, which 
gives him a free ticket to knocking off Dumbledore and the rest of 
the Order and Ministry.




From dwoodward at towson.edu  Mon Sep 15 00:32:53 2003
From: dwoodward at towson.edu (Deirdre F Woodward)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 20:32:53 -0400
Subject: Snape and Lily and Florence and Ginny and . . . 
References: <1063577920.8363.48291.m19@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <001601c37b20$e85bb500$79092244@parkvl01.md.comcast.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 80784

I'm sitting firmly on the WINDOW SILLS and I think there are some joiners up
here with me.  *waves to other (non) believers*

Ok.  Where to start.  So far, I've gotten several people defending theories
for Snape loving Lily (or Florence).  The authors note that Snape could hate
Harry because Harry is the cause of Lily's death.

Good theory, and I have no counterargument.

Except.

*Why* would Snape love Lily?  What possible plot device could it serve?  I
mean, we are reading a *novel* after all, and all threads lead to a
conclusion (except red herrings and FLINTS, of course).

Let's play this out at the very basic of levels -- at some point Snape
confesses his love of  Lily.  To whom?  The only one to whom it would matter
would be Harry, and what would that do to/for Harry?

Will that knowledge help Harry?  Under what circumstances could knowing
Snape loved Lily possibly help Harry?
Will it hinder Harry?  How?

[cut to Hogwarts]
Snape eyed Harry cooly.  "We've had our difficulties, Potter."

Harry nodded curtly.

Snape continued, "But we are on the same side, and we need to stand together
to defeat the Dark Lord."

Harry motioned impatiently.  Was this going somewhere, or was Snape
intentionally trying to delay Harry?  He felt the same lump of suspision and
dislike that had settle in him seven long years ago, the moment he'd set
eyes on Snape.  "What's up, Snape?" Harry bit out.  "I gotta get out of
here -- places to go, evil overlords to kill . . ."

Snape nodded, his eyes implicitly acknowledging Harry's superiority in every
way.  He cleared his throat.  "I have a confession, Harry.  I need to tell
you something before you go."

"What, then?" Harry said.  He felt bad for old Snape.  Clearly the old
fellow was keen to tell Harry a secret, but what could Snape possibly say to
Harry that Harry would care to hear?  There was too much water under that
bridge, Harry thought ruefully.  Oh, well.  No reason to be mean.  Better
make the best of it.  He smiled half-convincingly at Snape and patted him on
the shoulder.  "Let's hear it, old boy.  Better to just say it, get it out."

"Harry, before you set off to kill the Dark Lord, take this to battle with
you:  I loved your mother."  Snape's voice broke with emotion.

Harry stood perfectly still.  Had he heard what he thought he just heard?
Snape loved his mother?  So what?  How was that supposed to help Harry
defeat Voldemort?

[or alternatively,]

[cut to Godrick's Hollow, where the final battle is sure to take place or I
will be sorely disappointed]

"Harry." A cold voice just left of Harry's ear breathed his name quietly.
"Step carefully, boy."

Harry felt a hand on his shoulder, but didn't need to look around to know it
was Snape emerging from the shadows behind him.  "Don't try to stop me,
sir."  Harry sounded much braver than he felt.  "The prophesy started here,
and it will end here."

Snape dug his fingernails into Harry's shoulder.  "It will indeed, Potter. I
have my wand pointed at your entrails, and I will turn you over to the Dark
Lord myself, thus earning me my rightful place at his right hand in a
twisted anti-Christ/Judas the traitor who crosses sides more often than
Madonna sort of way."

"And before you die, Potter, there's just one more thing you should know."
Snape laughed softly.  "I loved your mother."

[cut back to real life]

Will someone else disclose the information to Harry, thus causing him to
act/not act to help/hinder who?

I just don't see how Snape's feelings for Lily could materially affect the
trajectory of the story, and if this love triangle is suddenly and IMHO
gratuitiously tossed in, and doesn't affect the trajectory of the story,
then it's poorly written, and she should have hired me to finish off the
last two novels.

You'd get lots more of that stuff up there!

Now, on to Florence and Ginny, which I think bears some un-defending.
Anti-defending?  How about counterargument, and on we go.

I *like* Ginny.  I wouldn't wish Snape on her for the world.  I think Ginny
is universally liked (someone correct me if I'm wrong, please).  I can't
imagine how badly Ginny would feel if it were true that she's not a Weasley
proper, that she's the daughter of an aunt, and worse, the daughter of
Snape.  I mean, come on.  How can Ginny, the Weasley boys, Harry, Hermionie,
and all the others possibly reconcile that knowledge with their current
relationship with Ginny?  In short, if the Daddy!Snape theory were true,
then poor Ginny would become an instant outcast.  Oh sure, they'd all say it
didn't change a thing, but you know the instant she's looking somewhere
else, they'd all be staring at her, the weird little kid with a missing
mother and a psycho father.  And Ginny hasn't done anything to warrent that
kind of fate.

Ok, enough from me.

Deirdre







From greatelderone at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 00:35:48 2003
From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 00:35:48 -0000
Subject: seeking knowledge and keeping secrets-long
In-Reply-To: <bk2un9+4qrv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk31h4+rhqa@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80785

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "angelberri56" 
<pokeypokey at c...> wrote:
> There's that one thread that has been pondered numerous 
> times... why didn't Crouch/Moody just turn Harry's pillow or 
> something into a portkey, why did he go through all that trouble 
to 
> get Harry through the Tournament  just so he could touch the 
> Cup?
> 

Because Hogwarts is protected by a variety of wards and spells and 
by some of the greatest wizards in the world. The creation of a 
portkey would be noticed and tracked by the Headmasters just as the 
creation of a portkey in Privet Drive in OOTP would be noticed by 
the ministry. However the Triwizard Cup was always intended to be a 
portkey out of the maze so all Crouch had to do was alter the 
destination of the portkey without having to blow his cover as 
Voldemort's spy under Dumbledore's nose.




From fc26det at aol.com  Mon Sep 15 00:43:39 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 00:43:39 -0000
Subject: seeking knowledge and keeping secrets-long
In-Reply-To: <bk31h4+rhqa@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk31vr+p5h3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80786

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "greatelderone" 
<greatelderone at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "angelberri56" 
> <pokeypokey at c...> wrote:
> > There's that one thread that has been pondered numerous 
> > times... why didn't Crouch/Moody just turn Harry's pillow or 
> > something into a portkey, why did he go through all that trouble 
> to 
> > get Harry through the Tournament  just so he could touch the 
> > Cup?
> > 
> 
Greatelderone:
> Because Hogwarts is protected by a variety of wards and spells and 
> by some of the greatest wizards in the world. The creation of a 
> portkey would be noticed and tracked by the Headmasters just as the 
> creation of a portkey in Privet Drive in OOTP would be noticed by 
> the ministry. However the Triwizard Cup was always intended to be a 
> portkey out of the maze so all Crouch had to do was alter the 
> destination of the portkey without having to blow his cover as 
> Voldemort's spy under Dumbledore's nose.

Now Susan:
Where does it say that the Triwizard Cup was intended to be a portkey 
out of the maze?  I don't remember reading this.
Thanks, Susan




From eowynn_24 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 00:57:10 2003
From: eowynn_24 at yahoo.com (eowynn_24)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 17:57:10 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] re: Bill's age/Voldemort as Ultimate Dementor/Slavery/Secrecy
In-Reply-To: <bk2pom+cd9i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030915005710.33279.qmail@web60207.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80787



"Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" <catlady at wicca.net> wrote:
Sue Great Raven wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/80744 :

<< I don't think Bill can be much over 22, because in GoF, when he
visits Hogwarts, he says he left five years ago. >>

No, he says "It's great being back here," said Bill, looking around
the chamber (Violet, the Fat Lady's friend, winked at him from her
frame). "Haven't seen this place for five years. Is that picture of
the mad knight still around? Sir Cadogan?" I understand that to mean
that he left school long ago, but visited there five years before 
GoF, which would be one year before PS/SS, when Percy would have been
in fourth year and the twins in second year.

 

Eowynn:

IN the HP Lexicon it states; "Bill completed his years at Hogwarts quite some time ago, but he has been there since. His last visit to Hogwarts before the Third Task of the Triwizard Tournament was five years earlier, which would be 1990. Ginny remembers Bill being at Hogwarts, which would mean that his last year was no longer (and probably less) than twelve years before the final showdown with Riddle in the Chamber of Secrets in the spring of 1993 (therefore 1981). In that case, Bill would have been at Hogwarts with James and Lily, although several years younger. "

Just a thought on how old Bill might be, however that would mean that he is dating a much younger woman (Fluer). 

Eowynn




---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From greatelderone at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 00:58:01 2003
From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 00:58:01 -0000
Subject: seeking knowledge and keeping secrets-long
In-Reply-To: <bk31vr+p5h3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk32qp+jvv9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80788

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Potterfanme" <fc26det at a...> 
wrote:
> Now Susan:
> Where does it say that the Triwizard Cup was intended to be a 
portkey 
> out of the maze?  I don't remember reading this.
> Thanks, Susan

It's only logical unless they intended for the winner to fight his 
way out of the maze, weighed down with the trophy and with his 
rivals as extra obstacles. Also in GOF, the portkey also took Harry 
out of the maze when he touched it again in the graveyard.




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 01:08:57 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 01:08:57 -0000
Subject: WINDOW SILLS
In-Reply-To: <002901c37aef$3859fda0$7f05a6d8@texas.net>
Message-ID: <bk33f9+5v26@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80789

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Amanda Geist" <editor at t...> 
wrote:
 And if Snape was indeed the spy who warned the Potters, suggested
> strongly in canon, his warning failed. If he loved Lily, that 
failure is a
> blame factor that his psyche must sublimate onto another. Cause 
enough for
> hate, even with no James in the equation.

Laura (trying hard not to imagine what Snape's sex life might have 
been like):

How does canon suggest this?  

Poor twisted old Severus.  I don't know if it's sadder to think that 
he never experienced love or that he did and it ended so 
catastrophically.  




From ktd7 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 01:19:52 2003
From: ktd7 at yahoo.com (Karen)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 01:19:52 -0000
Subject: seeking knowledge and keeping secrets-long
In-Reply-To: <bk2un9+4qrv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk343o+f18s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80791

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "angelberri56" 
<pokeypokey at c...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" 
> <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> > This whole line of discussion really struck me.  Why is it that 
> > adults would want to hide information from children (especially 
> at a 
> > school, for Pete's sake!).  <snip>
> > 

> If JKR just told us 
> (Harry) straight out all we needed to know, well then it wouldn't 
> be the teriffic book it is. Mystery books usually give you pieces 
of 
> information along the way, leading you to solve the mystery just 
> at the end. They build us up, making us want to read more. 
<snip> 
>So, what happens in books, we may not see as logical or 
> sensible, but it is there for the purpose of pure enjoyment. 
> 
> -angelberri56 ,   who really hopes you followed what she was 
> saying and are not asleep on your keyboard right now... 
> 
> - If anyone feels differently, please, I'd love to hear your 
opinion! 
> Thanks!

Me:

You are 100% correct in saying that it is part of a literary device 
to further a 7-book plot! However, I think that secret keeping is 
something that is a symptom of the problems in the wizarding 
world... just as the students in Hogwarts are basically unaware of 
the existence of the house elves, that no one really pays attention 
to the fact that all of the other sentient magical creatures are 
treated as second class citizens, to the fact that the MoM controls 
the press to prevent information being given to the wizarding world, 
to the registering of 'animagus' (not being registered ending in 
being imprisoned in Azkaban!!). There are many, many more examples. 
Not only are there many things that students are *not* taught, there 
are many things that even adult wizards don't know. Add to this the 
fact that the wizarding world is keeping an ENORMOUS secret all the 
time from the muggle world, and we have an entire society based on 
secrets. Every teacher in the school has a secret of some sort. 

Of course, a world full of secrets provides lots of good plot 
devices, doesn't it? Still, from a parent's point of view, there are 
many things I don't want my child to know all about. For example, 
I'm currently unemployed and living off of my IRA. I kid that I am 
prematurely retired. Although I try to stress to her that we are on 
a limited budget, I don't want her worrying about what would happen 
if we go indefinitely without income. She's thirteen, and she's got 
enough to worry about without watching my checking account and 
savings dwindle dollar by dollar. Still, she knows that without 
income we have more limitations than normal. I don't want her 
worrying too much about her grandfather, either, who was just 
diagnosed with prostate cancer. He's getting treatment, and chances 
are will be fine, but we cannot be completely sure. She knows about 
his diagnosis, but I'm not going to let on how much it worries me 
and her grandmother. 

I think Dumbledore was trying to give Harry enough information to 
operate on without scaring him to death. If Harry had known 
everything, including the fact that either he or Voldemort must 
eventually die, he would have a hard time having any sort of normal 
life, even if he knew that he was being watched and protected. 
However, if he had known that being at his uncle and aunt's house 
was one of the ways he was protected from Voldemort, it *might* have 
helped him cope with his confinement better, but it would have meant 
he would have to know that he was in danger all those years, even 
before Voldemort actually returned to his own body. 

Another thought: if Harry had known about the prophecy and all of 
Dumbledore's fears that Voldemort was coming back, how would he have 
reacted to the knowledge? Would he have given up and tried to hide 
away? Would he have tried even harder to learn defensive spells and 
hexes and become a real magical bully? If he had known that 
Voldemort could be seeing things through his eyes, would he have 
tried harder at Occlumency or would he have panicked and run away? 
Do we know for sure that occlumency works when Voldemort was *not* 
doing a Legilimens spell?

Anyway, I think that this is one of the more ingenious things about 
the books, the fact that we can even cuss and discuss these things 
in so much depth. I think the entire series is based on secrets, 
secrets, and more secrets from begining to end.

Karen




From RSFJenny19 at aol.com  Mon Sep 15 01:25:15 2003
From: RSFJenny19 at aol.com (RSFJenny19 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 21:25:15 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] WINDOW SILLS
Message-ID: <12d.31152010.2c966efb@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80792

Deirdre wrote:

<WINDOW SILLS:  Why I Never Doubted Our Wiley Snape is Loving Lily 
Still

BINBIITFP:  Because I Never Believed It In The First Place>


Now RSFJenny here:

:::sits down comfortably on the WINDOW SILLS next to Deirdre:::

Let's throw a little more canon into the mix here, eh?

"Lily, whose furious expression had twitched for an instant as though she was 
going to smile, said, 'Let him down!'"(OotP, Ch 28, p.648US ed)

Now, Lily may be defending Snape because she'd do it for anyone, this shows, 
IMO, that she's not exactly a fan of his, nevertheless.  She *did* think it 
was funny.  

I know, I know, you're all ready to protest that it's not about how Lily 
feels about Snape, but the other way around.  But even if he *did*, at one point, 
have a crush on her, do you really think he still would after he realized she 
found the whole thing funny?  Perhaps he didn't see her face twitch, you 
argue?  Maybe, but it's still canon that he *could* have seen it.

Furthermore, on the same page he goes on to say, "'I don't need help from 
filthy little Mudbloods like her!'"

Can you really think he didn't mean it??  Sheesh, let's just go say the most 
horrible insult in the world right to the person we have a crush on! Sure....

Snape hates James, and here he is, being "rescued" from James by a girl!  And 
a Mudblood to boot!  No wonder he's completely humiliated, just imagine how 
his fellow Slytherins teased him after!

Ah, I love hating Snape, it's so satisfying...

~RSFJenny~

"Imagine wasting your time and energy persecuting merpeople when there are 
little toerags like Kreacher on the loose -" -Sirius Black


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From DMCourt11 at cs.com  Mon Sep 15 01:44:06 2003
From: DMCourt11 at cs.com (bookraptor11)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 01:44:06 -0000
Subject: Somethings not right
In-Reply-To: <3F656506.19014.3A815CE@localhost>
Message-ID: <bk35h6+9974@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80793

Lori wrote:
> 
> > It sent one heck of a message to me, and for little kids reading 
> > this book as well. She basically is saying it's ok if someone 
hurts 
> > you, you don't have to tell an adult, you don't have to tell 
anyone, 
> > you can keep it a secret! >

Shaun Hately replied: 
> I came away with exactly the opposite impression, which is 
interesting. 
> Harry could have told someone and chose not to, and because he 
didn't, 
> he continued to suffer.
> 
> Maybe nothing would have happened if he had told someone - the way 
the 
> Wizarding World seems to work, I wouldn't be at all surprised, this 
is a 
> place where horsewhipping of pupils seems to be a legal possibility 
and 
> where they were hung from chains in the (recent?) past - but I 
don't 
> think there's a message there that you shouldn't tell someone.

Donna:

I agree with Shaun here, but would like to add that though the 
Wizarding World is harsh and tough, Dumbledore is very protective of 
his charges. One of the few times he gets genuinely angry is when 
Umbridge starts to shake Marietta Edgecombe on p.616 of OOP(US Ed.):

"A split second later Dumbledore was on his feet, his wand raised... 
Umbridge leapt back from Marietta, waving her hands in the air as 
though they had been burned.

"'I cannot allow you to manhandle my students, Dolores,' said 
Dumbledore, and for the first time, he looked angry."

Hopefully, any kids reading will remember Harry's detentions with 
Umbridge and realize that even if Harry couldn't get to see 
Dumbledore, a visit to McGonagall would have resulted in D being 
informed. If that's the way he reacts to a shaking, how much worse 
would he have considered Umbridge's quill?

I'm wondering if it was Dumbledore who abolished the chaining of 
students when he became Headmaster, or even successfully campaigned 
for their elimination while he was just a teacher. Filch said in COS 
that he missed the screaming; we don't know how long he's been 
caretaker. Perhaps he was never allowed to use this punishment and is 
just nostalgic for his own student days, sick little puppy.


Donna







From thomasmwall at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 02:09:30 2003
From: thomasmwall at yahoo.com (Tom Wall)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 02:09:30 -0000
Subject: FLINT?  When Hermione arrived at Grimmauld Place for Christmas
In-Reply-To: <1a8.1957b8b6.2c952a72@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bk370q+f0v2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80794

RSFJenny wrote:
Now note what Hermione says, 
"Dumbledore told me what had happened first thing this morning, but 
I had to wait for term to end officially before setting off." 

So Hermione spent an entire day(DAY 1) wondering where the heck they 
all were and DD told her "first thing" two days later(DAY 2)? Why 
would he not tell her the whole first day, but then tell her right 
away on the morning of the second day?
END QUOTE.

Tom replies:
He might not have told Hermione because, well, he has a lot of other 
stuff to be doing. That, and it occurs to me just now that she's a 
prefect. Since we haven't heard of any *other* Gryffindor prefects 
(don't want to get into a prefect debate, just pointing this out), 
it stands to reason that even if he did consider the effect of 
events on Hermione, he probably realized that he couldn't leave 
Gryffindor prefect-less until the end of term.

I bet Hermione asked McGonagall what happened and probably got some 
answer or other. I'd wager that when Phineas Nigellus caught Harry 
trying to sneak off, Dumbledore (realizing that Hermione is a person 
in whom Harry frequently confides) told her about the situation. 
Maybe he even asked her to skip the skiing? 

One way or the other, I don't really think that it's a FLINT.

-Tom




From thomasmwall at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 02:37:07 2003
From: thomasmwall at yahoo.com (Tom Wall)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 02:37:07 -0000
Subject: Somethings not right
In-Reply-To: <bk2uim+9ult@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk38kj+bt3q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80795

Lori wrote:
Now what I am having a difficult time with is, she abuses 
Harry in this book. NOT emotionally, but physically. Umbridges pen! 
It sent one heck of a message to me, and for little kids reading 
this book as well. She basically is saying it's ok if someone hurts 
you, you don't have to tell an adult, you don't have to tell anyone, 
you can keep it a secret! Secrets are not good for small children to 
keep. Especially if the secret includes someone hurting them, or 
worse things then that. Maybe it's not what she intended but it's 
there none the less. Lori

sarcasticmuppet replied:
Harry's reaction was reasonable considering his relationship with 
Dumbledore at the time. When R&H find out about the pen, they flip 
out and tell him to go to Dumbledore. Harry is having mixed feelings 
about going to Dumbledore about anything considering the cold-
shouldering he's been getting. Should he have told someone? 
Probably, but Harry isn't the type to go tell adults things anyway.

Tom, concurring with sarcasticmuppet, adds:
I understand where you're coming from, Lori, in that because Harry 
didn't at first tell anyone that he was being mistreated by 
Umbridge, a young child might decide similarly not to tell anyone if 
they themselves were being hurt.

However, I think sarcasticmuppet hit the nail on the head: there 
were many reasons for Harry not talking to anyone about this 
treatment. A) He felt that this was a private battle between himself 
and Umbridge - i.e. he didn't want to give her the satisfaction of 
knowing that she'd gotten to him. B) Dumbledore's very conspicuous 
avoidance of Harry contributes to the latter's feelings of 
alienation (which border on feelings of betrayal), so he feels like 
he can't go to Dumbledore. C) When he does reveal the truth to Ron 
and Hermione, they are outraged on his behalf, they tell him to talk 
to Dumbledore, and Hermione brings him the essence of murtlap. D) It 
is completely in character for Harry to not talk about what's 
bothering him. 

This last characteristic is responsible for a great deal of the 
series' development in general. How would Chamber of Secrets have 
worked out if Harry'd been up-front about what he was hearing? And 
there were *lives* on the line in that case. In my opinion, that's a 
*far* more grievous offense, as it involves the safety and well-
being of others. But again, we know why Harry did it - it's because 
Ron tells him that even in the Wizarding World, hearing voices that 
no one else can hear isn't a good thing.

A discerning reader would note that Harry frequently makes bad 
decisions, and tragically, he does so with the best of intentions. I 
never got the impression from these encounters with Umbridge that 
JKR was condoning her behavior, or that she was condoning Harry's 
secrecy concerning it. In fact, I got the opposite impression, 
namely that JKR firmly implied that Harry was wrong for not going to 
someone. She did this by showing us that, when his friends found out 
about it, they gave him encouragement and support, and they ALSO 
suggested that he go to Dumbledore. But because we're in Harry's 
mind (so to speak) I think that his behavior makes complete sense, 
under the circumstances. I may not agree with it, but it makes sense 
nonetheless.

-Tom




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 04:59:32 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 04:59:32 -0000
Subject: TBAY:  (The) A.I.R.S.H.I.P.  F.A.N.C.Y.
Message-ID: <bk3gvk+fe1f@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80796

The buoyant totem spirit of Sirius Black leans out over the edge of 
the hot air balloon Fancy's gondola and peers down on the ships 
afloat in Theory Bay.  "James would be buzzing them on his 
broomstick," he howls. "Look at that one!  Ship Ahoy!  Look up here, 
I'm dead! I'm really dead!" he barks with enthusiasm.

Captain and pilot Sandy loosens her goggles and pushes them up past 
her forehead.  "Snuffles, stop that right now!  Bad dog, no biscuit!  
If it weren't for the fact that you're no ballast at all I wouldn't 
have let you come, you big galoot."  The captain sighs.  "Though 
there's gonna come a time when that crew's gonna need a Newfie.  Of 
course, if any of those ships decides to aim a canon into air space, 
I could be the one needing a flotation device..."

Snuffles grins, showing a canine.  Captain Sandy bites her lip and 
looks determined.  "Have you written your journal entry today?" 
Snuffles whines. "I thought not.  What was it you said again that 
convinced me to let you come along?"

"About bringing me to heel?" Snuffles scratches one ear with apparent 
absorption.

"I meant bringing you to *heal* and you know it."

"Wonder who's got my old motorcycle?" Snuffles growls, shaking out 
his coat as he sneaks another look down.  "I could be fanning their 
sails myself if I had my flying motorcycle.  Alright, you're 
right...where's my quill?" he wonders aloud.  And humming a song 
Stubby Boardman never sang under his doggy breath, he noses in the 
nearest pile of balloon silk.

Acronym:

Any
Ingenious
Resurrection
Sirius
Has
Is
Problematic;

Fans
Absolutely
Need
Cathartic
Yielding




From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Mon Sep 15 06:09:54 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 06:09:54 -0000
Subject: WINDOW SILLS
In-Reply-To: <bk28e5+fa4i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk3l3i+plef@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80797

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> But I am very convinced that Snape-loves-Lily-
> and-hates-her-son-with-James is completely RW possible. Besides, 
with 
> Lily dead, Harry could be a constant reminder of the children 
Severus 
> can never have with her as well.

I myself am  certain that Snape loved Lily (probably after the 
pensieve incident). His feelings towards Harry and his father, his 
hatered of Harry combined with an intense effort to protect him, 
that goes through the entire series, is evidence. Notice how in PS
 it was Snape who took upon himself the task of protecting Harry 
from Quirrell - from the broomstick incident, to following him 
around the school and to keeping track of Quirrell. In CoS it is 
Snape who goes out to look for Harry and Ron when they have not 
arrived on the school train - true he wants them expelled but he 
shows more concern for their safety than the other teachers. In PoA 
Snape tries very hard to prevent Harry's escapades into Hogsmeade 
and he is the teacher who rashes after them when he sees Lupin going 
to the forest, and suspects what has happened. Not much action on 
his part in GoF but he is constrained by the fake Moody. Then of 
course, in OoP he takes upon himself the task of teaching Harry 
occlumency and saving him from Voldemort's trap. I am sure he hates 
Harry, but also that he wants to protect him, and I expect that at 
some point in the coming books these two emotions will come to a 
head, and it is possible (even likely) that Snape will fall back to 
evil being unable to overcome his negative feelings towards Harry.

There is some evidence to the Snape loved Lily theory in JKR's 
answer (or non-answer) to that very question during her BBC 
interview back in June (thanks to the poster who provided the link):

http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/uk/newsid_3004000/3004878.stm

Excerpt:

JP: Are we going to discover anything more about Snape ? 

JKR: Yes. 

JP: And Harry's mother? Did he have a crush on Harry's mother or 
unrequited love or anything like that? 

JKR: Hence his animosity to Harry? 

JP: Yes. 

JKR: You speculate? 

JP: I speculate, yes, I'm just asking whether you can tell us. 

JKR: No I can't tell you. But you do find out a lot more about Snape 
and quite a lot more about him actually. 



Salit





From Schlobin at aol.com  Mon Sep 15 06:30:28 2003
From: Schlobin at aol.com (susanmcgee48176)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 06:30:28 -0000
Subject: Snape the Traitor or is there one other
In-Reply-To: <bjrdui+pup5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk3ma4+3hre@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80798

I really can't see him actually *liking* Draco. He 
> sucks up to him and his awful dad because it's the only way to spy 
on 
> them. I can see him in the last novel punching Lucius (or the 
wizard 
> equivalent) and saying, "By the way, Draco, I never did like you. 
You 
> are a little *** and I'd rather be stuck in a room with Harry 
Potter 
> forever than spend another class with you." Sue B


I now find Snape one of the most interesting and complex characters 
in the series. For whatever reason, he turned his back on Voldemort.
I wonder why? Did V kill or torture someone he cared about?

Unfortunately, one of his defining characteristics is his hatred for 
James Potter and Sirius Black. (And we learn in the OoP that Snape 
has some basis for that hatred). And, in some ways, like Sirius, he 
cannot separate Harry from James. 

He bonds with Draco Malfoy because Draco, too, hates Harry.
Yet, Snape saved Harry's life in the Philosopher's Stone, and at the 
end of the GoF. He did give Umbridge fake Veritaserum, etc. etc.
He is a man who does his duty with great distaste.

Susan McGee




From kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 06:37:08 2003
From: kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com (Kewpie)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 06:37:08 -0000
Subject: WINDOW SILLS
In-Reply-To: <bk3l3i+plef@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk3mmk+cauo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80799

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "slgazit" <slgazit at s...> wrote:
> There is some evidence to the Snape loved Lily theory in JKR's 
> answer (or non-answer) to that very question during her BBC 
> interview back in June (thanks to the poster who provided the link):
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/uk/newsid_3004000/3004878.stm
> 

I used to a non-believer of LOLLIPOP but has change my mind ever 
since reading OOtP and the Paxman interview (whenever JKR said "no I 
can't tell you", you know it is something very crucial/right on the 
money). I went back and read all the wonderful written LOLLIPOP 
theories and they sure make a lot of sense and explain many things. 

I'm not sure if this was already mentioned here in HP4GU, I tried 
searching the archieve and Fantasitc Posts and don't seem to find it 
being mentioned (please correct me if there were). There is a very 
interesting speculation over at FAP on the very first question Snape 
asked Harry in Book 1: "What would I get if I added powdered root of 
asphodel to an infuson of wormwood?" The original post was written by 
Thirteen Ravens, here's the link:
http://www.fictionalley.org/fictionalleypark/forums/showthread.php?
s=&threadid=40698

and I quote (from the above link):
Asphodel is a plant of the Lily family... 
(lily meaning Majesty and Purity, and also a symbol of death) It 
has 'langor and regret' or to quote - 'memorial sorrow, my regrets 
follow you to the grave' associated with its traditional meaning. 

Wormwood - Bitterness, and absence or separation. Also protection and 
love. 

'According to myth, wormwood grew along the trail the Serpent made 
when leaving the Garden of Eden' 

Just a quote from one site. - 'To this day, wormwood is still called 
for in certain love potions' 


Could this be a JKR hint at Snape's unrequited love?


Joan





From Schlobin at aol.com  Mon Sep 15 06:54:03 2003
From: Schlobin at aol.com (susanmcgee48176)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 06:54:03 -0000
Subject: The 'Other' in the HP books (was: Harry's Sexual Preference SHIP) - LONG
In-Reply-To: <bhue23+ln54@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk3nmb+5dou@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80801


> 
> > On the other hand, we are also given depictions of Muggle-born 
> > witches and wizards who are born into very loving, supportive, 
> > accepting families.  Justin Finch-Fletchley is one such case, and 
> it 
> > is interesting that he is often depicted as gay in fanfiction.  
> > Hermione is also born into a loving, accepting family, and  
> > her activism seems to stem from a somewhat liberal upbringing--
she 
> > is the metaphorical accepted lesbian daughter.  The Evans family, 
>

I strongly and emphatically disagree. This is both sexist and 
homophobic. This idea is that if you are smart and independent you 
must be a lesbian. There are a ton of smart, independent women who 
are very heterosexual. There are lesbians who are neither smart nor 
independent. Activists come from all sexual orientations. JKR 
obviously identifies with HG and we all know about JKR's orientation.

Susan McGee (a lesbian) 




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 06:58:40 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 06:58:40 -0000
Subject: WINDOW SILLS
In-Reply-To: <bk3l3i+plef@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk3nv0+9ott@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80802

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "slgazit" <slgazit at s...> wrote:
> I myself am  certain that Snape loved Lily (probably after the 
> pensieve incident). His feelings towards Harry and his father, his 
> hatered of Harry combined with an intense effort to protect him, 
> that goes through the entire series, is evidence. Notice how in PS
> it was Snape who took upon himself the task of protecting Harry 
> from Quirrell - from the broomstick incident, to following him 
> around the school and to keeping track of Quirrell.

But there is an argument which goes, "James saved Snape's life (from 
Sirius' aiming Snape at Moony) and therefore there is a life-debt 
Snape felt he owed."  Where did Snape follow Harry around in CoS?  I 
thought he was keeping Quirrell from getting too close to the stone.  
(Which brings up another entirely different question:  if Snape knew 
or even suspected Quirrell was after the stone, why didn't he go to 
Dumbledore and "out" Quirrell?)

> In CoS it is Snape who goes out to look for Harry and Ron when they 
> have not arrived on the school train - true he wants them expelled 
> but he shows more concern for their safety than the other teachers. 

Is Snape actually out looking for Harry and Ron?  I am as inclined to 
believe that Snape is out to get Harry expelled so he won't have to 
look at him anymore as I am to believe he was worried about Harry.  
No, I'm *more* inclined to belief the former, actually.

> In PoA Snape tries very hard to prevent Harry's escapades into 
> Hogsmeade and he is the teacher who rashes after them when he sees 
> Lupin going to the forest, and suspects what has happened. Not much 
> action on his part in GoF but he is constrained by the fake Moody. 

Snape is trying to thwart Harry, that's true. For his own good?  
Still open to interpretation (or we wouldn't be having so much fun 
interpreting it, of course!)

> Then of course, in OoP he takes upon himself the task of teaching 
> Harry occlumency and saving him from Voldemort's trap. I am sure he 
> hates Harry, but also that he wants to protect him, and I expect 
> that at some point in the coming books these two emotions will come 
> to a head, and it is possible (even likely) that Snape will fall 
> back to evil being unable to overcome his negative feelings towards 
> Harry.

I thought Snape was *assigned* that tutoring duty by Dumbledore.  I 
suspect any desire Snape has to protect Harry (which I'm not denying) 
has everything to do with how he thinks that Harry is the key to 
Voldemort's ultimate and permanent defeat.

> There is some evidence to the Snape loved Lily theory in JKR's 
> answer (or non-answer) to that very question during her BBC 
> interview back in June (thanks to the poster who provided the link):

Like I've said, I'm a sucker for LOLLIPOPS. I do tend to feel really 
sorry for Snape, who makes a pretty believable Heathcliff at times.  
At those times I like to think that he loved Lily even if it was 
unrequited; I like to think that at some point in his life he was 
capable of some kind of love. If he was, it means he wasn't so 
damaged by his childhood as to never care about anyone; and so, maybe 
someday he will be able to let someone else in. If he survives.

On the other hand, perhaps we will find that he has been a double-
double agent and Nagini will get to eat him and I will cheer.  I go 
from LOLLIPOPS to FEATHERBOAS pretty easily (heck, I can be drooling 
around one and wearing the other simultaneously!) on the subject of 
Snape.

Sandy aka "msbeadsley"




From khajermae at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 01:25:07 2003
From: khajermae at yahoo.com (khajermae)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 01:25:07 -0000
Subject: Somethings not right
In-Reply-To: <bk2jaa+41s4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk34dj+pek7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80803

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "scooting2win" 
<scootingalong at b...> wrote:
>Concerning JKR:

 She basically is saying it's ok if someone hurts 
> you, you don't have to tell an adult, you don't have to tell 
anyone, 
> you can keep it a secret! Secrets are not good for small children 
to 
> keep. Especially if the secret includes someone hurting them, or 
> worse things then that. Maybe it's not what she intended but it's 
> there none the less. Lori

Now me,
I agree, you wouldn't want a little child to follow Harry's example, 
but I think it's very clear that Harry isn't a normal child. He's not 
conditioned to trust adults with much. He's more accustomed to just 
dealing with things given his history with the Dursleys. You have to 
understand in his eyes he was being logical. I don't think JKR is 
giving anyone any examples of model behavior. This is a very special 
set of circumstances. It would not be out of line to emphasize to 
your kids that Harry's response to his terrible punishment was not 
good, not helpful to him. That he shouldn't try to manage alone. But 
I wouldn't put it past any normal child to perhaps roll his eyes and 
say "Mom, it's just a book!"
Joyee





From feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca  Mon Sep 15 04:07:52 2003
From: feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca (feetmadeofclay)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 04:07:52 -0000
Subject: Deaths at Hogwarts? (Was: Dumbledore's Trust of Snape)
In-Reply-To: <bjv5ls+8j0l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk3duo+jp3f@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80804

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Inge" <Elvishooked at h...> wrote:
> > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "feetmadeofclay" 
> > <feetmadeofclay at y...> wrote:
> > 
> > It is possible that noone can die while on Hogwart's grounds. I 
> > don't think anyone ever has that we've seen.
> > 
> > Inge:
> > What about Mourning Myrtle? She died on Hogwart's grounds, didn't 
> > she? Can't remember anyone else though.
> 

I meant as a protection set by DD.  When MM was a student DD was not 
Headmaster.  However, Harry nearly died in CoS so this possibility is 
slim to none. 

Golly





From ladypensieve at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 04:15:02 2003
From: ladypensieve at yahoo.com (ladypensieve)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 04:15:02 -0000
Subject: Snape and Lily and Florence and Ginny and . . .
In-Reply-To: <001601c37b20$e85bb500$79092244@parkvl01.md.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <bk3ec6+cjoa@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80805

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Deirdre F Woodward" 
<dwoodward at t...> wrote:
> I'm sitting firmly on the WINDOW SILLS and I think there are some 
joiners up here with me.  *waves to other (non) believers*
> 
> Ok.  Where to start.  So far, I've gotten several people defending 
theories for Snape loving Lily (or Florence).  The authors note that 
Snape could hate Harry because Harry is the cause of Lily's death.
> 
> *Why* would Snape love Lily?  What possible plot device could it 
serve?  
__________________
Hi!  New to the group, but this debate made me think of a few things 
I'd written down after reading OOP... see what you think...

Snape is at HogsHead and overhears part of the prophecy before being 
tossed out.  His first thought is how this could rid him of James 
Potter forever ? if only


Snape visits Lily and tells her that there's trouble ? the Dark Lord 
may be coming after James and he doesn't want to see her hurt.  She 
backs away from him, momentarily, as Harry cries in the background.  
Lily tells Snape to leave.  She will never leave her husband or her 
child.  Snape's respect for Lily grows, as does his hatred for the 
man she married.

Snape tells Voldemort what he had heard, suggesting that even though 
the Longbottom's child may be the one
he feels Potter is the real 
foe.  The Dark Lord sends the LeStrange's to the Longbottom's to 
kill the child.  Neville, who has been hidden away, watches in 
horror as his parents are tortured until they are driven mad.

Realizing what he has done and that Lily may pay the price for his 
vengeance on her husband, Snape goes to Dumbledore, swearing his 
allegiance if only he can stop what is to come.  

Meanwhile Voldemort heads towards the Potter's.  He now knows 
Snape's weakness ? Lily.  He has agreed not to hurt the woman, which 
is why he tries to get her out of the way, only she just wouldn't 
let go of her son.  

Snape is devastated, and his hatred of Voldemort is so deep, so 
dark, that he vows to help Dumbledore to rid the world of the Dark 
Lord.  But the Dark Lord is nowhere to be found.  Dumbledore tells 
Snape that he will rise again, and Snape takes a position at 
Hogwarts as the Potions teacher. Now Snape feels an obligation to 
this child whose mother he so loved...

James and Lily Potter had a house-elf.  When their house was 
destroyed and they were murdered.  None of the family were left, and 
Harry had been given to a Muggle relative.  The elf could not follow 
there, so he was asked by Dumbledore to go to work for the Malfoys.

Still feeling the loyalty to this heir many years later, he tries to 
save his life, and in so doing ends up with his own freedom.  He has 
been asked by Harry to never try to save his life again.
Free to do as he chooses, he, Dobby, goes to Dumbledore for a 
position at Hogwarts, where he could watch Harry.

During Harry's time at Hogwarts, a particular teacher got close to 
him ? only at the end of the school year did Harry discover he was a 
death eater.  Harry doesn't worry about this person any longer 
because Barty Crouch, Jr. received the dementor's kiss ? something 
that sucks the soul out of someone.

Unfortunately, Voldemort knew that his minion would be in trouble 
and Apparated just outside Hogwarts, guised as a dementor.  He had 
no problem getting into the school and pretending to suck the soul 
from Crouch.  This had been his most faithful servant and would be 
rewarded greatly.  Besides, Voldemort has other plans for the boy

plans that may prove to be the end of Harry Potter once and for all.

Voldemort is tired of failure.  He needs successes, so he plans 
carefully.  Barty will take over someone Harry cares for, once again 
using the Polyjuice Potion, and by the end of it all, Harry will 
either have to kill his friend, or be killed.  

Even if Harry survives this round, Voldemort will take advantage of 
the boy's grief to make sure he is `the boy who didn't live'.  

Sorry - lengthy and more than one thought - but it does give a 
thread that would carry throughout the seven books.  

Kate






From LadyClio16 at netscape.net  Mon Sep 15 05:57:55 2003
From: LadyClio16 at netscape.net (Clio)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 05:57:55 -0000
Subject: Somethings not right
In-Reply-To: <bk38kj+bt3q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk3kd3+v69a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80807

Tom said:
 A discerning reader would note that Harry frequently makes bad 
> decisions, and tragically, he does so with the best of intentions. I 
> never got the impression from these encounters with Umbridge that 
> JKR was condoning her behavior, or that she was condoning Harry's 
> secrecy concerning it. In fact, I got the opposite impression, 
> namely that JKR firmly implied that Harry was wrong for not going to 
> someone. She did this by showing us that, when his friends found out 
> about it, they gave him encouragement and support, and they ALSO 
> suggested that he go to Dumbledore. But because we're in Harry's 
> mind (so to speak) I think that his behavior makes complete sense, 
> under the circumstances. I may not agree with it, but it makes sense 
> nonetheless.

I'll throw my two cents in and say that I agree here. Harry is just a
boy. He doesn't always make the best decisions. In the books when he
actually does do the smart thing and go to and adult with a problem
it's generally Dumbledore or Hagrid. Hagrid was missing for quite a
while there. Whe he does come back he obviously has his own problems
that he doesn't want to discuss. So Harry may have felt he 'shouldn't'
go to him. He might not wanted to have burdened him. Dumbledore wasn't
talking to Harry much and was avoiding him. So that outlet is gone.

Plus, you have to factor in this isn't the first case of abuse Harry
has suffered. He grew up in an abusive household. The Dursley's
mentally and emotionally abused him all his life. They neglected him
and generally treated him like dirt. They kept him under the stairs
for about 10 years. So he's used to abuse. He's used to being hurt.
That is nothing new to him. Harry's general reaction to this type of
pain is picking hisself up (now matter how hurt he is), dusting
himself off, and never letting anyone see how much they've truly hurt
him. He hid the abuse the Dursley's heaped on him all his life. Hiding
signs of abuse is second nature to him. It's not something he talks
about. He doesn't go about describing what the Dursley's did to him
very often. He doesn't whine about it. It's not an uncommon reaction
for him. So truly it's really in character. Hiding his pain and abuse
he's suffered is in his nature.

Clio 

 





From sir_thames at yahoo.no  Mon Sep 15 06:57:39 2003
From: sir_thames at yahoo.no (sir_thames)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 06:57:39 -0000
Subject: Somethings not right
In-Reply-To: <bk35h6+9974@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk3nt3+522s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80808

Donna "bookraptor11" wrote:

(Mostly removed, but: )

> I'm wondering if it was Dumbledore who abolished the chaining of 
> students when he became Headmaster, or even successfully campaigned 
> for their elimination while he was just a teacher. Filch said in 
COS 
> that he missed the screaming; we don't know how long he's been 
> caretaker. Perhaps he was never allowed to use this punishment and 
is 
> just nostalgic for his own student days, sick little puppy.


Being a Squib, I don't think Filch was a student.

sir_thames





From gbannister10 at aol.com  Mon Sep 15 09:51:16 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 09:51:16 -0000
Subject: Somethings not right
In-Reply-To: <bk2jaa+41s4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk422k+e1q1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80809

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "scooting2win" 
<scootingalong at b...> wrote:


Lori:
> I have been out for a little while (family reasons) and was 
> rereading the books, like I've not read them 20 times a piece. But 
> now something is bugging me about them. As we all know, the first 4 
> books were written with amazing speed. The fourth book from what I 
> understand Rowling lost the plot 1/2 way through it. She seemed to 
> do pretty well for something she lost 1/2 way through (and long at 
> that). So here is what I don't understand, in OoP, Rowling has 
Harry 
> going through yet another difficult time. She throws in some pretty 
> ugly people this time and adds some twist. She has always shown 
> Harry as being Emotionally abused. Maybe it's something that 
parents 
> see in the books. We see for 4 years Harry being belittled by his 
> aunt and uncle, and treasured in the wizarding world. This book 
> however, she slides off and has the Wizarding world belittleing him 
> as well. Now what I am having a difficult time with is, she abuses 
> Harry in this book. NOT emotionally, but physically. Umbridges pen! 
> It sent one heck of a message to me, and for little kids reading 
> this book as well. She basically is saying it's ok if someone hurts 
> you, you don't have to tell an adult, you don't have to tell 
anyone, 
> you can keep it a secret! Secrets are not good for small children 
to 
> keep. Especially if the secret includes someone hurting them, or 
> worse things then that. Maybe it's not what she intended but it's 
> there none the less. 


Geoff:
I can see the point of comments re telling an adult but I think Jo 
Rowling has got this spot on. I believe it's very much a male thing 
and I give a couple of examples from my own life to support that.

When I was in London, at the age of 11, I transferred from a primary 
school to a grammar school. I was rather small and, almost as soon as 
I arrived, I was picked on by a Third Year boy who took every 
opportunity to push me, trip me etc. whenever we met in the corridor. 
I can remember trying to avoid him if I saw him in the distance. 
Fortunately, after about five or six weeks, the attraction of shoving 
me around wore off and he left me alone. (As an aside, he went on to 
become a championship boxer and I could never see this name in the 
paper without experiencing a feeling of hate towards him).

I did nothing for two reasons. First, I didn't want to look a wuss if 
I went and complained to my teacher and, second, I had the thought at 
the back of my mind that, if I did, he might then take it out even 
more on me.

A second instance. 10 years ago, I took early retirement from 
teaching. I had been at that time Head of Computing for nearly ten 
years and had built up the Department from nothing to about 50 
machines. At that time, Gates had not managed to corner things to the 
extent that he has now and I was very used to Acorn/BBC machines 
which were widely used in UK schools.

Nowadays, I will sometimes hit a problem and find myself saying to 
myself "You must be able to solve this". Occasionally, I don't and I 
reluctantly ring up my younger son, who is now an IT consultant 
earning ?50K pa, an ask him. But I taught him his first programming 
20 years ago and it is very damaging to my (adult) pride to admit I 
have a problem which I can't handle.

I can see variants of these three operating in Harry's mind and there 
is also the point that, if he went to Dumbledore or McGonagall to 
tell them, he would see this as letting Umbridge win ? of conceding 
defeat; he would far sooner grit his teeth and plough on. I am always 
surprised that JKR has such a good grasp of the way in which we males 
are conditioned to operate. It may go against the way in which we are 
supposed to deal with bullying but I could see myself in a similar 
situation to Harry's behaving in precisely the same way.





From zanelupin at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 11:52:02 2003
From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 11:52:02 -0000
Subject: Snape and Lily and Florence and Ginny and . . .
In-Reply-To: <bk3ec6+cjoa@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk4952+ujpb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80810

Kate:
>Hi!  New to the group, but this debate made me think of a few 
things I'd written down after reading OOP... see what you think...<

KathyK:
Hi Kate, It's an interesting story, but I'm afraid I'm going to have 
to correct you on a few things.  *KathyK carefully avoids looking at 
the clock telling her it's almost time for work*

Kate:
<snip>
>Snape tells Voldemort what he had heard, suggesting that even 
though the Longbottom's child may be the one
he feels Potter is
the 
real foe.  The Dark Lord sends the LeStrange's to the Longbottom's 
to kill the child.  Neville, who has been hidden away, watches in 
horror as his parents are tortured until they are driven mad.<

KathyK:
Crouch Jr. and the Lestranges torture the Longbottoms into insanity 
AFTER Voldemort's AK curse backfires on Harry.  They do it because 
they think the Longbottoms have information on Voldemort's 
whereabouts.  Read GoF Chapter 30 (p 603 of the US paperback ed.)

Kate:
>Realizing what he has done and that Lily may pay the price for his 
vengeance on her husband, Snape goes to Dumbledore, swearing his 
allegiance if only he can stop what is to come.  
<snip> 
Snape is devastated, and his hatred of Voldemort is so deep, so 
dark, that he vows to help Dumbledore to rid the world of the Dark 
Lord.  But the Dark Lord is nowhere to be found.< <snip>

KathyK:
According to Dumbledore in the same chapter in GoF, Snape changed 
sides before Voldemort fell.  He says Snape became a spy, something 
he could not do (except in rounding up leftover DEs) if Voldemort 
was already gone.  And I don't like Snape but I never doubted his 
role as a spy for Dumbledore the first time around.  

Kate:
<snip, snip>
>Unfortunately, Voldemort knew that his minion would be in trouble 
and Apparated just outside Hogwarts, guised as a dementor.  He had 
no problem getting into the school and pretending to suck the soul 
from Crouch.  <snip>
Voldemort is tired of failure.  He needs successes, so he plans 
carefully.  Barty will take over someone Harry cares for, once again 
using the Polyjuice Potion, and by the end of it all, Harry will 
either have to kill his friend, or be killed.<  

KathyK:
Well, I hope we've seen the end of Polyjuice potion because if it's 
used again for such a plot twist I think I'll just roll my eyes. 
That aside, if it were to happen, I don't see why Harry would have 
to kill this friend because It's not like the one using the 
Polyjuice Potion takes over the body of the person they become.  The 
user only looks like the other. 

KathyK




From scootingalong at bellsouth.net  Mon Sep 15 12:05:13 2003
From: scootingalong at bellsouth.net (scooting2win)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 12:05:13 -0000
Subject: Somethings not right
In-Reply-To: <bk2jaa+41s4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk49tp+kibs@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80811

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "scooting2win" 
<scootingalong at b...> wrote:
>(snip) It sent one heck of a message to me, and for little kids 
reading 
> this book as well. She basically is saying it's ok if someone 
hurts 
> you, you don't have to tell an adult, you don't have to tell 
anyone, 
> you can keep it a secret! Secrets are not good for small children 
to 
> keep. Especially if the secret includes someone hurting them, or 
> worse things then that. Maybe it's not what she intended but it's 
> there none the less. Lori

I'm not sure that what I mean by this post got across. Some of it 
did. Children in homes like Harry's (foster, adopted, etc...) they 
tend to let things go. They tend to not want to show that someone 
has hurt them. JKR has written Harry this way from the beginning of 
the series, so I agree that it's in character for Harry. And as I 
said before I am not sure it's what JKR intended. And since I am not 
sure that people got what I was trying to say, I thought I would 
explain better (sometimes I suck at trying to do this). For what 13 
years harry had no one. Well 14 years Harry had no one. Then he had 
Sirius. Now given the fact that post were being watched I am sure, 
and given the fact that from my knowledge there is no phone at 
Hogwarts or at Grimmauld place. So as I said I don't think JKR 
intended for some readers to take it this way. I think her intention 
was to show how horrid Umbridge is/was rather then say "Hey kids, 
Harry makes really bad choices, look here he's keeping secrets now." 
No that's not what she intended (or I really hope it wasn't). None 
the less, Harry still did not tell, not even his friends. Ron had to 
see it before Harry told him what was going on. And I am glad Harry 
can't write with both hands! It's more a moral then the actual 
context. Moral JKR put out: Don't tell. Moral kids are going to get: 
Don't tell. Moral we as adults get from it: Harry has been abused 
throughout the series, what's a little bloody pen. It just doesn't 
fit right. JKR is a wonderful writer who puts books in children's 
hand and makes them turn off tvs, computers, video games, and I 
admire her for her ability to do so. I am not putting her down, I 
just don't like the message that came across. And sure there will be 
one kid who says, "Mom, it's just a book, it's make believe." But in 
a way even that makes me wonder, is my kid going to say that or are 
they going to say, Harry kept a secret that he should have told. 
Lori again




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 12:20:33 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 12:20:33 -0000
Subject: seeking knowledge and keeping secrets-long
In-Reply-To: <bk343o+f18s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk4aqh+n1th@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80812

> > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" 
> > <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
> > >
> > > <snip>
> > > This whole line of discussion really struck me.  Why is it that 
> > > adults would want to hide information from children (especially 
> > at a 
> > > school, for Pete's sake!).  <snip>
> > > 
> "angelberri56" 
> > If JKR just told us 
> > (Harry) straight out all we needed to know, well then it wouldn't 
> > be the teriffic book it is. <snip> 


> Karen:
> 
> You are 100% correct in saying that it is part of a literary device 
> to further a 7-book plot! However, I think that secret keeping is 
> something that is a symptom of the problems in the wizarding 
> world... <snip>the wizarding world is keeping an ENORMOUS secret 
all the 
> time from the muggle world, and we have an entire society based on 
> secrets. Every teacher in the school has a secret of some sort. 
> 
> Of course, a world full of secrets provides lots of good plot 
> devices, doesn't it? Still, from a parent's point of view, there 
are 
> many things I don't want my child to know all about. <snip> 

> I think Dumbledore was trying to give Harry enough information to 
> operate on without scaring him to death. If Harry had known 
> everything, including the fact that either he or Voldemort must 
> eventually die, he would have a hard time having any sort of normal 
> life, even if he knew that he was being watched and protected. 
<snip>

Laura again:

Well, sure, the secrets are plot devices.  But the question then is, 
why did JKR choose these particular devices?  There are so very many 
secrets in these books.

Yes, of course, we tailor our responses to our children's questions 
to their age, maturity level and any number of other factors.  But if 
a child asks you a direct question I think you should tell them 
*something*.  Maybe you try to answer the real concern under the 
spoken question if you think that's what's going on.  But Harry has 
learned already in PS/SS that LV has a vendetta going against him.  
That's not going to change.  The reasons for it are immaterial-it's 
the behavior of LV that's the problem. DD should have begun to 
explain to Harry at an age-appropriate level rather than refusing 
outright.

Kneasy suggested a few posts ago that kids Harry's age in PS/SS don't 
have a sophisticated understanding of death--that it's forever and 
that it can happen even to children.  So even if DD had told Harry at 
that point that LV wanted to kill Harry, would he have been as 
fearful as you think?  The idea would still be pretty abstract to 
him.  And remember, at the end of PS/SS, CoS, and GoF, Harry has 
defeated LV(albeit temporarily).  So he knows he's not completely 
powerless.  So telling him the general gist of the prophecy wouldn't 
have changed anything except that it would have been in Harry's 
consciousness as an idea he would grow to understand more fully over 
time (and something DD could build on to help him come to that 
understanding instead of acting like nothing was going on). And as he 
did, he'd also begin to understand the ramifications of that and what 
he'd have to do to deal with it.  So learning Occlumency would have 
made a lot more sense to him, for instance. 

I believe that there are times when adults need to withhold or edit 
information from children, for the sake of the mental health of the 
children.  But I don't think that's what's happening in these books.  
The adults are keeping secrets to protect themselves or to avoid 
difficult subjects.  Neither of those are good reasons, imo.  Kids 
know when they're being snowed or lied to, and that knowledge can 
create a level of anxiety that just answering the question never 
would have.




From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Mon Sep 15 12:22:49 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 12:22:49 -0000
Subject: Prophecy's value/ was Re: seeking knowledge and keeping secrets-long
In-Reply-To: <bk30v9+a9ts@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk4aup+cs0o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80813

Phoenix asked:
> > I thought the irony in OOtP was that Voldemort extended great 
> > effort to learn the "rest of the prophecy," but there really 
> > wasn't anything of value to learn (for LV anyway). LV doesn't know 
> > this, and may continue to seek it in other ways. [...] What part 
> > doesn't LV know? 

greatelderone answered:
> That the only one he has had to fear is Harry and that while Harry 
> lives Voldemort will not die at the hands of any other wizard, which 
> gives him a free ticket to knocking off Dumbledore and the rest of 
> the Order and Ministry.

IMO, Voldemort already knows this. He was beaten once, and didn't die. 
Being a good stuend and all-around intelligent (even if cruel, vicious 
and demented), I'm pretty sure he kept notes of the experiments he 
carried out to become immortal. Yes, he doesn't know which of them was 
the one that saved him, but he could simply re-use them all. And I 
think he has done (so now he's a cruel vicious and demented wizard that 
cannot be killed :D). 

The reason why he doesn't go head to head against the entire WW on his 
own is because he doesn't want to spend another 15 years in the vapour 
form because, for all it's advantages (like immortality) it lacks a 
certain something he wants above all else: power. The vapour!Voldemort 
could force himself to exist and get into animals and humans but he 
could not use a wand - that is why he stepped back and became human in 
GoF.

I believe that the prophecy was misdirection from Dumbledore. There is 
little useful information to be obtained from it. About the only thing 
is to tip him off to the fact that there is 50% chance Harry is able to 
destroy him... and that is not that big a deal, really (from the PoV of 
someone who keeps trying to kill the brat for vengeance, if nothing 
else).

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf, who keeps hearing in his head "we're not fighting against 
normal pirates. Cruel, vicious and demented pirates to be sure, but 
also cruel vicious and demented pirates *that cannot be killed*"





From scootingalong at bellsouth.net  Mon Sep 15 12:54:41 2003
From: scootingalong at bellsouth.net (scooting2win)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 12:54:41 -0000
Subject: Somethings not right
In-Reply-To: <bk49tp+kibs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk4cqi+slge@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80814

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "scooting2win" 
<scootingalong at b...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "scooting2win" 
> <scootingalong at b...> wrote:
> >(snip)
> (big snip) Forgot one more thing:
At the end of the book, Dumbledore states: (for the record adult 
version page 737) "You arrived at Hogwarts, neither as happy nor as 
well-nourished as I would have liked, perhaps, yet alive and 
healthy. You were not a pampered little prince, but as normal a boy 
as I could have hoped under the circumstances. Thus far, my plan was 
working well." Which leads me to think that Dumbledore is unhappy 
about how Harry has been raised thus far. He also states that Harry 
would have been welcomed into any wizarding family and raised as a 
son. If that would have happened Harry would have known that he was 
famous and then would have been spoiled for being the boy-who-lived. 
Certain aspects of the "whole" Harry story would need pain and 
suffering to make it "entertaining" (I say that word for lack of a 
better choice). Harry's whole life has been made up of pain and how 
he suffered since the death of his parents, how badly 
his "remaining" family has treated him, how Dumbledore thought of 
Harry as a child, and how Harry has had a rough life so far. But 
during the 5 years (in book years) we have read and lived in the 
books in which JKR writes. We imagine Harry growing into the young 
man that he is (and yes male ego as well). But to put that one 
little pen into the story and realize that this is real abuse. Be it 
as it may, yes Harry is being "male" as someone else puts it. Yes, 
Harry does not want anyone to know how he has suffered, to let 
Umbridge win this war of ego. It's not these facts that I have/had a 
problem with, it still boils down to "Harry kept a secret", not only 
from an adult who could have helped him (not sure I would have told 
Dumbledore myself) but he did not even tell a friend, or even go to 
the nurse, (who is really good at keeping things to herself and 
would have helped Harry as Ron always says "Pomfrey doesn't ask too 
many questions, guess she is used to seeing all sorts being a 
nurse/doctor in a wizard school). It's just the whole Harry did not 
tell on this one. Boys and in this case Hermoine have always seemed 
to tell things to each other, no matter if it's important or not. It 
always was told, there were no secrets kept between them, other then 
the time turner but that did not include Physical or Sexual (just an 
example on that one) abuse. This did indeed include physical abuse 
and the secret was kept even from his friends. It just bothers me. 
JKR has written these books for our enjoyment, and granted she might 
have made some mistakes with timelines or what have you. She usually 
tries to fix them. This one she can't fix or remove and it bothers 
me to think how many kids are going to get the same message that I 
got from it. Intended or not. Lori once again.




From kneazle255 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 12:29:21 2003
From: kneazle255 at yahoo.com (kneazle255)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 12:29:21 -0000
Subject: Somethings not right
In-Reply-To: <bk422k+e1q1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk4bb1+ggcc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80816

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" 
<gbannister10 at a...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "scooting2win" 
> <scootingalong at b...> wrote:

Geoff says: 
there is also the point that, if he went to Dumbledore or McGonagall 
to tell them, he would see this as letting Umbridge win ? of 
conceding defeat; he would far sooner grit his teeth and plough on. 

kneazle says:
Just to expand on Geoff's excellent point, I think Harry, Hermione 
and even Lee Jordan do not go to the teachers because they are very 
aware of the power struggle going on between the adults. They are 
aware that telling anyone else would result in a conflict between 
Umbridge and the teachers that the teachers would likely lose. So 
they say nothing.

At least that's my take.







From hecate92 at yahoo.co.uk  Mon Sep 15 12:41:22 2003
From: hecate92 at yahoo.co.uk (hecate92)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 12:41:22 -0000
Subject: Snape history/future
Message-ID: <bk4c1i+qgdm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80817

Hello, 
  I am also new to this group and have spent some very enjoyable 
evenings reading past messages.
  I have been fascinated by the Snape/Lily theories as reasons for 
his defection from LV. However, what is the general thought on 
Snapes' future? Will he end up dead by book seven(I do hope not) 
having sacrificed himself to protect Harry, or will he actually have 
something positive happen to him (current or yet to be met character 
revealing some sort of care/kindness/love for him?
  I would like to think of him doing other things rather than 
practising swishng his robes in the corridors and ordering vast 
amounts of immaculate underwear to be delivered by owl. Maybe he will 
expand his poetry writing.
   hecate92 





From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Mon Sep 15 13:10:24 2003
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 23:10:24 +1000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Somethings not right
In-Reply-To: <bk49tp+kibs@eGroups.com>
References: <bk2jaa+41s4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F6646E0.30713.15B6169@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 80818

On 15 Sep 2003 at 12:05, scooting2win wrote:

> context. Moral JKR put out: Don't tell. Moral kids are going to get: 
> Don't tell. Moral we as adults get from it: Harry has been abused 
> throughout the series, what's a little bloody pen. It just doesn't 
> fit right. JKR is a wonderful writer who puts books in children's 
> hand and makes them turn off tvs, computers, video games, and I 
> admire her for her ability to do so. I am not putting her down, I 
> just don't like the message that came across. And sure there will be 
> one kid who says, "Mom, it's just a book, it's make believe." But in 
> a way even that makes me wonder, is my kid going to say that or are 
> they going to say, Harry kept a secret that he should have told. 
> Lori again

The thing is Lori, I'm not seeing that message. I'm not seeing that 
moral. I can't see anything in the book to give children the impression 
that they shouldn't tell someone about abuse if it's occurring.

You're seeing a message in the book that I certainly don't think was 
intended - but I can't even see it there accidentally. Now that doesn't 
mean I'm right and you're wrong - but I work with kids - many of whom 
have been abused and some of who made the wrong choice about telling 
someone - and I can't see anything in Order of the Phoenix that makes it 
a skerrick more likely that any child will choose not to tell.

If anything, I see the opposite - kids seeing that even Harry Potter 
can't deal with everything alone - and sometimes that trying to, simply 
hurts him.

I'm not seeing the negatives you're seeing - quite the opposite 
actually. And I've been thinking about this most of today, because if 
you're right, it's something I'd feel a need to address in discussion 
with some of the kids I've encouraged to read the books.

But currently, I'm still thinking that any incidental message the books 
sends on this is a *positive* one.

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 keltobin at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 13:20:23 2003
From: keltobin at yahoo.com (Kelly)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 13:20:23 -0000
Subject: Deaths at Hogwarts? (Was: Dumbledore's Trust of Snape)
In-Reply-To: <bk3duo+jp3f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk4ean+l8dj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80819

> > > Inge:
> > > What about Mourning Myrtle? She died on Hogwart's grounds, 
didn't 
> > > she? Can't remember anyone else though.


Professor Quirrel died in the first book.  No, I don't think Hogwarts 
is protected from death.  One thing the books make clear is that 
death is inevitable and no amount of magic can stop it without great 
reprocussions to the soul (i.e. Unicorn's Blood).

Kelly




From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Mon Sep 15 13:23:25 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 13:23:25 -0000
Subject: Somethings not right
In-Reply-To: <bk3fts+6a47@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk4egd+qa0j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80820

 Golly wrote: 
> I thought [Lori's post] was a very insightful and sensitive assesment 
> of Rowling's intent versus its effect.  Why are people so resistant 
> to any criticism of Rowling's text? 
> 
> Golly.

I can't talk about the others, but I can tell you about my own problems 
with Lori's "criticism" - it is based on the wrong idea of what the 
book is. (::gets dreamy "good old times" look::) When I was at school, 
I was taught the styles of writting (not just prose and poetry, but 
also subdivisions of each). Inside prose was novel, short story and so 
on. One in particular is "fable" - short stories with a clear moral at 
the end (and usually animal characters. 

One I can remember involves a raven in a tree with a cheese in his beak 
and a starved fox at the foot of the tree. The raven laughs at the fox, 
dropping the cheese, which is eaten by the fox. Moral: don't laugh at 
other's misfortunes, you never know when tables might turn. (Or 
something along those lines)

HP is *not* a fable. It's neither short, nor has cute animals as main 
characters or a moral specified at the end. Lori treated it as if it 
was, which is why so many people have answered. Rowling's intent cannot 
be guessed, to start with. But even if we could, and it was to show how 
cruel that was, she still has to work through characters with 
distinctive personalities.

As I did a few days ago, in another thread, let me look at this from 
the other side: what would've happened if Harry had gone directly to 
McGonagall with the tale? Answer: it would've been so out of character 
for Harry that the screams would be heard miles from this board. Harry 
does *not* trust his elders. He used to trust Dumbledore, but he's felt 
betrayed by him all book. 

The story, I think, will have a moral at the end of the sevon books. It 
won't be printed, though, but will be a statment all throughout. There 
have been, so far, many good pieces - most coming from Dumbledore. In 
this occasion, we have it again: "I kept secrets and death was a 
result". Yes, it comes later in the books, but still applies to the 
circunstance we're talking here. Parents worried about the message 
their children are getting could point this out (and even flip back to 
when Harry should've realised it). 

But Harry isn't all knowing - he's learning. And in learning, mistakes 
happen. And certainly, JKR cannot stop the flow of the books every 
chapter to deliver a moral, because it would turn the novel she is 
writting into a fable and I, for one, wouldn't read it because of it.

In short, The moral is there, not immediately, but later on. There is 
plenty of evidence that Harry was wrong at hidding it, and can be 
paralleled to Dumbledore's mistake of hidding information from Harry. 
It could be argued it is the main theme of the book, in fact, set at 
different planes throughout. A LOON might even want to go through it to 
find other examples of hidding info = pain.

Tom Wall wrote:
> > However, I think sarcasticmuppet hit the nail on the head: there 
> > were many reasons for Harry not talking to anyone about this 
> > treatment. 
> 
> Golly:
> Sure but there are many ways to get around this.  In order to show an 
> act is wrong you don't have to have your hero refrain from doing it.

Yep. For example, you can have the wise mentor do the same mistake and 
point it out at the end. Which is what JKR did.

Golly:
> In POA Rowling pulled this off beautifully when she had Hermione turn 
> the Firebolt in.  Hermione made the sensible choice and Harry was 
> angry about it.  
> 
> Rowling could have gotten around this issue if she wanted. Instead 
> she chose to have Harry martyr himself to the truth.

Yes, because it fits Harry. As I said above, this means the 
characterization overrides everything else (if it is to be a good 
novel, mind you, IMO) and Harry has always misstrusted talking to 
teachers. The few times he does, he's never been back-up, in fact 
(talking to Hagrid about Snape in PS, for example). There is plenty of 
canon reason for Harry to keep silent - I for one don't see *how* Harry 
could've told anyone (except Hagrid or Lupin, but both are unavailable) 
and stay in-character. Yes, he could've gone to Dumbledore, but Harry 
has always seen him like a distant authority figure - he only 
voluntarily goes to him twice (IIRC), both in GoF. And that tenous 
trust is smashed by Dumbledore's atitude from the start of OoP.

Golly:
> Hermione's not usually one to cover other people's mistakes to their 
> detriment.  Rowling saw Harry's refusal as noble and a sign of 
> strength.(Though it may be a foolish kind of nobility.)

On the contrary, Hermione will respect, most of the time, the right to 
decide of others (will get to firbolt issue down the line). She does 
not report the rule-breaking of the pair in PS (when they leave for a 
midnight duel), for example. Someone would get hurt that night (if 
there had been a duel, that is) and yet all she does is threaten to 
talk to Percy (and only talks - she has ample time to tell someone 
since she knows from early that day, and yet never does).

She of course chooses to cover the fight on thhe troll, but it could be 
argued it wasn't in detriment of the pair. From then on, we are told 
she's more relaxed about rules, which suggests she does help cover 
their rule-breaking. She certainly participates in stealing from Snape 
in CoS, and so on and on.

I never have caught the "noble and sign of strength" moral you seem to 
think JKR put in. Harry was waging a war agains Umbridge (she'll always 
be Dolores -Pains, in Spanish- to me :D), and this is his battle, which 
is a form of strength, but I still got the feeling all along that it 
was a mistake, confirmed by Dumbledore's confession at the end.

> > TOM: A discerning reader would note that Harry frequently makes bad 
> > decisions, and tragically, he does so with the best of intentions. 
> 
> GOLLY:
> Yes, but the message of giving up your pride to tell the authorities 
> something embarrassing is not here.  Neither is the idea that one 
> child speaking out can make a difference for others.

No. There isn't a message about the dangers of fossil power, or the 
quickly dissapearing forestal masses. Nor does she tackle the problem 
of abortion, or superpopulation and its control. I haven't seen 
messages about the problems of communism or capitalism, either. There 
is only so many messages that can be crammed into a book before 
becoming transparent. JKR, IMO, is a genious for putting so many in HP 
almost seamlessly (and certainly without forcing it). But certainly, 
not *all* moral messages will be in there. Many, yes: worker's rights, 
enslavement, racial issues, good/evil etc. etc.

Golly:
> The message that Harry was wrong to keep his abuse a secret was lost 
> on me.

That's a pitty, because it is there - when Dumbledore admits he 
shouldn't have kept *his* secrets.

GOLLY: But none actually go to DD no matter how many times they 
> suggest it. None ask the teachers what they should do?  Not even 
> Hermione who trusts DD.  It is very much in Hermione's character to 
> go to an adult about something this big.

No it isn't. She has gone to teachers before, yes, but here the problem 
is another teacher. Remember PS: "Hermione, you think all teachers are 
saints [...]" (paraphrased). And it is true - she will go to McGonagall 
over a suspicious gift, but this is much more complex. I'm sure a part 
of her heart is thinking "but... but... Umbridge is our *teacher*... 
she *might* know what she's doing... she *has* to..." etc. Hermione 
trust teachers - that is canon. So the idea of denouncing one to 
another could sink her into indecission, and just let Harry decide.

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf





From keltobin at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 13:59:21 2003
From: keltobin at yahoo.com (Kelly)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 13:59:21 -0000
Subject: Somethings not right
In-Reply-To: <3F6646E0.30713.15B6169@localhost>
Message-ID: <bk4gjp+d0t3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80821

Dreadnought wrote:
<SNIP> And I've been thinking about this most of today, because if 
> you're right, it's something I'd feel a need to address in 
discussion 
> with some of the kids I've encouraged to read the books.
> 
> But currently, I'm still thinking that any incidental message the 
books 
> sends on this is a *positive* one.

I want to reply to this.  as the mother of six children (from 2 
months to 21 years), I started reading the Harry Potter series 
because I knew my kids would. Even though I rarely "ban" reading 
material in my house, I make sure I read everything they read so that 
I can address any issues they have.  Therefore, I think it is a great 
vehicle to ask the kids you've encouraged to read the books what they 
think about Harry not telling and why.  It will open some great 
discussions about what they should and could do if they are ever in 
similar situations.  What a fabulous series for parents this is!  I 
have never found another single book or series that can act a vehicle 
to discuss such a wide range of issues with my kids (love, death, 
war, humanity, slavery, abuse, etc.).

I agree that Harry does keep silent about many things that he has to 
endure.  However, I think this is completely in character for Harry 
as well as for many boys (and girls) of this age group.  The 
punishment with the pen was humiliating.  Not many kids will go and 
tell their friends about such a thing.  Personally, it reminded me of 
some of the punishments that were frequently given out at my grade 
school in the 1970's.  Therefore, when I was reading, it occurred to 
me that JKR may have been making a statement against things like 
corporal punishment in the schools -- Umbridge as a  symbol of the 
extreme conservative who wants to bring back the "old ways."

With this said, I can completely see the point that the original 
poster is making.  I, however, don't think that the books are 
encouraging the reader to do as Harry does.  If anything, it will 
make them think "C'mon Harry, tell someone!"  Hopefully, It will make 
them see the futility of keeping a secret that hurts and rethink 
their options if they are in a similar situation.

Kelly




From annemehr at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 14:05:55 2003
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 14:05:55 -0000
Subject: Shoemaker'sElves/ RegulusAtSchool/ VeelaReproduction/hating child of beloved
In-Reply-To: <bk0v6l+5j1v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk4h03+smdo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80822

 
Paula Gaon Griff wrote:
 
> << But does anyone have a theory who/what the Veelas are? They 
> remind me of the Sirens of Greek Mythology, who lured sailors to 
> crash on the rocks. >>
>

Catlady replied in part: 
 
> They appear as groups of beautiful young women, who dance in the 
> woods and try to lure any man who walks alone in the woods to dance
> with them, and then dance him to death or something. They take the
> form of swans in order to fly, and upon arrival at their dancing-
> place, they return to human form by taking off their swan skins.

Annemehr:

Would it be reaching too far to try to apply this symbolism to Cho? 
She attracted Harry as the canon Veelas didn't, and her patronus is a
swan.  I had never subscribed to Evil!Cho, but the juxtaposition of
the images Catlady mentions above is hard to ignore.  Is the swan
image a universal vila trait that JKR would be expected to know about
and therefore use in the books, or does it appear as only one of
several variations in folklore?

Though it seems Harry has got beyond his crush on Cho, it's difficult
to tell what is the state of her feelings.  When their eyes met on the
train at the end, she blushed and kept on walking, but did she blush
for shame in what her friend had done or because she still has some
sort of feelings for Harry?

I still shy away from Evil!Cho, but I am quite willing to believe that
their involvement with each other may bring bad consequences, even if
neither of them intend it to.  I have nothing speicific in mind, just
the feeling that they may well interact in the future to their
detriment, another dose of pain caused by the actions of Voldemort.

Annemehr




From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Mon Sep 15 14:21:58 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 14:21:58 -0000
Subject: Quirrell's outing (Was: WINDOW SILLS)
In-Reply-To: <bk3nv0+9ott@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk4hu6+ro6d@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80823

Sandy aka "msbeadsley" wrote:
> Which brings up another entirely different question:  if Snape knew 
> or even suspected Quirrell was after the stone, why didn't he go to 
> Dumbledore and "out" Quirrell?

:: taps microphone:: Hello, MD member speaking. Those that get 
headaches at the mention of the Magic Dishwasher theory might want to 
leave the room now :D. Those lucky ones that have never heard of it 
might want to check fantastical posts. All, don't worry - I won't go 
into controversial stuff (well, not much).

IMO, Snape did tell Dumbledore that Quirrell was after the stone. In 
fact, according to MD, the stone was in Hogwarts because they wanted 
whomever was after it (i.e. Voldemort) to go for it - but knew that 
Voldemort needed a helper since he was probably unable to do it on his 
own. There has been plenty of analysis of the "defenses" of the stone 
in this list, and the conclussion is that those defenses were more 
tasks for Harry et co than to stop Voldemort (notice the tasks were 
unusually suited for the trio + Neville, seen together at the midnight 
duel).

MD's conclussion is that Dumbledore lured Voldemort in and "invited" 
Harry to face him, both so Harry could meet him and also in the chance 
that in meeting Harry again Voldemort could be completely destroyed.

So far so good. But then why bother telling Quirrell to stop? Because 
Dumbledore, unlike Voldemort, is not a monster. I don't think 
Dumbledore and Snape realised that Voldemort was camped in Quirrell's 
scalp, and thus hoped they could convince him to stay good (which 
would've meant Voldemort would've had to use a DE, for example, or 
someone else he could quickly convince). I doubt Dumbledore would let 
someone die while there is a good chance to save him, and we know he is 
particularly fond of giving second chances. Of course, it had to be 
done through Snape, who is the most appropiate for such topics.

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf





From june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk  Mon Sep 15 14:24:09 2003
From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 14:24:09 -0000
Subject: WINDOW SILLS
In-Reply-To: <bk33f9+5v26@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk4i29+7a2j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80824

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
> > Laura (trying hard not to imagine what Snape's sex life might 
have 
> been like):
> 
> How does canon suggest this?  
> 

June: 

I debated whether to post the reply that came to mind, and 
successfully restrained myself for the morning.  

Then (as usual) cheap shot got the better of good taste.


> Poor twisted old Severus.  I don't know if it's sadder to think 
that 
> he never experienced love or that he did and it ended so 
> catastrophically.


For your EEEEWW moment this Monday September 15 my answer is as 
follows

Yes, perhaps he did experience love - but it was strictly on a short-
term contractual basis...

Non canonical but irresistible.

June

"Hanging on in quiet desperation is the English way"

Pink Floyd, Dark Side of the Moon






From scootingalong at bellsouth.net  Mon Sep 15 14:25:54 2003
From: scootingalong at bellsouth.net (scooting2win)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 14:25:54 -0000
Subject: Somethings not right
In-Reply-To: <bk4egd+qa0j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk4i5i+d2f4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80825

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Grey Wolf" <greywolf1 at j...> 
wrote:
>  Golly wrote: 
> > I thought [Lori's post] was a very insightful and sensitive 
assesment 
> > of Rowling's intent versus its effect.  Why are people so 
resistant 
> > to any criticism of Rowling's text? 
> > 
> > Golly.
> 
> I can't talk about the others, but I can tell you about my own 
problems 
> with Lori's "criticism" - it is based on the wrong idea of what 
the 
> book is. 
Um, no, not what I was thinking, and it was not "criticism" I just 
said I didn't like it, I never said well hell that was badly 
written. No I said I didn't like the idea of what kids were going to 
get from it. There are tons of things in the books that I praised 
JKR for putting in there. Things that some people have a hard time 
explaining. And besides if I only have a problem with one thing out 
of FIVE books. Not doing to badly since I read them because I had to 
sign a permission slip for my child to read them at school and 
wanted to see what was so "horrible" that I had to sign a form for 
my kid to read it.  
> 
Lori treated it as if it was, which is why so many people have 
answered. 
Um, no again. I should not have used the word "moral" sorry it 
should have been "idea". Kids would get the "idea" that it's ok to 
keep a secret like this, from friends or family.

> Answer: it would've been so out of character for Harry that the 
screams would be heard miles from this board. 
Agreed but I said I had a problem with him not telling Ron and 
Hermoine. It's not out of character for him to talk to his friends 
or did I miss that point. 
> 
 And certainly, JKR cannot stop the flow of the books every 
> chapter to deliver a moral, because it would turn the novel she is 
> writting into a fable and I, for one, wouldn't read it because of 
it.
True, but as I said before I don't think it was intended to take it 
this way. But for some of us, (children and adults) this message 
does present itself, either from experience or from worry, for some 
it will still be there.
> 
There isn't a message about the dangers of fossil power, or the 
> quickly dissapearing forestal masses. Nor does she tackle the 
problem of abortion, or superpopulation and its control. I haven't 
seen messages about the problems of communism or capitalism, either. 
There is only so many messages that can be crammed into a book 
before becoming transparent. JKR, IMO, is a genious for putting so 
many in HP almost seamlessly (and certainly without forcing it). But 
certainly, not *all* moral messages will be in there. Many, yes: 
worker's rights, enslavement, racial issues, good/evil etc. etc.

And again I say, I don't think this was intentional on her part, I 
think it was put in to point out a couple of things, 1) how horrible 
Umbridge is, 2) as you stated about Dumbledore at the end, he admits 
how keeping "his secret" from Harry resulted in Sirius' death. 3) 
That some times the choices we make are not good choices.
And all in all, JKR really tried (and succeed with it IMO) to make 
Umbridge a horrible, disgusting creature. It was not the story in 
itself that got me it was in whole a great story, it was just that 
part about not telling that someone was trying to make it sink in, 
literally. To scar him more then he already is so to speak. It was 
never, OMG she is beating Harry, it's more a was that intentional on 
her part to bring that to light and make a child think, ok well this 
guy did this to me, should I tell someone, no, Harry didn't tell. 
And children's mind sometimes work that way.


> 
> Hope that helps,
> 
> Grey Wolf
some thanks lori




From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Mon Sep 15 14:34:59 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 14:34:59 -0000
Subject: keeping secrets
In-Reply-To: <bk4aqh+n1th@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk4imj+976i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80826

jwcpgh wrote:
> I believe that there are times when adults need to withhold or edit 
> information from children, for the sake of the mental health of the 
> children.  But I don't think that's what's happening in these books.  
> The adults are keeping secrets to protect themselves or to avoid 
> difficult subjects.  Neither of those are good reasons, imo.

Ummm... see, in these books, most adults are keeping secrets for a very 
valid and very important reason that has nothing to do with the fact 
that those secrets are being kept from children (rather, they are being 
kept from everyone). Dumbledore and the Order of the Phoenix are in the 
middle of a war with Voldemort, a war that involves plenty of spying 
and careful manouvering around two other "sides" - Voldemort and the 
MoM. 

The phrase "need to know" is used by Molly Weasley, but with reference 
to instructions set by Dumbledore himself. This phrase is justifying 
many forms of lying, including (but not exclusively) those lies to 
children. While we could debate endlessly about the need to conceal 
information from the enemy during the war, and how much that requires 
you to keep information from your own people, it is Dumbledore's 
decission, and one he admits incorrect.

My point, however, is that you're being a little narrow-sighted (no 
offense meant - it is easy to concentrate so much on a discussion point 
you forget about the wider picture - I've done it plenty of times). 
Harry is not being kept in the dark because he is a child, but because 
he's a possible security hole.

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf, talking from the Safe House





From rsteph1981 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 14:51:25 2003
From: rsteph1981 at yahoo.com (Rebecca Stephens)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 07:51:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Somethings not right
In-Reply-To: <bk49tp+kibs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030915145125.97217.qmail@web20008.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80827

> <scootingalong at b...> wrote:
> >(snip) It sent one heck of a message to me, and for
> little kids 
> reading 
> > this book as well. She basically is saying it's ok
> if someone 
> hurts 
> > you, you don't have to tell an adult, you don't
> have to tell 
> anyone, 
> > you can keep it a secret! 

Harry Potter is a work of fiction.  It it a story.  It
is literature.  It is not an after-school special.  It
is not meant to be an operating manual for kids.  HHR
do tons of things kids should never do and that, if
kids were to follow their example, could get them
killed.

If JKR made them (or one of them) always do what a
child should do, or made sure someone always did it,
it would come off false, imo.  The very point of
Umbridge is how much power she has, how can't be
stopped. This is illustrated by the very fact that
every time they come up with something she just
changes the rules to make it unallowable. If they tell
someone and she is made to stop, then her function as
a character is weakened.

And I don't think kids are given enough credit.  They
see that Harry doesn't tell, and things keep getting
worse for him.  Any kids that are too young to get
that probably aren't reading a book this long.
Besides, I don't think "emualate Harry" has ever been
the point of HP.  Relate to Harry, has.



Rebecca

=====
http://wychlaran.tripod.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From ameliagoldfeesh at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 14:56:01 2003
From: ameliagoldfeesh at yahoo.com (ameliagoldfeesh)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 14:56:01 -0000
Subject: Somethings not right/LOLLIPOPS-Snape
In-Reply-To: <bk35h6+9974@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk4ju1+e4lf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80828

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, 
<HUGE SNIP>

---
"Donna" wrote.. 
> 
<snip> Filch said in COS 
> that he missed the screaming; we don't know how long he's been 
> caretaker. Perhaps he was never allowed to use this punishment and 
>is just nostalgic for his own student days, sick little puppy.
> 
> 
> Donna
---
 
Now: A Goldfeesh-
This is partially movie contamination, I believe.  "God, I miss the 
screaming" is only from the COS movie.  However, in the COS book, 
there is mention in Ch. 8 of Filch having a collection of chains and 
manacles that went unused on students.

Also for newer members- check out in Fantastic Posts and Where to 
Find Them some links to excellent Snape/LOLLIPOPS past discussion- 
both for and against.  Wonderful posts there by Amandageist and the 
great Tabouli, plus many others.

A Goldfeesh




From editor at texas.net  Mon Sep 15 15:16:58 2003
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 15:16:58 -0000
Subject: The 'Other' in the HP books (was: Harry's Sexual Preference SHIP) - LONG
In-Reply-To: <bk3nmb+5dou@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk4l5a+8i4l@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80829

The McGee said:

> I strongly and emphatically disagree. This is both sexist and 
> homophobic. This idea is that if you are smart and independent you 
> must be a lesbian. There are a ton of smart, independent women who 
> are very heterosexual. There are lesbians who are neither smart nor 
> independent. Activists come from all sexual orientations. JKR 
> obviously identifies with HG and we all know about JKR's 
orientation.

(Amandageist tumbles in, cheering!)

Susan! I just noticed you're back and posting! You young listies, 
Susan is a veteran of the highly charged, but high-quality debates on 
Female Roles in HP, and the semi-related Lack of Homosexual 
Representation thread, of close to 2 1/2 years ago. Worth going back 
to dig for.

I see your Kwikspell course in diplomacy lives up to the company's 
reputation. You really must stop being so blase about things. [She 
*did* say "metaphorical."]

~Amanda, delighted






From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Mon Sep 15 15:24:57 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 15:24:57 -0000
Subject: Bill Big in Book 6?
Message-ID: <bk4lk9+35rg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80830

Since JKR has immersed us in at least one new location per book, 
there's been lots of speculation on seeing more of underground 
Gringott's in book 6.

And she's also highlighted at least one new group per book, so
there's been some thought of another goblin uprising in book 6.

On rereading POA, I noticed that Bill Weasley worked for a time at 
Gringott's (right before he went on the family trip to Egypt). Since 
JKR loved the Weasley's so much, doesn't it stand to reason that he'd 
play a role in book 6, as well? After all, Fred and George have their 
joke shop to keep them busy now, and Bill seems ready to join the 
Order and/or the MoM.

And he knows Gringott's and goblins....

I think this looks to be one of the secondary threads in 6.

-Remnant




From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk  Mon Sep 15 15:38:19 2003
From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 15:38:19 -0000
Subject: seeking knowledge and keeping secrets-long
In-Reply-To: <bk4aqh+n1th@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk4mdb+qgpv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80831

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:

> Laura again:
> 
> a child asks you a direct question I think you should tell them 
> *something*.  Maybe you try to answer the real concern under the 
> spoken question if you think that's what's going on.  But Harry has 
> learned already in PS/SS that LV has a vendetta going against him.  
> That's not going to change.  The reasons for it are immaterial-it's 
> the behavior of LV that's the problem. DD should have begun to 
> explain to Harry at an age-appropriate level rather than refusing 
> outright.
> 
> Kneasy suggested a few posts ago that kids Harry's age in PS/SS
don't have a sophisticated understanding of death--that it's forever
and that it can happen even to children.  So even if DD had told Harry
at that point that LV wanted to kill Harry, would he have been as 
fearful as you think?  The idea would still be pretty abstract to 
> him.  And remember, at the end of PS/SS, CoS, and GoF, Harry has 
> defeated LV(albeit temporarily).  So he knows he's not completely 
> powerless.  So telling him the general gist of the prophecy wouldn't 
> have changed anything except that it would have been in Harry's 
> consciousness as an idea he would grow to understand more fully over 
> time (and something DD could build on to help him come to that 
> understanding instead of acting like nothing was going on). And as
he did, he'd also begin to understand the ramifications of that and
what he'd have to do to deal with it.  So learning Occlumency would
have made a lot more sense to him, for instance. 
> 
> I believe that there are times when adults need to withhold or edit 
> information from children, for the sake of the mental health of the 
> children.  But I don't think that's what's happening in these books.  
> The adults are keeping secrets to protect themselves or to avoid 
> difficult subjects.  Neither of those are good reasons, imo.  Kids 
> know when they're being snowed or lied to, and that knowledge can 
> create a level of anxiety that just answering the question never 
> would have.


As you already stated, Laura, Harry knew from the first book that
Voldemort wanted him dead and he has the scar to prove it, no need for
Dumbledore to tell him things he already knows. His first question in
the heart-to-heart they had in PS/SS was WHY. 
Would it be a good idea to explain to an eleven-year-old that 
he is going to either kill Voldemort or be killed by him? How could
Dumbledore *not* cause him mental harm by doing it? And is there even
a way to translate it into terms a child can understand? Harry had
trouble enough adjusting to it four years later.

So I guess I can buy Dumbledore's actions as a consequence of his love
for Harry and his wish to let him have at least some semblance of a
happy childhood. It might not be a wise decision, but understandable.

Grey Wolf beat me to the point of the Order's need for secrecy. What
the kids don't know they can't let slip at school. 

Alshain    




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Mon Sep 15 16:21:08 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 16:21:08 -0000
Subject: JKR and a Tale of Two Stories(Re: Rowling/writer's block )
In-Reply-To: <bjtum2+funn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk4otk+pguh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80832

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Wanda Sherratt" 
<wsherratt3338 at r...> wrote:<snip>
 
And I'll say more: OotP has "nervous 
> breakdown" written all over it.  I think she was in the impossible 
> situation of *having* to produce a book and feeling unable to do 
so, and this tortured hulk is the result of all that strain.  Maybe 
> she's over it, and maybe she's not.  I'll know when the next book 
> comes out - or if it DOESN'T come out, just like OotP for several 
> years.


Jen:  There is a breakdown at work, but it's not happening to JKR. 
It's happening to the WW as we know it, and as a consequence, to the 
readers.

OOTP is a different kind of story from the other four, and I don't 
think it's because JKR is slipping or because Harry is growing older 
and has a different POV. Rather, JKR is intentionally telling us two 
stories at once:  The literal plot that furthers the storyline, and 
the Pensieve story--a tremendous backstory JKR presents in a visceral 
way.

Let's enter The Pensieve during the time of the First War and see 
what we see.......

"Dark days, Harry. Didn't know who ter trust, didn't dare get 
friendly with strange wizards or witches....terrible things 
happened."{SS 54-55}

"The terror it {Dark Mark} inspired...you have no idea, you're too 
young. Just picture coming home and finding the Dark Mark hovering 
over your house, and knowing what your about to find 
inside...Everyone's worst fear..."{GOF 142}

"Imagine that Voldemort is powerful now. You don't know who his 
supporters are, you don't know who's working for him and who isn't; 
you know he can control people so that they do terrible things 
without being able to stop...the Ministry of Magic is in disarray, 
they don't know what to do...Terror 
everywhere...panic...confusion..."{GOF 526-527}


OOTP is a jagged, bleak, confusing story because, finally, we aren't 
just hearing memories of the First War, we are FEELING what it's like 
as Voldemort rises from the *dead* back to power. 

We see and feel what it's like when the Good side is divided: Harry 
and Dumbledore are suddenly considered untrustworthy; Fudge and the 
MOM are working at cross purposes with the Order; A woman like 
Umbridge comes into power because in all the confusion and betrayl, 
no one can stop her.

Who do we believe?!? Is Dumbledore credible anymore? Are the MOM and 
Fudge evil? Where ARE the dementors BTW, and what's their next move? 
Who's going to die next and will it be at the hand of a DE, or 
someone who seemed trustworthy at one time? And please, no, I can't 
believe ESE!Lupin....!

I tried to get at why Voldemort has this effect in another post 
(80749), but went off on a tangent. There's just something more to 
Voldemort than the evil-yet-strangely inept Dark Lord we've seen so 
far. We are definitely starting to FEEL his presence. Just as Harry 
has a "power the dark Lord knows not", Voldemort has an equally 
powerful force "to spread discord and enmity" as Dumbledore said. I'd 
like to think the Good side will unify in Book 6 and start fighting 
the power, but....

Whew! Glad I got that off my mind! This is just the only way (at the 
moment) I can reconcile the tone of OOTP with the series, and also 
close the gap between the abject fear Voldemort seems to inspire in 
so many characters, and the way he's actually been portrayed so far.

Jen




From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Mon Sep 15 16:48:35 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 16:48:35 -0000
Subject: New places and peoples / Bill (WAS: Bill Big in Book 6?)
In-Reply-To: <bk4lk9+35rg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk4qh3+51lo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80833

Remnant wrote:
> Since JKR has immersed us in at least one new location per book, 
> there's been lots of speculation on seeing more of underground 
> Gringott's in book 6.
> 
> And she's also highlighted at least one new group per book, so
> there's been some thought of another goblin uprising in book 6.

I was intrigued by this comment, since I have never seen it before 
(bear with me, though - just been back after long lurking phase so it 
might have come up last week - sorry if it did). Still, counting on my 
fingers, I get:

PS: WW, Wizards
CoS: House elves and the Burrow
PoA: Azkaban (?) and Dementors
GoF: QWC (?) and DE
OoP: St. Mungo's/Ministry of Magic (?) and Giants (?)

I have a few troubles with this list. Remnant's definition is 
"immersed" and some of those places are certainly not been immersive. 
The best example is Azkaban, in PoA, which is only mentioned (and for 
that matter, was mentioned equally in CoS). But the Quidditch World 
Cup, the MoM and Mungo's are also "just visited" rather than being a 
big experience.

In the part of the groups, I'm even more confused. I tried to come up 
with one for OoP but I couldn't decide: what group was highlighted that 
hadn't been before? I put down giants, but could be the OoP itself.

So, in short, am I missing something? If there is a previous post on 
this matter, could someone send me a link? Thanks.
 
> Bill seems ready to join the Order and/or the MoM.

Bill has, in fact, joined the Order and has a desk job for Gringotts, 
after having left Egypt to join the Order. I doubt he'll be soon 
joining the MoM, though.

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf





From sofdog_2000 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 16:50:27 2003
From: sofdog_2000 at yahoo.com (sofdog_2000)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 16:50:27 -0000
Subject: Bill Big in Book 6?
In-Reply-To: <bk4lk9+35rg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk4qkj+hcir@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80834

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "boyd_smythe" 
<boyd.t.smythe at f...> wrote:
> Since JKR has immersed us in at least one new location per book, 
> there's been lots of speculation on seeing more of underground 
> Gringott's in book 6.
> 
> And she's also highlighted at least one new group per book, so
> there's been some thought of another goblin uprising in book 6.
> 
> On rereading POA, I noticed that Bill Weasley worked for a time at 
> Gringott's (right before he went on the family trip to Egypt). 
Since 
> JKR loved the Weasley's so much, doesn't it stand to reason that 
he'd 
> play a role in book 6, as well? After all, Fred and George have 
their 
> joke shop to keep them busy now, and Bill seems ready to join the 
> Order and/or the MoM.
> 
> And he knows Gringott's and goblins....
> 
> I think this looks to be one of the secondary threads in 6.
> 
> -Remnant

Sof: 

Actually Bill still works for Gringott's, and he is a member of the 
Order. When Voldemort returned, Bill requested a transfer from Egypt 
to Britain. (He was the reason the family went to Egypt. They won a 
cash prize and spent in on a vacation visit to see Bill.) In Egypt, 
Bill was a curse-breaker working on tombs to recover treasure. 

As for going into Gringott's, that gives me the shivers. I'd like to 
know more about the Goblins, but that bank creeped me out. Especially 
the underground aspect. I'd like to see more Charlie since Bill got 
more play in OotP. Maybe he'll transfer in from Romania now that 
word's out on Voldemort's return. 




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Mon Sep 15 16:53:38 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (B Arrowsmith)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 17:53:38 +0100
Subject: The worst is yet to come
Message-ID: <276F58E0-E79D-11D7-98AF-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80835

I think we've been conned. Again.
That 'Snape's worst  memory' thing - yes, that one. I don't believe it.

Oh, I accept that it's a genuine memory, but I can't accept that it's 
his worst memory.

Think about it. Then think about all the other things we know or 
suspect about our Sevvy.
Do you really believe that a spot of severe embarrassment in front of 
his fellow pupils is the worst memory he has? You do? In that case, 
come over here, there's this bridge you ought to buy.

Four  memories are revealed in OoP. In addition there are others, of 
events which we know of or can deduce from canon. Let's  make a little 
list.

Firstly the  four revelations:

Happy Families.
Most listies assume the child is  Snape, the arguing adults his 
parents. Being contrary, I think the man is Snape, the child and woman 
his family. No matter. It is obviously an emotionally charged scene in 
the oasis of calm and domestic felicity that is chez Snape. Probably 
not an isolated incident, it's evidence that something was badly wrong, 
an on-going festering sore. Very private. Keep off.

Fly zapper
Apparently innocuous, mundane even. Until  proved otherwise it seems  
to be a random, meaningless memory.

Bucking broomstick.
Again we assume this is Snapey. It probably  is, but it could also be a 
memory where Snape is jinxing  some-one else. A young James perhaps? He 
was supposed to be the ace flyer. It'd be a fun trick to make him look 
a fool. But it's difficult to make an identification - no greasy hair, 
hooked nose, just described as 'scrawny'. Have to wait and see.

Grey underwear.
Firstly, it wasn't the only memory transferred to the pensieve; there 
were 'several', total unspecified.
I find it odd that Snape should transfer this particular memory to the 
pensieve. After all, Harry could have been told the tale by Sirius. 
Additionally, for a long time I've had the feeling that Snape *wants* 
Harry to know just how MWPP behaved, to show they were not as wonderful 
as Harry thought.
Snape could not have foreseen Malfoy's interruption, otherwise I'd 
suspect that Snape was going to 'accidentally' allow Harry access to an 
enlightening episode.

Now some memories  that can be deduced or are suspected:

Voldemort.
The breach with Voldy must have been a traumatic, bowel-loosening 
event. You don't cross Voldy. Not if you want to collect your pension. 
Probably there are two linked memories; first, the shock, horror, 
revulsion at some act of Voldemort's that precipitated the 
re-assessment, second the decision to split, knowing it could be 
terminally fatal if V survived for long. Remember Regulus.
(In my own mind I  link the re-assessment with Happy Families. I think 
V caused the destruction of Snape's wife and child. A double whammy. 
But what do I know?)

DE games.
I don't think becoming a DE is like joining the Ovaltinies. Send ?1.50, 
get your tattoo,  community singing and group hugs to follow. Oh, no. 
You are expected to be seriously evil. Carving a swathe of death and 
destruction, laughing and cheering as you go.Sevvy wasn't just  a 
supporter, he was in the inner circle, expected to participate in the 
nasties. He must have reached an acceptable standard, otherwise how 
could he stay on good terms with Malfoy et al? What would it take to 
get your merit badge? Something  very nasty. More very uncomfortable 
memories.

The 'Prank'.
Sevvy obviously has strong feelings and vivid memories about this. 
Fear, anger, humiliation, hate, lust for revenge, they must all be 
there. It has to be the most traumatic event of his school years. You 
think Grey  Underwear is worse? Come off it; pull the other one for 
Long Tom Minor.

SHIPwreck.
I'm not a SHIPper, can't stand  it. The prospect of romantic sludge 
oozing from the pages of HP gives me the  dry heaves. But, just this 
once, I'll grit my teeth and confront the poor, benighted, misguided, 
rosy-spectacled little pixies on their own terms.
*If* Snapey had the hots for Lily (shudder), there must be at least two 
horrible memories. First, when he realised he'd no chance, second, when 
she marries James.(Cringe)
Rejection is bad enough, but the second, where she links up with his 
enemy James would enrage him, plus feelings of loss and betrayal. Love 
is  not logical, after all. This is an area he would not want Harry to 
access under any circumstances.

A pretty comprehensive  list, I think. Maybe posters can come up with 
more.

Grey Underwear is a useful plot device. It allows a re-assessment of 
MWPP before Sirius is retired as surplus to requirements. But I  refuse 
to accept that it is the worst memory Snape has. At best I'd rate it 
fourth after the 'Prank', Voldemort and Happy Families. Fifth, if 
you're a SHIPper.

There is a choice then. Either the 'worst memory' has a significance 
we're not yet aware of, or it's a deliberate exaggeration, verging on 
red herring-dom.

Unless it's all a mistake.
Note that Harry does not bring the memory into the open as  DD did with 
Bertha. Harry immerses himself in the pensieve. Can Snape tell, from 
outside, which memory Harry is seeing? Does he think Harry sees 
something else? His reaction is a bit extreme for memories of 
school-boy feuds and their resulting embarrassments. I use the word 
'feud' advisably. Bullying is the mental or physical persecution of 
those too weak or frightened to defend themselves effectively. Although 
caught unawares, Snape is prepared to defend himself; at one point he 
retaliates, causing a gash on James' face which spurts blood. He lost 
this round, but you just know that next time it will be Snapes turn to 
gloat.

So, is 'Snape's worst  memory' to be taken at face value?
Or is JKR saying "Go on, pick a card, any card you like..."

Kneasy



From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com  Mon Sep 15 17:21:09 2003
From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 17:21:09 -0000
Subject: Her-mee-oh-nee (filk)
Message-ID: <bk4se5+cgjg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80836

Naturally, no GoF musical would be complete without a Yule Ball song, 
so here's the 12th A!Kedavra filk to the tune of Kansas City from 
Rodgers and Hammerstein's Oklahoma!

Her-mee-oh-nee (GoF, Chap. 22-23)

Dedicated to Constance Vigilance

THE SCENE: Gryffindor Commons. RON, getting desperate for a Yule Ball 
date, asks HER-MEE-OH-NEE, only to be turned down.

RON:
The faculty said, "Students, here's the deal-ah,
We'll have ourselfs a dance this winter term."
So even though I couldn't take no Veela
I knew that I could always count on Herm.

I didn't want her goin' to the Yule Ball by herself
Even if she is a Know-It-All
An' she ain't so bad, compared to Eloise.
What she tol' me sounded worse'n Draco's drawl.

I cannot get a date with Her-mee-oh-nee
I guess I'm gonna hafta take some troll!
She claims that she will be goin' with some other guy,
So all my plans are in the toilet bowl.

It isn't as if I dream of Her-mee-oh-nee
She prattles on `bout magic lesson goals.
I can turn to Parvati Patil
And with her twin sister go 
I'll try to fix these girl robes up
So they'll look apropos
And give my sympathy to friends
Who cannot take out Cho
We'll keep our magnetism in control

RON & CHORUS OF MALE GRYFFINDORS
Yes sir!
We'll keep our magnetism in control!

(Segue to the evening of the Ball. As HER-MEE-OH-NEE enters, escorted 
by Krum, every mouth falls open in reaction to her radiant 
transformation ? making RON more displeased than ever)

HARRY:
Who's she?

PARVATI:
Whut nerve!

CHORUS OF MALE GRYFFINDORS:
Woof Woof!

RON:
Whut this?
I'm astound!

Viktor Krum has a date with Her-mee-oh-nee
She's made herself as purty as can be!
She set her fangs a-shrinkin', her hair's all shiny too
And not one book does that bookworm carry!

Herm is a gal who now is fraternizin'
And giving info to the enemy.
She may think that she's a genius,
But she'll learn that's she's a heel,
`Cause Viktor Krum's jus' usin' her
To egg secrets reveal


HER-MEE-OH-NEE
Well, here is your solution then, I think it is ideal
Next time ask me to go initially!

ALL (to RON):
Yes sir!
Next time ask her to go initially!

(Lengthy and elaborate dance sequence: first the Champions dance with 
their partners, then everyone else joins in ? except RON - Fred & 
Angelina, Neville & Ginny, Draco & Pansy, Dumbledore & Sprout, Moody 
& Sinistra, Bagman & McGonagall, Hagrid & Maxime, Karkaroff & Snape, 
etc.)

ALL (to RON):
Next time ask her to go initially!
Next time ask her to go initially!

RON: (spoken)
Well, that just completely misses the ? uh, point
.

   -	CMC

HARRY POTTER FILKS 
http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm  

(just one song ? plus one reprise ? to go!)





From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Mon Sep 15 17:20:37 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 17:20:37 -0000
Subject: New places and peoples / Bill (WAS: Bill Big in Book 6?)
In-Reply-To: <bk4qh3+51lo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk4sd5+aq5b@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80837

Grey Wolf wrote:
> I was intrigued by this comment, since I have never seen it before 
(bear with me, though - just been back after long lurking phase so 
it might have come up last week - sorry if it did). Still, counting on 
my fingers, I get:
> PS: WW, Wizards
> CoS: House elves and the Burrow
> PoA: Azkaban (?) and Dementors
> GoF: QWC (?) and DE
> OoP: St. Mungo's/Ministry of Magic (?) and Giants (?)
>
> I have a few troubles with this list. Remnant's definition is 
"immersed" and some of those places are certainly not been immersive. 
The best example is Azkaban, in PoA, which is only mentioned (and 
for that matter, was mentioned equally in CoS). But the Quidditch 
World Cup, the MoM and Mungo's are also "just visited" rather than 
being a big experience.
> In the part of the groups, I'm even more confused. I tried to come 
up with one for OoP but I couldn't decide: what group was highlighted 
that hadn't been before? I put down giants, but could be the OoP 
itself.
> So, in short, am I missing something? If there is a previous post on 
this matter, could someone send me a link? Thanks.
> Grey Wolf


Thanks, Grey Wolf and Sof. I think I blew a gasket in forgetting about 
Bill in OoP! I'm in total PoA mode currently, halfway in this time.

As for the new locations in PoA, I was thinking of Little Whinging and 
the Shrieking Shack. I don't feel that we've really seen Azkaban as of 
yet. Another bit of the new is the time-turner, of course. The new 
groups in OoP are the OoP, the giants and the DA. The MoM as an 
institution/group was also expounded upon significantly. Also, in GoF 
the groups should include the other schools in the tournament (Durm 
and Beaux).

I haven't seen a previous post list all of these, but then again I 
joined after the first 50,000+ posts myself!

BTW, it's not that I think JKR is following some sort of recipe. It's 
just that she has kept the series fresh by adding liberal doses of the 
new without disagreeing with her previous books. And I think she'll 
continue wanting to do that. Goblins and Gringott's just seem like a 
natural fit.

-Remnant




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 17:47:33 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 17:47:33 -0000
Subject: The 'Other' in the HP books (was: Harry's Sexual Preference SHIP) - LONG
In-Reply-To: <bk4l5a+8i4l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk4tvl+m45c@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80838

> The McGee said:
> <snip> This is both sexist and homophobic. <snip>

> Amandageist said:
<snip> Susan is a veteran of the highly charged, but high-quality 
> debates on Female Roles in HP, and the semi-related Lack of 
> Homosexual Representation thread, of close to 2 1/2 years ago. 
<snip>

How timely, considering--I am going to detour OT here, but relevant 
nonetheless, and I will bring it back:

Yesterday, I attempted (ineptly, as it turned out) to participate in 
the weekly "chat" (my first ever) and found myself in a (what I 
thought was the main) HP chatroom with one other person. After what 
appeared to be a glitch, the other poster commented, "Gay computer."  
I inquired (with suspicion but without heat) what that meant and was 
told "Where I'm from it means "off."  You know, stupid.  Like my 
computer was acting." I inquired, "Well, what if I'm gay and object 
to your usage?" The answer I got was "Then I guess you're overly 
sensitive." I warmed up then and said something along the lines 
of, "And maybe I think that attitude belongs to a git." My companion 
shrugged that off: "I've been called worse." I became pedantic and 
said I did not approve of the pejorative usage and that I found it 
needlessly hurtful, which was ignored.

As the conversation went on, I found, along with other tidbits that 
came to light such as the poster's location (Dallas, Texas) and 
religious faith (I didn't ask, but Southern Baptist), the poster was 
13 years old.  About the time my age came up (old enough to be your 
grandmother), said poster expressed that she was getting taken off 
the computer and had to go. (And what was a Southern Baptist 13 year-
old from Dallas doing on any part of HPfGU's chat? Unknown.)

I am recounting all this because I have been very torn myself about 
what I have read here regarding whether or not certain characters in 
HP might be gay, and whether or not it is appropriate/desirous to 
have an obviously gay character in the series.  Until yesterday, I 
was leaning towards the "unnecessary" school of thought.

The exchange yesterday included enough details to assure me that the 
youngster had indeed read the books.  This is a Harry Potter "fan."  
Who thinks that the use of "gay" as a pejorative is normal.

(Personally, I fall into that part of the population which happens to 
be attracted to people pretty regardless of gender. I live a het 
lifestyle now; my current relationship, which has lasted nearly 
twenty years, is monogamous and with a man; I don't *think* I have an 
agenda in this regard.)

Before yesterday it was easy for me to pretend that anyone who 
embraced HP & the WW must surely be "enlightened" enough that, if 
Justin or someone else *did* turn out to be gay and that fact made 
its way into the narrative, that would be fine.  After all, the 
*only* overt mention of homosexuality in the books has been *Dudley* 
sneering, "Who's Cedric--your boyfriend?" After all, we all know 
Dudley is a pig, tail or no tail. Don't we? In spite of what follows 
and our reluctant sympathy for him in the wake of the dementor 
attack? In spite of the fact that his mother very shortly gets closer 
to becoming a sympathetic character than she has in the series thus 
far?

Hmmm.

Is Rowling an arbiter of social mores and attitudes? Is she? She 
tackles prejudice and slavery. She deals with several types of 
morality. She deals with political corruption. I believe absolutely 
that, as a writer, the story is hers: it should reflect those issues 
which matter to her. I think the pureblood/mudblood/muggle aspects of 
the story are there not because she sat down and put them on a list 
of "issues" to tackle in the readership's collective unconscious, but 
because these are things which resonate for her personally and so 
found their way into the story with little or no premeditation on her 
part.

I personally think homophobia qualifies and could fit in seamlessly 
with those things which she presents as smuts on the face of the 
human race. But I would not presume to tell her so. Nor would I place 
any *responsibility* on her to add a gay character. I am not part of 
the school which opines, "Hey, she's developed all that influence and 
now has a *responsibility* to use her super powers for good." 
(Somebody get that lady a cape and a pair of tights.) All I can do, 
after yesterday, is hope very hard personally that the issue 
resonates enough with her at some point before she's finished, that 
it, too, finds its way into the story.


Sandy aka "msbeadsley" who did find the main chat, thanks to someone 
named "--maus-," and had fun for a while and who is now off to 
investigate the historical McGee




From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Mon Sep 15 18:09:42 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 18:09:42 -0000
Subject: WINDOW SILLS
In-Reply-To: <bk3nv0+9ott@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk4v97+sbb5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80839

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "slgazit" <slgazit at s...> 
wrote:
> > Notice how in PS
> > it was Snape who took upon himself the task of protecting Harry 
> > from Quirrell - from the broomstick incident, to following him 
> > around the school and to keeping track of Quirrell.
> 
> But there is an argument which goes, "James saved Snape's life 
(from 
> Sirius' aiming Snape at Moony) and therefore there is a life-debt 
> Snape felt he owed."  Where did Snape follow Harry around in CoS?

I left my original quote above. I never said he followed him in
CoS - he did in PS/SS. The life debt to James was repaid in PS.
It does not explain Snape's active involvement in watching and
protecting Harry thereafter. Compare his involvement to Flitwick's
(for example - or even to McGonagall's who is the head of his House)
and see what I mean. 
 
> (Which brings up another entirely different question:  if Snape 
knew 
> or even suspected Quirrell was after the stone, why didn't he go to 
> Dumbledore and "out" Quirrell?)

Why do you think he did not? I think the whole thing was a setup
to get Quirell to reveal himself and possibly to give Harry an
opportunity to test himself against Voldemort. How otherwise does
Dumbledore know that "Harry went after him"? How does he even know
who "him" is?

[ CoS]
> Is Snape actually out looking for Harry and Ron?  I am as inclined 
to 
> believe that Snape is out to get Harry expelled so he won't have to 
> look at him anymore as I am to believe he was worried about Harry.  
> No, I'm *more* inclined to belief the former, actually.

I am sure he was looking for them. He wanted them expelled, true,
but that's no contradiction to his protectiveness of Harry's life.
What would he be doing outside while every other teacher is
inside watching the sorting? He is the head of Slytherine House,
you'd expect him to be there when new students are added to his House.

[PoA]
> Snape is trying to thwart Harry, that's true. For his own good?  
> Still open to interpretation (or we wouldn't be having so much fun 
> interpreting it, of course!)

To quote Snape (not verbatim - I don't have the book in front of me):
"So everyone from the Minister of Magic down is working to protect
Harry Potter. But Harry Potter is a law unto himself" (or something
along those lines).

And why otherwise would he have risked his life (literally) running
after Lupin when he knew he did not take his potion and that it
was Full Moon?

[OoP]
> I thought Snape was *assigned* that tutoring duty by Dumbledore.

Yes, but he could have refused. And he put a lot of effort into it -
2 lessons per week, each 1-2 hours long, and I suspect nearly as
draining on the teacher as on the student.

>  I 
> suspect any desire Snape has to protect Harry (which I'm not 
denying) 
> has everything to do with how he thinks that Harry is the key to 
> Voldemort's ultimate and permanent defeat.

I don't know how much of the prophecy Snape knows, and I think he
is very conflicted on Voldemort. He is clearly terrified of him,
but he speaks of him in reverence, names him the "Dark Lord" like
the DE's do. His allegiance with the good side hinges on only two 
things I think - loyalty to Dumbledore and that unexplained (as yet)
commitment to Harry's safety. I don't think that he genuinely 
believes in the "good" side - it's these two commitments that are
keeping him there. Once Dumbledore dies, will Snape's allegiance 
change? I am not sure of the answer. I can see his commitment to 
protecting Harry tested against his DE's old binding and his hatres
of him. Maybe that was why JKR had Lupin attend the post-pensieve 
conversation - to tip the scales in Snape's mind, by giving him 
evidence of Harry's real feelings on the subject?

> At those times I like to think that he loved Lily even if it was 
> unrequited; I like to think that at some point in his life he was 
> capable of some kind of love.

We know he is capable of positive feelings - he has a lot of courage 
(acting as a double agent requires that, not to mention going against 
his DE oath), he is protective of Harry, he admires Dumbledore. Why 
couldn't he have loved?

> On the other hand, perhaps we will find that he has been a double-
> double agent and Nagini will get to eat him and I will cheer.

The story will be much more interesting with a conflicted Snape
so I vote for LOLLIPOPS... :-)

Salit
(who does not like Snape but finds him the most interesting character 
in the story)





From june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk  Mon Sep 15 18:32:19 2003
From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 18:32:19 -0000
Subject: Snape and Lily and Florence and Ginny and . . .
In-Reply-To: <001601c37b20$e85bb500$79092244@parkvl01.md.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <bk50jj+i2ho@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80840

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Deirdre F Woodward" 
<dwoodward at t...> wrote:
> I'm sitting firmly on the WINDOW SILLS and I think there are some 
joiners up
> here with me.  *waves to other (non) believers*
> 
> [cut to Hogwarts]
> Snape eyed Harry cooly.  "We've had our difficulties, Potter."
> 
> Harry nodded curtly.
> 
> Snape continued, "But we are on the same side, and we need to 
stand together
> to defeat the Dark Lord."
> 
> Harry motioned impatiently.  Was this going somewhere, or was Snape
> intentionally trying to delay Harry?  He felt the same lump of 
suspision and
> dislike that had settle in him seven long years ago, the moment 
he'd set
> eyes on Snape.  "What's up, Snape?" Harry bit out.  "I gotta get 
out of
> here -- places to go, evil overlords to kill . . ."
> 
> Snape nodded, his eyes implicitly acknowledging Harry's 
superiority in every
> way.  He cleared his throat.  "I have a confession, Harry.  I need 
to tell
> you something before you go."
> 
> "What, then?" Harry said.  He felt bad for old Snape.  Clearly the 
old
> fellow was keen to tell Harry a secret, but what could Snape 
possibly say to
> Harry that Harry would care to hear?  There was too much water 
under that
> bridge, Harry thought ruefully.  Oh, well.  No reason to be mean.  
Better
> make the best of it.  He smiled half-convincingly at Snape and 
patted him on
> the shoulder.  "Let's hear it, old boy.  Better to just say it, 
get it out."
> 
> "Harry, before you set off to kill the Dark Lord, take this to 
battle with
> you:  I loved your mother."  Snape's voice broke with emotion,

Added by June:

Harry turns round and hits Snape with  a real haymaker and 
yells "Don't you dare even mention my mum you greasy B*****d."

> > Deirdre

OK here's what I think might happen.  Chapter whatever of Book 7.  
Snape gets AK-ed by LV because he intersects the death curse which 
was meant for Harry.  Dies with seraphic smile on face - oh and just 
for schmaltzy good measure as he goes, his lips can be seen to form 
one word, "Lily".  

(Well he's redeemed what do you expect - cure heavenly choir)

Some time later - a kind of coda after Harry finally defeats LV - 
the full story comes out.  Either Dumbledore or McGonagal will tell 
it.  It will be a ten tissue jobbie - that much is sure.

Harry will attend the funeral of Snape (a big wizardy funeral pyre 
type thing) and then see mistily the following figures (who will 
look slightly transparent):  Sirius, James, Lily ... and a smiling 
Snape.  Oh hey, wait a minute, hasn't that been done somewhere else 
before...

Back to the drawing board.

As you were.

June

Who likes Snape very much but sometimes wishes he'd go away and sort 
his own issues out.  "Pull yourself together you miserable bugger!  
Get a life!"




From persephone_kore at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 18:33:27 2003
From: persephone_kore at yahoo.com (persephone_kore)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 18:33:27 -0000
Subject: The Prank -- A New Thought
In-Reply-To: <bjt1r1+3vbm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk50ln+ahh6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80841

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bohcoo" <sydenmill at m...> wrote:
>
> melpomene, you also make a chilling point about the consequences of 
> The Prank. It is the horrific nature of the consequences that makes 
> me (want to) believe that Sirius thought or knew that Snape could 
> transform -- if not into a bat, then into something that could stay 
> away from Werewolf! Lupin's jaws. Otherwise, what Sirius did was so 
> heartlessly evil it cannot be seen as anything other than cold-
> blooded attempted murder. And I just can't see Sirius in that dark a 
> light. 

Actually, what I've found odd about "the prank" -- about nearly any
version of the logistics for it I've ever seen presented, in fact --
is Snape's behavior. My bewilderment has only grown since OotP. 

Leave aside, for the moment, the question of whether Sirius was being
mindblowingly stupid, careless, heartlessly evil, or some other
peculiar state of mind involving the belief that the consequences
wouldn't be all that bad. This is, granted, something of an important
question, but it doesn't necessarily bear on another interesting one....

Why did Snape GO there? Why in the world would Snape go somewhere that
SIRIUS BLACK of all people on the planet appeared to want him to go? 

Somehow I can't see it as having been disguised as an overture of
friendship. As a matter of fact, unless Snape's thought process went
something along the lines of "This is clearly a trick, but I shall be
more prepared than he expects and thwart his foul plan and get him
expelled," I find it very puzzling why Snape would have gone to the
tree at all if he thought Sirius wanted him to. 

And if he calls it a prank now, then either Snape is lying or he
honestly believes Sirius was pulling something on him. Lupin and
Sirius themselves support the latter interpretation and, in fact, that
Snape is right about it. Forget lying; discard the possibility that
there was no intentional trickery.

So... what did Sirius *do*? And this does matter. 

Did he somehow force Snape down to the Willow? This seems a bit
unlikely somehow; there's no mention of frogmarching or the like, and
it seems as if Snape would have mentioned it if "Black cast Imperius
on me!" -- though I suppose you could make an argument for ego. 

Did he let something slip, pretending it was by accident? (Did he
accidentally let something slip in such a way that nobody believes it
was an accident, even his friends, and now he's not sure himself? Does
this have anything to do with not wanting to be the Secret-Keeper?)

Did he tell Snape to go? Did he do so in such a snarky, sarcastic way
that Snape decided it was worth going just to show him up? Is Snape's
ability to goad Black into dangerous behavior an echo of schoolboy
taunts that ran the other way? (Sniveling... coward?) 

Did Sirius perhaps tell Snape exactly where to go on the theory that
"even Snivelly wouldn't be stupid enough to do what I tell him!" --
and get his bluff called when Snape either *was* that rash or saw
through the act, concluded correctly that Sirius was actually hoping
and assuming he wouldn't go, and found more being hidden than he
bargained for? (I rather like this one, to tell the truth... and not
just because of the amusing mental image of James snarling under his
breath about stupid... scheming... second-guessing... Slytherin gits
and Slytherin-get... while he runs out to the tree, which just came to
mind. It seems to feel right, somehow. The whole muddle of rashness,
cleverness, temper, and stupidity. On both sides, thanks.)

It's probably also worth noting that MWPP evidently did not take the
danger Remus could present as a wolf as seriously as they probably
should. Remus says himself it was stupid and careless, I believe, and
that they were lucky they never hurt anyone on those full-moon runs.
It seems likely, however, that their heedlessness on this point was
somewhat reinforced by the fact that the wolf *was* -- comparatively
speaking -- docile in their company; the other three might have become
used to the idea that he wasn't *as much* of a danger as generally
believed, and carried that too far, rather than genuinely going
through some thought process along the lines of "Well, it doesn't
really *matter* if he gets far enough to bite somebody"! 

Not that this would have helped if he ever had....




From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Mon Sep 15 18:42:15 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 18:42:15 -0000
Subject: Somethings not right
In-Reply-To: <bk4cqi+slge@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk5167+2eui@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80842

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "scooting2win" 
<scootingalong at b...> wrote:
> Which leads me to think that Dumbledore is unhappy 
> about how Harry has been raised thus far. He also states that Harry 
> would have been welcomed into any wizarding family and raised as a 
> son. If that would have happened Harry would have known that he was 
> famous and then would have been spoiled for being the boy-who-lived.

He would know but not necessarily spoiled. Think of Molly Weasley
who has done an excellent job of treating him as a normal boy when
in her care. Too normal sometimes (as he isn't really normal), but
I can't imagine her spoiling him.

I agree that the story would not have been so compelling without
creating a Harry who has to struggle against abuse.


> it still boils down to "Harry kept a secret", not only 
> from an adult who could have helped him (not sure I would have told 
> Dumbledore myself) but he did not even tell a friend, or even go to 
> the nurse,

He eventually told his friends, but notice that at that age showing
a weakness is something boys just don't want to do (I have a 15
year old boy and I see it all the time). Ron would not tell Harry 
that he wants to try out for the Quidditch team - what's to hide 
there?

In addition, when Ron tells Harry to go to McGonagall, Harry replies 
that "I don't know how much power McGonagall has [against Umbridge]". 
At this point Harry knows that whenever he needed help from adults 
against the Ministry, the result had been further restrictions on 
those adults. Umbridge was apparently nominated as teacher only after 
the Hearing, for example. Later on we see that Angelina's appeal to 
McGonagall to help her reform the Gryffindor Quidditch team resulted 
in further powers accorded to Umbridge to overide other teachers.
In other words, if Harry appealed for help it is doubtfull he would 
actually get it, but almost certain that his appeal will make the 
overall situation worse.

> This one she can't fix or remove and it bothers 
> me to think how many kids are going to get the same message that I 
> got from it. Intended or not. Lori once again.

I am not bothered by it at all. Kids know that these books are 
fictional, and will not internalize that anymore than they would try 
to ride a broomstick... :-)

Salit





From jferer at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 18:46:17 2003
From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 18:46:17 -0000
Subject: keeping secrets
In-Reply-To: <bk4imj+976i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk51dp+8g01@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80843

Jwcpgh:" The adults are keeping secrets to protect themselves or to
avoid difficult subjects. Neither of those are good reasons, imo."

Grey Wolf:" While we could debate endlessly about the need to conceal
information from the enemy during the war, and how much that requires
you to keep information from your own people, it is Dumbledore's
decision, and one he admits incorrect."

Dumbledore only wrongly withheld information from Harry, to spare
Harry and to perhaps avoid a painful time for himself.  Dumbledore
knows it was an error, and so do we, but we forgive him because he did
it out of love for Harry.

As for the rest, it is a well-known paradox of war that the more you
withhold information from your own forces the harder their jobs are,
but it is vitally necessary to keep information from the enemy.  No
good answer has ever been found.

Molly's "need to know" is the essential concept. No matter how much
you're trusted, you can't be told information that you do not
absolutely need for your duties right now.  My late father, who had
Top Secret/codeword clearances for stuff I'll never know, could not
discuss anything with anyone else who wasn't specifically cleared for
the same "compartment."  With all the spies in the Ministry, never
mind Lucius at the MoM and dear son Draco at Hogwarts, if you didn't
do something similar you might as well post an owl to Voldemort.

Only trusted people can betray you.

Jim Ferer

"Three people can keep a secret, as long as two of them are dead." ?
Benjamin Franklin





From freddie_mac1 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 19:02:59 2003
From: freddie_mac1 at yahoo.com (freddie mac)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 12:02:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] The worst is yet to come
In-Reply-To: <1063646535.12917.76839.m17@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030915190259.12425.qmail@web21403.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80844

Kneasy <arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com> wrote:

<snip> I think we've been conned. Again.
> That 'Snape's worst  memory' thing - yes, that one. I
> don't believe it.
> 
> Oh, I accept that it's a genuine memory, but I can't
> accept that it's 
> his worst memory.</snip>
> 
memories are summarized as:
> Happy Families.
> Fly zapper
> Bucking broomstick.
> Grey underwear.

deduced memories are summarized as:
> Voldemort.
> DE games.
> The 'Prank'.
> SHIPwreck: no chance with Lily & she marries James ...

<heavy snippage>

> Grey Underwear is a useful plot device. It allows a
> re-assessment of 
> MWPP ... I  refuse 
> to accept that it is the worst memory Snape has. ...

<snip> Harry immerses himself in the pensieve. Can Snape
> tell, from 
> outside, which memory Harry is seeing? Does he think
> Harry sees 
> something else? </snip>

Freddie (me): Excellent summaries and analysis, thanks!  My
choice for worst memory is ... Door #42 -- not yet
revealed. From Snape's actions, I agree that he thought
Harry had seen something else.  Perhaps all of Snape's
*worst* memories are in the same pensieve, and Harry would
have found the #1 Worst fairly soon? Given the sort of life
Snape has lead, memories of bullying could not possibly be
the *worst*.  Bad, yes; worst, no.


Freddie

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 19:45:25 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 19:45:25 -0000
Subject: keeping secrets
In-Reply-To: <bk4imj+976i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk54sl+dd2f@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80845

> jwcpgh wrote:
> > I believe that there are times when adults need to withhold or 
edit information from children, for the sake of the mental health of 
the children.  But I don't think that's what's happening in these 
books.  The adults are keeping secrets to protect themselves or to 
avoid difficult subjects.  Neither of those are good reasons, imo.


> Grey Wolf
> Ummm... see, in these books, most adults are keeping secrets for a 
very  valid and very important reason that has nothing to do with the 
fact that those secrets are being kept from children (rather, they 
are being kept from everyone). Dumbledore and the Order of the 
Phoenix are in the middle of a war with Voldemort, a war that 
involves plenty of spying and careful manouvering around two 
other "sides" - Voldemort and the MoM. 
> 
> The phrase "need to know" is used by Molly Weasley, but with 
reference to instructions set by Dumbledore himself. <snip> 

Laura again:

I think you're begging the question of what's a "valid and important 
reason."  At the time Harry first raised the question, at the end of 
PS/SS, the war hadn't yet resumed.  There was therefore no question 
about classified information.  DD didn't tell Harry because he 
couldn't bring himself to do so.  What if he had?  Then DD and Harry 
could have begun to work on a strategy to deal with the information. 
DD could have said, "Harry, we know that LV believes you are a danger 
to him.  Let's say LV is able to come back to power at some point.  
What skills and background will you need to defend yourself?  I will 
see that you learn these things." It takes LV 4 years to regain a 
body-surely in that time Harry could have been eased into knowing 
what he had to know.

It seems to me that the adults act like the prophecy is such a thing 
without ever discussing the options vis-a-vis Harry.  And how many 
people actually know what it says-do we have any evidence that anyone 
knows besides DD?  All they know is that there's a prophecy in the 
DoM that LV wants that has to do with himself and Harry.  So how are 
they supposed to make an informed decision? 

And clearly even the Order members are divided in what they think 
Harry needs to know.  Only DD and Molly (each for their own unhealthy 
reasons) feel Harry should be kept completely ignorant.  Arthur and 
Lupin think he should be given the basics; Sirius wants to tell him 
everything.  

I also really don't understand what the big deal was about keeping 
the contents of the prophecy a secret anyhow.  Why would it have been 
a problem for the Order if everyone in the WW knew what the prophecy 
said?  Forgive me if I'm being dense here.  The thing about secrets 
is that they're like prophecies in the DoM-they're very fragile and 
require special handling and care.  So once you have a secret you 
have to spend all kinds of energy protecting it.  Sometimes in the 
whole effort of doing so you lose sight of how significant the 
information is-or isn't- in the first place.  




From melclaros at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 19:50:13 2003
From: melclaros at yahoo.com (melclaros)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 19:50:13 -0000
Subject: Snape and Lily and Florence and Ginny and . . .
In-Reply-To: <001601c37b20$e85bb500$79092244@parkvl01.md.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <bk555l+apm2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80846

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Deirdre F Woodward" 
<dwoodward at t...> wrote:
> I'm sitting firmly on the WINDOW SILLS and I think there are some 
joiners up
> here with me.  *waves to other (non) believers*

Mel waves from her window in agreement

I've never liked the LOLLIPOPS ship, ever although admit that IF 
SNAPE WAS ANYONE ELSE it would make perfect sense. However, Snape 
being Snape I just don't see it. What I DO see however is the 
possibility that Kneasy put forth in jest in his AGGIE theory (Post 
7788) which begins thus:

""The Snape character is a fascinating one for many posters; dark, 
mysterious, forceful. Some girls would go weak at the knees when 
confronted by a rampant Snape; did Lily? After all, she made a public 
scene when James had a go at him. What does that tell you? A soft 
spot in Lilys' heart for the vulnerable heart-throb of the fifth 
year, perhaps? I've been told that vulnerability in a male is 
supposed to attract females and here was a shy retiring lad, subject 
to bullying, no idea of how to pick a decent shampoo and with sub- 
standard laundry arrangements. Obviously, he needs some-one to take 
care of him.""
I highly recommend anyone who hasn't read the rest to go check it out.

How this has anything to do with Snape's feelings towards Harry is 
anyone's guess--but IMHO Snape's take on Harry has less to do with 
mushy feelings towrads Lily than frustrated feelings towards James' 
thwarting of his (Snape's) attempt at pulling one over on 
Voldemort...or something like that I haven't quite been able to 
articulate yet.

Melpomene 





From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Mon Sep 15 20:03:12 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 20:03:12 -0000
Subject: Snape and Lily and Florence and Ginny and . . .
In-Reply-To: <bk555l+apm2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk55u0+nr5h@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80847

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "melclaros" <melclaros at y...> wrote:
> 
> How this has anything to do with Snape's feelings towards Harry is 
> anyone's guess--but IMHO Snape's take on Harry has less to do with 
> mushy feelings towrads Lily than frustrated feelings towards James' 
> thwarting of his (Snape's) attempt at pulling one over on 
> Voldemort...or something like that I haven't quite been able to 
> articulate yet.
> 
> Melpomene

Very, very interesting. I must give this some thought.
I've often mused  that post-school events may be affected by
in-school  actions among the Malfoy-Snape-MWPP set.
If they  are, then Snape could well be the key figure. Hmm...

And thanks for the compliments.

Kneasy




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 20:13:58 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 20:13:58 -0000
Subject: The worst is yet to come
In-Reply-To: <276F58E0-E79D-11D7-98AF-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bk56i6+5f6o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80848

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> I think we've been conned. Again.
> That 'Snape's worst  memory' thing - yes, that one. I don't believe 
it.
> 
> Oh, I accept that it's a genuine memory, but I can't accept that 
it's his worst memory.
<snip>
> Happy Families.
> Most listies assume the child is  Snape, the arguing adults his 
> parents. Being contrary, I think the man is Snape, the child and 
woman 
> his family. 

Laura:

Oh, so you *are* a SHIPper!  You just don't want to SHIP Sevvie with 
any known character (for which I'm sure they're all profoundly 
grateful).  Or do you?


Kneasy:
<snip> Grey underwear.
> Firstly, it wasn't the only memory transferred to the pensieve; 
there 
> were 'several', total unspecified.
> I find it odd that Snape should transfer this particular memory to 
the 
> pensieve. After all, Harry could have been told the tale by Sirius. 

Laura:

Why on earth would Sirius tell Harry about this incident? It doesn't 
make the Marauders look too good, and really, Harry and Sirius have 
better things to talk about than Snape.

Kneasy:
> Additionally, for a long time I've had the feeling that Snape 
*wants* 
> Harry to know just how MWPP behaved, to show they were not as 
wonderful 
> as Harry thought.

Laura:

This I believe, as vindictive and grudge-carrying as Sevvie is.  
However, I don't think he'd do it at this time.  Snape is loyal to DD 
and the Cause, and for him deliberately to anger Harry would 
interfere with the lessons and hinder the implementation of DD's 
plans.  If, on the other hand, the lessons work, Snape will have 2 
more years to make sure Harry learns the ugly truth about James and 
Co.  Even if he can't do it via a pensieve, SS is clever enough to 
figure out some other way.  After all, he got rid of Remus, didn't he?
> 
Kneasy:
> Now some memories  that can be deduced or are suspected:
> The 'Prank'.
> Sevvy obviously has strong feelings and vivid memories about this. 
> Fear, anger, humiliation, hate, lust for revenge, they must all be 
> there. It has to be the most traumatic event of his school years. 
You think Grey  Underwear is worse? Come off it; pull the other one 
for Long Tom Minor.

Laura:

I beg your pardon?  Oh, never mind, Britishisms are so sweet!  As we 
say here in the funky States, get down with your bad self...  

I don't know why you would think that an incident that was only known 
to 6 people would be worse than one that was witnessed by half the 
school.  SS might be angrier about the prank but I think he would 
feel more humiliated by pensieve 2.
> 
<snip remainder>




From benigs at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 09:20:48 2003
From: benigs at yahoo.com (benigs)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 09:20:48 -0000
Subject: Hermione the animagus
Message-ID: <bk409g+asad@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80849

Hi! A few months ago, it has been discussed that there is a certain 
scene in the CoS movie that the writer left in since JKR said it will 
be important in the latter books. Many said that it must be the 
Polyjuice potion scene wherein Percy caught Crabbe and Goyle (Harry 
and Ron actually) wandering around the corridors. But I have another 
theory (I just watched the movie a few minutes ago :)) and I 
apologize if this was already discussed before...

What if the important scene is still related to the Polyjuice potion 
but it is about Hermione's potion turning out wrong when she turned 
part human/part cat?

If I never knew anything about the HP books and watched the movie, I 
would totally think that that scene is totally unnecessary since 
Hermione's turning into a cat did not serve the movie's story at all. 
She just turned into a cat then became normal again a few minutes 
later with no lasting consequences... That is why I think it is the 
important scene that can't be cut...

Maybe in books 6 and 7, Harry and company needs to investigate 
something and it requires a disguise that is complicated, an animal 
form perhaps? And Hermione discovers that her polyjuice potion gone 
wrong is a part of the process of becoming an animagi? So she 
volunteers to become an animagi and do the investigating? Or maybe 
all three become animagi themselves? Just my theory :)

--->Ben

ADMIN: Please remember when responding to this post to stick to discussion about the books, not the movies.  On this list, the movies should be used only as a catalyst to discussing the books.  If you want to talk about the movies, please take the discussion to HPfGU-Movie.

http://yahoo.groups.com/group/hpfgu-movie/




From diversity33 at hotmail.com  Mon Sep 15 10:13:38 2003
From: diversity33 at hotmail.com (Kath Lane)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 11:13:38 +0100
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: WINDOW SILLS
Message-ID: <BAY1-F140T6hW1AqxbL00006377@hotmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80850


>From: "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at yahoo.com>

>But there is an argument which goes, "James saved Snape's life (from
>Sirius' aiming Snape at Moony) and therefore there is a life-debt
>Snape felt he owed."  Where did Snape follow Harry around in CoS?  I
>thought he was keeping Quirrell from getting too close to the stone.
>(Which brings up another entirely different question:  if Snape knew
>or even suspected Quirrell was after the stone, why didn't he go to
>Dumbledore and "out" Quirrell?)

One reason would be that Snape himself wants the glory of
defeating Voldemort or Black or others -- and he hates Harry
even more because Harry keeps pre-empting him and taking
away his chance of a Order of Merlin!

K

_________________________________________________________________
Find a cheaper internet access deal - choose one to suit you. 
http://www.msn.co.uk/internetaccess





From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 20:32:22 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 20:32:22 -0000
Subject: The 'Other' in the HP books (was: Harry's Sexual Preference SHIP) - LONG
In-Reply-To: <bk4tvl+m45c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk57km+515q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80851

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...>
wrote:
> 
> How timely, considering--I am going to detour OT here, but relevant 
> nonetheless, and I will bring it back:
> 
> Yesterday, I attempted (ineptly, as it turned out) to participate in 
> the weekly "chat" (my first ever) and found myself in a (what I 
> thought was the main) HP chatroom with one other person. After what 
> appeared to be a glitch, the other poster commented, "Gay computer."  
> I inquired (with suspicion but without heat) what that meant and was 
> told "Where I'm from it means "off."  You know, stupid.  Like my 
> computer was acting." I inquired, "Well, what if I'm gay and object 
> to your usage?"
> 
> ...edited...
> 
> 
> Sandy aka "msbeadsley" 

bboy_mn:

For a 13 year old Southern Baptist, I think this person showed
admirable restraint, and so did you. I would expect a 13 year old to
launch into an overly impulsive rant earmarked by emotional excess.
Since both of you played it cool, I'm impressed.

As far as the comment, I'm assuming that this was a regional
variation, and that this kid was attempting, whether intentional or
not, a silly 13 year olds twisted attempt at some reflection of adult
political correctness. Perhaps a 13 year old silly way of mock-PC. 

This implication is that your computer was acting a little queer
(odd), the politically correct and more polite way of saying 'queer'
is 'gay', so your computer was acting gay. That still doesn't add the
most benevolent spin to the word, but I think the kid saw his/her
comment as far more innocent than you did.

As far as the HP series, I think it already serves as a metaphor to
inspire gay kids with out actually having to have a gay kid in the
story. I think the moral lesson in most fairtales and in many other
good stories are not in-your-face moral lessons. They are much more
subtle and symbolic. So, again, my point is that the HP story already
serves as an excellent world in which gay kids can explore themselves.

As far as an actual gay character appearing in the story, I don't
think so. Just like I don't think sex in any form will appear in the
stories. I mean, Harry got his first kiss, and really, we didn't get
to see it. It was extremely subtly implied, and then spoken about
afterwards. If a kiss is so downplayed, then there is no way we will
see any overt sexuality; gay or straight. But I think relationships
and intimacy, and all the things associated with those, will appear.
So, it a gay character does appear, his/her 'gayness' will be VERY
subtly played out; barely noticable to all but the most observant.

So the short version is, I think the books already serve as a metaphor
that allows gay kids to explore themselves and find their strength; so
 the book doesn't really need a gay kid.

Much of JKR's story ethics are subtly and ambiguously reflected. For
example, Harry Potter is no Greg Brady (The Brady Bunch). He is far
more flawed, and commits far greater transgressions than any old-time
TV sit-com kid ever did. Plus, there are very very few of the
moralizing sermons that Beaver Cleaver's father used to give him. 

Personally, I think JKR's method teaches much greater and deeper moral
lessons than any amount of sermonizing or moralizing. Kids aren't
stupid. They see the Harry does things that are wrong, but Harry
doesn't blow those actions off. When Harry lies in the book; the book
calls it a lie, even though it obvious enough that the book could get
away with not saying it explicitly.  Harry also avoids looking people
in the eye when he lies. These are all subtle signs to the reader that
Harry understands that what he is doing is wrong, and that he feels
some sense of guilt about it.

But overal, when it really counts, we see Harry demonstrating superb
moral character, and very positive moral attributes. So rather than
teach kids by sermonizing, Harry teaches kids by example. The message
is that no one is perfect, but even given that imperfection, you are
still expected to be a good person, and more importantly, when it
really really counts, you are expected to do the right thing. Those
metaphoric lessons will cause kids to truly take these lessons to heart.

The moral ambiguity or uncertainty in these books will lead kids to
look inside themselves for their own sense of what is truly right and
wrong. I trust that when left alone under those circumstances, kids
will not have any trouble coming to the right conclusions.

The lessons you learn best are the ones you teach yourself.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn





From paulag5777 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 14:16:43 2003
From: paulag5777 at yahoo.com (Paula Gaon)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 07:16:43 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Veelas/The Rebellious Woman/Junguean Psychology
Message-ID: <20030915141643.4398.qmail@web40011.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80852

 
CatLady wrote: "They (Vilas) appear as groups of beautiful young 
women, who dance in thewoods and try to lure any man who walks alone 
in the woods to dancewith them, and then dance him to death or 
something. They take the form of swans in order to fly, and upon 
arrival at their dancing-place, they return to human form by taking 
off their swan skins. Ifa man steals a vila's swan skin, she has to 
marry him and keep his house and bear his children, but if she ever 
gets a chance, she willsteal back her swan skin and escape."
 
 
 
This is truly a universal and timeless theme!  There is even such a hint 
in the Bible, chapters 1 and 2, Book of Genesis.  If one reads 
carefully (especially in the original Hebrew), there are 2 different 
stories of the creation of mankind.  Chapter 1 mentions the creation 
of male and female and chapter 2 goes on to give all the details.  
Commentators long ago asked what happened to the woman in chapter 1.  
Some theorized that she was rebellious, refusing to help Adam fulfill
the commandment to be fruitful and multiply, a man's most basic 
instinct.  Hence, she was destroyed.  This first woman 
is traditionally called Lilith, from the Hebrew word for "night".  And 
by the way, Eve, (Hava, in Hebrew) from the Hebrew word for life.
 
 
Carl Jung wrote about a man's essential fear of woman. In summary, he 
held that woman holds such an incredible power over man because 
without her he cannot carry out his most basic instinct--so he both 
loves and fears her. He therefore held that the creation of witches 
and all kinds of horrible female creatures in all mythologies is the 
male's projection of his own fear onto the female. Of course, we see 
this in Harry Potter (GoF-don't have the book in front of me) when JKR 
tells us something to the effect that when Harry watched the Veelas, 
he felt that everything would always be OK.  But later on, the Veelas 
are perceived as horrible, ugly, creatures when they 
became rebellious. So, the short of it all.  Some things never 
change...
 
Paula "Griff" Gaon



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From kneazle255 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 14:16:38 2003
From: kneazle255 at yahoo.com (kneazle255)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 14:16:38 -0000
Subject: Somethings not right
In-Reply-To: <3F6646E0.30713.15B6169@localhost>
Message-ID: <bk4hk6+88j3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80853

Lori wrote:
Moral JKR put out: Don't tell. Moral kids are going to get: 
Don't tell. Moral we as adults get from it: Harry has been abused 
throughout the series, what's a little bloody pen. It just doesn't  
fit right. 

Kneazle responds:
I have always been quick to point out instances of abuse in these 
books, particularly with Snape in Book 1.  But I think the situation 
in OoTP is far more complex. 

The students are not acting out of abused child syndrome. On page 273 
of the American edition, Harry tells Ron that he won't go to 
McGonagall because he doesn't know how much power McGonagall has over 
Umbridge. It turns out that he is right to be concerned about that. 
Although I do not recall Harry ever directly telling Hermione about 
the quill, I know she finds out. She doen't report it either. And I 
firmly believe that she would have exposed Umbridge if she had 
thought it was a good idea.

Although Umbridge is abusive, Harry and the rest are making a 
remarkably adult decisions here. They find out quickly that Umbridge 
is gunning for the teachers; are they going to make things worse for 
them? No. They attempt to support the teachers in the face of 
Umbridge's attacks at a high cost to themselves.

And after DD is removed and the teachers are completely shackled, the 
students openly revolt. 

Finally, I think Rowling is conveying an important truth--Doing the 
right thing is really hard sometimes because a lot of people aren't 
going to like you for it.

Or as Dumbledore says, sometimes we all have to choose between what 
is right and what is easy.

The kneazle





From president0084 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 16:20:47 2003
From: president0084 at yahoo.com (president0084)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 16:20:47 -0000
Subject: Somethings not right
In-Reply-To: <bk4i5i+d2f4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk4osv+rrei@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80854



At first I was shocked that Umbridge attempted to kill Harry. Not the 
fact that he use physical punishment as a tool to shape Harry.

For year physical punishment has been used to teach/Discipline 
children, I for one can't understand it.(I didn't grow up with 
physical punishment) Everyone will agree that Harry Potter's "world" 
is still stuck in the Dark ages, therefore why are so many people 
shocked to see a form of physical punishment in JK's book. Even today 
Physical punishment is still used and still advocated by teachers on 
both sides of the Atlantic.

Umbridge was in the book, to introduce a different type of evil. to 
smudge the lines between good and evil. She tried to kill Harry 
before school started and then contemplated casting an unforgivable 
on him. She is just plain mean. but not a Voldemort supporter.

JK likes to foretell in her book. remember Dobby? I for one taught 
that Black was going to die when we seen how he treated the House-
Elf. (I did change my mind several times during the book). In COS 
Dobby betrayed the Malfoy. in OOP Umbridge can be evil and not be a 
servant of Voldermort.

I suppose what I'm trying to say in the 6th book I think Harry will 
fight for "good" but not be controlled by Dumbledore, or a member of 
the Order. I for one don't think I could ever forgive him and most No 
way  could I ever trust him again.

regards... Jim

I apologies for my poor structuring of my argument my Professor is 
always on about it.






From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Mon Sep 15 20:42:50 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 20:42:50 -0000
Subject: New places and peoples / Bill (WAS: Bill Big in Book 6?)
In-Reply-To: <bk4sd5+aq5b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk588a+7rpn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80855

I wrote:
> Thanks, Grey Wolf and Sof. I think I blew a gasket in forgetting 
about 
> Bill in OoP! I'm in total PoA mode currently, halfway in this time.
> 
> As for the new locations in PoA, I was thinking of Little Whinging 
and 
> the Shrieking Shack. I don't feel that we've really seen Azkaban as 
of 
> yet. Another bit of the new is the time-turner, of course. The new 
> groups in OoP are the OoP, the giants and the DA. The MoM as an 
> institution/group was also expounded upon significantly. Also, in 
GoF 
> the groups should include the other schools in the tournament (Durm 
> and Beaux).
> 
> I haven't seen a previous post list all of these, but then again I 
> joined after the first 50,000+ posts myself!
> 
> BTW, it's not that I think JKR is following some sort of recipe. 
It's 
> just that she has kept the series fresh by adding liberal doses of 
the 
> new without disagreeing with her previous books. And I think she'll 
> continue wanting to do that. Goblins and Gringott's just seem like a 
> natural fit.
> 
> -Remnant


Aaargh! Another oops as I substituted Little Whinging for Hogsmeade.

-Remnant
Thinking I should change my name to Memory-Charmed Neville




From two_flower2 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 17:58:15 2003
From: two_flower2 at yahoo.com (two_flower2)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 17:58:15 -0000
Subject: keeping secrets
In-Reply-To: <bk4imj+976i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk4ujn+bl13@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80856

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Grey Wolf" <greywolf1 at j...> 
wrote:

> Harry is not being kept in the dark because he is a child, but 
because 
> he's a possible security hole.
> 

Exactly.  And OoTP gives us a perfect reason why people who know more 
than they absolutely should are in imminent danger of becoming a 
security hole: Legilimensy, of course.  We know about three 
Legilimenses: V-mort, D-dore and Snape, but how many more are 
around?  Some people being able to read mind IMO is a perfectly good 
explanation of the wizarding society being so paranoic about keeping 
secrets.

Twoflower2





From morgan.cole at nf.sympatico.ca  Mon Sep 15 19:53:22 2003
From: morgan.cole at nf.sympatico.ca (T.J.)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 19:53:22 -0000
Subject: Snape history/future
In-Reply-To: <bk4c1i+qgdm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk55bi+vepd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80857

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hecate92" <hecate92 at y...> 
wrote:
> Hello, 
>   I am also new to this group and have spent some very enjoyable 
> evenings reading past messages.

>   I have been fascinated by the Snape/Lily theories as reasons for 
> his defection from LV. However, what is the general thought on 
> Snapes' future? Will he end up dead by book seven(I do hope not) 
> having sacrificed himself to protect Harry, or will he actually have 
> something positive happen to him (current or yet to be met character 
> revealing some sort of care/kindness/love for him?

>   I would like to think of him doing other things rather than 
> practising swishng his robes in the corridors and ordering vast 
> amounts of immaculate underwear to be delivered by owl. Maybe he will 
> expand his poetry writing.


I too (another newbie) would like to see a brighter future for 
Snape.  I don't think he will die--I think it's obviously Dumbledore 
who's going to be the sacrificial victim in Book 7--and I would like 
to see something mildly redeeming happen to Snape.  I think it would 
be unrealistic to have him become everyone's favourite teacher and a 
real laugh a minute...but I'd like to see him find some personal 
fulfillment and a career outside the teaching field, which I don't 
think is really a good match for him (who DID he get career 
counselling from...oh right, Dumbledore, the only guy who would hire 
him.  Too bad DD wasn't running a potions research facility, rather 
than a secondary school).

Your line about his immaculate underwear made me laugh.  I'd never 
really thought about the current colour of Snape's underwear but I 
imagine it *would* be brilliantly white, wouldn't it?

tj





From tub_of_earwax at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 20:50:07 2003
From: tub_of_earwax at yahoo.com (tub_of_earwax)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 20:50:07 -0000
Subject: OotP make you Blue?
Message-ID: <bk58lv+iab2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80858

Usually I am but a lurker, but I have made the choice to come out of 
Lurkdom to make my point on OotP. Now if you will have some patience 
and read this post with an open mind, I am sure I can let you see 
the purpose of the tone, feel etc of OotP and why it is wonderful, 
nothing short of ecstasy. 

1) I must start with the end of GoF. At the end of GoF something 
extraordinary happened. Harry found out that Mad-Eye Moody was not 
really Mad-Eye Moody, exposing him to the possibility that someone 
who you trust (Harry trusted Alastor) is not the person you thought 
him to be. I know that with Quirrell we have about the same thing, 
but Harry never really trusted Quirrell, or better said, had any 
sort of bond with The Quivering Prof. 
2) he has been exposed to new heights in which his fame has caused 
him trouble. He lost his friends, he got broadcasted over the whole 
WW by Rita Skeeter as a crying baby etc. From the still famous, but 
compared to GoF relative peacefulness of PoA to the hectic life of 
GoF. 
3) He had to see Voldy come back to life, so to speak. Going from 
Baby!Voldy, to Back and better than ever Voldy. This, with his 
closests followers at his feet. It's like seeing a bomb being
made, 
and being aware of the consequences. 
4) He saw the person that sold his parents, that sold the lives of 
his parents while being their "friends" give Voldy another
gift: 
flesh. This when Harry gave him a chance to live the year before 
that, in PoA. Harry saved Wormtail, only the next year to see that 
again he is at voldy's side, plotting Harry's destruction. 
5) Harry saw Cedric being Killed, and being treated as "the
spare". 
If it had not been for Harry Wormtail had not escaped, and even if 
that was not his fault, if it weren't for Harry Cedric
wouldn't have 
touched the cup and Cedric would be happily walking around. Most 
people have no idea how horrible it is to see someone die. I saw it, 
and I am 16, my father. How horrible it is to feel someone's body
go 
from warm to cold, and then knowing that you can NEVER ever hear 
his/her voice again, never can you ask him/her something ever again. 
And then when that person is not supposed to be dead is even more 
horrible (also my father). Even though cedric wasn't that close
to 
Harry, they had an understanding with eachother and you know? 
6) the emotional bang of seeing his parents appear as an echo. He 
never saw his parents before in this much close to living, actually 
saying something directly to him. 
7) the reality of the injustice of the MoM, with Barty jr not being 
questioned, and Cornelius not believing the return of Voldy. 
And last, but not least, being a teenager. A fourteen year old, with 
a crush, and with school and with growing up to do. 

Harry had all of these things, in ONE YEAR! Plus, being a 14 year 
old, even if he is almost 15. Now all of the above is what Harry 
felt, according to me, so not that I am saying that Cedric's
death 
is Harry's fault, but that is what he feels. This is the way we
let 
him go back to the worst place in the world for him: Privet Drive. 

When arriving at Privet Drive he hears nothing! When he has played 
such a pivotal role in Voldy's downfall and rising, he is told 
Nothing, and he thinks that other people do know a lot (like 
Hermione and Ron). So Obviously he is mad at people for not a) 
comforting him, and b) making him part of the war. Harry also does 
not understand why he is not made prefect. He thinks it is because 
just as not making him part of the war, they think him weak, like he 
thought Lupin thought in PoA with the Boggart. Harry is AGAIN (note 
the again) not believed, and seen as a freack, and he does not know 
who to trust. Alastor turning out to not be Alastor, Peter being the 
traitor, he has enough experience with that. And now without 
Dumbledore's twinkly eyes to look at Harry he does not trust, and
is 
frustrated. In OotP Harry cannot play Quidditch and is being 
terrorized by Dear sweet Dolores. Out to ruin your life even more. 

Now we all know some of Harry's ?uhm, more annoying character 
traits. These are not telling people, wanting to do it himself, 
being brave and foolhearty, listening to his emotions a little too 
much at times instead of his head, his reason (or just Hermione), 
and he always feels misunderstood (so doesn't even bother asking 
Ginny for the posessing thing for example). 

Harry see that he is very alone when it comes to life. He is the 
only one to have defeated Voldy, he does have friends, but they do 
not have the emotional baggage that he carries. He does not have a 
family. Sure, the weasley's, but when Arthur got bitten you can
see 
that he still does not fully see them as his own very own family. 
That is why he leans on Sirius so much, they are a lot in the same 
boat. Both alone, rebellious, come from unwanted families, and 
Sirius' whole life-goal is to help and save Harry. He lives to be 
there for Harry, and Harry knows this. Mrs. Weasley lives to help 
all of the weasley kids, Arthur, harry and Hermione. A lot more. 
Plus, Sirius is more of a brother to Harry whereas Molly is a 
typical Mom-firgure. So when he sees Sirius unhappy, and later dead 
he is completely devastated. Oh, kind of trailed off here, Harry has 
no real family, only semi-family now. Harry must yet learn how much 
some people love him, because he forgot about that. 

So do you see the utter, complete horror that Harry needs to have 
faced in OotP. No wonder the "tone" is different, because he
has 
changed a little because of his experiences. And the WW has changed. 

But there were great times in the books, even though they were 
sometimes clouded by Harry's utterly horrible mood. Gred and
Forge 
were very Funny, and very cool. Tnks I found amusing, Luna was such 
a wonderful contribution! Then there were great times at Christmas, 
and he had a great time while teaching the DA. Lockhart was amusing, 
and in general I liked al the St. Mungo scenes, as they had a 
typical HP let's go on an adventure (when they didn't even
know it), 
and find out some stuff thing. 

The character advances were wonderful, James not being so great 
always, Neville finally having some drive to go on, Ron becoming 
more independent, Ginny's greater role and how much she is
powerful 
and fun, Luna contradicting Hermione, or the other way around, Harry 
in the end not having a crush on cho anymore, Dumbledore's faults 
but also we finally see his very powerful and scary side when 
dueling with Voldy. The terror of Bellatrix! Oh how that woman is 
Ever so Evil! And Umbridge, whom I loathe!

I think that JKR has painted a very realistic and very colorful 
drawing of Harry's world in OotP. And I cannot wait to see what
she 
has in store for us next. The world is not all peaches and cream, 
and I know that many people think JKR is abusing Harry, but think 
about how much Neville was abused really, or think about how lucky 
Harry is I some ways. How many lifetime friends he has, and even 
though most of `em may die, he knows he will always have a
shoulder 
to lean on, even if he doesn't believe it himself. 

Toodles, 

*Lara*. 

PS. Sorry if this is late. 




From tub_of_earwax at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 20:53:12 2003
From: tub_of_earwax at yahoo.com (tub_of_earwax)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 20:53:12 -0000
Subject: Hermione's career
Message-ID: <bk58ro+r9jc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80859

I have been thinking about this for a while, after I read OotP. In 
OotP the trio have to think of future Careers, and Harry (obviously) 
really wants to be an auror. Hermione however, when they talked 
about the subject of becoming an auror, she said: yes, but I'd
like 
to do something really important. (Paraphrasing). Whereupon Harry 
and Ron reacted indignantly. As I read further, and thought about 
her possible career choices, I thought that an unspeakable might 
suit her well. What do the other Listees think of this? It is 
something important, it requires brains, and she will love to make 
new discoveries and such. 

What do you think? Sorry if it has been brought up before. 

*Lara*. 





From tub_of_earwax at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 20:54:29 2003
From: tub_of_earwax at yahoo.com (tub_of_earwax)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 20:54:29 -0000
Subject: Croaker hopped off?
Message-ID: <bk58u5+rvhp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80860

One thing I would like to mention. We have heard of two unspeakables 
in OotP, Rookwood and Bode. Both of whom had significance for the 
plot, or Voldy in one way or another. In GoF Croaker is also 
mentioned to be an unspeakable, at the QWC. Now we all know very 
well that JKR does not waste words. Why has she mentioned him, and 
not give him any screenplay? Or might he just be important for 
future books? It would seem highly unlikely that he does not come 
into play at all anymore. 

Thought?

*Lara*. 





From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 20:54:55 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 20:54:55 -0000
Subject: FF:  Flight of (the) Fancy 5; Sirius' Death-Journal cont'd
In-Reply-To: <bjtl5h+nmkm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk58uv+atbt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80861

Sirius Black, death-journal entry dated deathday plus five

I knew better.  Just like firewhiskey.  At least here, there are no 
hangovers.  Then again, I didn't think I could get angry here, 
either, and now I know better about that, too.

I am so tired of nothingness, of fading from featureless gray to 
solid unthinking darkness. Let me spend a little time trying merely 
to brighten up this place, add some color. That bird, yes, it was 
colorful. Loud, too, and funny...

Beak to tail, it was about as long as my arm from shoulder to 
fingertip, maybe a bit bigger.  It had an enormous, curved beak, 
large, bright red feathers, a long straight tail, and beady eyes set 
in the middle of white, featherless patches.  It opened nuts with its 
beak, commented raucously and unintelligibly on various things, and 
left chalky greenish mementos behind it.  Oh, and its feet were very 
strange:  two of its toes on each went forward, and two back.  It 
stood on one and used the other like a hand, holding the nut up to 
its beak to pry at. It could wedge apart shells I'd never have gotten 
into without a tool. I'd never seen anything even remotely like it.

There is it, ah, gone now, flown past. I'd forgotten the blue and 
yellow bits on its wings. As time went by, it would stand on my 
shoulder as I finished a letter, nibbling my hair, my ear--wait, I 
felt something, almost. Are you there, bird? (If I could still 
breathe I'd be holding my breath.) How can you stand on my shoulder 
when I no longer have one? But I remember having a shoulder, an arm, 
a hand. There. I do feel something. I remember very early on when it 
leaned its head down quite comically and fanned out all of its head 
feathers, begging, I was told by someone nearby, for a bit of a 
scratch. I was very wary of that beak. (Of course, that was before 
Buckbeak. I hope someone is looking after you, mate.) And the feel of 
its feathers: soft, like flower petals all growing in the same 
direction, having a very definite grain to them.

I do feel that. And in spite of the fact that I have no eyes, I feel 
a bit as if...well. How very strange this bird looks, so bright, and 
blurry around the edges. A macaw, that's what it's called. Hello, 
macaw. Mac. Would you like to learn a song? I think I will stop 
writing for a bit just now.

S.B.

[Sandy aka "msbeadsley"]




From pokeypokey at comcast.net  Mon Sep 15 20:57:25 2003
From: pokeypokey at comcast.net (angelberri56)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 20:57:25 -0000
Subject: seeking knowledge and keeping secrets-long
In-Reply-To: <bk343o+f18s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk593l+4v5p@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80862

 
 Karen wrote:
> Of course, a world full of secrets provides lots of good plot 
> devices, doesn't it? Still, from a parent's point of view, there are 
> many things I don't want my child to know all about. For 
example, 
> I'm currently unemployed and living off of my IRA. I kid that I am 
> prematurely retired. Although I try to stress to her that we are on 
> a limited budget, I don't want her worrying about what would 
happen 
> if we go indefinitely without income. She's thirteen, and she's 
got 
> enough to worry about without watching my checking account 
and 
> savings dwindle dollar by dollar. Still, she knows that without 
> income we have more limitations than normal. <snip>


I think it's very true what you said about parents limiting the 
information they give to their kids. Parents obviously want to 
protect their kids and shield them from things they think might 
scare or hurt them. And I believe that Dumbledore was saving 
Harry what he thought would be misery by not telling him the 
prophecy earlier on. However, Harry has a strong character, and, 
as Dumbledore stated, he proved himself worthy long before DD 
actually told him the prophecy. 


> Another thought: if Harry had known about the prophecy and all 
of 
> Dumbledore's fears that Voldemort was coming back, how 
would he have 
> reacted to the knowledge? Would he have given up and tried to 
hide 
> away? Would he have tried even harder to learn defensive 
spells and 
> hexes and become a real magical bully? If he had known that 
> Voldemort could be seeing things through his eyes, would he 
have 
> tried harder at Occlumency or would he have panicked and run 
away? 
> Do we know for sure that occlumency works when Voldemort 
was *not* 
> doing a Legilimens spell?
> 


I think we can definitely say that Harry would not run away, but 
would recover from this piece of information and learn to fight as 
hard as he could. Harry is not a wimp, and even though it does 
bother him a little at the end of OOtP, I think he will get over the 
fact that either he must murder or be murdered. It's just like 
when Harry found out that Sirius Black was after him in PoA; he 
hardly even cared. Of course, the prophecy is a much stronger 
topic, but Harry isn't the type to dwell and quiver in the shadow of 
something like that. And I'm sure that if he knew LV was seeing 
through his eyes, he would study harder at Occlumency. Harry 
did panic when he heard after the visit to St. Mungos that LV was 
posessing him, but that was before he knew Occlumency could 
help. 

Thanks so much! -angelberri56




From aimking0110 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 21:03:40 2003
From: aimking0110 at yahoo.com (Garrett)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 21:03:40 -0000
Subject: New places and peoples / Bill (WAS: Bill Big in Book 6?)
In-Reply-To: <bk588a+7rpn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk59fc+97s0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80863

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "boyd_smythe" 
<boyd.t.smythe at f...> wrote:
> I wrote:
> > Thanks, Grey Wolf and Sof. I think I blew a gasket in forgetting 
> about 
> > Bill in OoP! I'm in total PoA mode currently, halfway in this 
time.
> > 
> > As for the new locations in PoA, I was thinking of Little 
Whinging 
> and 
> > the Shrieking Shack. I don't feel that we've really seen Azkaban 
as 
> of 
> > yet. Another bit of the new is the time-turner, of course. The 
new 
> > groups in OoP are the OoP, the giants and the DA. The MoM as an 
> > institution/group was also expounded upon significantly. Also, in 
> GoF 
> > the groups should include the other schools in the tournament 
(Durm 
> > and Beaux).
> > 
> > I haven't seen a previous post list all of these, but then again 
I 
> > joined after the first 50,000+ posts myself!
> > 
> > BTW, it's not that I think JKR is following some sort of recipe. 
> It's 
> > just that she has kept the series fresh by adding liberal doses 
of 
> the 
> > new without disagreeing with her previous books. And I think 
she'll 
> > continue wanting to do that. Goblins and Gringott's just seem 
like a 
> > natural fit.
> > 
> > -Remnant
> 
> 
> Aaargh! Another oops as I substituted Little Whinging for Hogsmeade.
> 
> -Remnant
> Thinking I should change my name to Memory-Charmed Neville

For PoA I think Hogwarts. Think about it we get to see a whole new 
Hogwarts, because of the Maurdors map. And the group could well be 
the maurdors (i dont know how you spell that :-P)
Well there my opinion,
Garrett




From pokeypokey at comcast.net  Mon Sep 15 21:15:20 2003
From: pokeypokey at comcast.net (angelberri56)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 21:15:20 -0000
Subject: seeking knowledge and keeping secrets
In-Reply-To: <bk4aqh+n1th@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk5a58+8vas@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80864

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" 
<jwcpgh at y...> wrote:

> 
> Yes, of course, we tailor our responses to our children's 
questions 
> to their age, maturity level and any number of other factors.  But 
if 
> a child asks you a direct question I think you should tell them 
> *something*.  Maybe you try to answer the real concern under 
the 
> spoken question if you think that's what's going on.  But Harry 
has 
> learned already in PS/SS that LV has a vendetta going against 
him.  
> That's not going to change.  The reasons for it are 
immaterial-it's 
> the behavior of LV that's the problem. DD should have begun to 
> explain to Harry at an age-appropriate level rather than refusing 
> outright.


This is true, however in Harry's case, I think Harry would see that 
there was something more, other than what DD told him, at an 
age-appropriate level. Just like he spends all year trying to put 
together clues and solve whatever mystery, he would eventually 
find out something more about the prophecy. And anyway, how 
could DD possibly put it lightly that Harry was either going to 
have to murder LV, or be murdered? That's not something you 
could exactly make age appropriate. I think, this might be one of 
the reasons that Dumbledore withheld the information from 
Harry. 
 

> Kneasy suggested a few posts ago that kids Harry's age in 
PS/SS don't 
> have a sophisticated understanding of death--that it's forever 
and 
> that it can happen even to children.  So even if DD had told 
Harry at 
> that point that LV wanted to kill Harry, would he have been as 
> fearful as you think?  The idea would still be pretty abstract to 
> him.  


This contridicts my theory from above a bit, but another reason 
why DD didn't want to tell Harry the prophecy then would be 
because Harry wouldn't understand it fully, and appreciate the 
concept of death. Would Dumbledore want Harry to accept and 
comprehend it completely, the better to prepare himself? 
Knowledge is power, afterall, and maybe Dumbledore thought 
that if Harry couldn't understand the whole of it, he wouldn't give 
him any of it. 

Let me know what you think. :>)
-angelberri56

*This is just an off-hand thought... Isn't it interesting that Harry 
goes to many lengths to find out about the Sorcerer's Stone, or to 
learn more about the Chamber of Secrets, but never seems to 
want to solve that Egg Clue...... 




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Mon Sep 15 21:24:16 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 21:24:16 -0000
Subject: The worst is yet to come
In-Reply-To: <276F58E0-E79D-11D7-98AF-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bk5am0+o04a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80865

Thanks, Kneasy, for making a comprehensive list of Snape's memories--
it's like having a Pensieve at my disposal. Swirling around, first 
this memory, then that one, what do they all mean?!?

Well, I don't believe the memory Harry sees is Snape's worst one. We 
see Snape "removing, as usual, certain of his thoughts and placing 
them carefully in Dumbledore's Pensieve."  I'm betting on one of 
those.  

Why's the chapter called that, then? It could be a red herring, or 
Harry's assumption. I think that memory is primarily for Harry, as a 
device to learn more information about his parent's past--not to tell 
us more about Snape (although we're being led to believe this scene 
is a motive for Snape's hatred of James--I'm undecided on that 
aspect).


Kneasy:

Fly zapper
> Apparently innocuous, mundane even. Until  proved otherwise it 
seems  
> to be a random, meaningless memory.


Jen:
JKR seems to believe in the principle of "no energy is wasted" so I 
do think the aptly-named "Fly Zapper" scene has meaning. Here's a 
couple of possibilities:

1)  Is this Snape as a teenager practicing his curses? Is it 
considered unusal in the WW to practice killing things, even flies, 
or is this merely a bored teen?

2) We assume he's bored, but what if this is a snippet from a full 
memory. Snape is angry about something prior to this scene and is 
taking it out on the flies?

Most of the memories Snape elicits from Harry are emotionally charged 
ones.  It should be the same when Harry reverses the spell on Snape.


Kneasy:
> Unless it's all a mistake.
> Note that Harry does not bring the memory into the open as  DD did 
with 
> Bertha. Harry immerses himself in the pensieve. Can Snape tell, 
from 
> outside, which memory Harry is seeing? Does he think Harry sees 
> something else? His reaction is a bit extreme for memories of 
> school-boy feuds and their resulting embarrassments. 


Jen:  Snape does know immediately what memory Harry sees:  "Amusing 
man, your father, wasn't he?"  Even if several of the scenes in the 
Pensieve involve James, Snape knows generally what Harry got a 
glimpse of.  

Trying to sort out why Snape reacts the way he does--uh, that would 
be a difficult task for even the most talented psychiatrist. His 
reaction is extreme, but not totally out of character for Snape. His 
privacy was violated--to Harry it's merely curiousity, to Snape it 
could be his life.







From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Mon Sep 15 21:36:57 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 21:36:57 -0000
Subject: keeping secrets
In-Reply-To: <bk54sl+dd2f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk5bdp+nvab@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80866

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:

> And clearly even the Order members are divided in what they think 
> Harry needs to know.  Only DD and Molly (each for their own 
unhealthy 
> reasons) feel Harry should be kept completely ignorant.  Arthur and 
> Lupin think he should be given the basics; Sirius wants to tell him 
> everything.

Firstoff, I don't think the order members know what is in the 
prophecy. Just as with Harry, there is no benefit in letting them 
know more than they need. What if they were told the contents and 
either one of them turned traitor or was captured and had the 
information extracted from him or her by force?

I suspect they either know nothing of the contents, or know only what 
Voldemort knows (i.e. only the first part).

Incidentally Molly does not say that Harry should be kept ignorant, 
she only asks that Dumbledore's instructions (to keep him so) be 
followed. I don't think she actually said he should be told nothing,
but took a more stringent view of the instructions than the others 
did.

> I also really don't understand what the big deal was about keeping 
> the contents of the prophecy a secret anyhow.  Why would it have 
been 
> a problem for the Order if everyone in the WW knew what the 
prophecy 
> said?

The prophecy should be kept secret from the general public to protect 
Harry - he has enough attention without having the entire WW know he 
is supposed to be their salvation.

The parts of the prophecy which Voldemort does not know are very 
important. There are three parts of which Voldemort is ignorant:

1. Harry has power that Voldemort does not have:

   If Voldemort knew that, and figured out what it was (probably - he
   is after all the smartest Wizard around, except possibly DD), he
   may have figured out a way to neutralize it.

2. Neither can live while the other survives.

   Several times in the past Voldemort did not try to kill Harry
   because he thought he could use him first: getting the stone,
   meeting him in the CoS, using him to revive himself (GoF) and,
   of course, using him to get the prophecy. So long as Voldemort
   thinks he can use Harry, he will not put all his efforts into
   killing him, giving Harry the time he needs to grow and prepare.

3. One must die at the hand of the other.

   Not knowing that means that Voldemort may try to get Harry be
   killed or captured by people other than himself, and presumably
   fail - again giving Harry more time.

That said, I believe that eventually Voldemort will eventually
learn the contents - either from Harry's or from Trelawney's
subconscious mind.

Salit





From sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 22:10:27 2003
From: sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com (sarcasticmuppet)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 22:10:27 -0000
Subject: The 'Other' in the HP books (was: Harry's Sexual Preference SHIP) - LONG
In-Reply-To: <bk4tvl+m45c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk5dcj+4kr2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80867

<snip> 
> Yesterday, I attempted (ineptly, as it turned out) to participate 
in 
> the weekly "chat" (my first ever) and found myself in a (what I 
> thought was the main) HP chatroom with one other person. After what 
> appeared to be a glitch, the other poster commented, "Gay 
computer."  
> I inquired (with suspicion but without heat) what that meant and 
was 
> told "Where I'm from it means "off."  You know, stupid.  Like my 
> computer was acting." I inquired, "Well, what if I'm gay and object 
> to your usage?" The answer I got was "Then I guess you're overly 
> sensitive." I warmed up then and said something along the lines 
> of, "And maybe I think that attitude belongs to a git." My 
companion 
> shrugged that off: "I've been called worse." I became pedantic and 
> said I did not approve of the pejorative usage and that I found it 
> needlessly hurtful, which was ignored.
> 
> As the conversation went on, I found, along with other tidbits that 
> came to light such as the poster's location (Dallas, Texas) and 
> religious faith (I didn't ask, but Southern Baptist), the poster 
was 
> 13 years old.  About the time my age came up (old enough to be your 
> grandmother), said poster expressed that she was getting taken off 
> the computer and had to go. (And what was a Southern Baptist 13 
year-
> old from Dallas doing on any part of HPfGU's chat? Unknown.)
> 
> I am recounting all this because I have been very torn myself about 
> what I have read here regarding whether or not certain characters 
in 
> HP might be gay, and whether or not it is appropriate/desirous to 
> have an obviously gay character in the series.  Until yesterday, I 
> was leaning towards the "unnecessary" school of thought.
> 
> The exchange yesterday included enough details to assure me that 
the 
> youngster had indeed read the books.  This is a Harry 
Potter "fan."  
> Who thinks that the use of "gay" as a pejorative is normal.
> 

Do you have any teen to pre-teen kids?  Because the term "gay" has 
been in their language for some time now, meaning exactly what Dallas 
said:  stupid.  Refering either to actions of a person or object or 
cultural things (ie movies etc).  Did I invent this?  No, so don't 
start with the ad hominem and messenger-killing please.  I just 
happen to know where Dallas is coming from.  Did she mean gay people 
are stupid?  I really don't think so, because I doubt she knows 
enough gay people to have a valid opinion.  It's just a hominem, a 
word that sounds the same but has a different meaning.  Is it 
appropriate, probably not terribly so, but I would have been more 
offended if she had said "&*^$%#&$&*$ COMPUTER WITH THE F^#$*^% *^&%
^*% GLITCH!!!" but that's just me.

<snipage>

Is Rowling an arbiter of social mores and attitudes? Is she? She 
> tackles prejudice and slavery. She deals with several types of 
> morality. She deals with political corruption. I believe absolutely 
> that, as a writer, the story is hers: it should reflect those 
issues 
> which matter to her. I think the pureblood/mudblood/muggle aspects 
of 
> the story are there not because she sat down and put them on a list 
> of "issues" to tackle in the readership's collective unconscious, 
but 
> because these are things which resonate for her personally and so 
> found their way into the story with little or no premeditation on 
her 
> part.
> 
> I personally think homophobia qualifies and could fit in seamlessly 
> with those things which she presents as smuts on the face of the 
> human race. But I would not presume to tell her so. Nor would I 
place 
> any *responsibility* on her to add a gay character. I am not part 
of 
> the school which opines, "Hey, she's developed all that influence 
and 
> now has a *responsibility* to use her super powers for good." 
> (Somebody get that lady a cape and a pair of tights.) All I can do, 
> after yesterday, is hope very hard personally that the issue 
> resonates enough with her at some point before she's finished, that 
> it, too, finds its way into the story.
> 
> 
> Sandy aka "msbeadsley" who did find the main chat, thanks to 
someone 
> named "--maus-," and had fun for a while and who is now off to 
> investigate the historical McGee

If she did, she would lose me as a fan.  If she decides for the sake 
of being a superhero to include gay characters or liberals or 
abortionists or hippies it would mean she cares more about her 
contingency than she does about this story which she has been babying 
for over a decade.

--sarcasticmuppet--




From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk  Mon Sep 15 22:39:59 2003
From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 22:39:59 -0000
Subject: Boggarts, Riddikulus and laughter
Message-ID: <bk5f3v+o3c1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80868

Whatever became of the idea that the force that really destroys a
Boggart is laughter? To quote Lupin from "The Boggart in the Wardrobe"
(PoA): "...the thing that really finishes a Boggart is laughter... the
 word alone is not enough." The spell in itself is said to be the easy
part, what clinches the matter is the amusing shape.   

It took JKR half a chapter of PoA (and Snape in drag) to establish
this, but she hasn't really used it since. There's one Boggart in the
maze during the third task in GoF and Harry chases it off with a
Patronus, while Lupin finishes off the Boggart in the writing desk at
12 Grimmauld Place just with the spell.

The point that humour can make our greatest fears disappear was a good
one, and I'm a bit sad to see it just drain away like that.

Or is Remus actually forcing his greatest fear (the full moon) into
the shape of a crystal ball (harmless prop for fortune-telling)?

Alshain 
    




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 23:03:41 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 23:03:41 -0000
Subject: The 'Other' in the HP books (was: Harry's Sexual Preference SHIP) - LONG
In-Reply-To: <bk5dcj+4kr2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk5ggd+25ij@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80869

  --sarcasticmuppet-- said:
> If she did, she would lose me as a fan.  If she decides for the 
> sake of being a superhero to include gay characters or liberals or 
> abortionists or hippies it would mean she cares more about her 
> contingency than she does about this story which she has been 
> babying for over a decade.

I shall change my email name to "aspiring_pariah," I swear. I would 
not want JKR to decide *anything* for the sake of being a superhero. 
I only meant that I hoped some slight mention (like, ah, for instance 
that Justin had had a crush on Fred like Ginny had on Harry) would 
make it into the story as a natural part of her own creative process. 
Now I'm getting emails, too. How _could_ I have forgotten what a hot 
potato this is? [(<Twenty years of living het, that's how.>)] I swear 
it's funny what a little chance encounter can do to your world view.

Sandy aka "msbeadsley" now realizing why she was swaddled in an 
inverted soapbox instead of a cradle as a wee little 'un.




From sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 23:32:52 2003
From: sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com (sarcasticmuppet)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 23:32:52 -0000
Subject: Funny thing/DumbleVoldoremort
Message-ID: <bk5i74+1vj8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80870

Ever notice that Dumbledore and Voldemort's name kinda sound the 
same?  They're both three syllable words with the emphasis on the 
first syllable.  They both contain the letters O-L-D-E-M-R.  I 
thought it was interesting.

--sarcasticmuppet--




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 23:38:24 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 23:38:24 -0000
Subject: The 'Other' in the HP books (was: Harry's Sexual Preference SHIP) - LONG
In-Reply-To: <bk5dcj+4kr2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk5ihg+o812@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80871

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sarcasticmuppet" 
<sarcasticmuppet at y...> wrote:
> Do you have any teen to pre-teen kids?  Because the term "gay" has 
> been in their language for some time now, meaning exactly what 
> Dallas said:  stupid.

No, I don't have kids. If I did, my attitude about the use of the 
word "gay" as a pejorative would be much as my mother's was about the 
use of a certain six-letter racist word; "&*^$%#&$&*$" might have 
gotten me smacked, but the other, as far as I could tell, might have 
gotten me disowned. (Second generation soap box, I reckon.)

> Refering either to actions of a person or object or cultural 
> things (ie movies etc).  Did I invent this?  No, so don't start 
> with the ad hominem and messenger-killing please.  I just happen to 
> know where Dallas is coming from.

Do you? Do you think that the things we say and the words with which 
we say them aren't important? If so, why are you on this list? (What 
is literature if not words?) If anything, I feel *worse* considering 
that "gay = stupid" is common parlance. I hope this does not qualify 
as "messenger-killing."

> Did she mean gay people are stupid?  I really don't think so, 
> because I doubt she knows enough gay people to have a valid 
> opinion.  It's just a hominem, a word that sounds the same but has 
> a different meaning.  Is it appropriate, probably not terribly so, 
> but I would have been more offended if she had said "&*^$%#&$&*$ 
> COMPUTER WITH THE F^#$*^% *^&%^*% GLITCH!!!" but that's just me.

Imagine that you are a minority member: racially, whatever. Imagine 
that in the country in which you live, persons who belong to your 
minority are sometimes beaten and/or murdered for simply being a 
member of that minority. Now imagine that the young people in that 
country in which you live are commonly using as a negative adjective 
(can we all agree that "stupid" is a negative word?) the word which 
is also most commonly used to refer to members of your minority 
group. Would you not experience a frisson of fear, or at least a hint 
of sadness, whenever you heard it used thus? I will never, not for a 
sackful of galleons, agree that in this instance this word is no more 
than "just a hominem." This is a teeny, tiny pale scrawny minnow 
which, fed sufficiently, could grow up to be a big ol' whale of a 
hate crime, a la Matt Shepard.

Sandy aka "msbeadsley" seriously considering armor plating for soap 
box and who is done with this now extremely OT stuff; further 
replies, please get in line with the rest of the emails. Thx




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 23:39:37 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 23:39:37 -0000
Subject: The 'Other' in the HP books (was: Harry's Sexual Preference SHIP) - LONG
In-Reply-To: <bk5dcj+4kr2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk5ijp+301i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80872

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sarcasticmuppet" 
<sarcasticmuppet at y...> wrote:
> If she [JKR]did, she would lose me as a fan.  If she decides for 
the sake 
> of being a superhero to include gay characters or liberals or 
> abortionists or hippies it would mean she cares more about her 
> contingency than she does about this story which she has been 
babying 
> for over a decade.
> 
> --sarcasticmuppet--

Laura:

Well, gee, sarcasticmuppet, then I guess you may as well stop reading 
now.  I believe that in trying to start a liberation movement, 
Hermione would qualify as both a liberal and even a hippie, since 
freedom, dignity and equality of all people are basic tenets of their 
philosophies.  In fact, you might be suspicious of JKR herself-she's 
showing definite anti-authoritarian tendencies...

If you don't approve of homosexuality, liberalism, abortion or 
hippies (whatever it is you mean by that) and want to flame about it, 
I'd suggest respectfully that this list is not the place for that.  I 
find your gratuitous comments offensive.




From sues0101 at hotmail.com  Mon Sep 15 23:55:33 2003
From: sues0101 at hotmail.com (Sue Porter)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 23:55:33 +0000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Somethings not right
Message-ID: <BAY2-F158bt7hvvFCor00010e30@hotmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80873




Clio said:
>
>Plus, you have to factor in this isn't the first case of abuse Harry
>has suffered. He grew up in an abusive household. The Dursley's
>mentally and emotionally abused him all his life. They neglected him
>and generally treated him like dirt. They kept him under the stairs
>for about 10 years. So he's used to abuse. He's used to being hurt.
>That is nothing new to him. Harry's general reaction to this type of
>pain is picking hisself up (now matter how hurt he is), dusting
>himself off, and never letting anyone see how much they've truly hurt
>him. He hid the abuse the Dursley's heaped on him all his life. Hiding
>signs of abuse is second nature to him. It's not something he talks
>about. He doesn't go about describing what the Dursley's did to him
>very often. He doesn't whine about it. It's not an uncommon reaction
>for him. So truly it's really in character. Hiding his pain and abuse
>he's suffered is in his nature.
>
>Clio
>
>
Sue:
Actually, there is a few lines in OoTP where Harry says

"He knew she was watching him for any signs of weakness and he was not going 
to show any, not even if he had to sit there all night, cutting open his own 
hand with his quill." P241, and

P 243 "He also felt dimly that this was between himself and Umbridge, a 
private battle of wills, and he was not going to give her the satisfaction 
of hearing that he had complained about it."

P246 "No,.....I'm not giving her the satisfaction of knowing she's got to 
me."

I believe that this shows Harry was never ever going to complain about it 
and tell anyone in authority  what was happening in detention. It is a 
battle of wills as Harry said. He didn't want to tell Ron and Hermione 
because he didn't want to see the looks of horror on their faces. He is 
trying to be courageous in not leting 'evil' defeat him. Showing just how 
determined he is. Another chain in the suit of armour that he has to build 
up around himself in order to survive. Knowing the punishment unjust, he is 
fighting a righteous battle, and winning is the only outcome he will accept.

I think it shows how strong he is, and I don't think JK put it in the book 
to portray Harry being abused and making a wrong decision in not telling 
anyone in authority. After all, what would be the result if he did tell 
anyone?

P290 "And how long do you reckon it'd take Umbridge to pass another decree 
saying anyone who complains about the High Inquisitor gets sacked 
immediately?'

Even if he wanted to he couldn't.

Sue

_________________________________________________________________
Get less junk mail with ninemsn Premium. Click here  
http://ninemsn.com.au/premium/landing.asp




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 00:04:10 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 00:04:10 -0000
Subject: Funny thing/DumbleVoldoremort
In-Reply-To: <bk5i74+1vj8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk5k1q+2p7r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80874

sarcasticmuppet wrote:
> Ever notice that Dumbledore and Voldemort's name kinda sound the 
> same?  They're both three syllable words with the emphasis on the 
> first syllable.  They both contain the letters O-L-D-E-M-R.  I 
> thought it was interesting.

Interesting. I keep nosing around (got that from Snuffles, I reckon) 
notions of something like Harry (or Dumbledore, or Grindelwald or 
*somebody*) turning out to *be* Voldemort somehow; the similarities 
between Tom & Harry, the canon around time-turning and its attendant 
warnings, the "different generations/characters but same/similar 
experience with bullying/deprivation" echoes. You may have something 
there.

Then again, maybe "Voldemort" wasn't just the only anagram Tom Riddle 
could come up with; maybe whatever made DD "the only one he ever 
feared" also inspired him (earlier) to choose a name with some of the 
same cadence.

Sandy aka "msbeadsley"




From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Tue Sep 16 00:19:16 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 00:19:16 -0000
Subject: seeking knowledge and keeping secrets-long
In-Reply-To: <bk4mdb+qgpv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk5ku4+3olo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80875

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "alshainofthenorth" 
<alshainofthenorth at y...> wrote:
> Kneasy suggested a few posts ago that kids Harry's age in PS/SS
> don't have a sophisticated understanding of death--that it's forever
> and that it can happen even to children.  So even if DD had told 
Harry
> at that point that LV wanted to kill Harry, would he have been as 
> fearful as you think?  The idea would still be pretty abstract to 
> him.

I don't think Harry would view it as an abstract concept. He knows 
that death is permanent and can happen to children - both his parents 
are dead and he was the target of an assassination attempt at the 
tender age of one, after all!

I think Dumbledore was right not to tell him at 11. The right time to 
tell him the prophecy should have been after Voldemort was revived,
at the end of GoF. At that point, Harry was old enough to understand 
and the need to inform him was magnified. Until then I do not see the 
point.

Of course if he had told him then, we would not have OoP to read...
:-)

Salit





From dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu  Tue Sep 16 00:30:01 2003
From: dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu (Arya)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 00:30:01 -0000
Subject: How Old is Katie Bell?
Message-ID: <bk5li9+hrdv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80876

So, in yet another reread of OotP, I find yet another little truffle of canon fodder 
for snacking (give me a break, here--it's nearly time for dinner and I'm hungry).

On US p. 575 of OotP, Ginny says, "...I think I'll try out for chaser. Angelina and 
Alicia are both leaving nexy year..."  Ginny never mentions Katie leaving next 
year.  

Now I had been under the impression, as I believe many were, that the three 
chasers were all 7th years in OotP.  Even the Lexicon lists her as the same 
year as Alicia and Angelina.

Also, I went back to SS/PS to read about the team.  Since we heard what a stir 
it caused when a 1st year (Harry) made the team, then I might think a second 
year (also a rookie with Harry, then) might be noteworthy.  In PS/SS Chapter 
11, we read about the first Quidditch match and the chasers are mentioned 
here first.  

In US paperback version p180, we see Jordon announcing:  "...pass to Alicia 
Spinnet, a good find of Oliver Wood's, last year only a reserve--....."  and this 
tells us exactly all about Alicia.  She was a reserve in her 2nd year and now a 
full player in her 3rd year.    Later in the game, Lee announces Katie first as: 
"...Gryffindors take the Quaffle--that's Chaser Katie Bell of Gryffindor there, 
nice dive..." which *may* seem like she could be new if--*if* it weren't the 
same way that Angelina was:  "...by Angelina Johnson of Gryffindor--what an 
excellent chaser that girl is, and rather attractive, too--...."

So, what I mean to say, is that I would imagine that in SS/PS, there would be 
some mention of another young prodigy on the team (such as a second year) 
and anyone playing their first game (such as Harry and Alicia).  

Also, some more circumstantial evidence of her being in the same year as 
Alicia and Angelina is that when the kids go to the Hogs Head, those three 
girls arrive together.  Also, I might think if Angelina were a 7th year and Katie 
a 6th year, then McGonagall should have picked the younger one (Katie) as a 
captiain just because she would be around another year--yes I know, this 
means she really should have picked harry, then but she may not have picked 
him for the same reasons Dumbledore passed him over as a prefect.  I also 
know, it's a different story if there is a clear-cut better leader or strategizer 
between Katie and Angelina.)  

Anywho.........Anyone have any real strong ideas on how old Katie is and if 
we'll see her at Hogwarts next year??

Arya

Of course, it is still possible that JKR did originally think of all three girls as the 
same year, but now, in OotP, has a reason to keep Katie Bell around for 
another year.  




From jdr0918 at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 16 01:16:18 2003
From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 01:16:18 -0000
Subject: The 'Other' in the HP books (was: Harry's Sexual Preference SHIP) - LONG
In-Reply-To: <bk5ijp+301i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk5o92+3n4m@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80877

<<< "jwcpgh" wrote:...Well, gee, sarcasticmuppet,...I believe that in 
trying to start a liberation movement,  Hermione would qualify as 
both a liberal and even a hippie,...If you don't approve of 
homosexuality, liberalism, abortion or hippies (whatever it is you 
mean by that) and want to flame about it, I'd suggest respectfully 
that this list is not the place for that.  I find your gratuitous 
comments offensive.>>>

The Sergeant Majorette (brandishing her camomile dart gun) says

I'm pretty sure the muppet was being sarcastic, as the handle 
suggests. The point is that nobody wants to be hit over the head with 
an obvious moral. And Hermiones's activism is *not* portrayed in a 
sympathetic manner, but rather as a function of her tragic flaw, 
which is her pigheaded inability to relate fully to others.

Deep, cleansing breaths, herb tea...

--JDR




From FilkMavenGB at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 16 01:32:13 2003
From: FilkMavenGB at hotmail.com (Gail Bohacek)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 21:32:13 -0400
Subject: (FILK) She Leaves Clothes
Message-ID: <BAY9-F8Q77jWARKToVR00006a9f@hotmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80878


She Leaves Clothes

(A FILK to the tune of _It's Only Love_ by the Beatles)

Midi is here: http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Studio/7779/beatle10.html


Dobby:

'Mione leaves clothes so they'll be freed secretly
It's her dream but we elves see her scheme - they're angry
Feeling really peeved that she's concealing clothes

She leaves these clothes, they are appalled
The elves say that she's being dumb
She doesn't know what names she's called
'Cause they don't want their freedom

When Dobby sees clothes he's very pleased - says, "Yippie!"
He agrees to keep the tower clean from debris
He keeps every piece though he's teased for it

These clothes she leaves, Dobby takes all
Though Dobby's always being shunned
The elves perceive they're not enthralled
But Dobby's the exception
Yes, Dobby's the only one
Only one

-Gail B.

_________________________________________________________________
Need more e-mail storage? Get 10MB with Hotmail Extra Storage.   
http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es




From RSFJenny19 at aol.com  Tue Sep 16 01:46:34 2003
From: RSFJenny19 at aol.com (RSFJenny19 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 21:46:34 EDT
Subject: Longbottom's torture (was: Snape and Lily and Florence and Ginny and.. .)
Message-ID: <137.24e6e083.2c97c57a@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80879

KathyK wrote:
Crouch Jr. and the Lestranges torture the Longbottoms into insanity 
AFTER Voldemort's AK curse backfires on Harry.  They do it because 
they think the Longbottoms have information on Voldemort's 
whereabouts.  Read GoF Chapter 30 (p 603 of the US paperback ed.)
 

Now Jenny here:

I wonder if that is really the reason the Longbottoms were tortured. I'm not 
trying to say the LV sent them, but DD said that the information gotten from 
the Longbottoms was none too reliable, given their condition.  He was referring 
to who did it to them, but this can also mean that their information on *why* 
they were tortured was also unreliable.

And even if it were the reason why, what made Bellatrix and Co. think they 
had this information? Was Frank there the night the Potters were killed? The 
reason I think of Frank is because he was the focus of the torture, and they 
moved on to Alice when he wouldn't talk.

While I'm heading in the direction of the night the Potters were killed, can 
anyone kindly direct me to the consensus that was reached about how the heck 
DD knew they had been attacked?????


~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


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 01:49:39 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 01:49:39 -0000
Subject: The 'Other' in the HP books (was: Harry's Sexual Preference SHIP) - LONG
In-Reply-To: <bk5o92+3n4m@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk5q7j+a53m@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80880

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jdr0918" <jdr0918 at h...> wrote:
> <<< "jwcpgh" wrote:...Well, gee, sarcasticmuppet,...I believe that 
in 
> trying to start a liberation movement,  Hermione would qualify as 
> both a liberal and even a hippie,...If you don't approve of 
> homosexuality, liberalism, abortion or hippies (whatever it is you 
> mean by that) and want to flame about it, I'd suggest respectfully 
> that this list is not the place for that.  I find your gratuitous 
> comments offensive.>>>
> 
> The Sergeant Majorette (brandishing her camomile dart gun) says
> 
> I'm pretty sure the muppet was being sarcastic, as the handle 
> suggests. The point is that nobody wants to be hit over the head 
with 
> an obvious moral. And Hermiones's activism is *not* portrayed in a 
> sympathetic manner, but rather as a function of her tragic flaw, 
> which is her pigheaded inability to relate fully to others.
> 
> Deep, cleansing breaths, herb tea...
> 
> --JDR

Laura:

If I misread, apologies all around.  Forget the herb tea-I'm going 
straight for the chocolate.




From editor at texas.net  Tue Sep 16 02:14:25 2003
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 21:14:25 -0500
Subject: Amanda Predicts Snape's future, was Snape history/future
References: <bk4c1i+qgdm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003a01c37bf8$40e28a00$5c6463d1@texas.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 80881

Hecate92:

>   I am also new to this group and have spent some very enjoyable
> evenings reading past messages.
>   I have been fascinated by the Snape/Lily theories as reasons for
> his defection from LV. However, what is the general thought on
> Snapes' future? Will he end up dead by book seven(I do hope not)
> having sacrificed himself to protect Harry, or will he actually have
> something positive happen to him (current or yet to be met character
> revealing some sort of care/kindness/love for him?
>   I would like to think of him doing other things rather than
> practising swishng his robes in the corridors and ordering vast
> amounts of immaculate underwear to be delivered by owl. Maybe he will
> expand his poetry writing.

Amanda's Predictions for Snape.

Alas. My own thought is that he will die. I'm betting there is an exchange
of understandings; he will probably go heroically in some blaze of
redemption, but I think he's toast. To paraphrase myself from some eons
ago--he has spent too long and invested too much of himself into looking
backward, to ever shake it off and stride on.

I think he is a father figure to Harry--one of the most reliable, in fact.
He is all the negative aspects--the one who doesn't understand, who sets
curfews, who isn't interested in explanations, who sets rules, who doesn't
seem to care. The aspect that you hate. The one you do not appreciate until
many years later--or when he is gone. And we don't have the luxury of "many
years later" in this series (or indications are strong that we don't), so I
think:

--he and Harry will come to understand each other (groundwork has already
been laid in that brilliant plot device of Occlumency, forcing an
understanding without having to lighten their relationship or make it less
tense);
--this understanding will not be driven by either of them *wanting* to
understand; it will be forced by circumstances, much as it already has been
[I am picturing some scene where Harry is facing Voldemort and Snape is
there as a DE; and Snape uses the connection they have established to shield
Harry, who is a truly lame Legilimens. Harry has to allow this, and Snape
cannot shield his own thoughts and protect Harry at the same time. Or
something like that.];
--very close to that moment of understanding, Snape will, in his particulary
nasty and cruel manner, without one shred of softening at all, do something
entirely in character that results in saving Harry, or saving something, and
also results in his death; in other words, he will remain Snape and operate
on Snape's own terms to the end;
--Harry will only then come to realize what Snape has been and why he has
done what he has, how he has.

Yeah, so I'm a hopeless romantic (in the archaic sense of the word--get your
minds out of the gutter!).

~Amanda, once-premier Snapologist



>    hecate92
>
>
>
>       Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>             ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
> ________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.
>
>




From editor at texas.net  Tue Sep 16 02:35:54 2003
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 21:35:54 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: WINDOW SILLS
References: <bk4v97+sbb5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <006e01c37bfb$41612880$5c6463d1@texas.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 80882

Salit:

> And why otherwise would he have risked his life (literally) running
> after Lupin when he knew he did not take his potion and that it
> was Full Moon?

He wanted to catch Sirius, and the thought that he would be proved right
about Lupin, too, was just too alluring.

That said: I fully believe that he had every intention of saving the
children. And I admire anyone who is ready to go up against someone you
honestly believe to be a dangerous, insane murderer *and* a werewolf about
to "go," single-handedly. He didn't *have* to come out from under the Cloak
before he took one of them out.

If I recall my canon correctly, Snape saw *Lupin* hurrying along the passage
on the Map. Not the kids. They were already off the Map, in the Shack (which
is not on the grounds of Hogwarts). Snape went in pursuit of *Lupin.* He
only realized the children were involved at one of two points: when he found
the Cloak at the foot of the tree, or when he actually entered the room.

I'm inclined to believe it was when he found the Cloak, because I think he
probably discovered that James had one in their school years. However, he
could have just found a handy tool, and only understood it was Harry's
through James in listening to Lupin.

In any case, it's pretty clear in canon that Snape didn't go charging off to
protect the kids; he went charging off to catch him a werewolf and a
murderer and be proved right to Dumbledore, after all this time Dumbledore
had insisted on not *listening* to him about this.

> I don't know how much of the prophecy Snape knows, and I think he
> is very conflicted on Voldemort. He is clearly terrified of him,
> but he speaks of him in reverence, names him the "Dark Lord" like
> the DE's do. His allegiance with the good side hinges on only two
> things I think - loyalty to Dumbledore and that unexplained (as yet)
> commitment to Harry's safety. I don't think that he genuinely
> believes in the "good" side - it's these two commitments that are
> keeping him there. Once Dumbledore dies, will Snape's allegiance
> change? I am not sure of the answer. I can see his commitment to
> protecting Harry tested against his DE's old binding and his hatres
> of him. Maybe that was why JKR had Lupin attend the post-pensieve
> conversation - to tip the scales in Snape's mind, by giving him
> evidence of Harry's real feelings on the subject?

But we don't know if that conversation ever happened. I am inclined to
believe it didn't; given Dumbledore's summation to Harry of the reason Snape
discontinued the lessons. Dumbledore does many things, but gloss over the
causes at the heart of things (when he's in an explaining mood) is *not* one
of them, and I doubt he'd have failed to mention the pensieve incident more
directly.

That said: I think you're right. Like Lupin, I think that to Snape,
Dumbledore's trust has meant everything. The memory of it may be strong
enough to hold him to his course, should anything happen to Dumbledore; my
take on Snape is that he has a very strong (if individualistic) streak of
honor in him and will keep a promise he has made. Partly because of the
bitter and grudging way he interacts with Harry. He already *is* keeping his
word to someone, and hating every minute of it, and doing it because he said
he would.

I think that streak of honor is key: if he is indeed the "one who has left
me forever," then I believe Voldemort knows that Snape left because he,
Voldemort, stepped over some line in Snape's code and Snape is inflexible.
If Dumbledore trusts him, I believe it is because he, Dumbledore, knows that
Snape will hold to that honor and his word, because he is proud, stubborn,
and inflexible.

All I don't know yet is *why,* what epiphany took place to shift Snape. And
I still think it has to do with Lily.

~Amanda, Snapologist





From greatraven at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 16 02:42:59 2003
From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 02:42:59 -0000
Subject: Hermione's career
In-Reply-To: <bk58ro+r9jc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk5tbj+5v8a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80883

As I read further, and thought about 
> her possible career choices, I thought that an unspeakable might 
> suit her well. What do the other Listees think of this? It is 
> something important, it requires brains, and she will love to make 
> new discoveries and such. 
> 
> What do you think? Sorry if it has been brought up before. 
> 
> *Lara*.

I've thought of this too. How about a union organiser for house 
elves? Goodness knows, they need one!
:-)She would, of course, have to find a way to persuade them without 
offending them.

Sue B





From dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu  Tue Sep 16 02:56:20 2003
From: dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu (Arya)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 02:56:20 -0000
Subject: Longbottom's torture (was: Snape and Lily and Florence and Ginny and.. .)
In-Reply-To: <137.24e6e083.2c97c57a@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bk5u4k+qge6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80884

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, RSFJenny19 at a... wrote:
> KathyK wrote:
> Crouch Jr. and the Lestranges torture the Longbottoms into insanity 
> AFTER Voldemort's AK curse backfires on Harry.  They do it because 
> they think the Longbottoms have information on Voldemort's 
> whereabouts.  Read GoF Chapter 30 (p 603 of the US paperback ed.)


> 
> Now Jenny here:
> 
> I wonder if that is really the reason the Longbottoms were tortured. I'm not 
> trying to say the LV sent them, but DD said that the information gotten from 
> the Longbottoms was none too reliable, given their condition.  He was 
referring 
> to who did it to them, but this can also mean that their information on *why* 
> they were tortured was also unreliable.
>

I think you have to be careful-- the assumption that they were tortured 
because the DE thought they had knowledge of Voldemort's whereabouts is 
conjecture, at best.  I think it may also be a possibility that they wanted to 
know where someone else is---maybe someone who had disappeared...such 
as a certain little baby named Harry?  



> And even if it were the reason why, what made Bellatrix and Co. think they 
> had this information? Was Frank there the night the Potters were killed? The 
> reason I think of Frank is because he was the focus of the torture, and they 
> moved on to Alice when he wouldn't talk.

To go with my possibility that the longbottoms were tortured for info on Harry's 
whereabouts, I cite the yet-unnamed godmother of Harry.  I think it may be 
possible, to assume that whoever his godmother is, she was a contemporary 
of Lily and James, female (duh), and also currently not around or else she 
would have been revealed to Harry.  The only person thus far fitting this 
criteria, is Alice Longbottom.  Why wouldn't anyone have told Harry about 
this?  Well, who wants to tell the poor boy, yet another person who was to 
have been a parental figure is  irretreivably gone--possibly because of him?

If it were known that Harry Potter was alive, yet orphaned, after his "defeat' of 
Voldemort, it would likely be easy to find out in public records who the 
godparents were.  Sirius was in Azkaban shortly after the defeat and 
Dumbledore decided to use the blood link to Petunia, but DE wouldn't know 
about this.  They may, however know, who Harry's godmother had been and 
have went to them to find Harry.  (Or even neville, who also may have been 
hidden away at the time for his own protection, as the threat of the known 
prophecy still lingered.)

> While I'm heading in the direction of the night the Potters were killed, can 
> anyone kindly direct me to the consensus that was reached about how the 
heck 
> DD knew they had been attacked?????

Still a mystery, but many theories....See the Lexicon for the theories.


> ~RSFJenny~
\

Arya




From two4menone4you88 at aol.com  Tue Sep 16 03:04:53 2003
From: two4menone4you88 at aol.com (yairadubin)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 03:04:53 -0000
Subject: Snape's Worst Memory
Message-ID: <bk5ukl+vjmo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80885

I've noticed a lot of people posting about how could the scene with 
MWPP be Snape's worst memory? They were saying how he probably has a 
lot of other horrible memories from his time as a death eater.  I 
just wanted to add another variable to the mix.  As I was rereading 
OOP I noticed that Harry doesn't finish reliving Snape's memory, 
Snape interrupts him in the middle.  Maybe the part of that memory 
that's so horrible to Snape to be called his worst memory was at the 
end and we didn't see it because Harry didn't get that far.  Just a 
thought.  Any comments?
                             LUV,
                               *Yaira*





From jdr0918 at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 16 04:00:24 2003
From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 04:00:24 -0000
Subject: Amanda Predicts Snape's future, was Snape history/future
In-Reply-To: <003a01c37bf8$40e28a00$5c6463d1@texas.net>
Message-ID: <bk61so+6u3l@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80886

<<<"Amanda Geist" wrote:...Alas. My own thought is that he will 
die...he will probably go heroically in some blaze of redemption...>>>

The Sergeant Majorette says

And he will become a Hogwarts ghost; he already has the wardrobe. 
Ironically, there will also be some incident surrounding his death 
that frees Sir Nicholas, making Snape the new Gryffindor Ghost...

--JDR




From Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com  Tue Sep 16 05:54:06 2003
From: Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com (arcum42)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 05:54:06 -0000
Subject: WINDOW SILLS
In-Reply-To: <bk4v97+sbb5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk68hu+nfqp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80887

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "slgazit" <slgazit at s...> wrote:

<snip>

> And why otherwise would he have risked his life (literally) running
> after Lupin when he knew he did not take his potion and that it
> was Full Moon?
> 

Are you kidding? Look at the basic scenario: In the Shreaking Shack,
we have Lupin reprising his traditional 'rampaging werewolf' role,
with Harry filling Snapes former role as the innocent student about to
be eaten. And Snape had the opportunity to play the 'heroic git' role
James had so long ago in rescuing him. How could he resist? It would
be a perfect role reversal, and probably would have done his mental
state some good. Half of the reason he was so upset afterwords is that
it didn't play out the way he imagined it would...

--Arcum




From princessmelabela at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 06:22:45 2003
From: princessmelabela at yahoo.com (Melanie Black)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 23:22:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Bill Big in Book 6?
In-Reply-To: <bk4lk9+35rg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030916062245.64171.qmail@web20706.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80888


On rereading POA, I noticed that Bill Weasley worked for a time at 
Gringott's (right before he went on the family trip to Egypt). Since 
JKR loved the Weasley's so much, doesn't it stand to reason that he'd 
play a role in book 6, as well? After all, Fred and George have their 
joke shop to keep them busy now, and Bill seems ready to join the 
Order and/or the MoM.

And he knows Gringott's and goblins....

I think this looks to be one of the secondary threads in 6.

-Remnant

 
My reply:  Also, I think Charlie will become more prominent.  Especially since he's a character we have known about since the first book.  There has to be something significant about dragons.  


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!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Tue Sep 16 06:29:40 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 06:29:40 -0000
Subject: WINDOW SILLS
In-Reply-To: <006e01c37bfb$41612880$5c6463d1@texas.net>
Message-ID: <bk6akk+4cqb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80889

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Amanda Geist" <editor at t...> 
wrote:
> He wanted to catch Sirius, and the thought that he would be proved 
right
> about Lupin, too, was just too alluring.
> 
> That said: I fully believe that he had every intention of saving the
> children.

I think Snape has been keeping track of Harry and just like Lupin 
suspected that the kids would go to Hagrid on Execution Day so he may 
have suspected that the kids were there. He certainly did not act 
surprised at their presence. But that is just a guess, I have no 
evidence to support it.

> > Maybe that was why JKR had Lupin attend the post-pensieve
> > conversation - to tip the scales in Snape's mind, by giving him
> > evidence of Harry's real feelings on the subject?
> 
> But we don't know if that conversation ever happened. I am inclined 
to
> believe it didn't; given Dumbledore's summation to Harry of the 
reason Snape
> discontinued the lessons.

When I referred to the "post-pensieve conversation" I meant the one 
Harry had with Sirius and Lupin while the twins were staging their 
farewell stint. What I meant was that by having Lupin in on the 
conversation then, he could in a future book help resolve the 
atmosphere between Harry and Snape, as his relationship with Snape 
seems the least contentious of the four. Hopefully that will happen 
before he too dies (I expect all four MWPP to eventually die over the 
course of the series, and probably Snape as well for good measure...).

> That said: I think you're right. Like Lupin, I think that to Snape,
> Dumbledore's trust has meant everything. The memory of it may be 
strong
> enough to hold him to his course, should anything happen to 
Dumbledore;

I am not so sure. He was a DE. I am guessing that that implies much 
more than just an ugly mark on the arm. If Dumbledore is gone it will 
be a lot harder for him to keep faith with the good side for the sake 
of Harry whom he hates so much, when at the same time he has both the 
threat and the binding implied by the DE mark.

> I think that streak of honor is key: if he is indeed the "one who 
has left
> me forever," then I believe Voldemort knows that Snape left because 
he,
> Voldemort, stepped over some line in Snape's code and Snape is 
inflexible.

I don't believe that Snape was one of the ones referred to by 
Voldemort. If Voldemort thought that he "left him forever" how could 
he have acted as a spy?

> If Dumbledore trusts him, I believe it is because he, Dumbledore, 
knows that
> Snape will hold to that honor and his word, because he is proud, 
stubborn,
> and inflexible.

But Dumbledore has made mistakes in the past. However, I don't think 
we'll know if he has done so with Snape until the end of the series.
We still have a few more years to debate the issue... :-)

Salit
(who would love to read books 6 and 7 but will miss the speculations)





From june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk  Tue Sep 16 07:35:27 2003
From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 07:35:27 -0000
Subject: Snape's Worst Memory
In-Reply-To: <bk5ukl+vjmo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk6efv+c928@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80890

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "yairadubin" 
<two4menone4you88 at a...> wrote:
> I've noticed a lot of people posting about how could the scene with 
> MWPP be Snape's worst memory? They were saying how he probably has 
a 
> lot of other horrible memories from his time as a death eater.  I 
> just wanted to add another variable to the mix.  As I was rereading 
> OOP I noticed that Harry doesn't finish reliving Snape's memory, 
> Snape interrupts him in the middle.  Maybe the part of that memory 
> that's so horrible to Snape to be called his worst memory was at 
the 
> end and we didn't see it because Harry didn't get that far.  Just a 
> thought.  Any comments?
>                              LUV,
>                                *Yaira*

I have always firmly believed that the "Snape's Worst Memory" tag is 
merely the appelation that Harry places on it.  

Harry is fifteen at the time of seeing it.  Snape was probably about 
16.  Never having been a boy of sixteen I can't be sure, but I would 
suspect that humiliation looms large in your list of what you don't 
want to happen.  so to Harry (as to teenage Snape) getting exposed is 
about as bad as it could get.

>From the POV of a man of 36 - the worst memory could be radically 
different - hearing that despite your best efforts, the woman you 
loved is dead could possibly overtake the underpants issue (I knew I 
could get the subject back on that if I really tried!) or perhaps the 
time he put his first move on Lily and got politely but firmly 
brushed off, or when he was about to ask her to dance at the Yule 
Ball and James got there ahead of him....

We don't know what else he put in the Pensieve, do we?  Also we don't 
know what Snape would describe as his worst ever memory - and his 
psychiatrist isn't talking either.

June

"Hanging on in quiet desperation is the English way"

Pink Floyd, Dark Side of the Moon

(and my quote of the week for Snape)




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 07:48:57 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 07:48:57 -0000
Subject: Longbottom's Torture - Why?
In-Reply-To: <bk5u4k+qge6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk6f99+7lic@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80891

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Arya" <dequardo at w...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, RSFJenny19 at a... wrote:
> > KathyK wrote:
> > Crouch Jr. and the Lestranges torture the Longbottoms into
> > insanity AFTER Voldemort's AK curse backfires on Harry. ...they 
> > think the Longbottoms have information on Voldemort's....  Read 
> > GoF Chapter 30 (p 603 of the US paperback ed.)

 
> > 
> > Now Jenny here:
> > 
> > I wonder if that is really the reason the Longbottoms were 
> > tortured?


> Arya: 
> 
> ... -- the assumption that they were tortured because the DE thought
> they had knowledge of Voldemort's whereabouts is conjecture, at 
> best.  I think ... they wanted to know where someone else is---maybe
> ...a certain little baby named Harry?  
> 

bboy_mn:

Conjecture...? I'm confused. Do you mean conjecture on the part of us,
the readers, or on the part of the DE's?

It can't be reader conjecture because the book says that's why they
were there. Of course, I will admit that the information we have now
may not be the whole story, so anything could happen in the future.
But for now, seeking knowledge of Voldemort's where abouts, is the
official story line.



> Arya(?):
>
> ...edited... (speculation that Alice Longbottom is Harry's 
> Godmother)...
> 

> > KathyK:
> >
> > While I'm heading in the direction of the night the Potters were
> > killed, can anyone kindly direct me to the consensus that was 
> > reached about how the heck DD knew they had been attacked?????

> Jenny(?):
> 
> Still a mystery, but many theories....See the Lexicon for the 
> theories.
> 
> 
> > ~RSFJenny~
> 
> 
> Arya

bboy_mn:

RE: How did Dumbledore know?
This whole Secret Keeper thing is very confusing. I would have
speculated in past that once the secret was broken, the information
would no longer be blocked and Dumbledore would have a revelation. But
we know from the most recent book that the secret can be given away to
as many people as the Secret Keeper desires (everyone who entered
Grimauld Place knew that secret) and the secret still remains intact. 

Perhaps when the people who were being protected by the Secret Keeper
Spell died (Harry's parents), the spell was broken because the people
being hidden were dead. Nope... that doesn't work either. Harry was
still alive, and it was the location that was the secret (ie: the
house) not the people.

Perhaps when Sirius discovered that Peter was missing, he sent a owl
to Dumbledore telling him there might be trouble. Again... a Secret
Keeper problem. Can someone who knows the secret tell someone else
even if the first person is not the Secret Keeper. Example; could
Harry tell Neville how to find Grimauld Place? I don't think so.

Perhaps, the Potters or Peter send a note to Dumbledore in the same
fashion that Dumbledore sent a note to Harry telling him the location
of Grimauld Place. It's possible that Dumbledore, while not the Secret
Keeper, was in on the secret. But then I have to wonder, if he knew
the secret, how is it that he didn't know the Secret Keeper? Another
mystery.

This is all complicated by the fact that we assume Godric's Hollow is
in Wales since Hagrid flew over Bristol which is near Wales and a long
 long way from Scotland/Hogwarts. So any message between Dumbledore
and Hagrid would have had to travel pretty fast to cover that ground. 

So why did I waste all your time, telling you all the ways it can't
work? Because I think this is another one of those endless 'thought
traps', that will keep us helplessly and pointlessly running around in
a circle chasing an answer that isn't there. Until JKR explains it, I
don't think we have enough information to determine the answer.
Although, that won't stop me from trying.

Re: Why the Longbottoms?

OK, I have a theory. There is a missing approximately 24 hours between
when Hagrid picked Harry up at Godric's Hollow and when he delivered
him to Privet Drive. Where was Hagrid during that time?

Some have speculated that Hagrid is not the ideal person to care for a
1 year old tramatized child. So the assumption is that he would have
taken Harry to someone who could help, and offer him shelter until it
was time to go to Privet Drive.

I speculate that Hagrid took Harry to Neville's house so Alice
Longbottom could care for Harry until it was time to go. That would
mean that the Longbottoms would have had first hand access to Harry,
and to Hagrid who had been on the scene. It's also reasonable to
assume that they were being kept up to date of what was happening with
the Order of the Phoenix, and would have therefore had inside
information on the events that would never have been released to the
public; maybe even information that was never released to the Ministry.

That could have been enough to make the DE's think that the
Longbottoms had inside information on what happened to Voldemort.
Since the DE's are just as irrational and illogical as Voldemort
himself, they wouldn't have need much of an excuse to reach the
conclusion that Longbottoms knew where Voldemort was.

The only missing bit? How did Hagrid and McGonagall communicate with
each other? Rememeber at Privet Drive, McGonagall said Hargid had
informed her that Dumbledore would be taking Harry to Privet Drive.
The only conclusion I can reach is that the Longbottoms home could
have been the meeting place for the Order. Although, I admit that
seems weak.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn




From lawtrainer at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 15 21:27:53 2003
From: lawtrainer at yahoo.com (Jana Fisher)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 21:27:53 -0000
Subject: Hermione's career
In-Reply-To: <bk58ro+r9jc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk5asp+50u5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80892

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tub_of_earwax" 
<tub_of_earwax at y...> wrote:
> Hermione however, when they talked 
> about the subject of becoming an auror, she said: yes, but I'd
> like 
> to do something really important. (Paraphrasing). Whereupon Harry 
> and Ron reacted indignantly. As I read further, and thought about 
> her possible career choices, I thought that an unspeakable might 
> suit her well. What do the other Listees think of this? It is 
> something important, it requires brains, and she will love to make 
> new discoveries and such. 
> 
> What do you think? Sorry if it has been brought up before. 
  


After reading this I pictured Hermione to go into the MOM - and 
someday become Minister.  I think she would be well suited as she is 
diplomatic and at the same time opinionated.  And she wants to change 
the injustices of the world - and what bigger injustices (after 
Voldemort is gone) are there beyond SPEW and the treatment of 
mudbloods/muggles - both things she can relate to.
Jana





From gbannister10 at aol.com  Tue Sep 16 09:58:56 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 09:58:56 -0000
Subject: Funny thing/DumbleVoldoremort
In-Reply-To: <bk5k1q+2p7r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk6mt0+sl77@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80893

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> sarcasticmuppet wrote:
> > Ever notice that Dumbledore and Voldemort's name kinda sound the 
> > same?  They're both three syllable words with the emphasis on the 
> > first syllable.  They both contain the letters O-L-D-E-M-R.  I 
> > thought it was interesting.
> 


<snip>


> Then again, maybe "Voldemort" wasn't just the only anagram Tom 
Riddle 
> could come up with; maybe whatever made DD "the only one he ever 
> feared" also inspired him (earlier) to choose a name with some of 
the 
> same cadence.
> 

Geoff:
Then again, the two names have their own meaning. "Voldemort" is 
French for "flight of death" and "Dumbledore" is an Old English word 
for "bumblebee". The latter is personally interesting because in the 
village in which I now live, there is a house called "Dumbledory" - 
the name had intrigued me. Now it makes a bit more sense....

Perhaps LV transfigures into a bee carrying a Cruise missile!  :-))




From karomonkwon at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 03:34:06 2003
From: karomonkwon at yahoo.com (Karolina)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 03:34:06 -0000
Subject: The worst is yet to come
In-Reply-To: <276F58E0-E79D-11D7-98AF-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bk60be+534s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80894

Kneasy wrote:
> *If* Snapey had the hots for Lily (shudder), there must be at 
least two 
> horrible memories. First, when he realised he'd no chance, second, 
when 
> she marries James.(Cringe)

Kneasy, it's sweet of you to entertain the possibility of a ship in 
your post. I'm not a shipper myself (well, I try not to be, publicly 
^_^) but I have a few thoughts on this.

The memory Harry sees in the pensieve might be the one in which 
Snape realizes he has no chance and James and Lilly start on the 
road to becoming an item. 

We might assume from the way he reacts to the Maurauders' attentions 
that Snape has been harassed by them before. So why is this 
particular memory, according to the chapter title, the "worst"? 
Well, it seems to be the first time Lily steps in between James and 
Snape. That, in itself, might be a terrible thing for the young 
Severus - having a mudblood girl rescue him from the class bullies. 
Notice how vicious Snape is towards Lily. This could be hate, pure 
and simple, but it could also be frustration and helplessness. He 
has just been abused and humiliated in front of everyone, <shipper 
hat on> including that one special girl and he can't think of 
anything to do but to spit venom all around him. In the process of 
ranting and raving, he insults Lily and in this way pushes her away 
from him. James is told off by Evans and starts reconsidering his 
actions. He quits beating up on Severus cold turkey, and changes his 
life so he can better impress the girl. 
This leads to very little or no contact between Severus and the 
future Potters - Lily wants nothing to do with him, and James is 
trying not to pick on him anymore. Snape keeps his distance, and 
eventually receives secondhand information that the two have wound 
up together. Traumatic, but perhaps not so much; I expect Snape had 
suspected it from the time of the events seen in the pensieve, as he 
had inadvertently been the catalyst that brought the two together on 
that day, making it his worst memory.</shipper hat off> 

Me, shipper? Perish the though!

I agree that Harry doesn't see _all_ of SS's bad memories - after 
all, he sees only one. In the passage, Snape removes memorieS 
(plural) from his mind and places them in the pensieve. I'm sure the 
Whomping Willow werewolf memory is in there, and we can only guess 
what others Harry misses out on.

By the way, when I first read the chapter, I assumed that, at the 
end of the memory, the "flash of light" Harry saw before the vision 
of Snape in his underoos signified switching between different 
memories. I took it as a reminder that the previous memory had not 
been the only one in the pensieve. Had anyone else understood it 
that way? 






From morgan.cole at nf.sympatico.ca  Tue Sep 16 01:54:08 2003
From: morgan.cole at nf.sympatico.ca (T.J.)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 01:54:08 -0000
Subject: How Old is Katie Bell?
In-Reply-To: <bk5li9+hrdv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk5qg0+689m@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80895

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Arya" <dequardo at w...> wrote:
>[snip] In US paperback version p180, we see Jordon 
announcing:  "...pass to Alicia 
> Spinnet, a good find of Oliver Wood's, last year only a reserve--
....."  and this 
> tells us exactly all about Alicia.  She was a reserve in her 2nd 
year and now a 
> full player in her 3rd year.    

I haven't given any thought to your primary question about how old 
Katie Bell is, but this reference raises a question in my mind: 
Doesn't the Gryffindor team have any reserves now (i.e. in OOP, 
Harry's 5th year)?  When they have to replace Harry, Fred and George 
it seems they are totally scrounging around for players and not very 
happy with what's available...also Ron goes from no connection with 
the team, to trying out and coming straight in as Keeper.  If they 
once had reserves, why don't they anymore? You'd think each house 
would have more than a tiny handful of good Quidditch players and 
there'd be no shortage of talented reserve players to draw on if, 
say, three of your team members got booted in one day.

tj (apologies if this is one of those questions that has been done to 
death before I got here)





From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 10:21:14 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 10:21:14 -0000
Subject: Hermione's career
In-Reply-To: <bk5asp+50u5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk6o6q+4nra@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80896

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jana Fisher" <lawtrainer at y...> 
wrote:
I pictured Hermione to go into the MOM - and someday become 
Minister.  I think she would be well suited as she is
diplomatic and at the same time opinionated.  And she wants to change 
the injustices of the world - and what bigger injustices (after 
Voldemort is gone) are there beyond SPEW and the treatment of 
mudbloods/muggles - both things she can relate to. 

hg:
I have pictured her as a sort of public defender or an activist for 
creature/being rights. She has a strong sense of right and wrong, a 
social conscience, and (so far) a blatant disregard for what the 
creatures she is trying to help want or think. The house elves are a 
prime example of this.

She can be extremely empathetic (like with Neville in GoF)but this 
can often be overshadowed by her logic. Once she has reached a 
conclusion, she cannot drop it and see anybody else's point of view. 
That awful socratic dialogue she puts Lavender thru on the death of 
her rabbit trying to disprove Trelawney is a perfect example.











From amyhae13 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 05:14:05 2003
From: amyhae13 at yahoo.com (amyhae13)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 05:14:05 -0000
Subject: Hermione's career
In-Reply-To: <bk58ro+r9jc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk666u+e7bf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80897

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tub_of_earwax" 
<tub_of_earwax at y...> wrote:
> I have been thinking about this for a while, after I read OotP. In 
> OotP the trio have to think of future Careers, and Harry 
(obviously) 
> really wants to be an auror. Hermione however, when they talked 
> about the subject of becoming an auror, she said: yes, but I'd
> like 
> to do something really important. (Paraphrasing). Whereupon Harry 
> and Ron reacted indignantly. As I read further, and thought about 
> her possible career choices, I thought that an unspeakable might 
> suit her well. What do the other Listees think of this? It is 
> something important, it requires brains, and she will love to make 
> new discoveries and such. 
> 
> What do you think? Sorry if it has been brought up before. 
> 
> *Lara*.

Hi all!

I'm Amy.  This is my first post.

I was thinking Hermione might want to be a healer.  I think (but I'm 
not sure, and don't have my copy of OotP with me)that when Ron reads 
off the list of qualifications to be a healer and can't believe all  
the subjects a healer needs to have, Hermione says something about it 
being an important job.  And she would definately be able to meet the 
acedemic standards for the job.  and she might be able to break new 
ground by combining some useful ideas from Muggle medicine with 
magical healing techniques, and have more success at doing it than 
Mr. Weasley's healer did with the stiches.  that's my guess,  would 
like to hear what other people are tinking.

Amy





From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Tue Sep 16 10:22:31 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 10:22:31 -0000
Subject: Hermione's career
In-Reply-To: <bk5tbj+5v8a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk6o97+m3dj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80898

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sbursztynski" <greatraven at h...> wrote:
> 
> I've thought of this too. How about a union organiser for house 
> elves? Goodness knows, they need one!
> :-)She would, of course, have to find a way to persuade them without 
> offending them.
> 


Which, of course, is not likely to  happen.
They already get upset at her hints and suggestions; the only way
she could impose her ideas is by coercion. "I know what's best for you
and you'll damn well do it."
Freedom by Dictatorship. 

Animal Farm all over again.

Kneasy




From two_flower2 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 05:18:36 2003
From: two_flower2 at yahoo.com (two_flower2)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 05:18:36 -0000
Subject: TBAY:  "I See London, I See France!"
In-Reply-To: <bk2rfl+8olm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk66fc+gf6b@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80899

> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cindy C." 
> wrote:
>> Underwear
> > is often considered a bit of a gag, really. Mildly embarrassing, 
to
> > be sure, but hardly the climax of what is supposed to be Snape's
> worst
> > memory ever. Worse than being a DE. Worse than the Prank. Worse
> > than whatever he did for Voldemort at the end of GoF.
> 


 I don't know, Cindy, if exposing of underwear is really just a gag, 
especially for young people as old as fifteen.  It was precisely the 
underwear part that made me cringe when I read that chapter. And the 
subsequent threat of
 stripping made the scene even more disturbing. I had the same
 reaction as Harry: "This is sick." Am I the only one who thinks that
 the whole scene carries a certain whiff of unhealthy sexuality?
 Another point is that if people who can be good sports about
stripping of underwear exist at all, Snape, judging from what we' ve
 seen of his character, is certainly not one of them. Demonstrating
Snape's graying underwear to the world, James thus exposed his poor
 physique, his powerty, made him look totally helpless and vulnerable,
and, as you rightly noticed, made all this look funny--for some
onlookers. Surely, having people laughing at his torturous and 
humiliating position for somebody with Snape's craving for respect is 
worth than a death threat.

Twoflower2






From hecate92 at yahoo.co.uk  Tue Sep 16 08:17:07 2003
From: hecate92 at yahoo.co.uk (hecate92)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 08:17:07 -0000
Subject: Snapes' worst memory/the worst is yet to come
Message-ID: <bk6gu3+5eg0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80900

I am enjoying this debate enormously, but have to say....none of the 
other chapter titles seem to be entirely from Harrys' view, nor do 
they seem cryptic. So, for the reasons seen, the WMPP incident 
(complete or not) would be the worst memory.
     It also bothers me that when Snape was called away to sort out 
Montague, which would be a fairly important task in his mind, but not 
so important that he would leave his memories unprotected. Surely it 
would have taken all of about 15 seconds to put a protection charm on 
the pensieve or at least put it away in a cupboard away from an 
individual he knows breaks the rules and has a great curiosity about 
his fathers' past behaviour. You would hardly leave your personal 
diary open on your desk at work and go off to the loo!
   Perhaps Snape really wanted Harry to see these memories so Harry 
would "see" what an arrogant twerp James was as telling him was 
having no effect.
    hecate92...still hoping that Snape will not get killed and that 
he will become a slightly less mierable git.





From gromm at cards.lanck.net  Tue Sep 16 10:27:25 2003
From: gromm at cards.lanck.net (Maria Gromova)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 14:27:25 +0400
Subject: Mungojerrie and Rumpleteazer?
Message-ID: <001601c37c3d$21185d40$4442983e@rcomputer>

No: HPFGUIDX 80901

Has anyone attempted to write a filk about Fred and George to the song
'Mungojerrie and Rumpleteazer' from 'Cats'? Mungojerrie and Rumpleteazer are
just like Fred and George, IMO.
Maria.





From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 11:45:54 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 11:45:54 -0000
Subject: Hermione's career
In-Reply-To: <bk6o97+m3dj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk6t5i+7ufp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80902

> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sbursztynski" 
<greatraven at h...> wrote:
> > 
> > I've thought of this too. How about a union organiser for house 
> > elves? Goodness knows, they need one!
> > :-)She would, of course, have to find a way to persuade them 
without 
> > offending them.
> > 
> 
>Kneasy: 
> Which, of course, is not likely to  happen.
> They already get upset at her hints and suggestions; the only way
> she could impose her ideas is by coercion. "I know what's best for 
you
> and you'll damn well do it."
> Freedom by Dictatorship. 
> 
> Animal Farm all over again.

Laura:

Goodness, have you no hope for Hermione?  

I see her making the kinds of mistakes that very bright, very 
principled kids make.  She has the right ideas but she has yet to 
develop tact and diplomacy.  (I'm assuming you agree that keeping 
house elves in slavery is not a good thing.)  And she has to learn to 
work with people (or whatever) rather than try to roll over them.  We 
see her make these mistakes both in her approach to the house elves 
and in her dealings with the centaurs.  She doesn't come to them 
where they are but rather she tries to make them adopt her point of 
view, and it will not work.  Nor is there any reason why it should.

One thing about Hermione, though, is that you can rely on her to 
solve problems.  She comes up with a very nice way to handle Rita 
Skeeter, for instance, and she definitely did some quick thinking 
with Umbridge toward the end of OoP.  So I think there's hope that 
she'll learn some more constructive tactics as she tries to put her 
principles into practice.








From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Tue Sep 16 12:59:07 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 12:59:07 -0000
Subject: The worst is yet to come
In-Reply-To: <bk60be+534s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk71er+45v2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80903

Karolina wrote:
> I agree that Harry doesn't see _all_ of SS's bad memories - after 
> all, he sees only one. In the passage, Snape removes memorieS 
> (plural) from his mind and places them in the pensieve. I'm sure the 
> Whomping Willow werewolf memory is in there, and we can only guess 
> what others Harry misses out on.

I don't see why Snape would've taken memories such as the prank out of 
his mind and into the Pensieve, just because they were bad memories. 
Let's examine the situation: Harry is a huge, gaping defensive hole in 
Hogwarts right now. Dumbledore suspects that Voldemort's powers for 
reading minds can be used on Harry even when thousands of miles are in 
the way thanks to the link in the scar. Thus, he needs the best man for 
the job of teaching Harry to close that hole. Unfortunately, the best 
man also happens to be the one that has the most secret knowledge 
inside his head (Dumbledore, in case I've lost someone :D). So Snape is 
chosen.

Why is it important how much knoledge the teacher has? As we know, 
during the lessons of Occlumency the teachers thoughts can be read, if 
a succesful block against the spell is managed. Dumbledore cannot teach 
Harry because he'd have to empty his mind almost completely if he was 
to minimise risk of letting some important tibit out. Thus, Snape is 
chosen... but Snape's mind isn't free of secrets, either, having been 
spying on Voldemort (or some other delicate task). But the amount of 
thoughts that Snape has to keep from Harry are much less, and he can 
empty his mind of them at the start of every lesson.

Now, I have always seen Snape as a tad paranoic... with full reasons 
for it (and a good ability for hunches, even if he does get the 
occasional one wrong). So, IMO, once he has emptied all the important 
thoughts into the pensieve, he puts one more as a cover for the rest, 
just in case the Potter brat manages to get hold of the pensieve. And 
being the cruel person I know him to be, he puts one memory that is not 
only long (so if Harry does put his nose where it doesn't belong Snape 
has more than enough time to get back before the memory is finished), 
but also shows Harry's father at his worst, thus maximizing Harry's 
lesson of not going through Snape's private memories.

Indeed, "Snape's worst memory" isn't the worst memory Snape *has* but 
the one that is worst *for Harry* since it shows him exactly what Snape 
thinks of his father: an arrogant git. Yes, it involves a little 
humiliation for Snape, but as Cindy pointed out, there are worse things 
than having you underwear displayed... and one of them is learning 
without a shadow of doubt that your father was a bully, just like your 
ugly fat cousin is :D. 

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf





From entropymail at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 13:04:18 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 13:04:18 -0000
Subject: Percy's letter
In-Reply-To: <200309082319.17186.silmariel@telefonica.net>
Message-ID: <bk71oi+pdsi@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80904

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Carolina <silmariel at t...> wrote:
<snip> 
> See Den's "Percy (yes, again :-)" #69029. One of the basic ideas of
> that post is that the letter was edited by Umbridge, that Percy
> wouldn't write that. I think he would.

Now me, Entropy:

Apologies if this has been mentioned before, but I looked back and
hadn't seen anything about it:

I was struck today by re-reading Percy's letter to Ron in OOP. It
seems so strange to me that Percy would refer to Harry as "Harry
Potter" and, later, "Potter". Granted, it may have to do with Percy
becoming an insufferable git, but nevertheless, it does seem odd that
Percy would refer to this boy who has attended school with him for
years, eaten breakfast with the family, seen him in his pj's, and been
his brother's best friend since day one as anything but "Harry". Of
course, canon shows Percy referring to him as "Harry" many many times.
 Proof of someone else's hand in Percy's letter?

:: Entropy :: (who loves a good conspiracy theory)




From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Tue Sep 16 13:11:49 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 13:11:49 -0000
Subject: seeking knowledge and keeping secrets
In-Reply-To: <bk5a58+8vas@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk726l+h2gq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80905

-angelberri56 wrote:
> *This is just an off-hand thought... Isn't it interesting that Harry 
> goes to many lengths to find out about the Sorcerer's Stone, or to 
> learn more about the Chamber of Secrets, but never seems to 
> want to solve that Egg Clue...

I found that as the single most perfect characterization of a 14 year 
old I had seen in almost any book until Harry's fits of anger in OoP. 
*All* boys of that age that I have ever known (including yours truly) 
would *never* even think of starting on homework until the night before 
the deadline. Harry is a very peculiar sort of boy, much more 
responsible than the average boy when lives are on the stake (he makes 
a great main character and hero), but when matters are not boiling, he 
certainly used to take the long view ("Bah, I ahve forever"). 

I loved that part - I can picture him sitting in the seats in the 
Gryffindor hall playing chess or explosive Snap with not a second (or 
first!) thought for the Egg for weeks... and suddenly find out that 
he's out of time. I think that JKR did a great job on this... including 
Harry learning the lesson and getting extra training from moment one 
for task 3.

Yep, all in all a perfectly healthy, normal adolescent boy (and poor 
Harry has so few oportunities to be just that, he should treasure those 
few and far between times).

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf, discouriging the other males in this list from e-mailing him 
to tell him they weren't that lazy at fourteen, since he already knows 
there must be exceptions, and that just because he has never seen one 
it doesn't mean they don't exist.





From entropymail at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 13:17:59 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 13:17:59 -0000
Subject: Longbottom's torture (was: Snape and Lily and Florence and Ginny and.. .)
In-Reply-To: <137.24e6e083.2c97c57a@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bk72i7+59va@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80906

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, RSFJenny19 at a... wrote:
> KathyK wrote:
> Crouch Jr. and the Lestranges torture the Longbottoms into insanity 
> AFTER Voldemort's AK curse backfires on Harry.  They do it because 
> they think the Longbottoms have information on Voldemort's 
> whereabouts.  Read GoF Chapter 30 (p 603 of the US paperback ed.)

And speaking of torture, I'm being tortured myself, by the scene in
GOF where Harry watches the Lestrange's trial of Neville's father. 
Why not Neville's *parents*? It seems significant that the MOM tried
the people responsible for the torture of Mr. Longbottom separately
from that of Mrs. Longbottom. That is, if her torture was tried at
all. Do we have any canon that she really was tortured, other than
what everyone believes happened? Are we really sure she was tortured
along with her husband, or does the MOM know something we don't know yet?

:: Entropy :: (who can't decide if Neville's mom is faking it)




From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Tue Sep 16 13:20:11 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 13:20:11 -0000
Subject: Boggarts, Riddikulus and laughter
In-Reply-To: <bk5f3v+o3c1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk72mb+bdhq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80907

Alshain wrote:
> Whatever became of the idea that the force that really destroys a
> Boggart is laughter?

And then continues to put examples:
> There's one Boggart in the maze during the third task in GoF and 
> Harry chases it off with a Patronus

Not exactly - he sees a dementor, thus uses the patronus, but then 
notices the patronus tripping over his own robes, which makes him 
realise it's a boggart (after which, IIRC, he uses the Ridikulus 
spell). What's the funny part? Well, I chuckled at the image of a 
dementor tripping over his robes, and I should imagine Harry did as 
well.

> Lupin finishes off the Boggart in the writing desk at
> 12 Grimmauld Place just with the spell.

Yes, exactly the same way he did at the lesson in GoF, if you notice 
(although thanks for pointing it out - I had never noticed that there 
wasn't anything funny about the ball when Lupin vanishes it).
 
> Or is Remus actually forcing his greatest fear (the full moon) into
> the shape of a crystal ball (harmless prop for fortune-telling)?
> 
> Alshain

I've been thinking about it, and I think that Lupin uses a much better 
trick - he imgines a moon eclipse, or maybe something as simple as a 
new moon (since he only fears the full moon, either would be enough). 
When he pictures either, the moon simply "isn't there" so he might find 
it funny, but above all forces the Boggart to *disapear* (IMO, of 
course).

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf, still chuckling at the mental image of a tripping dementor.





From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Tue Sep 16 13:28:00 2003
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 13:28:00 -0000
Subject: Longbottom's torture (was: Snape and Lily and Florence and Ginny and.. .)
In-Reply-To: <bk72i7+59va@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk7350+jegl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80908

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "entropymail" 
<entropymail at y...> wrote:
 
> 
> And speaking of torture, I'm being tortured myself, by the scene in
> GOF where Harry watches the Lestrange's trial of Neville's father. 
> Why not Neville's *parents*? It seems significant that the MOM tried
> the people responsible for the torture of Mr. Longbottom separately
> from that of Mrs. Longbottom.  > 
> :: Entropy :: (who can't decide if Neville's mom is faking it)

No, Bellatrix and the others are accused of driving Frank Longbottom 
and his wife into madness. It's only, that Alice isn't mentioned by 
name, but Crouch accused them, of putting the Cruciatus curse on 
Frank Longbottom and later on "Frank Longbottom's wife".

Hickengruendler




From meltowne at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 13:43:29 2003
From: meltowne at yahoo.com (meltowne)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 13:43:29 -0000
Subject: The worst is yet to come
In-Reply-To: <20030915190259.12425.qmail@web21403.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bk7421+tbap@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80909

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com

Kneasy <arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> 
> <snip> I think we've been conned. Again.
> > That 'Snape's worst  memory' thing - yes, that one. I
> > don't believe it.
> > 
> > Oh, I accept that it's a genuine memory, but I can't
> > accept that it's 
> > his worst memory.</snip>
> > 
> memories are summarized as:
> > Happy Families.
> > Fly zapper
> > Bucking broomstick.
> > Grey underwear.
> 
> deduced memories are summarized as:
> > Voldemort.
> > DE games.
> > The 'Prank'.
> > SHIPwreck: no chance with Lily & she marries James ...

<more snipping>

Freddie: Excellent summaries and analysis, thanks!  My
> choice for worst memory is ... Door #42 -- not yet
> revealed. From Snape's actions, I agree that he thought
> Harry had seen something else.  Perhaps all of Snape's
> *worst* memories are in the same pensieve, and Harry would
> have found the #1 Worst fairly soon? Given the sort of life
> Snape has lead, memories of bullying could not possibly be
> the *worst*.  Bad, yes; worst, no.

Melinda (me):

I think the chapter is titled as such becasue HARRY thinks this must 
be Snape's worst memorie.  But if so, why are some of the other 
memories not also in the penseive?  I think they were in the penseive 
for some other reason, and that reason is somehow important.  The 
worst memory may yet have been in there, as well, but I don't think 
we saw it.  

What do we learn from the scene following the OWL exams:

- We see how Snape and MWPP interacted, and that Lily didn't 
initially like James.
- We see that Lily was identified as a mudblood by Snape
- We learn Lily's surname
- We learn that identifying a werewolf was on the exam

We don't know if the penseive memories are objective or subjective, 
but even if snape didn't hear what MWPP were saying, it is clear he 
had reason to suspect Lupin was a werewolf.  It had to be obvious 
that Lupin was outside the school on a regular basis, at the same 
time of month.  Put that together with the traits listed on the exam, 
and anyone who is truly observant should have figured it out.  I'm 
sure Snape did - most of the students probably didn't care why he 
left, but Snape did.

Melinda





From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Tue Sep 16 13:47:42 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 13:47:42 -0000
Subject: The worst is yet to come
In-Reply-To: <bk71er+45v2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk749u+goh3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80910

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Grey Wolf" <greywolf1 at j...> 
wrote:
> 
> Indeed, "Snape's worst memory" isn't the worst memory Snape *has* 
but 
> the one that is worst *for Harry* since it shows him exactly what 
Snape 
> thinks of his father: an arrogant git. Yes, it involves a little 
> humiliation for Snape, but as Cindy pointed out, there are worse 
things 
> than having you underwear displayed... and one of them is learning 
> without a shadow of doubt that your father was a bully, just like 
your 
> ugly fat cousin is :D. 


Jen:  Great post! Yours is the best explanation I've heard yet for 
Snape's Worst Memory.  

I've always thought that scene is there to tell Harry (and the 
readers) more about his Lily and James, not Snape (underwear aside--
more than I needed to know...). 

I also don't buy that Snape intentionally left the memory for Harry 
to see--yes, he wants Harry to see his father was arrogant, but no, 
doubtful he *wants* Harry to see his own humiliation. 

That's why Grey Wolf's theory is so good--Snape must have memories in 
his brain that would be *much worse* for Harry to find out about, 
thus he chooses a "cover" memory that Harry won't be able to 
resist...genius. Snape is really growing on me now; he's one smart 
cookie, and suddenly I'm intensely interested in knowing his *real* 
worst memory.... 




From erinellii at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 13:49:07 2003
From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 13:49:07 -0000
Subject: TBAY:  "I See London, I See France!"
In-Reply-To: <bk66fc+gf6b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk74cj+5uij@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80911

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "two_flower2" 
<two_flower2 at y...> wrote:
> > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cindy C." 
> > wrote:
> >> Underwear
> > > is often considered a bit of a gag, really. Mildly 
embarrassing, 
> to
> > > be sure, but hardly the climax of what is supposed to be Snape's
> > worst
> > > memory ever. Worse than being a DE. Worse than the Prank. Worse
> > > than whatever he did for Voldemort at the end of GoF.
> > 
> 
> 
>  I don't know, Cindy, if exposing of underwear is really just a 
gag, 
> especially for young people as old as fifteen.  It was precisely 
the 
> underwear part that made me cringe when I read that chapter. And 
the 
> subsequent threat of
>  stripping made the scene even more disturbing. I had the same
>  reaction as Harry: "This is sick." Am I the only one who thinks 
that
>  the whole scene carries a certain whiff of unhealthy sexuality?
>  Another point is that if people who can be good sports about
> stripping of underwear exist at all, Snape, judging from what we' ve
>  seen of his character, is certainly not one of them. Demonstrating
> Snape's graying underwear to the world, James thus exposed his poor
>  physique, his powerty, made him look totally helpless and 
vulnerable,
> and, as you rightly noticed, made all this look funny--for some
> onlookers. Surely, having people laughing at his torturous and 
> humiliating position for somebody with Snape's craving for respect 
is 
> worth than a death threat.
> 
> Twoflower2


I think you're forgetting something.  As I recall it, the memory 
didn't end when Harry was yanked out of it.  As I recall, James was 
just threatening to do worse.  I don't have my book with me, but I 
think he was saying something like "who wants to see me take down 
Snivelus's pants?"  The underwear was indeed not the worst thiing 
that happened that day.  Who knows how bad it got after Harry was 
gone?

Erin 




From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 14:17:42 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 14:17:42 -0000
Subject: Percy (Was: "What's Arthur been up to")
In-Reply-To: <BAY1-F5897lhwLTZ80a0000adc3@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <bk7626+25nk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80912

"Kath Lane" <diversity33 at h...> wrote: Post 80753


> >from hg's original post "What's Arthur been up to"
> >"Either way, it seems clear that something happened
> >with Percy: it was either right before the third Triwizard task, or
> >it was after that argument with Arthur; but something happened that
> >changed him."

K replies:
> There is a similar inconsistency with Fudge's attitude though --
> in POA he says "You-know-you alone and friendless is one thing,
> but give him his most faithful servant back and I dread to think
> how soon he'll rise again" (approximately). But in GOF he totally
> disbelieves in this return, even though he thinks the servant
> (Sirius in his eyes) has escaped to assist Voldemort.
> 
> Probably it is just a JKR mistake instead of deep plot significance!
> 
> K

hg's response:
I would in no way consider either scenario a mistake on JK's part.  I 
think Fudge has good (for him) reasons to wholly deny the return of 
Voldemort.  It will threaten his position in the ministry, mayhem and 
chaos will engulf the WW and he knows he's not the leader to try to 
rein that in.  He's asked Dumbledore's advice for years, and he's now 
certainly relying on Malfoy's advice (happily doled out with a bit of 
gold for good measure).  He's terrified and choosing to bury his head 
in the sand.
There is a clear change in Percy from the last we see and hear of him 
in GoF to when he first shows up in OoP, and all the way through OoP, 
each time we see him the point is driven home farther that he's way 
over the top.  When did you ever see him guffawing along when the 
Minister made a derisve comment, before OoP?  When did he ever write 
such a long-winded, fawning letter?  And, as Entropy said just today 
in post 80904, when did Percy ever refer to Harry as "Harry Potter," 
or "Potter," or anything other than "Harry," for that matter?
I'm open to speculations as to WHY Percy has changed, but I am 
sticking by my observation that there has indeed been a change in him.

hg.




From melclaros at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 14:19:35 2003
From: melclaros at yahoo.com (melclaros)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 14:19:35 -0000
Subject: The worst is yet to come/Happy Families
In-Reply-To: <276F58E0-E79D-11D7-98AF-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bk765n+2uvq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80914

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> 
> Happy Families.
> Most listies assume the child is  Snape, the arguing adults his 
> parents. Being contrary, I think the man is Snape, the child and 
woman 
> his family. No matter. It is obviously an emotionally charged scene 
in 
> the oasis of calm and domestic felicity that is chez Snape. 
Probably 
> not an isolated incident, it's evidence that something was badly 
wrong, 
> an on-going festering sore. Very private. Keep off.


Veering of for a moment:
Yes, it's a possibility that "we've" got this wrong and what we're 
seeing is Severus' proving himseld a miserable family man. But for 2 
problems. It appears that the memories are appearing to Harry in 
chronological order.  Young child to teen. But that's not even my 
biggest problem with the idea of seeing this scene in the way you 
describe. My biggest problem is TIME.
How old would Severus have been when this cowering son of his was 
born? It's made quite clear that Harry sees a "little boy"--not a 
baby or toddler--but a crying little boy. Harry himself was what, 1.5 
when Voldemort met his match in him? And we all agree that James and 
Lily seemed to have started their family unusually young. 
Now there are those among us who see the adult, mysterious, gliding, 
honeytongued, he of the ironic bow, Severus as a stud-muffin but I'd 
have to say that even the most die-hard of us, given what we see of 
him at age 15/16 give him much hope of marriage/fatherhood at 18 
(give or take a year) in order to produce a "little boy" for Voldy to 
do away with prior to Snape's defection and his Voldy's subsequent 
demise.

Melpomene--wondering just *how* cruel JKR is planning to be to 
Severus.







From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Tue Sep 16 15:00:13 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (B Arrowsmith)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 16:00:13 +0100
Subject: Hermione's career
Message-ID: <7951059A-E856-11D7-A9DB-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80915

Laura:

Goodness, have you no hope for Hermione?

I see her making the kinds of mistakes that very bright, very
principled kids make. She has the right ideas but she has yet to
develop tact and diplomacy. (I'm assuming you agree that keeping
house elves in slavery is not a good thing.) And she has to learn to
work with people (or whatever) rather than try to roll over them. We
see her make these mistakes both in her approach to the house elves
and in her dealings with the centaurs. She doesn't come to them
where they are but rather she tries to make them adopt her point of
view, and it will not work. Nor is there any reason why it should.

One thing about Hermione, though, is that you can rely on her to
solve problems. She comes up with a very nice way to handle Rita
Skeeter, for instance, and she definitely did some quick thinking
with Umbridge toward the end of OoP. So I think there's hope that
she'll learn some more constructive tactics as she tries to put her
principles into practice.


Kneasy:

What can one say about Hermione? Bright, motivated, idealistic and 
bloody dangerous.

I have a slight suspicion  that you might find the final description 
somewhat contentious.

Me, I'm a cynical old fart, steeped in disillusion, disappointment and 
distrust of idealists. Hermione is just the type I try and  keep my 
distance from. Unfair? Only partly, and only partly an exaggeration on 
my  part.

Bright, we won't argue with. She's demonstrated that often enough.

Motivated, now. Motivated to do  what? She works really hard  in class 
and in exams; but with what end in view? None, apparently.
No career plans; Muggle Liason? Maybe, have to  think about it. SPEW? 
Perhaps, have to think about it. She's taken extra classes increasing 
her workload to overload; why? What  is she trying to  achieve? Just 
academic distinction? But the few career paths in which she's expressed 
even mild interest don't require it. It  could actually be  
counter-productive. Muggle  Affairs is not going to be a happy place if 
some bright spark just out of school comes along and tells them they're 
doing it all wrong. An employer would find Hermione a very 
uncomfortable employee.

SPEW perhaps. Well, first she's got to show she knows what she's 
talking about. So far that's not been so. Consider, she starts her 
crusade after  hearing about Dobby. She immediately assumes all House 
Elves  are  badly treated and exist in a state little different from 
slavery. Evidence please! Even Kreacher doesn't fit these criteria 
comfortably. He *loves* his evil mistress, everything would be 
wonderful, if only she  were back or  Sirius was like her. Winky I've 
covered in a previous post, but by the accepted standards of Elvish 
behaviour as enunciated by Elves, she failed her family and deserved 
clothes.  In this crusade she has jumped to conclusions, refused 
suggestions to think about it a bit  more and has received no support, 
even from such as Dumbledore, the apparent epitome of compassion.
Dobby, Winky and Kreacher think she's wrong. As do the Hogwarts Elves. 
As does Hagrid, who seems to love every creature  around.

There has to be a reason. We don't know it, Hermione doesn't know it, 
but it's going to deflate a lot of highly developed principles when it 
comes to light. As things stand, if she launched a SPEW campaign onto 
the WW, she's liable to end up  with egg  on her face and lose all  
future credibility into the bargain. But she  steamrollers on- "I'm 
right! I'm right!" Sorry, she's lost me.

Every poster who  fulminates about the iniquity of Elvish slavery 
mirrors only one point of view - Hermione's. No-one else's. That point 
of view is the one taken by a radical idealist jumping to conclusions 
on very limited evidence to demonstrate her social conscience. I'll 
have no truck with  slavery  or involuntary bondage; such are truly 
evil, but  I'm convinced the  Elves are something else. They are too 
magical not to be. Hermione is heading for a fall, like many a bright 
teenager who think they  have a monopoly on interpretation of social 
structures.

I don't trust idealists. All too often the  ends justify the means.
And they rarely listen. They know they have all the answers when often 
they haven't considered what the question really is. Sure, Wilberforce 
and Elizabeth Fry did a great job banning slavery wherever the British 
Navy could reach. But they didn't do it like Hermione, they got the 
facts first. They tempered idealism with practicality and accurate 
information.

Hermione could cause more problems than she solves.

Mind, it could be fun. Hermione raises bloody revolt and  Dumbledore is 
roasted on a spit in the Hogwarts kitchens. Hmm..
C'mon Hermione!

Kneasy









[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From diana at slashcity.com  Tue Sep 16 15:00:49 2003
From: diana at slashcity.com (Diana Williams)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 11:00:49 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Mistaken identity - part three
References: <bjtjs8+mla4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <040401c37c63$51fa23a0$0a02a8c0@DianaPC>

No: HPFGUIDX 80916

From: "laylalast" <liliana at worldonline.nl>

And then on to the age of Bertha at the time of the kissing scene:

>"K":
I think it's important to remember the age of Bertha at the time she
was snooping as we will see later.

GoF/Ch 30 Instantly, a figure rose out of it, a plump, scowling girl
of about sixteen...

Lilian:

This is what Harry sees, he sees a girl who HE guesses is about
sixteen. That does not set it as canon that Bertha was actually
sixteen at the moment. She might have been younger, she might have
been older. When I was 16 I was constantly mistaken for 18. By the
time I was really 18, and thus a legal adult, I had to prove that
time and time again as everybody then thought I was 16.
So Bertha may very well have been 17-18 and sitting her NEWTS and
MWPP-S-L-F two classes lower, sitting their OWLS at their 15-16th.

Me:
Yes, but in GOF, Sirius states that Bertha was a couple of years older than
they were.  Even if Bertha was in her 7th year and, assuming the "couple"
means 2 so that Snape/Sirius/James were in their 5th year, we know from PoA
that the "prank" took place in their 6th year.  Bertha was gone by then.
And I doubt that Sirius would wait a whole year to get around to taking
revenge on Snape by setting up the prank.

Diana W.





From diana at slashcity.com  Tue Sep 16 15:14:42 2003
From: diana at slashcity.com (Diana Williams)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 11:14:42 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] WINDOW SILLS
References: <bk0ln9+hgle@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <050001c37c65$42c5db70$0a02a8c0@DianaPC>

No: HPFGUIDX 80917

From: "Deirdre F Woodward" <dwoodward at towson.edu>
>
> The two don't add up.  Why would Snape hate the child of the woman he
> loves/-ed?  Can any of us imagine hating -- despising with the
> blackest of hatred -- the child of the person we love?  Without
> provocation?

Although I'm a die-hard Snape fan and don't really support LOLLIPOPS, I had
to pop up and say something to this.

Any Sherlock Holmes fans here?  If so, the "Case of the Norwood Builder"
comes to mind.  The villain in this story fakes his own death and sets up
all the evidence to make it look like the son of his former fianc committed
the murder.  His only provocation was that she broke off the engagement and
married another man when she realized what kind of person the Norwood
Builder was.  He harbored a deep grudge against her ever since - and, since
the son was a grown man and old enough to be a practicing lawyer, he had
held that grudge far longer than Snape would have (20-something years as
opposed to 10).

Diana W.





From deemarie1a at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 15:21:22 2003
From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 15:21:22 -0000
Subject: SHIP, SHIP, AND MORE SHIP!
Message-ID: <bk79pi+t5tj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80918

I recently posted this in the Harry Potter Lexicon Forum.  I was 
wondering what you all think about this...

I think in book 6 (boy, I wish we knew the title) one of the subplots 
will be Harry's dealing with his breakup with Cho, and the discovery 
of a new relationship on the horizon. I think that will be with 
Ginny, though. I think they are both smart enough to realize that 
this means trouble. They have both been intimately involved with 
Voldemort. This will probably what draws them closer together. Yet, 
they realize that starting this type of relationship is inherently 
dangerous. 

What will make this more exciting in plotting (and this is certainly 
just my opinion) is that Ron really wants Harry and his sister 
together. Since Ginny said she wants to try for Chaser, and Ron is 
already on the team this puts the three of them in close contact with 
each other. I can see Ron pushing the relationship. And Hermione is 
not above pushing Harry on. Witness her prodding in OotP. She 
initiates the conversations about Cho with Harry. She sees his crush 
quite plainly. BTW, this is one reason I cannot see her with Harry. 
What girl in their right mind would push the boy they like into a 
relationship with someone she sees as a rival. Certainly not logical 
Hermione. 

Let's face it, shipping is a very important part of a teen's life. I 
have a teenaged daughter and she talks to me about all the stuff that 
goes on in her school. It seems that the kids love lives are almost 
as important as their school work. 

I can also see Ron and Hermione being drawn closer together in a very 
amusing way over this. Can't you just see them arguing about Harry 
and Ginny and then Hermione grabbing Ron and kissing him, or the 
other way around? I am looking forward to this. But, of course, JKR 
has her own ideas. She has got the story firmly fixed in her mind and 
she does love to twist and turn our suppositions around. I don't 
think I will mind very much how all this 'shipping turns out, as long 
as Harry, Ginny, Hermione and Ron are happy in the end. Battered, 
bruised, enduring many horrible things, but in the end an ending that 
is satisfactory. After all, if she wants us to continue buying any 
books that she writes. She does have to resolve the story in a way 
that she won't betray her fans. (Ooooh! I hear the pens scratching 
away already.)

Just one more thought, I find her work very Dickensian. When reading 
these stories I was put in mind of how horribly abused Dickens made 
his heroes and heroines. Yet in the end, they found happiness. But 
this is a discussion for another thread. 

Boy, this view I am getting from the Mirror of Erised is getting 
better and better. Help, pull me away! 

D - who is hoping everyone will be kind when responding, after all, 
we are all entitled to our own opinions.






From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Tue Sep 16 15:32:14 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 15:32:14 -0000
Subject: The worst is yet to come
In-Reply-To: <bk71er+45v2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk7adu+pltq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80919

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Grey Wolf" <greywolf1 at j...> wrote:
 
> As we know, 
> during the lessons of Occlumency the teachers thoughts can be read, if 
> a succesful block against the spell is managed. 

> Now, I have always seen Snape as a tad paranoic... with full reasons 
> for it (and a good ability for hunches, even if he does get the 
> occasional one wrong). So, IMO, once he has emptied all the important 
> thoughts into the pensieve, he puts one more as a cover for the rest, 
> just in case the Potter brat manages to get hold of the pensieve. 
> 
>

Kneasy:
Hate to say it, but wouldn't it be more likely that Harry would access the
memory if it stayed in Snape's mind?

Comparing the chances of Harry reading Snape's memories in the lesson 
and those of having the opportunity to access the pensieve, the latter 
seem miniscule unless deliberately  planned, which appears not to be
the case.

In addition, the  contents of the pensieve 'swirl'. How does one stay  on 
top to ensure certain disclosure of a specific memory?

Harry 'immerses' himself in the pensieve, a bit more than skimming the 
surface. No, I think which memory is accessed is a random event.




From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 16 15:39:27 2003
From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 15:39:27 -0000
Subject: All or No One (filk)
Message-ID: <bk7arf+e7ff@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80920

All or No One (GoF, Chap. 25-26)

The 13th and penultimate A!Kedavra filk to the tune of All er Nothin' 
from Rodgers and Hammerstein's Oklahoma!

Dedicated to HAGGRIDD

THE SCENE: Gryffindor Commons. HARRY has finally figured out the egg 
clue for the second task, but that's just the beginning of his 
difficulties.

HERMIONE:	
You'll need to be a whole lot more ambitious
If you're to win the second task, you know.

HARRY:
I just found out I have to swim with fishes
And learn somehow to breathe in H2O.

I heared from Cedric over ta the Yule Ball
To take the egg and stick it in a bath.
I thought for sure that this was jus' some fool-all
But he set me upon the ko-rect path.

(HARRY immerses the egg in water, which immediately begins singing)

CHORUS OF MERPEOPLE VOICES
List!
You better learn to do things underwater, Potter
Something in which you have the greatest stake we'll take
Unless you win it back with magic power ? an hour
Is all the time that you'll have to partake
.

HERMIONE & HARRY (joyously and wearily, respectively)
The library once more, for goodness sake.

(Segue to the early morning hours of February 24. HARRY, under his 
Invisibility Cloak, is searching desperately for a spell that will 
aid him in the second task. )

HARRY:
Well, you see
.
I read through ev'ry book and scroll
And runes with all their hexagons
I looked at jinxes, I tried all these spells
An' even Vander Ark's Lexicon!
I think that I could read here til
I'm ready to get my pension
`Cuz as far as magic scuba gear,
They isn't no such invention!

(HARRY collapses in exhaustion. Enter, at 9:20 a.m., DOBBY, with a 
handful of Gillyweed)

DOBBY:
Poor guy, he can't find nuthin'.
He jus' cain't find nuthin' he needs
Though it ain't playin' fair
Though it ain't by the book
I must tell him of Gillyweed!

I'm an H. Potter elf, faithful & true
Socks the shade of the deepest blue
Wake him up right now, and let him know!
I must give him this Weed, known as Gilly
To rehabilitate his bro. 

HARRY (coming awake with a start):
They got my Wheezy?

DOBBY:
Gilly's how you'll let him go!

(HARRY takes the Gillyweed, and dashes off to the Lake. Segue to 
HARRY standing partially submerged, as he begins eating it.) 

HARRY:
It cain't be an error

CROWD:
Hmm Hmm!

HARRY:
Or a debacle-ey
Or my poor Wheezy pal is through!

Now I'm growin' some gills
Webbed hands and toes
Free and light the water it flows

(Segue to HARRY entering the Merpeople's  town square, and sees all 
four hostages bound to a huge statue)

Now I see Ron plus the other three!

CHORUS OF MERPEOPLE
The rules is that you only rescue one.

HARRY:
No, I must save the other three!

CHORUS OF MERPEOPLE (scattering)
He's got his wand out!

HARRY:
No, I must save the other three!

(HARRY goes about trying to free all four hostages, using a rock to 
hack at the ropes. As RON is set free, enter Viktor and Cedric ? 
HARRY helps direct their rescue efforts)

HARRY:
Fer me it's all or no one.
Ev'ryone I've got to unbind!
To the table I bring my saving-people thing
I pledge to leave no child behind.

(With all the hostages free, but the effects of Gillyweed wearing 
off, HARRY struggles toward the surface with RON and Gabrielle 
Delacour in tow)

So I ain't gonna fuss, ain't gonna frown,
Set `em free, don't let no one drown,
Head for air with the girl and Wheezy

(HARRY reaches air. Segue to the presentation of points. )

RON
So even though you were showing thickness,
You've won another victory!

JUDGES (except Karkaroff):
What moral fiber!

RON, HERMIONE & GRYFFINDOR STUDENTS:
He's won another victory!

FLEUR:
Come on and kiss me!

(FLEUR kisses HARRY twice on each cheek, causing steam to come out of 
his ears.)

   -	CMC

HARRY POTTER FILKS 
http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm 

(just the finale to complete!)





From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 15:44:14 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 15:44:14 -0000
Subject: Snapes' worst memory/the worst is yet to come
In-Reply-To: <bk6gu3+5eg0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk7b4e+2ais@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80921

hecate wrote:
> I am enjoying this debate enormously, but have to say....none of 
> the other chapter titles seem to be entirely from Harrys' view, nor 
> do they seem cryptic. So, for the reasons seen, the WMPP incident 
> (complete or not) would be the worst memory.
<snip>
> Perhaps Snape really wanted Harry to see these memories so Harry 
> would "see" what an arrogant twerp James was as telling him was 
> having no effect.

I think I said this before: what if "Snape's Worst Memory" refers not 
to anything in the Pensieve but to how he will later regard his own 
actions around Now-you've-really-pissed-me-off-Potter-no-more-lessons-
for-you?

"Snape stopped give me Occlumency lessons! Harry snarled. "He threw 
me out of his office!"

And part of Dumbledore's response is, "I thought Professor Snape 
could overcome his feelings about your father--I was wrong."

Now, if I were Snape, I would be castigating myself, especially if I 
knew Dumbledore viewed the matter as he seems to, as a failure on 
Snape's part to overcome his *feelings*, as well as failed judgement 
on his own (Dumbledore's) part (which, if I were Snape, might 
actually make me feel worse in that Daddy's-disappointed-in-me-and-
blames-himself kind of way). It would fit, later, too, with Snape's 
newly subdued reaction to Harry over his, "I'm trying to decide what 
curse to use on Malfoy, sir."

I can't help thinking (probably because this has already been said): 
if the Pensieve is the same one Harry investigated in Dumbledore's 
office, and Snape used it in accordance with Dumbledore's advice, 
well, did Dumbledore orchestrate Harry's new insight into "Professor" 
Snape? He knew Harry's propensity for snooping in the Pensieve. If 
Dumbledore expected Harry would investigate Snape's Pensieved 
thoughts, and Snape's apprehension of Harry doing just that brought 
about the end of those lessons, Dumbledore could very well be feeling 
extremely hoisted on that particular petard.

Dumbledore did not respond to Harry's bristling assertion with, well, 
Harry, you did snoop in his diary, what did you expect? (And where 
that *could* be tact on Dumbledore's part, it doesn't seem to fit the 
rest of the conversation where Dumbledore seems perfectly content to 
agitate Harry further.) He responds with a comment about Snape's 
feelings about Harry's father; I don't think Dumbledore is just 
taking a stab at what happened: he knows that Harry went into the 
Pensieve and he knows what Harry saw there. How else would he chalk 
up the end of Occlumency lessons to Snape's feelings about James, 
unless he is just generically assigning blame for Snape's dislike of 
Harry to that Snivellus/Prongs dynamic?

Sandy aka "msbeadsley" [nod to Pippy Elf: yes, smaller spring board 
give adequate boost]




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 15:56:42 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 15:56:42 -0000
Subject: Longbottom's torture (was: Snape and Lily and Florence and Ginny and.. .)
In-Reply-To: <bk72i7+59va@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk7brq+9km0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80922


> :: Entropy :: (who can't decide if Neville's mom is faking it)

This is just too good to pass up as I was thinking the other day of 
what the *opposite* of Crucio would be, and how it would kinda work 
to distract an enemy from being able to attack you, at least 
temporarily...victory through love, and all that.

^  ^
*  *
 ()

Sandy aka msbeadsley




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 16:09:38 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 16:09:38 -0000
Subject: The worst is yet to come
In-Reply-To: <bk749u+goh3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk7ck2+5cea@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80923

"Grey Wolf" wrote:
> > Indeed, "Snape's worst memory" isn't the worst memory Snape *has* 
> > but the one that is worst *for Harry* since it shows him exactly 
> > what Snape thinks of his father: an arrogant git. Yes, it 
> > involves a little humiliation for Snape, but as Cindy pointed 
> > out, there are worse things than having you underwear 
> > displayed... and one of them is learning without a shadow of 
> > doubt that your father was a bully, just like your ugly fat 
> > cousin is :D. 

> Jen:  Great post! Yours is the best explanation I've heard yet for 
> Snape's Worst Memory.  <snip> 
> That's why Grey Wolf's theory is so good--Snape must have memories 
> in his brain that would be *much worse* for Harry to find out 
> about, thus he chooses a "cover" memory that Harry won't be able to 
> resist...genius. <snip>

I really like Grey Wolf's theory, too, wow: it sort of hit my brain 
and expanded in there; but then I thought, okay, but where does 
Snape's apparently real rage over Harry's foray into the Pensieve 
come from, then? He is so over the top that I cannot believe he 
planned for Harry to find that memory or even that he was in any way 
prepared for the possibility that Harry would "snoop." That's why I 
see Dumbledore as the manipulator here. (Where do I get my MAGIC 
DISHWASHER baseball cap?)

Sandy aka "msbeadsley"




From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Tue Sep 16 16:24:16 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 16:24:16 -0000
Subject: TBAY: MAGIC DISHWASHER defunct? (was: Still all quiet on the TBAY front...)
In-Reply-To: <bemu92+v8js@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk7dfg+glm2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80924

Kirstini wrote:
> I'd like to make a little plea.
> Where have all the old TBAYers gone? I desperately want to know what 
> they think of OoP in the George, how Avery's taking it, and which 
> particular detergent the MAGIC DISHWASHER is running on at the 
> moment. I want to see Percy and James put through the Virtue Meter, 
> and to know if the GARBAGE SCOW has loaded all the references to 
> Neville's forgetfulness on board yet. I want to know how the 
> LOLLIPOPS crew are coping with the "mudblood" problem. And I want 
> all of these things badly. Are you all in exile from the list 
> because of high volume and TBAY interlopers? Please come back. 
> Please.
> Kirstini
> TBAY fan.


I was out for a stroll yesterday, and while most of TBAY looked closed 
for the season, I did see one vessel on the horizon, the illustrious 
GARBAGE SCOW. And what a racket it made! Curious, I strode out to take 
a look.

It was enormous and growing. The crew was huge and building great twin 
cranes of the strongest variety I had ever seen! And it looked as 
though it was developing some kind of a ... battering ram?

"Ahoy there!" I called to the crew. "What's all this for? Has 
something happened?"

"Aye, and sure it has!" called one of the scurviest of the crew. "We 
hear that the MAGIC DISHWASHER has been leaking detergent faster than 
a snitch, and we're preparing for an, er, house call! A bit more 
than our typical few references, you see. Big Fred and Big George 
here" and he pointed to the cranes "are made just for oversized 
appliances. Have you seen the size of tha' bloody thing lately? And 
sharp edges everywhere! Ugly beast, that DISHWASHER."

"Yes, it is ugly," I replied. "And the ram?"

"Well, we hear it's defended by a pack of OCELOTS (Once-zealous Crew 
of Elder Listees Oddly Taken Silent), but we're not too worried about 
them. They haven't opened their mouths to cast a spell in eons. 
Besides, there's precious little time for Ms. Rowling to stop by for 
repairs. Did you know there are only two books left?"

"Yes", I sighed, "I know. And she'll probably be too busy developing 
the endgame to fix all of the holes in the DISHWASHER."

"Aye," he cackled, "as though she'd spend her pages on all tha' 
backstory! For a broken-down, old appliance! Ha ha ha ha ..."

And at that he laughed so hard, he rolled right off the SCOW into the 
bay!

As I plodded away, I examined my feelings. Part of me would miss the 
MAGIC DISHWASHER--it had been a fun diversion for a time. But that 
time was coming to a close. And with that realization, I felt lighter 
of step. Yes, the final books would be about Harry! About choices! 
About finding the strength to battle and defeat evil at its worst!

Still, as I ran home, I called out one last time, "TBAYers, where have 
you gone? Defenders of the MAGIC DISHWASHER, please break your long 
silence! Won't anyone answer me?"

-Remnant




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Tue Sep 16 16:42:07 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 16:42:07 -0000
Subject: Percy  (Was: "What's Arthur been up to")
In-Reply-To: <bk7626+25nk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk7egv+6uvh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80925

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hermionegallo" > There is a 
clear change in Percy from the last we see and hear of him 
> in GoF to when he first shows up in OoP, and all the way through 
OoP, 
> each time we see him the point is driven home farther that he's way 
> over the top.  When did you ever see him guffawing along when the 
> Minister made a derisve comment, before OoP?  When did he ever 
write 
> such a long-winded, fawning letter?  And, as Entropy said just 
today 
> in post 80904, when did Percy ever refer to Harry as "Harry 
Potter," 
> or "Potter," or anything other than "Harry," for that matter?
> I'm open to speculations as to WHY Percy has changed, but I am 
> sticking by my observation that there has indeed been a change in 
him.


Jen Reese: I'm with you on this one. Especially after I read that 
post suggesting Percy didn't write the letter to Ron, or it was 
tampered with--that thought never occurred to me, but now that it 
has....here's my theory:

Clue #1:  The trio/Weasleys are discussing Percy's promotion in OOTP
(pg. 71, US). Harry is surprised because "Percy had committed the 
fairly large oversight of failing to notice that his boss was being 
controlled by Lord Voldemort."

Clue #2:  Farther down the page, George expresses surprise that Percy 
was promoted because "Percy got into a load of trouble about Crouch, 
there was an inquiry and everything."

Clue #3: Yet he's promoted anyway, into Fudge's office, where 
Umbridge also happens to be. And Umbridge also happens to have 
influence over Fudge.

OK, add in the fact that Umbridge is not above sending dementors to a 
Muggle area, and using the Crucio against a student....and I'd say 
Percy is under the Imperius Curse at the moment.

Yes, that's been done before with Crouch, so here's theory # 2, which 
I don't like but it's a possibility:  Percy was so wounded by his 
failure at his first job that he cast his scruples aside and made a 
deal with Umbridge to get into Fudge's office.  His ambition got the 
better of him, and in order to go through with his devious plan, he 
decided to shut out his family, who largely act as his conscience and 
are definitely a ballast for his ego.

Sink or Swim? Jen






From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Tue Sep 16 16:56:08 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 16:56:08 -0000
Subject: The worst is yet to come/Happy Families
In-Reply-To: <bk765n+2uvq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk7fb8+jpq6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80926

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "melclaros" <melclaros at y...> wrote:
> Yes, it's a possibility that "we've" got this wrong and what we're 
> seeing is Severus' proving himseld a miserable family man. But for 2 
> problems. It appears that the memories are appearing to Harry in 
> chronological order. 


Kneasy:
Not necessarily so.
As Snape himself so helpfully points out, memories are not neatly
sorted as if in a filing cabinet. So  chronological order is unlikely.
We are not even sure they are all  of Snape.
 
Mel:
> My biggest problem is TIME.
> How old would Severus have been when this cowering son of his was 
> born? It's made quite clear that Harry sees a "little boy"--not a 
> baby or toddler--but a crying little boy. Harry himself was what, 1.5 
> when Voldemort met his match in him? And we all agree that James and 
> Lily seemed to have started their family unusually young. 
> Now there are those among us who see the adult, mysterious, gliding, 
> honeytongued, he of the ironic bow, Severus as a stud-muffin but I'd 
> have to say that even the most die-hard of us, given what we see of 
> him at age 15/16 give him much hope of marriage/fatherhood at 18 
> (give or take a year) in order to produce a "little boy" for Voldy to 
> do away with prior to Snape's defection and his Voldy's subsequent 
> demise.


Kneasy:
Oh ye of little faith!
In the last book, Harry is, what, 16? And Snape 38, maybe 39. I'm sure
we can imagine interesting activities that give  us say, 4 years slippage.

And if things get *really* tight, well, maybe it was Snape that Florence
was  kissing  behind the greenhouses, and maybe things got a bit, um,
previous  shall  we say.

Anyway, I  don't have to be right, I just have to be interesting.
I may be wrong, but I'm not uncertain. It's more fun that way.






From gromm at cards.lanck.net  Tue Sep 16 14:05:38 2003
From: gromm at cards.lanck.net (Maria Gromova)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 18:05:38 +0400
Subject: Rusalki
References: <bk0v6l+5j1v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <06d001c37c74$093f4da0$4442983e@rcomputer>

No: HPFGUIDX 80927

Catlady wrote:
 I can't remember whether it is water or land vila who are called
> 'rusalka' (plural: rusalki) in Bulgaria or someplace, from the name
> of the Greek holiday Rosalia, which IIRC has something to do with
> putting roses on the family graves (more death).

Maria here:
Rusalki are from the Russian folklore, and they are water spirits. There was
a traditional holiday in Russia, called Rusalnaya nyedyelya, or Rusalki
week, the name is said to be derived from the name Rosalia. The week was
dedicated to honouring the Rusalki.
Maria (from Russia).





From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 17:11:01 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 17:11:01 -0000
Subject: Percy  (Was: "What's Arthur been up to")
In-Reply-To: <bk7egv+6uvh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk7g75+70jl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80928

> There is a clear change in Percy from the last we see and hear of 
> him in GoF to when he first shows up in OoP, and all the way 
> through OoP, each time we see him the point is driven home farther 
> that he's way over the top.

> suggesting Percy didn't write the letter to Ron, or it was 
> tampered with

> Yes, that's been done before with Crouch [Imperio]

I have one question: where is Penelope Clearwater? Can we get real 
insight into Percy's behavior without considering Penny? Is she being 
held hostage against Percy's good behavior (by some whose opinion 
of "good" is way off)? Did she tell Percy, "Honey, if you want me 
around, you have to be able to afford that lifestyle to which I'd 
like to become accustomed?" Did she dump him after the Imperio!Crouch 
investigation by the Ministry? I don't have any particular favorite 
theory, but didn't she just sort of up and *vanish* like people were 
known to do last time Voldie was on the campaign trail?

I did notice one thing in the pile of nits I picked: if you compare 
Percy in his letter to Ron to Percy as quoted in the Daily Profit on 
the following day, his comments about Umbridge absolutely do not 
jibe, where Percy says in the letter that Umbridge is getting no 
cooperation at Hogwarts but says in the paper that she has been an 
immediate success. There's an obvious answer: PR. But I wonder if 
it's a clue. Of course, now I wonder that about just about 
*everything*...

Sandy aka "msbeadsley"




From entropymail at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 17:32:48 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 17:32:48 -0000
Subject: Percy  (Was: "What's Arthur been up to")
In-Reply-To: <bk7egv+6uvh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk7hg0+1oen@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80929

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" <stevejjen at e...>
<snip>...as Entropy said just today in post 80904, when did Percy ever
refer to Harry as "Harry Potter," or "Potter," or anything other than
Harry," for that matter?
I'm open to speculations as to WHY Percy has changed, but I am 
sticking by my observation that there has indeed been a change in 
him.
Jen Reese: I'm with you on this one. Especially after I read that 
post suggesting Percy didn't write the letter to Ron, or it was 
tampered with--that thought never occurred to me, but now that it 
has...<snip>


Now me, Entropy, again:

For that matter, it also seems a bit off that Percy would refer to Mr.
and Mrs. Weasley as "our parents", rather than Mum and Dad. (I've
never said "our parents" to my sister!). Definitely sounds to me as
someone else wrote the letter.

As we know, in the world of JKR, everything is there for a reason. 
But this letter is such an anomaly. I can't see any reason for it,
other than to clue us in on something that's going on with Percy.





From melclaros at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 17:33:16 2003
From: melclaros at yahoo.com (melclaros)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 17:33:16 -0000
Subject: The worst is yet to come/Happy Families
In-Reply-To: <bk7fb8+jpq6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk7hgs+sg0t@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80930

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> Oh ye of little faith!
> In the last book, Harry is, what, 16? And Snape 38, maybe 39. I'm 
sure
> we can imagine interesting activities that give  us say, 4 years 
slippage.
> 
> And if things get *really* tight, well, maybe it was Snape that 
Florence
> was  kissing  behind the greenhouses, and maybe things got a bit, 
um,
> previous  shall  we say.
> 
> Anyway, I  don't have to be right, I just have to be interesting.
> I may be wrong, but I'm not uncertain. It's more fun that way.


Oh you are always interesting!
Ok, you want intersting--how's this? Now we're throwing in completely 
non-canon, off-the-cuff, out-of-this world unlikelihoods here but 
what if:
It's been noted here more than once that many of the DEs mentioned by 
name have children at HW. It's been suggested that Voldy 
um...suggested strongly...that his faithful followers...um...go forth 
an multiply. Now this is generally thought to be important because so 
many of thise kids (Malfoy, Crabbe, Goyle,etc) are Harry's age. We 
thought maybe, just maybe there was some prophecy....
What if it's just that one's...um...dues...yes we'll just say dues 
for now...is well, contributing another purebreddarkwizard to the 
ranks? Hmmm? So, VERY young Snape, ever eager to please, does 
whatever it takes ("potion up a booty call" I believe was mentioned 
here once--a turn of phrase which I shall never forget) to produce 
his...ah...contribution.
BUT ALAS! The witch of his choosing has had the temerity to 
produce...GASP! A SQUIB! Not suitable at all! 
Perhaps even material to be done away with. 
Doing away with one's wife (status negligible in this case) and 
child, or 
giving them up to be done 
away with, would certainly count towards free admission to the front 
row of DE theater, wouldn't you think?

Well it's no worse than the vampire stuff, really!

And it speaks to the *"Look what you made me do!"* theory of why 
Snape turned AGAINST Voldy in the end. If he did.

Melpomene--always willing to be creative, as long as it's recongnised 
as such.






From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 18:14:08 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 18:14:08 -0000
Subject: Percy  (Was: "What's Arthur been up to")
In-Reply-To: <bk7egv+6uvh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk7jtg+7tgh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80931

hg, replying to Jen (post 80925):

Jen quotes hg (snipped):

"There is a  clear change in Percy from the last we see and hear of 
him in GoF to when he first shows up in OoP, and all the way through 
> OoP, each time we see him the point is driven home farther that 
he's way over the top....  And, as Entropy said just today in post 
80904, when did Percy ever refer to Harry as "Harry Potter," 
or "Potter," or anything other than "Harry," for that matter?
I'm open to speculations as to WHY Percy has changed, but I am 
sticking by my observation that there has indeed been a change in 
him."


Jen replies: (snipped)
"I'm with you on this one...here's my theory:
> 
> Clue #1:  "Percy had committed the fairly large oversight of 
failing to notice that his boss was being controlled by Lord 
Voldemort."
> Clue #2:  "Percy got into a load of trouble about Crouch, 
> there was an inquiry and everything." 
> Clue #3: Yet he's promoted anyway, into Fudge's office, where 
> Umbridge also happens to be. And Umbridge also happens to have 
> influence over Fudge.
> 
> OK, add in the fact that Umbridge is not above sending dementors to 
a Muggle area, and using the Crucio against a student....and I'd say 
> Percy is under the Imperius Curse at the moment.
> 
> Yes, that's been done before with Crouch, so here's theory # 2, 
which I don't like but it's a possibility:  Percy was so wounded by 
his failure at his first job that he cast his scruples aside and made 
a deal with Umbridge to get into Fudge's office.  His ambition got 
the better of him, and in order to go through with his devious plan, 
he decided to shut out his family, who largely act as his conscience 
and are definitely a ballast for his ego."

hg replies:

Before I get too far in to my reply, I'd like to point to my post 
80225, where I quoted the letter Percy wrote in GoF.  Note how 
significantly it differs from the letter in OoP, and also note that 
H/R/H have NO RESPONSE whatsoever to the letter in GoF.  I was 
responding to Del's post 69029, which was a breakdown of how the OoP 
letter could be written to ellicit particular responses from the 
trio; I don't recall Del posing a reason why (Imperio, caught between 
a rock and a hard place, working undercover).

Jen, I agree that the clues you point to from OoP are hugely 
relevant.  I went back and reread all that myself, and the whole 
series, actually, trying to figure out why Percy's been acting 
differently.  These are my theories: 

1) Imperious
2) Replacement 
3) The obvious: Percy is a huge git who has finally gone off the deep 
end
4) Percy is acting way under cover for Dumbledore, and can't tell any 
of his family
5) Percy is acting under cover to the knowledge of only Dumbledore 
AND Arthur or Arthur and Molly

I've never liked option 3: although it goes along nicely with one of 
the big themes of the series (the right choice vs. the easy choice), 
it still seems too simple.  But I've tried to remain open to it, 
mainly because I haven't found anything rock solid to disprove it.  
But I haven't found anything rock solid to prove it, either.

Imperious (1) is highly likely.

Replacement (2): this one is interesting.  Percy could have gotten so 
worried about Mr. Crouch and his upcoming inquiry, that he went to 
Mr. Crouch's house (this would have happened after he wrote to Ron et 
al in GoF) -- when he got there, he found Wormtail and/or Voldemort, 
who could have either disposed of him or taken him as a wonderful 
opportunity to "worm" (ha) even deeper into the Ministry.  Polyjuiced 
Percy hasn't been too warmly received anywhere I've presented it, but 
it's not such a stretch.  The only thing that would say it's 
ridiculous is the fact it's been done before.  And actually, that 
could be evidence that it could happen again.  I've thought that the 
way Percy talks and acts in OoP seems more like Wormtail than Percy.  
Problem: the silver hand.

Percy deep under cover (4): Percy always had deep respect and 
admiration for Dumbledore, who returned the same to him.  I could see 
him asking Percy to do something extremely difficult, probably right 
after the Triwizard tournament and Percy's inquiry, when he's going 
around gathering his troops and placing them where they need to be.

Percy under cover, Arthur knows, of course Dumbledore, maybe Molly 
(5):  They'd have to keep it secret to protect him and everyone else, 
and so playing the part of rejection etc.  I talked about this some 
in post 80641, "What's Arthur been up to."  It would have been 
precipitated by Arthur and Percy's fight, which would have led Arthur 
to disclose some things that have been kept secret previously, 
because Percy so clearly needed to understand.

Sandy in post 80928 brings up two points: one, we haven't seen or 
heard from Penelope Clearwater for quite some time; two, what Percy 
says in the letter contrasts with how he's quoted the next day in the 
Daily Prophet (Sandy, did you deliberately misspell Prophet 
as "Profit?"  I hope so, because that's rich!)
Entropy adds in post 80929 that he refers to Mr. & Mrs. Weasley 
as "our parents" rather than "Mum and Dad."  

I've been aching to discuss this for so long, it was so wonderful to 
see someone write something about Percy other than, "Percy is a git, 
move on."

hg.





From przepla at ipartner.com.pl  Tue Sep 16 18:28:12 2003
From: przepla at ipartner.com.pl (Przemyslaw Plaskowicki)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 20:28:12 +0200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Rusalki
In-Reply-To: <06d001c37c74$093f4da0$4442983e@rcomputer>
References: <bk0v6l+5j1v@eGroups.com> <06d001c37c74$093f4da0$4442983e@rcomputer>
Message-ID: <3F67563C.1050807@ipartner.com.pl>

No: HPFGUIDX 80932

On 2003-09-16 16:05, Maria Gromova wrote:

>Catlady wrote:
> I can't remember whether it is water or land vila who are called
>  
>
>>'rusalka' (plural: rusalki) in Bulgaria or someplace, from the name
>>of the Greek holiday Rosalia, which IIRC has something to do with
>>putting roses on the family graves (more death).
>>    
>>
>
>Maria here:
>Rusalki are from the Russian folklore, and they are water spirits. There was
>a traditional holiday in Russia, called Rusalnaya nyedyelya, or Rusalki
>week, the name is said to be derived from the name Rosalia. The week was
>dedicated to honouring the Rusalki.
>Maria (from Russia).
>  
>
Yup. http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/rusalka

In Slavic mythology <http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavic_mythology> 
*Rusalka* was a succubus <http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Succubus>, a 
type of female demon <http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demon>, whose eyes 
shone like a green fire. Men who were seduced by her died in her arms.

/*Rusalka*/ is also an opera <http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera> by 
Antonin Dvorak <http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonin_Dvorak>;

Pshemekan

-- 
Slow but sure moves the might of the gods. (Euripides, The Bacchae, circa 407 B.C.)






From dwoodward at towson.edu  Tue Sep 16 18:37:19 2003
From: dwoodward at towson.edu (Woodward, Deirdre)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 14:37:19 -0400
Subject: Snape's Worst Memory
Message-ID: <CB08EA121F31B94DA58296DEF3668AE12B218E@helium.towson.edu>

No: HPFGUIDX 80933

Maybe I am being a little thick here, but I thought the chapter was named "Snape's Worst Memory" not because it was Snape's worst memory, but because it was Snape's worst memory that he doesn't want Harry to see.  Does that make sense?  Of course Snape would have worse memories than the several Harry sees, but these several that he dumps into the pensive are the memories that would embarrass him the most if Harry tapped into them during their Leg./Occul. sessions, thus making them the worst memories for Harry to know.
 
Deirdre
 
 
 
 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From n_longbottom01 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 18:46:48 2003
From: n_longbottom01 at yahoo.com (n_longbottom01)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 18:46:48 -0000
Subject: SHIP, SHIP, AND MORE SHIP!
In-Reply-To: <bk79pi+t5tj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk7lqo+ob5c@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80934

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Donna" <deemarie1a at y...> wrote:
> 
<snip>
> What will make this more exciting in plotting (and this is 
certainly 
> just my opinion) is that Ron really wants Harry and his sister 
> together. Since Ginny said she wants to try for Chaser, and Ron is 
> already on the team this puts the three of them in close contact 
with 
> each other. I can see Ron pushing the relationship. And Hermione is 
> not above pushing Harry on. Witness her prodding in OotP. 

<snip>  
> 
> I can also see Ron and Hermione being drawn closer together in a 
very amusing way over this. Can't you just see them arguing about 
Harry and Ginny and then Hermione grabbing Ron and kissing him, or 
the other way around? I am looking forward to this. 
<snip>

Now me, n_longbottom01:

I like your idea of Ron playing something of a matchmaker for Harry 
and Ginny.  It presents some funny possiblities; I can see Ron trying 
to "subtly" engineer possible romantic encounters between Harry and 
Ginny, and failing misserably at being subtle.  I think Ron's "Choose 
someone better next time" comment at the end of OotP shows that he's 
not above trying to nudge Ginny towards Harry.

I think Ron is pretty hilarious whenever it comes to the boyfriend / 
girlfriend type stuff.  He instantly dislikes a guy he's never met 
before (as a big brother should) when he hears that his sister is 
dating him.  He woops it up when Harry admits he and Cho were 
kissing.  He totally, completely neglects his date to the Yule Ball, 
and does not feel the slightest twinge of guilt for doing so.  He's 
totally clueless at least half of the time when it comes to this type 
of stuff, and the rest of the time he is acting jealous, immature, 
overprotective, ect.  But always, always, his reaction (or clueless 
state) is funny (in my opinion anyhow).

So, I wouldn't mind seeing Ron try his hand at a little match-
making.  I'm not sure about Hermione's role in it though.  In OotP 
she was pretty direct and on target when it came to relationship 
advice.  But, I guess if she saw that Harry and Ginny were good 
together, she might be convinced to go along with something silly Ron 
might come up with to set them up.

I have to admit that I've always liked Ginny.  Ever since she started 
acting shy around Harry in CoS, I've been rooting for her.  And, 
also, I have been a fan of the idea of Ron and Hermione getting 
together since their confrontation after the Yule Ball.  Not that 
that scene is difinitive proof that they were meant for each other; I 
just really enjoyed the interaction in that scene, and now I am 
hoping it leads some where.  

n_longbottom01




From dcyasser at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 18:55:58 2003
From: dcyasser at yahoo.com (dcyasser)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 18:55:58 -0000
Subject: Hermione's mistakes (was Hermione's career)
In-Reply-To: <7951059A-E856-11D7-A9DB-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bk7mbu+sk07@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80935

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> Laura said:
 
> I see her making the kinds of mistakes that very bright, very
> principled kids make. She has the right ideas but she has yet to
> develop tact and diplomacy. <snip> And she has to learn to
> work with people (or whatever) rather than try to roll over them.  
<snip>I think there's hope that she'll learn some more constructive 
tactics as she tries to put her principles into practice.
> 
> 
> To which Kneasy replied:
> 
> What can one say about Hermione? Bright, motivated, idealistic and 
> bloody dangerous. 

<snip> 
> 
 Hermione is heading for a fall, like many a bright 
> teenager who think they  have a monopoly on interpretation of 
social structures.

<snip>

> I don't trust idealists. All too often the  ends justify the means.
> And they rarely listen. They know they have all the answers when 
often they haven't considered what the question really is. 



Now dc:  

Gracious, Hermione's behavior inspires a great deal of dialogue.  
Let us not forget that she is 15, and therefore entitled to behave, 
on occasion, like an inexperienced child. 
Yes indeed, Hermione pursues her own agenda with great passion, sure 
she is right and everyone else is wrong.  Just like a billion other 
teenagers trying to discover their role in a society that has 
already been established.  Will Hermione learn to temper her 
idealism with realism? I believe so. I hope so.  Because otherwise 
she is "bloody dangerous," due to the fact that she and her cohorts 
live in a dangerous world that is not going to cut any slack for 
typical adolescent mistakes.  We can't, however, expect Hermione and 
her fellows to give up on idealism altogether, or we might as well 
close Gryffindor House and roll over to Voldemort. Heaven help us if 
every idealistic teen who discovered an impassioned social 
consciousness, only to be brutally disillusioned, then swore off 
activism of any sort. 
Ah, the old days, when I was bristling with the absolute certainty 
of righteousness!

cheers

dc
 






From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Tue Sep 16 19:04:07 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 19:04:07 -0000
Subject: The worst is yet to come/Happy Families
In-Reply-To: <bk7hgs+sg0t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk7mr7+c02j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80936

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "melclaros" <melclaros at y...> wrote:
> 
> It's been noted here more than once that many of the DEs mentioned by 
> name have children at HW. It's been suggested that Voldy 
> um...suggested strongly...that his faithful followers...um...go forth 
> an multiply.

> So, VERY young Snape, ever eager to please, does 
> whatever it takes ("potion up a booty call" I believe was mentioned 
> here once--a turn of phrase which I shall never forget) to produce 
> his...ah...contribution.
> BUT ALAS! The witch of his choosing has had the temerity to 
> produce...GASP! A SQUIB! Not suitable at all! 
> Perhaps even material to be done away with. 
>

Kneasy:
Now that is truly evil thinking. I'm proud of you.
Now I shall think long and hard on this, taking care to dose myself
with a sedative and tying my nightshirt firmly to my ankles. Can't  be
too  careful. The excitement might be too much.

The possibilities are gobsmacking! Is Hermione the love child of
Voldy and Bella, hidden in a  dentists surgery until the time is ripe?
Was Trevor used in primitive pregnancy testing? 
Have the Weasleys no restraint? Is this Seamus' mother's dark secret?

I  think we should  be told.
The public has a right to know.






From pegruppel at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 19:11:16 2003
From: pegruppel at yahoo.com (Peggy)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 19:11:16 -0000
Subject: TBAY: MAGIC DISHWASHER defunct? (was: Still all quiet on the TBAY front...)
In-Reply-To: <bk7dfg+glm2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk7n8k+u3un@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80937

Very Big Snip!

Remnant wrote:

> Still, as I ran home, I called out one last time, "TBAYers, where 
have 
> you gone? Defenders of the MAGIC DISHWASHER, please break your long 
> silence! Won't anyone answer me?"
> 
> -Remnant

The crew of the good ship SILK GOWNS watched the sad, lonely figure 
racing down the beach.

Captain Jenny leaned over the beautifully polised railing of the good 
ship SILK GOWNS and said, "I guess she didn't see us behind the SCOW."

A crewmember sighed, "Guess not.  And we're not sexy--no slashing, no 
romance, not even a trace of Snape, or Florence, or even Lily, for 
that matter. Just anagrams.  Word games. And gum.  We've got great 
gowns, though.  And lots and lots of canon . . ."

"What's that?" said one crewmember who had just stuck her head out 
from belowdecks, "Are we under attack?  I thought I heard somebody 
mention canon.  I've got some great quotes, but no additional canon, 
so if we're being fired on . . ."

"Nope, all's quiet," said the Captain, "Almost too quiet.  An ominous 
silence.  Be prepared for anything, and keep that gum off the deck.  
Makes it sticky."

Peg, crewmember of the good ship SILK GOWNS





From hpfanmatt at gmx.net  Tue Sep 16 19:19:37 2003
From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 19:19:37 -0000
Subject: Snape-Harry Detente & Dumbledore (was: Worst is yet to come, etc.)
In-Reply-To: <bk7b4e+2ais@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk7no9+9nha@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80938

---  Sandy wrote, in support of a theory that
Snape was chastened by Dumbledore's reaction to
his stopping the Occlumency lessions:

> It would fit, later, too, with Snape's newly 
> subdued reaction to Harry over his, "I'm 
> trying to decide what curse to use on Malfoy, 
> sir."

I had the same impression about Snape's reaction 
in that scene, but I chalked it up to something
else.  Two things about the sentence you quote
from Harry struck me when I read it, and might 
have struck Snape when he heard it, as rather 
unlike the old Harry.  First, Harry almost always 
forgets to address his teachers with honorifics 
when he is interrupted in the heat of the moment.
Especially Snape.  Here, however, Harry remembers 
to say "sir."  

Thinking about why that might be led me to this second observation:
both Harry's tone and his words indicate a degree of perspective, of
deliberation, that is in contrast to his past approach to conflicts. 
When asked what he's doing, Harry doesn't snap "I'm hexing Malfoy,
just like he deserves"; he says "I'm *trying to decide* what curse to
use on Malfoy, *sir*."  Those words could almost have come out of
Snape's mouth in a similar circumstance: Harry has enough distance
from his emotions that he is not only able to remember to address
Snape respectfully, but also to come up with a *subtle* put down of
Malfoy.  "Malfoy is so slow on the draw that I have time to toy with
him as I dredge my mind for the perfect curse to deploy in this
situation."   The whole idea of "trying to decide" what curse to
deploy in such a situation is, if I may essentialize for a moment, not
very Gryffindor.  Gryffindors react; Slytherins plan.  

So, why is Snape's reaction subdued?  Well, I'm not going to try to
convince anyone that he consciously processed all of this, but I don't
think it's too much of a stretch to think that hearing this kind of a
response from Harry was a good bit less infuriating than watching Harry
rush into trouble like an impetuous fool, as he usually does (at least
from Snape's POV).  Perhaps, in hearing this, Snape has an inkling,
conscious or subconscious, of the idea that Harry *has* learned
something from him.  (Although I'm of the opinion that Harry's ability
to distance himself is a product more of processing his grief than of
anything he experienced with Snape, Snape the teacher could perceive
it the other way.)  

I think that this scene is the first, hopeful little hint that Harry
and Snape are beginning, despite their mutual animosity, to understand
one another, or at least to think that they do.  Not a reconciliation,
but perhaps detente.

> If Dumbledore expected Harry would investigate Snape's 
> Pensieved thoughts, and Snape's apprehension of Harry 
> doing just that brought about the end of those lessons, 
> Dumbledore could very well be feeling extremely hoisted 
> on that particular petard.

Since I'm responding to this post, the nitpicker in me cannot resist
pointing out that one is not hoisted (or, in Shakespeare's now archaic
usage, "hoist") "on" a petard, but rather "with" it.  The "petard" was
the military engineer's charge (i.e., explosive) used for breaching
walls, and the expression colorfully refers to what happened if the
engineer employed too short a fuse, and was unable to get out of range
before the charge exploded.  

> I ... think Dumbledore ... knows that Harry went into 
> the Pensieve and he knows what Harry saw there. How 
> else would he chalk up the end of Occlumency lessons to 
> Snape's feelings about James ... ?

Not an impossible reading, but isn't it just as likely that Dumbledore
already attributes most of Snape's nastiness toward Harry to Snape's
feelings about James?  It seems to me that if Snape had told DD about
the Pensieve incident DD would be *more* likely to blame Harry than
Snape.  I also sort of think, given what we know about the
Snape-Harry-Dumbledore dynamic, that Snape would be embarrassed to
tell DD exactly what happened.  DD does not even necessarily know
about the particular incident with James/Sirius, so broaching that
would be one embarrassment.  Then, the fact that Snape chose this
particular memory to conceal might be a bit personal.  And since Snape
already feels as though DD unreasonably takes Harry's side of things,
particularly where MWPP are involved (as at the end of PA), it seems
more likely to me that he would have just told DD that Harry didn't
apply himself and was impossible to work with -- close enough to the
truth, from Snape's perspective.




From msn.tsf at hccnet.nl  Tue Sep 16 17:11:58 2003
From: msn.tsf at hccnet.nl (Joris)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 19:11:58 +0200
Subject: DD's 2th mistake
Message-ID: <004a01c37c75$a30d94e0$0200a8c0@Newpc>

No: HPFGUIDX 80939

Hmm is it just me or did Dumbledore make a fault of giantic proportions on
the end of OP? He just tells Harry EVERYTHING about his grand master plan
including the text of the vision, and more of that blabla and then he sends
Harry back home without learning real occlumency and with all those secrets
in his mind... all LV has to do is open up poor Harry's mind and suck all
secrets out.

First I thought LV might not be capable of it but at least DD thinks he is
("he would seize his chance to use you as a means to spy on me" OP) and also
Snape is capable of reading the mind and he seems far less powerfull then
LV.

I was thinking maybe on Private Drive he is so well protected Voldemort
can't even enter his mind but he did get a lot of scar hurt and visions on
private drive (-> Mind Connection)
also maybe I think the first of the MOM dreams...

Yoris/Ender

OR did DD pump Harry's mind full of lies so misinform the enemy?!





From constancevigilance at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 19:24:30 2003
From: constancevigilance at yahoo.com (Susan Miller)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 19:24:30 -0000
Subject: Percy  (Was: "What's Arthur been up to")
In-Reply-To: <bk7jtg+7tgh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk7o1e+1okr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80940

--- hermionegallo posted a brilliant post that I agree with 100%, so 
I snipped almost the whole thing, except:

Replacement (2): this one is interesting.  <snip>
Polyjuiced Percy hasn't been too warmly received anywhere I've 
presented it, but it's not such a stretch. <snip> I've thought that 
the way Percy talks and acts in OoP seems more like Wormtail than 
Percy.  
Problem: the silver hand.

Constance Vigilance (me):

Actually, that's not a problem. We have canon to prove that physical 
infirmities are corrected in the polyjuicing process - when Harry 
becomes Goyle, his eyesight improves. The juiced person assumes the 
infirmities of the one duplicated, see Moody's eye and leg.

I really like this theory, because it also explains why Peter is not 
among the DE muster in the Dept of Mysteries. He's busy being someone 
else at the time. And besides, I believe in P.I.N.E. (Percy Is Not 
Evil). At this point, I would like to propose P.I.N.E.S.A.P. Percy Is 
Not Evil, Simulated Alternate: Peter!

Besides, I always wanted an acronym.

~ Constance Vigilance




From kneazle255 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 17:36:12 2003
From: kneazle255 at yahoo.com (kneazle255)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 17:36:12 -0000
Subject: SHIP, SHIP, AND MORE SHIP!
In-Reply-To: <bk79pi+t5tj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk7hmc+38k3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80941

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, 

"Donna" <deemarie1a at y...> wrote:
I don't think I will mind very much how all this 'shipping turns out, 
as long as Harry, Ginny, Hermione and Ron are happy in the end. 

Kneazle writes:
I thought OoTP contained some provocative passages involving Harry 
and Ginny.
 
Interestingly, the only character willing to snarl back at Harry when 
he is in one of his "moods" is Ginny.  Everyone else, including DD, 
allow him to throw tantrums. And I don't think Harry acts on anyone's 
advice except hers.

But what I found most interesting are the suggestions that Harry is 
as oblivious about his feelings for Ginny as Ron was in GoF regarding 
Hermione. It's really hard to tell because it's all told from Harry's 
perspective, but it appears that Ron and Hermione think there is 
something going on with Harry and Ginny. There's Ron's smile and 
knowing glance at Harry on the train ride at the end of the year, and 
Hermione's knowing comment (During the possession talk they have over 
Christmas) that "perhaps you are looking at each other in turns"

The comic potential of this situation for Book 6&7 is high. 

--JKR has Hermione and Ron in love and not admitting it.

--Harry and Ginny are aware of Hermione and Ron's feeling for each 
other. 

--Conversely, H and G are in love and don't know it

--Ron and HErmione are aware of how Harry and Ginny feel.









From davidseppi at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 18:10:04 2003
From: davidseppi at yahoo.com (davidseppi)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 18:10:04 -0000
Subject: Snape Vampire Theory
In-Reply-To: <bj30jq+ju8q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk7jls+okie@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80942

Alright, this is my first post, so I have no idea if this material 
has been covered or not.  For me, the greatest evidence that Snape is 
indeed a vampire is in POA when Lupin is sick and Snape is covering 
his class for him.  Snape has the class write parchment in how you 
can tell a werewolf.  He does this with obvious contempt towards 
Lupin.  When Lupin "recovers" and is covering for Harry in Snape's 
office after the Hogsmead visit, Lupin refers to their essay on 
vampires in Snapes presence.  I believe this is done to get back at 
Snape for his obvious insult towards Lupin.  Just some thoughts.  
Again, forgive me if this has already been covered, I'm a newbie.

-David





From s_karmol at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 18:13:04 2003
From: s_karmol at yahoo.com (s_karmol)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 18:13:04 -0000
Subject: Percy's letter
In-Reply-To: <bk71oi+pdsi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk7jrg+76oj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80943

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "entropymail" 
<entropymail at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Carolina <silmariel at t...> 
wrote:
> <snip> 
> > See Den's "Percy (yes, again :-)" #69029. One of the basic ideas of
> > that post is that the letter was edited by Umbridge, that Percy
> > wouldn't write that. I think he would.
> 
> Entropy:
> 
> Apologies if this has been mentioned before, but I looked back and
> hadn't seen anything about it:
> 
> I was struck today by re-reading Percy's letter to Ron in OOP. It
> seems so strange to me that Percy would refer to Harry as "Harry
> Potter" and, later, "Potter". Granted, it may have to do with Percy
> becoming an insufferable git, but nevertheless, it does seem odd that
> Percy would refer to this boy who has attended school with him for
> years, eaten breakfast with the family, seen him in his pj's, and been
> his brother's best friend since day one as anything but "Harry". Of
> course, canon shows Percy referring to him as "Harry" many many times.
>  Proof of someone else's hand in Percy's letter?
> 
> :: Entropy :: (who loves a good conspiracy theory)


By using Harry's full name or just his last makes Harry an object.  Using someone's first name is a way to show friendliness or good tidings. Percy is trying to do business with Ron in that letter.  It's very formal and uncaring.
If Percy was to use Harry's first name only, he would be admitting to having or wanting a friendship with him.

Just my opinion.
Stephanie





From msn.tsf at hccnet.nl  Tue Sep 16 18:16:14 2003
From: msn.tsf at hccnet.nl (Joris)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 20:16:14 +0200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Thestralls and seeing death (was: Deaths at Hogwarts?)
References: <bk4ean+l8dj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <008e01c37c7e$9d66f640$0200a8c0@Newpc>

No: HPFGUIDX 80944

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kelly" <keltobin at yahoo.com>
> > > > Inge:
> > > > What about Mourning Myrtle? She died on Hogwart's grounds, didn't
> > > > she? Can't remember anyone else though.
>
Kelly:
> Professor Quirrel died in the first book.  No, I don't think Hogwarts
> is protected from death.  One thing the books make clear is that
> death is inevitable and no amount of magic can stop it without great
> reprocussions to the soul (i.e. Unicorn's Blood).


Now come to think of it? if Quirrel died in Harry's presence then why didn't
he see the thresthralls before?

And what about his mom (and dad?) that died protecting Harry with her body?

Ender/Yoris





From paulag5777 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 18:32:31 2003
From: paulag5777 at yahoo.com (Paula Gaon)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 11:32:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Hermione'sCareer
Message-ID: <20030916183231.35501.qmail@web40008.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80945

On 16September "jwcpgh"  wrote:  

"How about a union organiser for house elves? Goodness knows, they need one!
She would, of course, have to find a way to persuade them without offending them."


And 

Laura wrote:

".....And she has to learn to work with people (or whatever) rather than try to roll over them.  We see her make these mistakes both in her approach to the house elves and in her dealings with the centaurs.  She doesn't come to them where they are but rather she tries to make them adopt her point of view, and it will not work..."



But really, why would Hermione waste such a good, analytical mind and tax herself with the rigors, and duplicity of  political life?  Wouldn't it be better and lots more interesting to see her exploit her talents?  It would also be a much more interesting device if JKR placed her with the Unspeakables, giving us a chance to see what they are really up to, and a much more involved and interesting and involved plot.

"Paula"




From kaustin at danvilletelco.net  Tue Sep 16 19:05:01 2003
From: kaustin at danvilletelco.net (klaustininia)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 19:05:01 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy
Message-ID: <bk7mst+ajgp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80946

My theory is that Percy is deeply undercover as a spy for Dumbledore and his parents don't know.

1.  Someone let Dumbledore know that Harry's trail time was changed. It may have been Percy.

2.  The letter was worded strangely.  Percy may have been trying to let Ron know what was going on but had to be careful how he put his words.

3.  Percy left before Dumbledore stunned the Aurors,Fudge and Umbridge.  He may have left to help in the means of Dumbledore's escape.

4.  Percy is in a position where he could easily pass information since Fudge thinks Percy is 100% loyal to him.

Until proven otherwise I think Percy the undercover spy is a very likely possibility.

"Klaustininia"





From two_flower2 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 00:47:40 2003
From: two_flower2 at yahoo.com (two_flower2)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 00:47:40 -0000
Subject: The 'Other' in the HP books (was: Harry's Sexual Preference SHIP) - LONG
In-Reply-To: <bk5ijp+301i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk5mjc+gmim@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80947

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sarcasticmuppet" 
> <sarcasticmuppet at y...> wrote:
> > If she [JKR]did, she would lose me as a fan.  If she decides for the sake 
> > of being a superhero to include gay characters or liberals or 
> > abortionists or hippies it would mean she cares more about her 
> > contingency than she does about this story which she has been babying 
> > for over a decade.
> 
> Laura:
> 
> Well, gee, sarcasticmuppet, then I guess you may as well stop reading 
> now.  I believe that in trying to start a liberation movement, 
> Hermione would qualify as both a liberal and even a hippie, since 
> freedom, dignity and equality of all people are basic tenets of their 
> philosophies.  In fact, you might be suspicious of JKR herself-she's 
> showing definite anti-authoritarian tendencies...
> 
> If you don't approve of homosexuality, liberalism, abortion or 
> hippies (whatever it is you mean by that) and want to flame about it, 
> I'd suggest respectfully that this list is not the place for that.  I 
> find your gratuitous comments offensive.


Laura, I think you might have missed sarcasticmuppet's point. I take 
it, she (he?) just meant that putting characters in a book just for 
the sake of making a political statement, showing diversity or being 
politically correct is bad for the story.  And I agree.  Although I 
am not anti-gay, anti-hippie ... or anti-abortionist, for that matter.

Two2





From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Tue Sep 16 19:40:58 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 19:40:58 -0000
Subject: Snapes' worst memory/the worst is yet to come
In-Reply-To: <bk7b4e+2ais@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk7p0a+qspj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80948

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> Dumbledore did not respond to Harry's bristling assertion with, 
well, 
> Harry, you did snoop in his diary, what did you expect?

I think he responded as he did for several reasons:
1. Harry is already suffering from guilt feelings over his part in
   Sirius' death. The last thing he needs then is to have more guilt
   induced over that by implying the halting of the occlumency
   lessons was his fault.
2. Dumbledore has higher expectations of behaviour from Snape
   (an adult and teacher) than he does of Harry (a 15 yo student).
3. Dumbledore must have learned about the pensieve incident from
   Sirius or Lupin, so he knows what Harry's reaction was to it.
   As such, he views it as a positive development, not something
   to chastise Harry about.

> it doesn't seem to fit the 
> rest of the conversation where Dumbledore seems perfectly content 
to 
> agitate Harry further.)

Yes, but Dumbledore tries very hard to reduce Harry's guilty
feelings by taking on the blame himself. Blaming Harry for the
pensieve incident would hardly serve that end. He agitates Harry
primarily when he implies that Sirius was less than perfect...

Salit





From jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 19:45:08 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 19:45:08 -0000
Subject: James (a filk)
Message-ID: <bk7p84+epsp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80949

This is a filk of the song "Dames" from the musical "Forty-Second Street."

I dedicate this filk to Caius Marcius, whose ultimate talent and craft
ever relegate my skills to the ranks of "penultimate."

                 James
SCENE:  Harry has learned some new and uncomfortable information about
his father.  His question below is posed in turn to two of his
father's classmates at Hogwarts, Severus Snape and Sirius Black, with
rather different answers.
 
HARRY:
Who was my father, really,
Who fought against the Foe? 
No one says, so I don't know. 
Is he the handsome hero,
As ev'rybody claims?
But I don't care if he is or not,
Just want to learn a lot `bout James!

SEVERUS SNAPE:
Why be offensive, 
Look in my Pensieve? 
Tell the truth 
He was all brag and swaggering, James.
Do snoop extensive; 
Be comprehensive. 
Learn all you can `bout 
Drunk and staggering James.
Oh! James played nasty tricks and games on me.
James, the one that Lily blames,
Not me!

But his excesses
Clearly distresses,
Anyone of us who ran afoul of your James.

HARRY:
Sorry to bother, 
But he's my father. 
Tell the truth 
I need to find out all about James.
You're still resenting
All the tormenting
At the hands of Sirius 
And his blood brother, James.
Oh! James is where your envy aims, Snivelly?
James, who dated all the dames,
Didn't he? 



SIRIUS: 
How nice to show up,
But please don't blow up 
Tell the truth 
He was an adolescent, was James.
He was a young pup,
But he did grow up 
Into one great Auror, 
Incandescent was James.
Your father James 
Brings honors wealth and fames to you.
James, you only know his names,
Do you? 

SIRIUS:
Proud and all, Harry, 
Ever contrarv,
He played Chaser, and a varsity letter had-
And never really was a cad.
No son could have a better dad. 
James, James, James, James, 
James, James, James, James-
James!


-Haggridd




From tub_of_earwax at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 20:09:29 2003
From: tub_of_earwax at yahoo.com (tub_of_earwax)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 20:09:29 -0000
Subject: DD's 2th mistake
In-Reply-To: <004a01c37c75$a30d94e0$0200a8c0@Newpc>
Message-ID: <bk7qlp+bi2b@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80950

The Post below, to which is will reply..............



--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Joris" <msn.tsf at h...> wrote:
> Hmm is it just me or did Dumbledore make a fault of giantic 
proportions on
> the end of OP? He just tells Harry EVERYTHING about his grand 
master plan
> including the text of the vision, and more of that blabla and then 
he sends
> Harry back home without learning real occlumency and with all 
those secrets
> in his mind... all LV has to do is open up poor Harry's mind and 
suck all
> secrets out.
> 
> First I thought LV might not be capable of it but at least DD 
thinks he is
> ("he would seize his chance to use you as a means to spy on me" 
OP) and also
> Snape is capable of reading the mind and he seems far less 
powerfull then
> LV.
> 
> I was thinking maybe on Private Drive he is so well protected 
Voldemort
> can't even enter his mind but he did get a lot of scar hurt and 
visions on
> private drive (-> Mind Connection)
> also maybe I think the first of the MOM dreams...
> 
> Yoris/Ender
> 
> OR did DD pump Harry's mind full of lies so misinform the enemy?!





The Reply........

I think that Albus clearly avoided making a mistake again. Would 
Harry have ever learned Occlumency if he didn't know exactly why? 
Sure Sirius is dead, but his atttitude would be: He's dead anyway, 
so it's all done, I'm not bothering now iwth it. Then Hermione would 
tell him off for that of course. Anyway, back to the point. I think 
that knowing everything gives Harry a better understanding of what 
he needs to do, what the dangers and possibilities are. And see how 
Harry fought off Voldy's possesion in the Atrium in the MoM? It's 
because of his emotional self (his emotionality? that's not a word). 
So I think that Dumbledore is relying on this a little. Besides, 
Voldy weill stop at nothing to get what he wants, so I think that 
Dumbledore would much rather now explain to Harry than tell Harry 
and that's it. 

So yeah. Hope that helps. 

*Lara*. 




From erinellii at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 20:31:58 2003
From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 20:31:58 -0000
Subject: TBAY: Bill and Fleur
Message-ID: <bk7rvv+cm0n@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80951

TBAY:

It was a fine fall morning in Theory Bay. A breeze was blowing, gulls 
were circling, and Abigail was on the deck of the Imperius!Arthur 
trimaran, enjoying the beautiful weather. 

However, in spite of the sun shining brightly overhead, there was a 
bit of a nip in the air, and the water had felt decidedly cool to 
Abigail when she'd risked dipping her big toe into it earlier.  Which 
was why Abigail was so surprised when she spotted someone out there, 
swimming steadily towards the trimaran. 

As the person drew nearer, Abigail realized that the nut swimming 
through the chilly water was in fact a young red-haired woman whom 
she had never met before. She watched as the woman painstakingly 
hauled herself, huffing, over the railing and collapsed in a sodden 
heap on the deck.  After a few minutes, in which the young woman lay 
perfectly still, breathing heavily and letting the water pour off her 
into large puddles, Abigail approached her with some trepidation.  
The redhead might have had a bit less trouble swimming here, Abigail 
found herself thinking, if she hadn't been wearing a large brown 
trenchcoat atop her regular clothes.

"Um... Hello?" Abigail ventured tentatively.

The red-haired woman looked up slowly, and then, with a massive 
groan, pushed to her feet.  Once upright, she appeared to give 
herself a mental shake, and taking a step towards Abigail, the 
redhead stuck out her hand.

"Hi, I'm Erin," she said brightly. "I'm so glad to finally be here in 
TBAY!  I've been wanting to come for months and months, but I decided 
to wait until after the storm (no point in enlisting on a ship that's 
going to be smashed to pieces next week, right?) and then, well, I 
couldn't find you!  I had particularly wanted to join the crew of 
this trimaran, it just makes so much sense to me, the whole triple 
canon thing, you know, but I looked and asked around everywhere, and 
no one had seen it anywhere!  Then last week, the bartender at the 
Royal George- he really is just as cute as everyone says he is!- told 
me that he'd seen you (you are Abigail, aren't you?-pleased to meet 
you!) single-handedly rescue the trimaran from being lost out at sea! 
That was so brave of you! And so since then I've been keeping a 
lookout and when I saw the ship today I just dove in and swam right 
out to it." She said all this very fast, and taking a quick glance 
around the large deck, finished with a question. "Say, is Elkins 
here?"

"Elkins?" Abigail shook her head sadly. "You really are new here, 
aren't you? Elkins hasn't been around for months, since the end of 
February, at least."

"She hasn't?" Erin gasped in horror. "But,- but, she built this ship 
with her very own canon! Are you telling me she hasn't even come by 
to see how it weathered the storm?"

"Well, there were reports of a sighting back in August. But as far as 
I know, no, she hasn't been back to the ship."

"That's too bad," Erin replied, looking crestfallen. "I was really 
looking forward to meeting her.  I've read almost all of her TBAY 
posts back through '02, and I'm kind of a fan, I guess you might say."

"Nope, no Elkins," said Abigail, looking around at the empty 
deck.  "No Elkins at all.  In fact," and here she paused to give a 
dramatic sigh, "Sometimes I think I'm the only one left who cares 
about this ship."

"Not anymore!" Erin practically shouted, as she snapped into a crisp 
salute. "Crewmate Erin, reporting for duty! Aye, Aye Sir!"  A short 
pause.  "Was that corny? That was too corny, wasn't it? Sorry."

"Well," said Abigail, looking a bit happier, "I do appreciate your 
enthusiasm. And I *could* use some help with my patches."

"Your- patches?" Erin echoed.

"Yes, the ones on the side of the Auror!Arthur cabin.  I'm the head 
of the Auror!Arthur division of this trimaran, you know.  And, the 
thing is, I had to do some major renovation after OoP, and the 
patches- well, sometimes I worry that maybe they aren't as secure as 
I hope they are.  But with you helping me
"

But Erin was taking a step back, looking apologetic as she shook her 
head and held up one hand.  "I'm sorry, but Auror!Arthur isn't really 
my thing at all.  I've just never been able to make myself buy it.  
So I'm afraid I won't be able to help you with the patches."

"Well, then," said Abigail, her demeanor distinctly cooler, "what ARE 
you here for?  I think it's about time we got down to the point of 
this conversation, don't you?"

"It's just that I think I may have found some new canon for Imperio'd!
Arthur," Erin said proudly.  "George gave me a list of the OoP canon 
you've shown him."

"Yes?" Abigail said impatiently.

"Well, you mentioned the Percy being named for Dumbledore suggestion, 
which I like.  I prefer Dumbledore giving testimony in Arthur's 
favor, rather than helping to break the curse on him, because I like 
to think that Moody was the one who did that.  Just my personal 
preference there." A quick glance at Abigail's face prompts Erin to 
get back on track. "Erm, yes, and I believe you also brought up the 
fact that during the fight at the MoM, Ron was the only member of the 
group whose injury was mental rather than physical, which ties in to 
Elkins' idea that Arthur's weakness to the Imperius curse is genetic, 
and may have been passed to some of the Weasley children. You even 
mention the Veelas, so how you missed this bit of canon I'm about to 
bring up, I'll never know..." 

Erin waved her arms around over her head and declared loudly "Ron is 
not the only Weasley child to be mentally incapacitated in OoP!"

Abigail looked somewhat underwhelmed by this dramatic 
announcement.  "Are you talking about Percy?" she said with a slight 
sneer. "Because that's hardly new canon. People have been suggesting 
that ever since Goblet of Fire came out."

"No, no," said Erin, looking shocked. "I may be new, but I'm not that 
new.  I wouldn't waste your time with the old Imperio'd!Percy 
theory.  No, I'm talking about something much more obvious, and yet 
subtle.  Something right under everyone's nose, which is probably why 
it was so easy to overlook."

"I'm talking about Bill. Bill and Fleur Delacour.  Dating.  Or, as 
Fred put it, "Bill's been giving her a lot of private lessons."  It 
just doesn't seem right to me.

"I think I see what you're getting at," said Abigail, beginning to be 
interested despite Erin's slur on Auror!Arthur.  "You think she used 
her Veela powers on him?  I don't know
 JKR hinted that there might 
be a spark there in GoF, and this seems like a perfectly natural next 
step."

"Yes, but is it really, though?" Erin asked, pulling a waterproof 
plastic baggie containing a few typewritten notes out of one large 
trenchcoat pocket. "That `spark' in GoF, let's examine that scene:

------------------------------------------------------------------
        Fleur Delacour, Harry noticed, was eyeing Bill with great 
interest over her mother's shoulder.  Harry could tell that she had 
no objection whatsoever to long hair or earrings with fangs on them.
"This is really nice of you," Harry muttered to Mrs. Weasley. "I 
thought for a moment - the Dursleys-"
	"Hmm," said Mrs. Weasley, pursing her lips. She had always 
refrained from criticizing the Dursleys in front of Harry, but her 
eyes flashed every time they were mentioned.
        "It's great being back here," said Bill, looking around the 
chamber (Violet, the Fat Lady's friend, winked at him from her 
frame).  "Haven't seen this place for five years.  Is that picture of 
the mad knight still around?  Sir Cadogan?"
        "Oh yeah," said Harry, who had met Sir Cadogan the previous 
year.
        "And the Fat Lady?" said Bill.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

"Mrs. Weasley proceeds to tell a story about the Fat Lady, and then 
Bill asks for a tour of the grounds, and they leave the room.  Never 
once does  Bill acknowledge Fleur eyeing him, and yet she's doing it 
so obviously that even Harry (who, as OoP shows us, is not the most 
adept at interpreting female signals) notices.  If Bill was 
interested, shouldn't he have made some sort of acknowledgement?  
Flirted back a little?  What he does is almost exactly the opposite.  
He makes an excuse to get out of the room as quickly as possible. 
People have wondered about Bill's seeming lack of enthusiasm before.  
Some of them have come up with some pretty wild theories to explain 
it.   Everything from Bill is gay-"

"Wait a minute!" Abigail protests. "I was the one who wrote that, and 
it was in the OT-chatter group.  I didn't mean it as a serious 
theory."

"Well, I've seen a lot of listies take it pretty seriously since I 
joined.  But check out this one from Errol, who argues that Bill's 
non-response shows him to be a powerful wizard in message 55257:

"...Or does it typify a stronger constitution that can resist 
Imperius with Impunity?  I'd say Bill is Strong, to...if Fleur was 
turning on the charm there, he was well up to not making a fool of 
himself, and I'm sure that intrigued Fleur more...come on, she's so 
used to those poor saps fawning around her.  Did she turn on a full 
blast of magic then? Maybe, `cause Harry not reacting is no clue - 
he's practically immune too."

"Anyway," Erin continued, "both you and Errol assume that Fleur used 
her Veela magic, and that Bill was able to resist it, either by being 
gay or by being strong.  I don't think that she did use it at all.  
Fleur's mother, her sister, and Bill's mother were all in the room.  
It's likely that one, if not all, of them would have caught on to 
what she was doing, and I don't think Fleur wanted that to happen.  
Not that I think there's anything wrong about using Veela Magic.  The 
Quidditch World Cup clearly demonstrates that it is both tolerated 
and legal in the WW. But I think I understand Fleur's reluctance as a 
seventeen-year-old about heavy flirting in front of her family, or 
the family of the guy she wants to flirt with.  The phrase "over her 
mother's shoulder" shows that she is trying to be surreptitious 
about  her interest in Bill.  So she wouldn't zap him with a dose of 
Veela charm right there.

"So Bill has a clear head.  He sees a girl at least six years younger 
than himself, possibly as many as 12 years younger, and of obvious 
Veela ancestry, eyeing him.  And he makes some hasty inane 
conversation and gets his group out of the room.  I think he's 
scared.  Maybe he just isn't into young girls (yes, I know 17 is "of 
age" in the WW, but over in the US she'd be jailbait.) but I'm pretty 
sure it's the fact that she's a part-Veela that makes him run.  To 
quote Elkins, from message 40168:  "
he is - or perhaps merely fears 
himself to be - even more vulnerable than ordinary men."  Elkins is 
talking about Arthur Weasley's reluctance to watch the Veela at the 
Quidditch World Cup, but it applies equally well here.  And it fits 
perfectly into her theory that the weakness is hereditary.  All the 
Weasley men run from Veelas.  I'm sure that Ron, if he ever gets the 
chance to see one again, will have learned his lesson and be just as 
quick to turn the other way as his father and brother are now.    

"Aren't you forgetting something?" Abigail reminded Erin. "Bill 
hasn't `turned the other way'.  He's with Fleur now."

"Ah, yes.  Poor Bill.  He was right to be afraid.  As soon as she 
could, Fleur got him alone and turned up the magic.  He didn't stand 
a chance."

"But she doesn't even make an appearance in OoP.  Bill is at 
Grimmauld Place without her.  Wouldn't he leave once he was away from 
Fleur and realized he was being manipulated? " Abigail protested.

"Not necessarily," said Erin. "We don't know exactly how Veela magic 
works.  It may grow stronger with more exposure to it or with more-er-
 intimacy with the Veela.  It may be like a drug - once you have so 
much of it, you have to have more.  I tend to compare Bill to someone 
with a family history of alcoholism.  He's tried very hard to stay 
away from the stuff because he knows that once he starts, it will be 
next to impossible to quit."

"So where does this leave Fleur?" Abigail asked. "According to you, 
she's taken away Bill's freedom of choice.  Does that make her evil?"

"Not at all," Erin replied. "In fact, she may not even know she's 
done it.  Take a look at  this canon from GoF:


--------------------------------------------------------------------
"She's part veela," said Harry. "You were right - her grandmother was 
one.  It wasn't your fault, I bet you just walked past when she was 
turning on the old charm for Diggory and got a blast of it - but she 
was wasting her time.  He's going with Cho Chang."
---------------------------------------------------------------------


"And in fact, Cedric does end up going with Cho.  So we know that, if 
they really wish to, ordinary men can resist Fleur's charm.  She 
doesn't make most guys (with the obvious exception of Ron Weasley) go 
absolutely nuts and start doing things they wouldn't normally do, the 
way that full-blooded Veelas can.  So it may not occur to her that 
Bill doesn't have the option of saying no.

"And also, I don't think at this point that Fleur is harming Bill in 
any way.  She may not be something that he would have chosen if left 
to his own devices, but that doesn't mean she's bad for him.  She 
probably has genuine feelings for him."  

"So to recap:  Fleur Delacour has diluted Veela magic. Most men are 
capable of resisting Fleur's magic.  Ron Weasley is not.  Bill 
Weasley, when unaffected by Fleur's magic, chooses not to respond to 
Fleur.  However, Bill Weasley is now dating Fleur Delacour.  
Conclusion?  Bill has been affected by Fleur's magic and, like his 
brother Ron, is unable to resist her.

"Well, it's an interesting theory, with some compelling ideas, I 
admit," said Abigail. "Let me think about it while we set you up with 
a hammock in the crews' quarters.  And then you can get to work 
mopping the deck.  It's still all wet from your swim." As Abigail 
turned to lead Erin below deck, she noticed a strange long lump under 
Erin's large brown trenchcoat, almost as if Erin were concealing a- 
Abigail's eyes widened.

"What is THAT?!!" Abigail screamed, pointing.  "Have you brought a 
weapon aboard this ship?  Are you an assassin?  Who sent you?!!"

"Wait, don't be scared!" Erin said.  "It's not heavy weaponry, only a 
little old disassembled BB GUN. I didn't show it at first because I 
wasn't sure how you'd feel about it."

"A BB GUN?" Abigail echoes. "But what-?"

"Bitter Bill Goes Undeniably Nefarious.  I need to work on it a 
little before I take it over to the safe house.  But it shouldn't be 
too much in your way here on the trimaran.  It's not at all 
incompatible. 


---Erin (with thanks to Abigail for letting me use her character)





From deemarie1a at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 20:53:12 2003
From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 20:53:12 -0000
Subject: DD's 2th mistake
In-Reply-To: <004a01c37c75$a30d94e0$0200a8c0@Newpc>
Message-ID: <bk7t7o+oi65@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80952

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Joris" <msn.tsf at h...> wrote:
> Hmm is it just me or did Dumbledore make a fault of giantic 
proportions on
> the end of OP? He just tells Harry EVERYTHING about his grand 
master plan
> including the text of the vision, and more of that blabla and then 
he sends
> Harry back home without learning real occlumency and with all those 
secrets
> in his mind... all LV has to do is open up poor Harry's mind and 
suck all
> secrets out.
> 
> First I thought LV might not be capable of it but at least DD 
thinks he is
> ("he would seize his chance to use you as a means to spy on me" OP) 
and also
> Snape is capable of reading the mind and he seems far less 
powerfull then
> LV.
> 
> I was thinking maybe on Private Drive he is so well protected 
Voldemort
> can't even enter his mind but he did get a lot of scar hurt and 
visions on
> private drive (-> Mind Connection)
> also maybe I think the first of the MOM dreams...
> 
> Yoris/Ender
> 
> OR did DD pump Harry's mind full of lies so misinform the enemy?!

I think that Voldemort is effectively blocked from Harry for now.  
After he tried to invade Harry and have DD kill the boy for him, 
Harry experienced that surge of emotion and forced LV out.  It's just 
my opinion, but that has given LV pause to try that tactic again.  
Harry is a very emotional creature and now that he knows what LV is 
capable of, even if he doesn't keep up the occlumency lessons, he 
knows how to keep LV out.

D




From deemarie1a at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 20:57:11 2003
From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 20:57:11 -0000
Subject: Thestralls and seeing death (was: Deaths at Hogwarts?)
In-Reply-To: <008e01c37c7e$9d66f640$0200a8c0@Newpc>
Message-ID: <bk7tf7+7bvj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80953

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Joris" <msn.tsf at h...> wrote:

> Now come to think of it? if Quirrel died in Harry's presence then 
why didn't
> he see the thresthralls before?
> 
> And what about his mom (and dad?) that died protecting Harry with 
her body?
> 
> Ender/Yoris

But in the book, Quirrel did not die in Harry's presence. Harry had 
passed out before the end.  As far as seeing his mum and dad die, I 
think you have to be aware of what death is.  Being an infant, that 
would count Harry out.

D




From n_longbottom01 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 21:00:20 2003
From: n_longbottom01 at yahoo.com (n_longbottom01)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 21:00:20 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy
In-Reply-To: <bk7mst+ajgp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk7tl4+2tbk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80954

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "klaustininia" <kaustin at d...> 
wrote:
> My theory is that Percy is deeply undercover as a spy for 
Dumbledore and his parents don't know.
> 
> 1.  Someone let Dumbledore know that Harry's trail time was 
changed. It may have been Percy.
> 
> 2.  The letter was worded strangely.  Percy may have been trying to 
let Ron know what was going on but had to be careful how he put his 
words.
> 
> 3.  Percy left before Dumbledore stunned the Aurors,Fudge and 
Umbridge.  He may have left to help in the means of Dumbledore's 
escape.
> 
> 4.  Percy is in a position where he could easily pass information 
since Fudge thinks Percy is 100% loyal to him.
> 
> Until proven otherwise I think Percy the undercover spy is a very 
likely possibility.
> 
> "Klaustininia"

now me, n_longbottom01:

I like the evidence you present, especially #1 and #3.  I really want 
to believe this theory, and it's nice to at least have a little 
circumstantial evidence pin my hopes to.  I want to believe it, 
because Percy is a Weasley, and I hate to see a Weasley go so far 
wrong.

On my first, and second read through of OotP, it didn't strike me 
that Percy was acting out of character in anything that he said or 
did.  I am still 90% convinced that Percy made the decision on his 
own to place his career above everything else, and that decision lead 
him to sever ties with his family, and to send that letter to Ron.  I 
was thinking that something would happen in book 6 or 7 that would 
cause him to see that he's been a fool.

If the Undercover Percy theory is correct, though, maybe Percy 
already came to the realization that he had been a fool at the end of 
GoF, when the truth came out about Barty Jr.  He might have realized 
that his ambition was blinding him at that time, and then been 
approached by Dumbledore to do some spying.  In order to get in good 
with the MoM he would have to appear to head further down his path of 
foolish ambition, but in reality, he's only playing a role, and his 
heart is in the right place.

n_longbottom01




From pegruppel at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 21:01:41 2003
From: pegruppel at yahoo.com (Peggy)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 21:01:41 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy
In-Reply-To: <bk7mst+ajgp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk7tnl+5pq8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80955

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "klaustininia" <kaustin at d...> 
wrote:
> My theory is that Percy is deeply undercover as a spy for 
Dumbledore and his parents don't know.
> 
> 1.  Someone let Dumbledore know that Harry's trail time was 
changed. It may have been Percy.
> 
> 2.  The letter was worded strangely.  Percy may have been trying to 
let Ron know what was going on but had to be careful how he put his 
words.
> 
> 3.  Percy left before Dumbledore stunned the Aurors,Fudge and 
Umbridge.  He may have left to help in the means of Dumbledore's 
escape.
> 
> 4.  Percy is in a position where he could easily pass information 
since Fudge thinks Percy is 100% loyal to him.
> 
> Until proven otherwise I think Percy the undercover spy is a very 
likely possibility.
> 
> "Klaustininia"

Peg:

Klaustininia (hope I got all those I's and N's right), you've made an 
interesting point.  Percy *did* leave.  Hmm.  Very, very suggestive.  
The only reason he could have left was to make "travel 
arrangements."  Kingsley Shacklebolt took one for the team in that 
particular brawl, so if Percy didn't have some other business, he 
could just as well have stayed, gotten stunned, and looked perfectly 
innocent alongside Shacklebolt.

Verrrry interrresting.






From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 21:28:43 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 21:28:43 -0000
Subject: The worst is yet to come/Happy Families
In-Reply-To: <bk7hgs+sg0t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk7vab+ages@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80956

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "melclaros" <melclaros at y...> 
wrote:
 <snip>It's been suggested that Voldy 
> um...suggested strongly...that his faithful followers...um...go 
forth 
> and multiply... maybe, just maybe there was some prophecy....
> What if it's just that one's...um...dues...yes we'll just say dues 
> for now...is well, contributing another purebreddarkwizard to the 
> ranks? Hmmm? So, VERY young Snape, ever eager to please, does 
> whatever it takes ("potion up a booty call" I believe was mentioned 
> here once--a turn of phrase which I shall never forget) to produce 
> his...ah...contribution.
<snip>

Laura:

Snape?  Booty call?  Eeewww!  And who would be the unfortunate victim 
of this initiation rite?  Would post-traumatic stress result from 
this liaison?  *shakes head vigorously trying to clear away some very 
unwelcome images...*

Is it just me or does dear Severus seem to provoke more than his 
share of eew's?  The condition of his underthings, the suggestion of 
a ship with him and just about anyone...wow.  <g>




From entropymail at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 21:35:27 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 21:35:27 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy
In-Reply-To: <bk7tl4+2tbk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk7vmv+as5m@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80957

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "n_longbottom01"
<n_longbottom01 at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "klaustininia" <kaustin at d...> 
> wrote:
> > My theory is that Percy is deeply undercover as a spy for 
> Dumbledore and his parents don't know.
> > 
> > 1.  Someone let Dumbledore know that Harry's trail time was 
> changed. It may have been Percy.
> > 
> > 2.  The letter was worded strangely.  Percy may have been trying to 
> let Ron know what was going on but had to be careful how he put his 
> words.
> > 
> > 3.  Percy left before Dumbledore stunned the Aurors,Fudge and 
> Umbridge.  He may have left to help in the means of Dumbledore's 
> escape.
> > 
> > 4.  Percy is in a position where he could easily pass information 
> since Fudge thinks Percy is 100% loyal to him.
> > 
> > Until proven otherwise I think Percy the undercover spy is a very 
> likely possibility.
> > 

Don't forget that (5) Percy was a prefect/headboy, which means that
Percy had, at one time, great loyalty to Dumbledore. Possibly still does!

:: Entropy ::




From Malady579 at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 16 22:20:22 2003
From: Malady579 at hotmail.com (Melody)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 22:20:22 -0000
Subject: TBAY: MAGIC DISHWASHER defunct? (Ha!)
In-Reply-To: <bk7dfg+glm2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk82b6+hru5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80958

A man stood on the deck of the ever so lovely ship called the GARBAGE
SCOW with newly fitting harnessing devices to lift something beyond
heavy and terribly complex.  For obvious reason, the GARBAGE SCOW is
the disposal place for all defunct, destroyed, canon holed, sinking
fast as the sun sets theories.  But you know all this, you read the
Hypothetical Alley before posting, right?
( http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/faq/hypotheticalley.html )

"Full steam ahead, mates," Remnant bellowed as the salty air hit his
face.  "Oh, I love a good scraping in the morning.  To the Safe House,
and the Dishwasher!"


---

Back on the grassy lawn of the safe house, Sneaky, the safe house elf,
and Melody were setting up for a barbeque scheduled for this
afternoon.  A *long* over due barbeque to celebration the Dishwasher
and its longevity in theory bay.  

"Wow, Sneaky!  You got the good plastic plates," Melody said admiring
the heavy duty plastic.

"Yes, Miss," she squeaked back.  "Mistress Pip!Squeak said to spare no
expense short of real china, since the plates always ends up being
thrown around by Cap..."

Sneaky froze, her eyes grew large, and her hands began to tremble. 
Melody looked at her and frowned worried that Sneaky was having a fit,
but then turned to see what Sneaky was staring at.  Melody's jaw
dropped and fists clenched.

"Oi, mates," called a gruff voice.  "Easy on that oar!  Bring down
that sail."  The GARBAGE SCOW bumped up against the coastline and
settled rather gruffly.

The man with the voice hopped down and began striding over instructing
over his shoulder, "I want that harness loose and ready to drag this
dishwasher to its new home."

Melody and Sneaky looked at each other.  "Miss," Sneaky squeaked
slightly hyperventilating, "That is a government ship.  And Mistress
Pip!Squeak is still resting for the barbeque.  And Mister Wolf is
hunting.  And he took Coney with him.   What will we do?"  She
scurried behind Melody's skirt and cowered as the man walked up to the
pair.

"You MDDT?" he asked whipping his forehead and tipping his hat.  

"Yes," Melody said quietly eyeing the man and slightly amused he dare
to approach this place.

"Aren't you a little young?" he asked looking her up and down.

"Why are you here?" Melody bristled tired of this man already.

"Why I have a order to pick up this..er...dishwasher from said Safe
House," he said producing a paper labeled post #80924.  Sneaky
squeaked an almost inaudible pitch and scurried up to the top of
Melody's head.

Melody just blinked.  

Blinked again.

Then start laughing causing Sneaky to fall.

"You--hehe--think you are going---hehehe---to take--Pip!Squeak's--
-haha---Dishwasher--Ahahaha--just like *that*?" Melody was doubled
over in laughter with Sneaky and Remnant staring at her.

"Well--er--why can't I?" he asked slightly abashed.

"Hon, you cannot declare a theory trashed without canon," Melody
explained in a voice older than her age.  "If you can find the canon
that we can both agree spells out the defeat of MD (and by we I also
mean all of MDDT) then by all means, we will happily repair this
version of the dishwasher, *but* we are NOT tossing this one to the
trash."

Remnant looked at the little flurry of passion in front of him. 
"Darling, it is just a dishwasher."

"Yes, and OoP did not destroy it.  Not by my viewpoint, not Grey
Wolf's viewpoint, and definitely not by the Pip!Squeak's viewpoint.  I
mean we have a Dumbledore that will lie and manipulate (Ch27).  A
Snape that *is* a good actor (Ch32).  A Harry that we are told in
plain *canon* is on the status of 'needs to know' (Ch5).  Both Mrs.
Weasley and Sirius use the phrase (Ch5).  And Lupin stops Sirius
telling Harry everything (Ch5).  What more do you want?  MD was
exalted in OoP," she said turning back to set up the barbeque. 
Sneaky, not so scared now, returned to her fussing over the plate setup.

"Then why are you all so silent?" he asked scratching the back of his
neck.

"You'll see," she said as her eyes twinkled.  

"Now get this nasty smelling ship away from our lawn.  We are having
guests soon, which, of course, you are invited to join," she smiled
but paused, "er--*after* you shower."


Melody




From rsteph1981 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 22:22:12 2003
From: rsteph1981 at yahoo.com (Rebecca Stephens)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 15:22:12 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Undercover Percy
In-Reply-To: <bk7tl4+2tbk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030916222212.20399.qmail@web20006.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80959


--- n_longbottom01 <n_longbottom01 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> On my first, and second read through of OotP, it
> didn't strike me 
> that Percy was acting out of character in anything
> that he said or 
> did.  

See, that's strange to me.  Maybe it's because I've
always been a Percy lover, but from the moment I saw
him in OOTP the words "something is *wrong*"
reverberated through my head.  I fully expected some
explanation before the book was finished.  And, when
there was no closure at all, I felt that we'd hear
more in the next book.

It's interesting sometimes, how differently we can
read the same book.  So many different impressions and
interpretations.  That's what makes this list so fun.


Rebecca

=====
http://wychlaran.tripod.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 22:35:11 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 22:35:11 -0000
Subject: Snape-Harry Detente & Dumbledore (was: Worst is yet to come, etc.)
In-Reply-To: <bk7no9+9nha@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk836v+abai@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80960

Me then:
<snip>
> > "I'm trying to decide what curse to use on Malfoy, 
> > sir."

Matt:
<snip> 
> Two things about the sentence struck me when I read it and might 
> have struck Snape when he heard it, as rather unlike the old 
> Harry. First, Harry almost always forgets to address his teachers 
> with honorifics when he is interrupted in the heat of the moment. 
> Especially Snape.  Here, however, Harry remembers to say "sir."  
<snip>
> Harry has enough distance from his emotions that he is not only 
> able to remember to address Snape respectfully, but also to come up 
> with a *subtle* put down of Malfoy.

Me now:
So can we draw a parallel between how Snape perceives Harry's use 
of "sir" and the way McGonagall instructs Harry that incidents in his 
DADA class have nothing to do with truth? (Are these both examples of 
Harry needing to learn to control himself, learn a little subtlety? 
Become a cold, premeditating, mealymouthed *git* like Draco?)

Matt:
> The whole idea of "trying to decide" what curse to deploy in such a 
> situation is, if I may essentialize for a moment, not very 
> Gryffindor. <snip>

Me now, snarkily:
(Essentialize? Whuzzat? One o' dem verbs by committee? <ducking>)

Matt:
> Gryffindors react; Slytherins plan.
> So, why is Snape's reaction subdued? <snip> Perhaps, in hearing 
> this, Snape has an inkling, conscious or subconscious, of the idea 
> that Harry *has* learned something from him.

Me now:
And Snape is trying to encourage, to nurture, Harry's inner 
Slytherin. Lovely.

Matt:
> I think that this scene is the first, hopeful little hint that Harry
> and Snape are beginning, despite their mutual animosity, to 
> understand one another, or at least to think that they do. Not a 
> reconciliation, but perhaps detente.

Me now:
You know...I actually saw Harry's response as less respectful than a 
hot-headed answer would have been; he just looked Snape right in the 
eye and said, in effect, very deliberately: yeah, I was, what are you 
gonna do about it? He was just out-there defiant.

Me then: 
> > Dumbledore could very well be feeling extremely hoisted 
> > on that particular petard.

Matt:
> Since I'm responding to this post, the nitpicker in me cannot resist
> pointing out that one is not hoisted (or, in Shakespeare's now 
> archaic usage, "hoist") "on" a petard, but rather "with" it.  
> The "petard" was the military engineer's charge (i.e., explosive) 
> used for breaching walls, and the expression colorfully refers to 
> what happened if the engineer employed too short a fuse, and was 
> unable to get out of range before the charge exploded.  

Me now:
<singing> You say po~tay~to and I say po~tah~to...I knew that. ;-) 
(My housemate grumbles and gives me that same lecture (!) each time I 
say "hoisted on" (or "hoisted by") and I keep doing it ("hoisted 
upon" is my favorite); usage drives the language, so consider me 
driving with my own style, down the median, or whatever. While I tend 
to be a purist, I branch out now and then and take a walk on the wild 
disco side. ^--^)

Me then:
> > I ... think Dumbledore ... knows that Harry went into 
> > the Pensieve and he knows what Harry saw there. How 
> > else would he chalk up the end of Occlumency lessons to 
> > Snape's feelings about James ... ?
 
Matt:
> Not an impossible reading, but isn't it just as likely that 
> Dumbledore already attributes most of Snape's nastiness toward 
> Harry to Snape's feelings about James? <snip>

Me now:
This Occlumency stuff was *so* crucial to the cause that Dumbledore 
gave the task of teaching it to Harry to the teacher well known for 
liking him least (an understatement) and never bothered to check in 
on its progress? Never addressed Snape's feelings about Harry at all? 
(So much for MAGIC DISHWASHER! It's back to paper plates!)

Matt:
> It seems to me that if Snape had told DD about the Pensieve 
> incident DD would be *more* likely to blame Harry than Snape.

Me now:
Why? Last year (book time), given a prime opportunity, Dumbledore's 
reaction to Harry's first trip into the Pensieve was, "I quite 
understand," and "Curiosity is not a sin,"--the *strongest* 
admonition he offered was, "But we should exercise caution with our 
curiosity...yes, indeed" (and here he is thinking of Bertha Jorkins, 
as indicated by the fact that she appears then). Does Dumbledore 
assume, even knowing how way Harry was (or wasn't, more precisely) 
raised, that Harry just somehow "got" that uninvited Pensieve-diving 
is a no-no? (Old argument; feel free to ignore.)

Matt:
> I also sort of think, given what we know about the Snape-Harry-
> Dumbledore dynamic, that Snape would be embarrassed to
> tell DD exactly what happened.  DD does not even necessarily know
> about the particular incident with James/Sirius, so broaching that
> would be one embarrassment.

Me now:
The "particular incident" shed a lot of light on James/Sirius for us 
of the readership; if Dumbledore doesn't know about it, or things 
very much like it (therefore robbing it of its sting, IMO), how does 
he then know that Snape's hatred of Harry is about James? What then 
is Dumbledore then referring to as "...some wounds run too deep for 
the healing?"

Are you saying Snape would be embarrassed about his hissy fit with 
the exploding jar, about James' historical hexing of him, or both? 
(Are you saying that, with the world at stake, Snape is still 
protecting himself from *embarrassment*? Snape was a Death Eater. At 
some point he had to recant pretty convincingly to Dumbledore to gain 
his trust; what's left to be embarrassed about?)

Matt:
<snip>
> it seems more likely to me that he would have just told DD that 
> Harry didn't apply himself and was impossible to work with -- close 
> enough to the truth, from Snape's perspective.

Me now:
Harry says, referring to the end of his Occlumency lessons with 
Snape, "He threw me out of his office!" and Dumbledore says, "I am 
aware of it." It doesn't sound to me like Dumbledore bought 
any "didn't apply himself/impossible to work with" spiel Snape gave 
him about Harry. Anyway, somehow I am of the mind that Snape doesn't 
dissemble with Dumbledore; I'd think that his trust would be precious 
to Snape and make him pretty careful, more than just "close enough," 
with the truth. Not to mention the whole Legilimens-to-Legilimens 
dynamic I envision there. 

Sandy aka "msbeadsley" (humming: in da mornin', in da evenin', ain't 
we got fun...)




From erinellii at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 22:54:55 2003
From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 22:54:55 -0000
Subject: Snape-Harry Detente & Dumbledore (was: Worst is yet to come, etc.)
In-Reply-To: <bk836v+abai@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk84bv+ac24@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80961

> Sandy aka "msbeadsley"
> This Occlumency stuff was *so* crucial to the cause that Dumbledore 
> gave the task of teaching it to Harry to the teacher well known for 
> liking him least (an understatement) and never bothered to check in 
> on its progress? Never addressed Snape's feelings about Harry at 
all?  (So much for MAGIC DISHWASHER! It's back to paper plates!)


Um, I'm not a believer in MAGIC DISHWASHER, but I thought that their 
current take on OoP was that Dumbledore *wanted* Harry to fail the 
lessons and be lured to the MoM, because the death of Sirius was 
nessacery for the activation of Weapon!Harry.   
  Or is that another theory altogether?  And if so, whose was it?  Am 
I just completely confused?

Erin 






From rredordead at aol.com  Tue Sep 16 23:18:12 2003
From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 23:18:12 -0000
Subject: Did Voldemort kill Petunia & Lily's parents?
Message-ID: <bk85nk+bcl7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80962

I've been confused over Petunia's behaviour since the last book, as 
I'm sure we all have and I can't find a satisfactory solution to why 
she agreed to take in this hated child of a hated sister. A child who 
represents and is a daily reminder of a world that she despises and 
is terrified of unless there is a huge benefit for her and her family 
that out-ways the 20 plus years of burden that is Harry Potter to 
her.  I don't agree with the love concurs all theories in Petunia 
Dursley's case.   

So I've come up with a theory which popped in to my head after 
reading the essay entitled The Tragedy of Petunia Dursley by Ali 
Hewison on the Lexicon.  I found this to be very interesting and 
recommend the essay to everyone, however while I agree wholeheartedly 
on the idea that Petunia has made a deal with Dumbledore, I disagree 
with Dudley having magical ability. (Read the essay for more detail)

I propose the deal went something like this:  In return for Harry's 
protection, Dumbledore has provided protection for Petunia and her 
family (and of course to Harry as well) from Voldemort, his DE's as 
well as any contact with the Wizarding World.  Why?  I'm thinking 
perhaps Voldemort was responsible for Lily and Petunias parent's 
death. 

I am going to assume Harry's maternal grandparents are dead, as Harry 
and Dudley have never seen or met them in their 15 years of life. 
(That we are aware of up to now.)  Petunia has never spoken of them 
in any of the books and Harry has never asked about them, which is 
strange, don't you think?  My only answer is that they are dead or at 
least severely estranged from Petunia and her family, but if that is 
the case surely they would have shown some interest in their 
grandchildren and at least tried to contact Harry at school?  So I'm 
going with the deceased option for now.  So how did they die?  Well, 
we know Lily and James defied Voldemort 3 times. We don't yet know 
what Voldemort did, but I bet it was nasty and I'm willing to bet one 
of those times Voldemort and/or his DE's used Petunia and Lily's 
parents as bate. 

This to me is a terrifying reality for Petunia, fueling her hate for 
her sister and the WW in general and putting her in a position 
Dumbledore knows is to his advantage.  Dumbledore has to get Pertunia 
to agree to take in this child, who I believe she could easily have 
let die, because Dumbledore needs Harry to live with a blood 
relative. This connection would be meaningless to Petunia but if she 
had known of, or seen her parents death (possibly at the hands of 
Dementors???  She seems to know what they are clear enough) she could 
prove willing to look after this kid in return for the protection of 
her own son.

What do you all think?

Mandy





From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Tue Sep 16 23:30:53 2003
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 23:30:53 -0000
Subject: Did Voldemort kill Petunia & Lily's parents?
In-Reply-To: <bk85nk+bcl7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk86fd+e0vl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80963

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ghinghapuss" <rredordead at a...> 
wrote:
 
> 
> What do you all think?
> 
 
I think Petunia's and Lily's parents are dead. Because Petunia is 
Lily's last blood relative. If the Evans' were still alive, 
Dumbledore could have given Baby Harry to them.

And I also think, it is likely, that Voldemort or the Death Eaters 
killed them. Petunia complained in PS, that they always thought Lily 
was extraordinary, because she was a witch. That means, they must 
have still be alive, while Lily went to school (or at least at some 
time of it). However, both were (probably) already dead, when 
Voldemort killed Lily and James. Of course it's possible, that both 
died of natural causes during this time, or in a car crash or 
something like this. But currently I assume, that they are killed by 
the Death Eaters, if only, because I think that Petunia's jealousy 
isn't a reason for SUCH a hatred towards the wizarding world.

There is a similar problem with Jame's parents. Sirius quasily told 
Harry, that they were still alive, when he ran away from his parents 
home. And yet, six years or so later no track from them. Of course 
they aren't Lily's blood relatives, so maybe Dumbledore wouldn't have 
given Harry to them, anyway. But it is really odd, that McGonagall 
didn't even mention the possibility.

Hickengruendler 




From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 00:51:56 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 00:51:56 -0000
Subject: Percy  (Was: "What's Arthur been up to")
In-Reply-To: <bk7o1e+1okr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk8b7c+b5vd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80964

reply to 80940
constancevigilance wrote:
"hermionegallo posted a brilliant post that I agree with 100%, so 
I snipped almost the whole thing, except:
 
Replacement (2): this one is interesting.  <snip>
Polyjuiced Percy hasn't been too warmly received anywhere I've 
presented it, but it's not such a stretch. <snip> I've thought that 
the way Percy talks and acts in OoP seems more like Wormtail than 
Percy.  Problem: the silver hand.
 
Constance Vigilance (me):
 
Actually, that's not a problem. We have canon to prove that physical 
infirmities are corrected in the polyjuicing process - when Harry 
becomes Goyle, his eyesight improves. The juiced person assumes the 
infirmities of the one duplicated, see Moody's eye and leg.
 
I really like this theory, because it also explains why Peter is not 
among the DE muster in the Dept of Mysteries. He's busy being someone 
else at the time. And besides, I believe in P.I.N.E. (Percy Is Not 
Evil). At this point, I would like to propose P.I.N.E.S.A.P. Percy Is 
Not Evil, Simulated Alternate: Peter!"
 
hg reply:
I love the acronym!  PINESAP has been my first line of thinking on 
Percy since I read OoP.  I felt 1) that the letter was trying too 
hard to sound like Percy; 2) that the fawning over Fudge was way 
beyond Percy's awed respect of his superiors (compare Percy offering 
tea to Crouch, Sr. at the QWC to Pettigrew buttering up Harry -- and 
everyone else, one by one -- in the Shrieking Shack, or even any 
Pettigrew/Voldemort scene); and 3) that slamming the door in Molly's 
face was highly suspect -- it could have been that the real Percy was 
in the room behind him, restrained.  There's a perfect time-gap where 
no one sees Percy, before the third TW task up until the fight with 
Arthur, which would allow for this explanation.

I have to admit that Undercover Percy has also been growing on me 
over the months as I've tried to remain open-minded about Percy.  

In 80946, klaustininia says:
(snipped) "Someone let Dumbledore know that Harry's trial time was 
changed. It may have been Percy. (and) Percy is in a position where 
he could easily pass information since Fudge thinks Percy is 100% 
loyal to him."  

These are excellent points that can certainly point to Percy being 
undercover.  I also had wondered about who told Dumbledore the trial 
time had changed; although we already have another operative in the 
Ministry, Shacklebolt, it couldn't have been him, because he was 
speaking with Arthur before the trial and didn't mention anything.  
He didn't know.  Therefore this really lends credence to Percy being 
undercover.

Several folks also added that Percy left Dumbledore's office before 
Dumbledore zapped everybody, but I should point out that Fudge 
directed Percy to leave, to go bring word to the Daily Prophet about 
Dumbledore's arrest.

n_longbottom01 adds in post 80954 that the revelation about BCrouch 
Jr could have pushed Percy into realization of the seriousness and 
validity of what his parents and Harry are saying.

As much as I'd like to jump onto a TBAY Percy craft -- heck, even 
take the helm of one -- I don't know if I could jump on PINESAP 
before ruling out Percy as Spy.  I wish I could, because PINESAP is 
so dear to my heart, the reason I went back and read ALL the books 
right after my first read of OoP.  But I've been thinking a lot about 
Arthur these days and wondering about his undercover assignment, so 
to speak, and in light of that it would make sense that Percy would 
be now involved in such a way as well.  I wonder if those of us who 
are especially interested in this could continue to pick at it until 
we reach some consensus, on board or on email.  I'm open to both.
hg.






From ktd7 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 01:06:22 2003
From: ktd7 at yahoo.com (Karen)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 01:06:22 -0000
Subject: DD's 2nd mistake (was DD's 2th mistake) :-)
In-Reply-To: <004a01c37c75$a30d94e0$0200a8c0@Newpc>
Message-ID: <bk8c2e+kgu5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80965

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Joris" <msn.tsf at h...> wrote:
> Hmm is it just me or did Dumbledore make a fault of giantic 
proportions on
> the end of OP? He just tells Harry EVERYTHING about his grand 
master plan
> including the text of the vision, and more of that blabla and then 
he sends
> Harry back home without learning real occlumency and with all 
those secrets
> in his mind... all LV has to do is open up poor Harry's mind and 
suck all
> secrets out.
> 
> First I thought LV might not be capable of it but at least DD 
thinks he is
> ("he would seize his chance to use you as a means to spy on me" 
OP) and also
> Snape is capable of reading the mind and he seems far less 
powerfull then
> LV.
> 
> I was thinking maybe on Private Drive he is so well protected 
Voldemort
> can't even enter his mind but he did get a lot of scar hurt and 
visions on
> private drive (-> Mind Connection)


My reply:

On page 844 of the American edition, Dumbledore says, "In the end it 
mattered not that you could not close your mind. It was your heart 
that saved you." 

I suspect that Dumbledore believes that Harry's love for Sirius and 
his friends is enough to prevent Voldemort from invading his mind 
again. Voldemort was never controlling Harry, just using the fact 
that Harry could sense what Voldemort was feeling or seeing to 
misdirect Harry. We have no evidence that Voldemort could actually 
read Harry's mind at any time! The most we know of 
Voldemort "seeing" anything through Harry's eyes are the two times 
when Harry made eye contact with Dumbledore and Voldemort's anger 
appeared to take hold of Harry. 

Obviously this is only theory on my part, but it would seem to me 
that strong thoughts of love are enough to prevent Voldy-thingy from 
being able to read Harry's mind.

Karen




From oppen at mycns.net  Wed Sep 17 01:19:12 2003
From: oppen at mycns.net (Eric Oppen)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 20:19:12 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Undercover Percy
References: <bk7mst+ajgp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <005701c37cb9$b7613160$c7560043@hppav>

No: HPFGUIDX 80966



> My theory is that Percy is deeply undercover as a spy for Dumbledore and
his parents don't know.
>
> 1.  Someone let Dumbledore know that Harry's trail time was changed. It
may have been Percy.
>
> 2.  The letter was worded strangely.  Percy may have been trying to let
Ron know what was going on but had to be careful how he put his words.
>
> 3.  Percy left before Dumbledore stunned the Aurors,Fudge and Umbridge.
He may have left to help in the means of Dumbledore's escape.
>
> 4.  Percy is in a position where he could easily pass information since
Fudge thinks Percy is 100% loyal to him.
>
> Until proven otherwise I think Percy the undercover spy is a very likely
possibility.
>
> "Klaustininia"

I don't know if you saw it, but I came up with an acronym for this some time
ago:

PUNIC FAITH---Percy Undercover, Near Idiotic Cornelius Fudge, Accessing
Information That Helps.

--Eric, normally not an acronym expert




From zanelupin at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 01:17:19 2003
From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 01:17:19 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy
In-Reply-To: <bk7mst+ajgp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk8cmv+418t@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80967

"Klaustininia" wrote:

<snip>
> 3.  Percy left before Dumbledore stunned the Aurors,Fudge and 
Umbridge.  He may have left to help in the means of Dumbledore's 
escape.<

OoP, US ed p 619:

"'Very well, then,' said Fudge, now radiant with glee.  'Duplicate 
your notes, Weasley, and send a copy to the Daily Prophet at once.  
If we send a fast owl we should make the morning edition!'  Percy 
dashed from the room, slamming the door behind him, and Fudge turned 
back to Dumbledore."

Percy left the room to give Fudge a hand in discrediting 
Dumbledore.  Because Fudge *told* him to.  So unless Fudge is a spy 
for Dumbledore against himself, I don't think this can be used to 
prove Percy is Dumbledore's agent.  Or at least it can't be used to 
say Percy is helping Dumbledore out in this instance.


> Until proven otherwise I think Percy the undercover spy is a very 
likely possibility.<
 
> "Klaustininia"

And until JKR writes "Percy is a spy for Dumbledore" or "Percy is 
Evil" I will continue to believe he's an overly ambitious fool who 
traded up his family for the wrong reason and will either die for 
his mistaken loyalty or eventually return to the Weasley fold a 
humbled young man.

KathyK (who hopes for the latter)




From meltowne at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 01:36:21 2003
From: meltowne at yahoo.com (meltowne)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 01:36:21 -0000
Subject: Longbottom's Torture - Why?
In-Reply-To: <bk6f99+7lic@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk8dql+74n3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80968

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
 
> The only missing bit? How did Hagrid and McGonagall communicate with
> each other? Rememeber at Privet Drive, McGonagall said Hargid had
> informed her that Dumbledore would be taking Harry to Privet Drive.
> The only conclusion I can reach is that the Longbottoms home could
> have been the meeting place for the Order. Although, I admit that
> seems weak.

I like your theory; it meshes well with mine.  I think Dumbledore 
(and whoever else) didn't find out about James & Lily until later in 
the morning.  Something happened later that evening that caused 
Dumbledore to be albe to tell Hagrid where to go.  Hagrid then runs 
into McGonagle (who already knows James and Lily are dead), and tells 
her DD will be at Privet Drive later that evening.  THEN Hagrid goes 
back in time to fetch Harry, using a time turner.  Wherever he takes 
Harry, he must stay out of sight at least until the time when her was 
sent back.

I think this works because while Sirius was in on the secret, and 
could get to Godric's Hollow, nobody else could until later.  Hagrid 
is able to, because Future!Hagrid does know where to go.

As for the Longbottoms, I think the DE's tortured them because they 
did think they knew where LV was.  Neville and Harry both had the 
potential to be the prophesy boy, and it can be assumed they were 
both being protected the same way.  If they were, it makes sense that 
Frank and Alice would know what was supposed to be done to LV.

Even if Frank was at Godric's Hollow, how would the DE's know?  I 
doubt Wormtail told them - he's responsible for LV's downfall!

Melinda




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 01:41:55 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 01:41:55 -0000
Subject: Boggarts, Riddikulus and laughter
In-Reply-To: <bk72mb+bdhq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk8e53+jqfa@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80969

> Alshain wrote:
> > Whatever became of the idea that the force that really destroys a
> > Boggart is laughter?
<snip> 

> Grey Wolf
> <snip> Lupin finishes off the Boggart in the writing desk at
> > 12 Grimmauld Place just with the spell.
> 
<snip>

Laura:

Do you suppose it's possible that once you get good at the spell, you 
don't need to force the boggart to change shape?  Maybe you can just 
get so comfortable with the spell that it becomes automatic and you 
can shortcut directly to the neutralizing of the boggart.




From ktd7 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 01:47:39 2003
From: ktd7 at yahoo.com (Karen)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 01:47:39 -0000
Subject: Snape-Harry Detente & Dumbledore (was: Worst is yet to come, etc.)
In-Reply-To: <bk836v+abai@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk8efr+42p4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80970

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> Me then:
> <snip>
> > > "I'm trying to decide what curse to use on Malfoy, 
> > > sir."
<snip>
> Matt:
> > The whole idea of "trying to decide" what curse to deploy in 
such a 
> > situation is, if I may essentialize for a moment, not very 
> > Gryffindor. <snip>
> 
> Me now, snarkily:
> (Essentialize? Whuzzat? One o' dem verbs by committee? <ducking>)
> 
> Matt:
> > Gryffindors react; Slytherins plan.
> > So, why is Snape's reaction subdued? <snip> Perhaps, in hearing 
> > this, Snape has an inkling, conscious or subconscious, of the 
idea 
> > that Harry *has* learned something from him.
> 
> Me now:
> And Snape is trying to encourage, to nurture, Harry's inner 
> Slytherin. Lovely.

Considering how close Harry came to being put in Slytherin, this 
might be a valid observation! Harry has had plenty of reason to want 
to let Draco have the benefit of his developing knowledge of hexes 
and jinxes!

> 
> Matt:
> > I think that this scene is the first, hopeful little hint that 
Harry
> > and Snape are beginning, despite their mutual animosity, to 
> > understand one another, or at least to think that they do. Not a 
> > reconciliation, but perhaps detente.
> 
> Me now:
> You know...I actually saw Harry's response as less respectful than 
a 
> hot-headed answer would have been; he just looked Snape right in 
the 
> eye and said, in effect, very deliberately: yeah, I was, what are 
you 
> gonna do about it? He was just out-there defiant.

I had the same take on this scene... I thought Harry was really 
being openly defiant and daring Snape to do anything about it.

<snipping petard ramble... ;-)> 

> Me then:
> > > I ... think Dumbledore ... knows that Harry went into 
> > > the Pensieve and he knows what Harry saw there. How 
> > > else would he chalk up the end of Occlumency lessons to 
> > > Snape's feelings about James ... ?
>  
> Matt:
> > Not an impossible reading, but isn't it just as likely that 
> > Dumbledore already attributes most of Snape's nastiness toward 
> > Harry to Snape's feelings about James? <snip>
> 
> Me now:
> This Occlumency stuff was *so* crucial to the cause that 
Dumbledore 
> gave the task of teaching it to Harry to the teacher well known 
for 
> liking him least (an understatement) and never bothered to check 
in 
> on its progress? Never addressed Snape's feelings about Harry at 
all? 
> (So much for MAGIC DISHWASHER! It's back to paper plates!)

The problem is that anytime a teacher leaves something out on a desk 
with a student still in the room, there should be little expectation 
of privacy! I taught for several years, and I guarantee that 
anything that wasn't under lock and key had to be considered public 
property. Grade books, tests, etc., all had to be kept out of view 
and inaccessible. 

Still, for Snape to get so angry over Harry seeing a piece of his 
ancient history begs another question... why was he so embarrassed 
by that? I understand needing to remove the memory to help him 
control his anger, but if the memory was removed, why was Snape 
still angry about it? If the memory is gone, wouldn't the emotions 
connected with it also be gone? I expect that Dumbledore gave Snape 
the penseive to allow him to do just that... rid himself of the 
thoughts that caused him so much anger so he could teach Harry 
without his past interfering. So, why didn't it work? Why was Snape 
still angry?

If Snape told Dumbledore about the pensieve incident, I would expect 
Dumbledore to remind him that something like that shouldn't be left 
out, that regardless of Harry's indiscretion, Snape is still the 
adult, still the person charged with instructing Harry, and still 
the one that Dumbledore had trusted to prevent Voldemort from 
getting into Harry's mind. Under other circumstances, Dumbledore 
might have explained to Harry how peeking into someone else's 
private thoughts is a rude intrusion, but I can't imagine him 
getting more than a detention at best for being nosey. 

I can't help but believe that Snape has got a lot longer way to go 
to acting like an adult than Harry has. Harry is not able to control 
his emotions well, right now, but he is learning. Snape has had many 
more decades to learn and still hasn't mastered the skill.

Karen




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Wed Sep 17 01:52:23 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 01:52:23 -0000
Subject: Percy  (Was: "What's Arthur been up to")
In-Reply-To: <bk8b7c+b5vd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk8eon+53qm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80971

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hermionegallo" 
<hermionegallo at y...> wrote:
> {snipping throughout--sorry, good thoughts here}

These are excellent points that can certainly point to Percy being 
> undercover.  I also had wondered about who told Dumbledore the 
trial 
> time had changed; although we already have another operative in the 
> Ministry, Shacklebolt, it couldn't have been him, because he was 
> speaking with Arthur before the trial and didn't mention anything.  
> He didn't know.  Therefore this really lends credence to Percy 
being undercover.
> 
> As much as I'd like to jump onto a TBAY Percy craft -- heck, even 
> take the helm of one -- I don't know if I could jump on PINESAP 
{Percy Is Not Evil--Simulated Alternate Peter}
> before ruling out Percy as Spy. I wonder if those of us who 
> are especially interested in this could continue to pick at it 
until we reach some consensus, on board or on email.  I'm open to 
both.


Jen Reese: HG--Thanks for laying out all the possible options for 
Percy's behavior in post 80931. I didn't get back to that one and now 
see there are two threads going on old Percy--he would be thrilled by 
all the attention, I'm sure!

Count me in for picking this apart. I'm leaning toward the option of 
Percy as undercover spy, mainly because of the letter. Carolina 
Silmariel in post 80213 gave some interesting ideas about why Percy 
wrote the letter the way he did, and what his "code talk" might be 
trying to get at with H/R/H.

The thought also occurred to me that Percy's letter just *happens* to 
be in the same chapter as the clever letter Harry writes to Sirius, 
trying to obscure his true meaning in "code talk."  So is JKR trying 
to show the similarities of these letters, or the differences? 

Re: the polyjuiced Percy.  It really would fit together so well and 
explain so much, that I'm betting against it. It's more of a gut 
feeling than anything specific.

I think the Imperius could work but once again, been there, done 
that. Of course, you could argue against the Spy theory for the same 
reason b/c so many people already suspect Snape of that. Wouldn't 
that be interesting, though, if we're all focused on Snape and Percy 
is really the spy?!?  Now that seems like something surprising that 
JKR might have fun with.

Re: Penelope Clearwater--good point from Sandy, but where can we go 
with it? There's absolutely zero mention of Penelope which seems 
suspicious, but there's absolutely zero mention so we don't have 
anything to go on but pure speculation.

So, if you take the helm of a new TBAY re: Percy as Spy, count me in. 
You can use anything I've written if it's useful.  Another post on 
the "undercover Percy" thread had an acronym for this idea, but I 
can't look it up at the moment without losing my post. 

All hands on deck! Jen





From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 02:04:17 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 02:04:17 -0000
Subject: Hermione's career
In-Reply-To: <7951059A-E856-11D7-A9DB-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bk8ff1+6bjk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80972

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> 
> What can one say about Hermione? Bright, motivated, idealistic and 
> bloody dangerous.
> 
> I have a slight suspicion  that you might find the final 
description 
> somewhat contentious.
> 
> Me, I'm a cynical old fart, steeped in disillusion, disappointment 
and 
> distrust of idealists. Hermione is just the type I try and  keep my 
> distance from. Unfair? Only partly, and only partly an exaggeration 
on 
> my  part.
> 
> Bright, we won't argue with. She's demonstrated that often enough.
> 
> Motivated, now. Motivated to do  what? She works really hard  in 
class and in exams; but with what end in view? None, apparently.
<snip> 

> SPEW perhaps. Well, first she's got to show she knows what she's 
> talking about. So far that's not been so. <snip> In this crusade 
she has jumped to conclusions, refused suggestions to think about it 
a bit  more and has received no support, even from such as 
Dumbledore, the apparent epitome of compassion.  Dobby, Winky and 
Kreacher think she's wrong. As do the Hogwarts Elves. As does Hagrid, 
who seems to love every creature  around.
> 
> There has to be a reason. We don't know it, Hermione doesn't know 
it, but it's going to deflate a lot of highly developed principles 
when it comes to light. <snip> Hermione is heading for a fall, like 
many a bright teenager who think they  have a monopoly on 
interpretation of social structures.
> 
> I don't trust idealists. All too often the  ends justify the means.
> And they rarely listen. They know they have all the answers when 
often they haven't considered what the question really is. Sure, 
Wilberforce and Elizabeth Fry did a great job banning slavery 
wherever the British Navy could reach. But they didn't do it like 
Hermione, they got the facts first. They tempered idealism with 
practicality and accurate information.
 <snip>

Laura:

If I may paraphrase Sirius, reading between the lines, mate, I'd 
guess you're not fond of Hermione.  <g>

But really, I think you're being awfully hard on a 15 year old girl.  
Most of the people I knew as teenagers were burning idealists (okay, 
this was the late 60's, but still).  And they've learned over the 
years to work in the real world.  Isn't it better to start out with 
some vision of the way you think the world could be better and change 
the way you work to bring that about than not to have any vision at 
all?  I agree that if Hermione were 35 and still acting the same way, 
she would be not only unpleasant to be around but ineffective as 
well.  But she's got lots of time to learn.

I suspect you're right about the house elf situation-there may well 
be more there than meets Hermione's eye.  But if it turns out she's 
wrong about their status, that will be a very important lesson for 
her to learn-as you say, make sure you've done your prep work before 
you charge off.  And better to learn it at school than later, when 
she could, indeed, do some real damage.

Not to get overly personal, but did you know what you wanted to do 
with your life when you were 15?  I sure didn't.  Hermione's drive 
for knowledge is motivated by 2 things:  her continuing awareness of 
her shaky status as a muggle-born in the WW, and her simple desire to 
learn.  The girl loves learning!  Harry loves Quidditch, Neville 
loves herbology, Fred and George love creating practical joke 
products, and Hermione loves soaking up as much knowledge as she can 
find.  More power to her for it, I say.  





> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From betsymarie123 at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 16 21:20:02 2003
From: betsymarie123 at hotmail.com (Betsy Corts)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 21:20:02 +0000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione's career
Message-ID: <Law10-F103iyhREXPkp00054852@hotmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80973

> >Kneasy:
> > Which, of course, is not likely to happen.
> > They already get upset at her hints and suggestions; the only way
> > she could impose her ideas is by coercion. "I know what's best for you
> > and you'll damn well do it."
> > Freedom by Dictatorship.
> >
> > Animal Farm all over again.
>
>Laura:
>
>Goodness, have you no hope for Hermione?
>
>I see her making the kinds of mistakes that very bright, very
>principled kids make.  She has the right ideas but she has yet to
>develop tact and diplomacy.  (I'm assuming you agree that keeping
>house elves in slavery is not a good thing.)  And she has to learn to
>work with people (or whatever) rather than try to roll over them.  We
>see her make these mistakes both in her approach to the house elves
>and in her dealings with the centaurs.  She doesn't come to them
>where they are but rather she tries to make them adopt her point of
>view, and it will not work.  Nor is there any reason why it should.
>
>One thing about Hermione, though, is that you can rely on her to
>solve problems.  She comes up with a very nice way to handle Rita
>Skeeter, for instance, and she definitely did some quick thinking
>with Umbridge toward the end of OoP.  So I think there's hope that
>she'll learn some more constructive tactics as she tries to put her
>principles into practice.


Reading your posting about Hermione, I've come to the idea that maybe she 
will end up working at MoM on the DoM.  She wants to make something great to 
the WW and for the muggles as well, so I guess the best place to do taht is 
where she can keep track of the strange things and mysteries kept there.  
Besides, she Is very good solving things & explaning them, so what do all of 
you think?

Betsy
_________________________________________________________________
Get 10MB of e-mail storage! Sign up for Hotmail Extra Storage.  
http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es





From president0084 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 16 21:50:54 2003
From: president0084 at yahoo.com (president0084)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 21:50:54 -0000
Subject: Thestrals and seeing death (was: Deaths at Hogwarts?)
In-Reply-To: <bk7tf7+7bvj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk80ju+6l3k@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80974

I don't have my book with but 1st year Harry didn't use the Carriage.
2nd year he used the flying car to get to Hogwarts, in 3rd year we 
would all agree he was not really paying attention to his 
suroundings. But here is the kicker, in 4th year there is no reason 
why he shouldn't have seen them unless it didn't really count if he 
was an infant with not been able to remember or understand what was 
happening.

So Harry's been able to see the thestrals happened by either the 
event of the 3rd task or seeing the memory of his mother dieing.

Don't forget Harry didn't see Quirell die, he was told by Dumbledore, 
he also didn't see James die as he was in a different room.

"Jim"




From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz  Tue Sep 16 22:25:24 2003
From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 10:25:24 +1200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The worst is yet to come/Happy Families
In-Reply-To: <bk7hgs+sg0t@eGroups.com>
References: <bk7fb8+jpq6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20030917101408.023ab510@pop3.xtra.co.nz>

No: HPFGUIDX 80975


Melpomene:

> It's been noted here more than once that many of the DEs mentioned by
> name have children at HW. It's been suggested that Voldy
> um...suggested strongly...that his faithful followers...um...go forth
> and multiply. Now this is generally thought to be important because so
> many of thise kids (Malfoy, Crabbe, Goyle,etc) are Harry's age. We
> thought maybe, just maybe there was some prophecy....

> What if it's just that one's...um...dues...yes we'll just say dues
> for now...is well, contributing another purebreddarkwizard to the
> ranks? Hmmm? So, VERY young Snape, ever eager to please, does
> whatever it takes ("potion up a booty call" I believe was mentioned
> here once--a turn of phrase which I shall never forget) to produce
> his...ah...contribution.

> BUT ALAS! The witch of his choosing has had the temerity to
> produce...GASP! A SQUIB! Not suitable at all!
> Perhaps even material to be done away with.
> Doing away with one's wife (status negligible in this case) and
> child, or giving them up to be done
> away with, would certainly count towards free admission to the front
> row of DE theater, wouldn't you think?

<snip>

> And it speaks to the *"Look what you made me do!"* theory of why
> Snape turned AGAINST Voldy in the end. If he did.

That would make sense.  In groups like this there comes a time when procreation
is used as a main instead of conscription as a means to swell the ranks.  However getting the right results can be rather tricky if they want a certain type.

But interesting theory that seems probable.  But whatever the reason was for him
to leave, it must of been major.

Tanya




From hecate92 at yahoo.co.uk  Tue Sep 16 22:54:22 2003
From: hecate92 at yahoo.co.uk (hecate92)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 22:54:22 -0000
Subject: Amanda Predicts Snape's future, was Snape history/future
In-Reply-To: <bk61so+6u3l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk84au+hna6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80976

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jdr0918" <jdr0918 at h...> wrote:
> <<<"Amanda Geist" wrote:...Alas. My own thought is that he will 
> die...he will probably go heroically in some blaze of 
redemption...>>>
> 
> The Sergeant Majorette says
> 
> And he will become a Hogwarts ghost; he already has the wardrobe. 
> Ironically, there will also be some incident surrounding his death 
> that frees Sir Nicholas, making Snape the new Gryffindor Ghost...

.....and maybe become a member of the headless hunt aka..Sever 
(usS)..nape

"hecate92"





From editor at texas.net  Wed Sep 17 03:27:08 2003
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 22:27:08 -0500
Subject: Three Years and Counting!
Message-ID: <008d01c37ccb$ab42e880$d304a6d8@texas.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 80977

It's that time again!

(steps back to allow the marching band through, brushes confetti out of
hair)

Yes....it's time for Amanda's Anniversary Re-Post!!!

Control yourselves.

In the dim, dark, far-off days, when my children still napped and I was
spending money and not earning it, I bought a book on sale, that I had
avoided because it was popular. But 30% off, hey. You know the rest.

And I had only one friend who had also read them, and she is not the
literary analysis type, and it occurred to me one day out of the blue that
maybe there were *online discussion groups* for this. Surely I wasn't the
only one who was dissecting these books. So I searched on "Harry Potter,"
found a few groups, and most of them were drivel. But one looked likely. I
joined.

Some of those who were here to meet me, who are still here:  Penny
Linsenmayer, the Jims Ferer and Flanagan, siriusgeologist, JenP, Joywitch,
Ebony, the Flying Ford Anglia, Catlady, Lexicon Steve, Aberforth's Goat,
Kelley Elf-to-be, Sheryll, Susan McGee, Golden_faile (and others, but Yahoo
keeps crashing as I attempt to see the members list. I was something like
the 234th member. I find it meaningful on some random-conjunction level that
the list reached 11,000 members on my third anniversary.

And so here follows the re-post of Message 1583. Needless to say, in the
intervening years I have done my best--and all my fellow listmembers have
helped--to remedy the lack I complain about:

From:  Amanda Lewanski <editor at texas.net>
Date:  Sat Sep 16, 2000  9:52 pm
Subject:  Hello, and a question

Greeting to the list. I'm new, and I've been group-hopping trying to find
the level of discussion I'd like, and you seem to be it. I hope I can
contribute items of interest, too.

A question---in all the groups I've observed, nobody's talking about Snape.
Can I get your thoughts on him? He seems to be such a complex
character---any theories (I've got a few) on *why* he stays with the good
guys? Why Dumbledore trusts him?

Just wondering if you were pondering what I was pondering,

Amanda

------------------------------------
Those who cannot hear the music, think the dancers daft.




From fc26det at aol.com  Wed Sep 17 03:43:36 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 03:43:36 -0000
Subject: Boggarts, Riddikulus and laughter
In-Reply-To: <bk8e53+jqfa@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk8l98+b30p@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80978

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
> > Alshain wrote:
> > > Whatever became of the idea that the force that really destroys 
a
> > > Boggart is laughter?
> <snip> 
> 

> > Grey Wolf
> > <snip> Lupin finishes off the Boggart in the writing desk at
> > > 12 Grimmauld Place just with the spell.
> > 
> <snip>
>
 
> Laura:
> 
> Do you suppose it's possible that once you get good at the spell, 
you 
> don't need to force the boggart to change shape?  Maybe you can 
just 
> get so comfortable with the spell that it becomes automatic and you 
> can shortcut directly to the neutralizing of the boggart.

Now Susan:  Or could it be that Lupin was having the kids laugh at 
their boggarts to show them that what they feared most was really 
fear itself?

Susan




From fc26det at aol.com  Wed Sep 17 03:51:47 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 03:51:47 -0000
Subject: Snapes' worst memory/the worst is yet to come
In-Reply-To: <bk6gu3+5eg0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk8loj+r19v@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80979

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hecate92" <hecate92 at y...> 
wrote:
> I am enjoying this debate enormously, but have to say....none of 
the 
> other chapter titles seem to be entirely from Harrys' view, nor do 
> they seem cryptic. So, for the reasons seen, the WMPP incident 
> (complete or not) would be the worst memory.
>      It also bothers me that when Snape was called away to sort out 
> Montague, which would be a fairly important task in his mind, but 
not 
> so important that he would leave his memories unprotected. Surely 
it 
> would have taken all of about 15 seconds to put a protection charm 
on 
> the pensieve or at least put it away in a cupboard away from an 
> individual he knows breaks the rules and has a great curiosity 
about 
> his fathers' past behaviour. You would hardly leave your personal 
> diary open on your desk at work and go off to the loo!
>    Perhaps Snape really wanted Harry to see these memories so Harry 
> would "see" what an arrogant twerp James was as telling him was 
> having no effect.
>     hecate92...still hoping that Snape will not get killed and that 
> he will become a slightly less mierable git.

Now Susan:

Personally, tho I find everyones ideas very interesting, I have 
always thought the title was short for Snape's Worst Memory of 
James.  I seriously doubt that this is Snape's worst memory with the 
horrible childhood he apparently had and being a DE and a spy.  Here 
is a 30 something or more man and this is his worst memory?  I don't 
think so.

However, this is the worst memory Harry has seen of his father.  This 
is a memory that will haunt him forever.  No matter if it is 
clarified or James is redeemed later on, Harry will never forget what 
he saw or the horror he felt at that time.

That is why I think this is Snape's Worst Memory of James to Harry.

Susan




From dwoodward at towson.edu  Wed Sep 17 04:30:58 2003
From: dwoodward at towson.edu (Deirdre F Woodward)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 00:30:58 -0400
Subject: Bothered by the Pensive scene in OOP
References: <1063731375.6599.28434.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <000901c37cd4$d29caca0$79092244@parkvl01.md.comcast.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 80980

Hi All:

Snape, in OoP American Edition, tells Harry:

"Only Muggles talk of 'mind reading.'  The mind is not a book, to be opened
at will and examined at leisure.  Thoughts are not etched on the inside of
skulls, to be perused by any invader" (OoP, Am. Ed., 530).

Does anyone else find this doesn't jibe with the fact that wizards seem to
be able to pull out of their brain a fully intact memory that can be
deposited into the Pensive?

Deirdre





From dwoodward at towson.edu  Wed Sep 17 05:09:08 2003
From: dwoodward at towson.edu (Deirdre F Woodward)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 01:09:08 -0400
Subject: Undercover Percy 
References: <1063766824.12125.28292.m10@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <003601c37cd9$d3f370c0$79092244@parkvl01.md.comcast.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 80982

First, doesn't Undercover Percy sound like a FILK set to Alan O'Day's
"Undercover Angel"?

But I digress.  I think the Percy-is-a-git theme has been building since
Book One.  He's made out to be a laughing stock almost every time he comes
into the book.  I was very satisfied with his portrayal in OoP because it
seemed the next logical step in his development as a character.   He's
young, impressionable, pretentious, ambitious, and naive -- the perfect
person to get sucked into Fudge's moronic plan to ignore/foil Dumbledore.

I thought the letter to Ron about Harry was pure Percy.  It showed all of
his vanities and weaknesses in the worst possible light.  I don't think the
letter was soley for us to hate Percy.  I think it has a specific purpose --
Percy needs a crisis of faith, and his split with his family opens up that
occasion.  He will need to examine why he was so ready to sacrifice friends
and family for career, and he will be forced to either accept his character
and move on (a future Umbridge) or face his character and change (a future
member of the OoP, perhaps?).

I don't think Percy is under any curse or spell, nor do I think Percy was
acting under orders from someone else.  *aims canon towards the PINESAP ship
and another others in the bay*

Deirdre who is beginning to realize she's a killjoy





From gbannister10 at aol.com  Wed Sep 17 06:47:59 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 06:47:59 -0000
Subject: Snape-Harry Detente & Dumbledore (was: Worst is yet to come, etc.)
In-Reply-To: <bk836v+abai@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk902v+6b8b@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80983

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> Me then:
> <snip>
> > > "I'm trying to decide what curse to use on Malfoy, 
> > > sir."
> 
> Matt:
> <snip> 
> > Two things about the sentence struck me when I read it and might 
> > have struck Snape when he heard it, as rather unlike the old 
> > Harry. First, Harry almost always forgets to address his teachers 
> > with honorifics when he is interrupted in the heat of the moment. 
> > Especially Snape.  Here, however, Harry remembers to say "sir."  
> <snip>
> > Harry has enough distance from his emotions that he is not only 
> > able to remember to address Snape respectfully, but also to come 
up 
> > with a *subtle* put down of Malfoy.
> 
> 

Geoff:
I saw this as Harry being rather tongue-in-cheek and having a quiet 
little "dig" at Snape..........




From uncmark at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 06:56:54 2003
From: uncmark at yahoo.com (Mark D.)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 06:56:54 -0000
Subject: Bill Big in Book 6?
In-Reply-To: <20030916062245.64171.qmail@web20706.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bk90jm+3r69@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80984

I see Bill (and Charlie)instrumental in books 6 & 7 on two fronts:
First the war may bring in many races (centaur, house-elf, goblin, 
veela, and maybe even dragon) Bill seem well-placed to be goblin 
liaison to the OOP. (Charlie should be in the forefront for the 
return of Norbert)
Second, IMHO Fleur delacourt will return soon. Bill will no doubt be 
alongside her.

Opinions?
--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Melanie Black 
<princessmelabela at y...> wrote:
> 
> On rereading POA, I noticed that Bill Weasley worked for a time at 
> Gringott's (right before he went on the family trip to Egypt). 
Since 
> JKR loved the Weasley's so much, doesn't it stand to reason that 
he'd 
> play a role in book 6, as well? After all, Fred and George have 
their 
> joke shop to keep them busy now, and Bill seems ready to join the 
> Order and/or the MoM.
> 
> And he knows Gringott's and goblins....
> 
> I think this looks to be one of the secondary threads in 6.
> 
> -Remnant
> 
>  
> My reply:  Also, I think Charlie will become more prominent.  
Especially since he's a character we have known about since the 
first book.  There has to be something significant about dragons.  
> 
> 
> 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!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk  Wed Sep 17 07:27:25 2003
From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 07:27:25 -0000
Subject: Snape-Harry Detente & Dumbledore (was: Worst is yet to come, etc.)
In-Reply-To: <bk902v+6b8b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk92ct+4191@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80985

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" 
<gbannister10 at a...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" 
<msbeadsley at y...> 
> wrote:
> > Me then:
> > <snip>
> > > > "I'm trying to decide what curse to use on Malfoy, 
> > > > sir."
> > 
> > Matt:
> > <snip> 
> > > Two things about the sentence struck me when I read it and 
might 
> > > have struck Snape when he heard it, as rather unlike the old 
> > > Harry. First, Harry almost always forgets to address his 
teachers 
> > > with honorifics when he is interrupted in the heat of the 
moment. 
> > > Especially Snape.  Here, however, Harry remembers to 
say "sir."  
> > <snip>
> > > Harry has enough distance from his emotions that he is not only 
> > > able to remember to address Snape respectfully, but also to 
come 
> up 
> > > with a *subtle* put down of Malfoy.
> > 
> > 
> 
> Geoff:
> I saw this as Harry being rather tongue-in-cheek and having a quiet 
> little "dig" at Snape..........

I don't think I saw this as any evidence of burgeoning mutual 
respect.  Only just earlier in the book (if my memory serves) we had 
from Harry's pov that 'he would never ever forgive Snape' or always 
hate him, or some such (posting at work so not with books).  None of 
that sounds much like mutual respect to me.  In addition, Snape gets 
immediately back into character by deducting points (non-existent I 
grant you).  The only thing I think might be possible from this 
exchange is that we might just be betting a teeny weeny insight into 
Snape's real attitude to Malfoy (father and son) as he doesn't lay 
into Harry with his usual sharpness in front of Draco.

June




From nansense at cts.com  Wed Sep 17 07:41:59 2003
From: nansense at cts.com (zesca)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 07:41:59 -0000
Subject: Prophecy placing process
In-Reply-To: <bk92ct+4191@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk9387+mif2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80986

Is anyone familiar with the process by which a prophecy is funnelled into a 
crystal sphere?

DD meets with Sybil, realizes he's heard a real prophecy...there's a ball at the 
Department of Mysteries with the prophecy inside. 

What might be the steps between?

TIA,
madeyemood




From abigailnus at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 09:13:08 2003
From: abigailnus at yahoo.com (abigailnus)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 09:13:08 -0000
Subject: TBAY: Romance on the Imperius!Arthur Trimaran (was: Bill and Fleur)
In-Reply-To: <bk7rvv+cm0n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk98j4+rgu5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80987

Having installed Erin, the newest crewmember on the trimaran, in her very 
own cabin, Abigail has now invited her to watch the sunset over drinks.  
They lounge about on deck chairs, enjoying some of Captain Veronica's 
finest Pina Coladas.  

"Those are some very interesting ideas you had about Bill and Fleur."  
Abigail says, accepting another tray of drinks from a passing deck hand.  "I 
especially like the comparison you drew between Bill's situation and 
someone with a family history of alcoholism.  It ties into something that 
Elkins wrote in one of her very first Imperius!Arthur posts."  Abigail claps 
her hands, and the deck hand straightens his shoulders, clasps his hands 
behind his back, and begins to recite in a clear, ringing voice from 
message #40168.

>>So is there any evidence in the text that Bill and/or Charlie are hip 
 to something about their father and his relationship to the past, 
 something that the younger children in the family do not know about?
 
 I think that there is. 
 
 At the end of _GoF,_ in Chapter 36, when Dumbledore announces his 
 intention of sending a letter to Arthur to enlist his help in 
 convincing other Ministry officials of the truth of Voldemort's 
 return, Bill immediately volunteers to go to him in person.
 
 "'I'll go to Dad,' said Bill, standing up. 'I'll go now.'"
 
 It's a fast response. It also has the feel of a preemptive strike. 
 Bill wants to convince Dumbledore not to send Arthur a letter at 
 all. "I'll go right this very second. It will be just as fast as 
 the post. Just please don't make my father learn this news from a 
 *letter.*"
 
 It's touching, that, but it is also really very suggestive. Why 
 precisely *is* Bill so concerned about Arthur's feelings when it 
 comes to this topic?
 
 I think that Arthur was an Imperius victim, and that Bill knows it.>>

"So you see, the idea that Bill knows about his predilection to mind-control 
magic has been suggested before, and I like your suggestion that Bill 
chooses to ignore Fleur because of that awareness."  Abigail puts down her 
glass and dismisses the deck hand.  "But I have to admit, I find the notion a 
little... icky."

"Icky?"  Erin repeats, confused.  "Why?"

"Well,"  Abigail settles more comfortably into her deckchair.  "If we follow 
your alcoholism analogy to its logical conclusion, then Bill has succumbed 
to the family curse.  You even suggested that he is now addicted to Fleur.  
Rather then the innocent romance suggested by the beginning of OOP, when 
Fred and George give the absent Bill a friendly ribbing, there is something 
much more sinister going on."

"Wait a minute!"  Erin objects.  "We covered this already.  Fleur isn't evil.  
She's used to men being capable of resisting her when they truly want to, so 
it may not occur to her that  Bill doesn't have the option of saying no.  And 
also, I don't think at this point that Fleur is harming Bill in any way.  She may 
not be something that he would have chosen if left to his own devices, but 
that doesn't mean she's bad for him.  She probably has genuine feelings for 
him."  

Abigail gives Erin a stern look.  "The fact the Fleur's intentions may be good, 
or that she is unaware of her power, doesn't make stealing Bill's free will 
excusable, nor does the fact that she has genuine feelings for him.  You said 
it yourself - Bill Weasley, when unaffected by Fleur's magic, chooses not to 
respond to  Fleur."  Abigail thumps the small table beside her for emphasis, 
causing drinks to go flying.  "He *chooses* it.  There's nothing romantic about 
their relationship if Bill's own choice in the matter has been overridden."

"Am I going to have to clean that Pina Colada?"  Erin asks forlornly.

Abigail smiles indulgently, and claps her hands again.  The deck hand 
reappears, wearing a long-suffering expression, and begins expertly 
swabbing the deck.  "He's had a lot of experience."  Abigail explains.  "Why, 
in the old days, you could barely hold on to your drink, the trimaran was 
listing so often.  Anyway, back to Bill and Fleur.  There's something else that's 
bothering me about this suggestion.  Where's Arthur in all this?"

"Arthur?"  Erin asks.  "What does this have to do with him?"

"Arthur has famously refused to look at Veelas head-on."  Abigail explains.  
"At the QWC, he removes his glasses as soon as he recognizes them, 
ostensibly to clean them, but Elkins suggests that his purpose was to avoid 
the Veelas' mind-control.  Now Arthur's oldest son is involved with a 
part-Veela - wouldn't you expect a strong reaction from Arthur?  He knows 
that Veelas use mind-control.  If he is an Imperius victim, he's connected 
Veela magic to Imperius magic and surmised that the two operate on him in 
the same way.  Since Ron and the Twins know about Bill's new relationship, I 
find it hard to believe that Bill's parents wouldn't - Molly in particular strikes 
me as the kind of mother who would consider it her duty to wheedle out such 
information."

"Arthur may not know that Fleur is part-Veela."  Erin points out.

"True, but Ron does know it."  Abigail says.  "And more importantly, he 
assumed as much the very first time he saw her.  Was it because of Fleur's 
beauty?  Perhaps, but Hermione's reaction to Ron's awe suggests that the 
matter may not be clear-cut.  I suspect that Ron felt drawn to Fleur in the 
same way that he was drawn to the Veelas in the QWC.  If Arthur and Molly 
had met Fleur, he may have deduced her lineage even if Ron hadn't 
enlightened him.  And if Arthur finds out, I can't imagine him letting the 
matter go."

"That's not necessarily a strike against my suggestion."  Erin says.  "There's 
precious little of Bill in OOP - in fact, the most important thing we learn about 
him is that is dating Fleur.  Perhaps Arthur hasn't yet discovered the entire 
truth about Fleur, and when he does, in book 6, all hell will break loose."

"As the battle for Bill's soul begins."  Abigail muses, still not entirely convinced.  
"It's true that the older Weasley boys got very little exposure in OOP - 
surprisingly so, in fact, when you consider the massive changes that took place 
in the lives of the younger children.  Each of the five younger Weasleys spent 
OOP coming out from under some sort of subjugation.  For Percy it was the 
perceived shadow of his father's reputation and political opinions, and in a 
physical sense, his last strings of dependance were cut as he left home.  The twins 
chose to leave the structured environment of school, first by escalating their 
pranks, and then by leaving entirely, and repudiated their mother's chosen 
profession for them by finally opening their joke shop.  Ron got out from under 
the twins' thumb and Harry's shadow, and became both a Prefect and the 
Gryffindor Keeper.  Ginny finally overcame her crippling crush on Harry, freeing 
herself to pursue other romantic relationships, join the Quidditch team, and 
become a valued member of Harry's circle.  Maybe book 6 will be Bill's turn to 
come out from under someone's thumb."

Abigail takes a sip from her Pina Colada and swills it in her mouth.  "You do 
know what this means, though, don't you?"  She says.  "Fleur is inescapably cast 
in the role of a villain, no matter how unwitting.  And in fact, I'm not sure that 
she is unwitting.  Doesn't it strike you as rather a large coincidence that Fleur 
just happened to end up working in the same place as Bill?  When she last saw 
him, Fleur was about to return to France and Bill was working in Egypt.  That she 
managed to get wind of his transfer and to get herself a job in the same place is 
either a massive stroke of luck or the result of serious planning."

"So you think Fleur is a bad guy?"  Erin asks.

"It seems like the inescapable conclusion of your theory."  Abigail says with a 
sigh.  "Which is sad, because I never got a sinister vibe from Fleur.  Oh, she was 
spoiled and vain, but not ultimately a bad person.  Still, I seem to have a bit of 
a blind spot when it comes to her - I never would have guessed that she'd make 
an appearance in OOP, or that she'd strike up a relationship with Bill."

"I still don't think Fleur is necessarily a bad person."  Erin insists.  "Why can't she 
just be infatuated with a guy?  For all we know, Bill might like Fleur as a person.  
He could have tried to stay out of her way because he saw that she was 
part-Veela, but he didn't know her then.  He might be truly happy with her."

"So was Roger Davies."  Abigail says calmly.  "Your remember Roger, right?  He 
took Fleur to the Yule Ball, and looked as though he couldn't believe his luck.  But 
when Harry overhears them talking over dinner, he repeats everything she says 
with a stupid expression and dribbles food over himself."  Abigail raises an eyebrow.   
"Is that what you want for Bill?"

Abigail




From dfran at sbcglobal.net  Wed Sep 17 07:50:51 2003
From: dfran at sbcglobal.net (deedeee88)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 07:50:51 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy
In-Reply-To: <bk7mst+ajgp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk93or+11bu8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80988

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "klaustininia" <kaustin at d...> 
wrote:
> My theory is that Percy is deeply undercover as a spy for 
Dumbledore and his parents don't know.
> 
> 1.  Someone let Dumbledore know that Harry's trail time was 
changed. It may have been Percy.

This could be true...but I see it as Percy sending word to his dad 
(see, "I'm a big ministry fan now"...

> 
> 2.  The letter was worded strangely.  Percy may have been trying to 
let Ron know what was going on but had to be careful how he put his 
words.
Is there any other writings of percy...I still think he may have 
written the letter for other reasons...


> 
> 3.  Percy left before Dumbledore stunned the Aurors,Fudge and 
Umbridge.  He may have left to help in the means of Dumbledore's 
escape.


Did he leave because he was a spy...or did he leave sooner because 
his conscience was so torn between MOM and Hogwarts....and was 
becoming too much for him.
> 
> 4.  Percy is in a position where he could easily pass information 
since Fudge thinks Percy is 100% loyal to him.

Percy could, in fact pass information....but if he was in the passing 
info business, then we'd have heard from hiim earlier regarding the 
crouch incident...IMHO


> Until proven otherwise I think Percy the undercover spy is a very 
likely possibility.


I disagree....

When looking at his namesake "percival"--re: arthurian legend...
(noting that many of the HP characters develop/have many of the same 
traits of their name sakes...

I believe percy serves other purposes...

1.  Percival is INITIALLY percieved as a fool in a great 
deal...naieve, lofty ambitions, no knowledge of what the real world 
is like, no knowlege whatsoever of what he may accept outside of 
his "home".

2.  In Arthurian legend....the initial writings of him(percival) are 
incomplete....so many authors over the ages have tried to write 
the "ending" of Percivals travels..

If JKR follows "parallel" literary characters..then it would have to 
do so for percy..(Percy is the true wild card.)..

Once thing about Percival---he plays a vital role in the quest for 
the holy grail...(ultimate enlightenment?!?!?!)....in most of the 
literature he is portrayed in.

One thing regarding Arthurian legend is that Percival sets out for 
great things in an entirely innocent way...(wow, those knights looked 
great--I want to be one..)

But the lessons he learns along the way are incorporated into his 
belief/value system....(hence in some stories he actually obtains the 
grail without help from others..)..

There is great potential that Percy MAY become a spy.....but he has 
not learned, or rather "experienced enough of the world" enough yet. 
(proof of this--he sends back his parent's Christmas gift(he could 
have done many things to portray a facade of not speaking with his 
family---but, on the other hand, writes Ron a letter giving all sorts 
of adivice.  I suppose we should note here that he is not turning hsi 
back on his entire family).  If he had kept the gift AND sent the 
letter clearly, Percy would be in another state of mind. 

Given all aspects of spys portrayed in the books thus far(Snape, 
wormtail, Ms. Figg and all those who stand "watch" over 
Harry)...Percy simply isn't ready to become a spy.  At this point in 
time--his ambition is too great, he is too disparaging of 
certain "legal" sects of the WW's society.(i.e. rules, rules, 
rules...following the rules equates to success)  If he had been 
anywhere near Harry, Ron, Hermione, George, Fred, Ginny, Dumbledor, 
McConagal,Dobby, Hagrid--all within the real of Ron's experience..he 
would have to explain how All these people associating with Harry is 
a demeaning, detrimental experience for Ron. Point is Ron's 
association with ALL of these people is not wrong..

And irregardless of all the babble above 

IF we say Percy is a spy for DD....How can Percy tell Ron to do 
something that DD ENcourages--namely his friendship with Harry. If 
something more important than merely graduating from Hogwarrs was at 
stake; DD would not let Harry and friends get away from so much.



Percy...much like Percival in Arthurian legend is too caught up in 
the "here and now", the perception of "being correct/right" in the 
eyes of those around him and is entirely too concerned about the 
minutia of it all. Just like Percival wove a suit of armor out of 
willow--looks nice but will not protect...so has percy surronded 
himself with a false sense of security(i.e. MOM will kill 
volde..irregardless of profecy, harry, DD).

I can't wait until book six to see how Percy is coming along...given 
all the different "endings" to the "Percival" story he will play some 
role in the final ending--He's just mentioned too much in the books.
 
DeeDee








From gbannister10 at aol.com  Wed Sep 17 10:34:49 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 10:34:49 -0000
Subject: Thestrals and seeing death (was: Deaths at Hogwarts?)
In-Reply-To: <bk80ju+6l3k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk9dc9+regd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80989

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "president0084" 
<president0084 at y...> wrote:


Jim:
> I don't have my book with but 1st year Harry didn't use the 
Carriage.
> 2nd year he used the flying car to get to Hogwarts, in 3rd year we 
> would all agree he was not really paying attention to his 
> suroundings. But here is the kicker, in 4th year there is no reason 
> why he shouldn't have seen them unless it didn't really count if he 
> was an infant with not been able to remember or understand what was 
> happening.
> 
> So Harry's been able to see the thestrals happened by either the 
> event of the 3rd task or seeing the memory of his mother dieing.
> 
> Don't forget Harry didn't see Quirell die, he was told by 
Dumbledore, 
> he also didn't see James die as he was in a different room.
> 

Geoff:
I think that to see the Thestrals, you have to have seen death and 
know what it was. As a child of one, Harry must have realised that 
something out of routine was happening, but would you really expect 
him to realise what death actually entailed? I would agree with your 
own suggestion that he became able to see Thestrals after Cedric's 
death.




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Wed Sep 17 10:36:22 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (B Arrowsmith)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 11:36:22 +0100
Subject: Hermione's career
Message-ID: <C7C67C0B-E8FA-11D7-9E6B-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80990

Laura:

If I may paraphrase Sirius, reading between the lines, mate, I'd
guess you're not fond of Hermione. <g>


Kneasy:
I'm  not altogether sure that we're  meant to like her. Sure, she 
resonates with a lot  of the posters, but  I think  she's meant to be 
an irritant, a speck of grit that *may* produce a pearl, but far from 
perfect for all that. The  generation before mine would refer to her as 
"a right little madam." (Note to US readers - madam does not imply she 
runs a house of ill-repute, but is getting above herself.)

Laura:
But really, I think you're being awfully hard on a 15 year old girl. 
Most of the people I knew as teenagers were burning idealists (okay, 
this was the late 60's, but still). And they've learned over the years 
to work in the real world. Isn't it better to start out with some 
vision of the way you think the world could be better and change the 
way you work to bring that about than not to have any vision at all? I 
agree that if Hermione were 35 and still acting the same way, she would 
be not only unpleasant to be around but ineffective as well. But she's 
got lots of time to learn.


Kneasy:
Quite possibly I am being hard. But as a committed observer of the 
human condition, I've reached certain conclusions. I may be wrong, but 
I  think the ideals of youth tend to become the default  mode in 
adulthood. The first reaction when presented with a possibly anomalous 
situation is  to revert to  old guidelines. Only after considerable  
argument and explanation is any modification of view considered, often 
reluctantly and with suspicion. I suppose it's natural  to try and 
validate your youthful actions. Fair enough, you may say, it's healthy 
to have open discussion. The problems arise when a proposal is  made  
that  supports your youthful instincts. Discussion is then viewed as 
irrelevant and any counter-view is obviously wrong. Dodgy, very dodgy. 
A lot of people end up being very unhappy.

Laura:
I suspect you're right about the house elf situation-there may well
be more there than meets Hermione's eye. But if it turns out she's
wrong about their status, that will be a very important lesson for
her to learn-as you say, make sure you've done your prep work before 
you charge off. And better to learn it at school than later, when she 
could, indeed, do some real damage.


Kneasy:
I  think she's  being set up to be wrong, but in the right way, if you 
get my meaning. Her friends will be able to say that she 'meant well' 
But we all know where good intentions lead.


Laura:
Not to get overly personal, but did you know what you wanted to do
with your life when you were 15? I sure didn't. Hermione's drive
for knowledge is motivated by 2 things: her continuing awareness of
her shaky status as a muggle-born in the WW, and her simple desire to 
learn. The girl loves learning! Harry loves Quidditch, Neville
loves herbology, Fred and George love creating practical joke
products, and Hermione loves soaking up as much knowledge as she can 
find. More power to her for it, I say.


Kneasy:
Oh,  yes, I had very definite goals when I was 15. They changed later 
of course, as the realities of the world impinged onto my imagined 
certainty. You find out you don't have the necessary aptitude or 
academic leanings and that a treasured career path was not what you 
imagined. It's a pity that ideals can't be modified in the same 
reasonable, realistic manner.

As to Hermione, what can she do? She'd be a disaster in the political 
field ("How can the majority be right when they disagree with me?"). 
She'd be  very unhappy.

With her love  of knowledge I see two possibilities for her:

Either she becomes an academic and writes papers and theses that  are 
never read and the WW can safely ignore and file at the back of the 
cupboard,

or, she wins the  equivalent in the WW of "Who wants to be a 
Millionaire?" and spreads the money around what she considers to be 
good causes. That would make her very happy.






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From liliana at worldonline.nl  Wed Sep 17 11:40:44 2003
From: liliana at worldonline.nl (laylalast)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 11:40:44 -0000
Subject: Thestrals and seeing death (was: Deaths at Hogwarts?)
In-Reply-To: <bk9dc9+regd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk9h7s+seh8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80991

> Jim:
> > I don't have my book with but 1st year Harry didn't use the 
> Carriage.
> > 2nd year he used the flying car to get to Hogwarts, in 3rd year 
we 
> > would all agree he was not really paying attention to his 
> > suroundings. But here is the kicker, in 4th year there is no 
reason 
> > why he shouldn't have seen them unless it didn't really count if 
he 
> > was an infant with not been able to remember or understand what 
was 
> > happening.
> > 
> > So Harry's been able to see the thestrals happened by either the 
> > event of the 3rd task or seeing the memory of his mother dieing.
> > 
> > Don't forget Harry didn't see Quirell die, he was told by 
> Dumbledore, 
> > he also didn't see James die as he was in a different room.
> > 
> 
> Geoff:
> I think that to see the Thestrals, you have to have seen death and 
> know what it was. As a child of one, Harry must have realised that 
> something out of routine was happening, but would you really expect 
> him to realise what death actually entailed? I would agree with 
your 
> own suggestion that he became able to see Thestrals after Cedric's 
> death.

Lilian:

This is what JKR said about Harry's not being able to see the 
Thestrals in the Royal Albert Hall interview:

"Email: Harry saw his parents die so why hasn't he been able to see 
the Thestrals before?
JK Rowling:  I knew I was going to get that one
that is an excellent 
question. And here is the truth. At the end of Goblet of Fire we sent 
Harry home more depressed than he had ever been leaving Howarts.  I 
knew that Thestrals were coming, and I can prove that because they're 
in the book I'd produced for Comic Relief (UK) Fantastic Beaststs and 
Where to Find Them.
These are lucky Black Winged Horses. However, if Harry had seen them 
and it had not been explained then it would cheat the reader.  So, to 
explain that to myself, I decided you had to have seen the death and 
allowed it to sink in a bit
 slowly
these creatures became solid in 
front of you. So that's how I'm going to sneak past that one."





From keltobin at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 12:07:58 2003
From: keltobin at yahoo.com (Kelly)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 12:07:58 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy
In-Reply-To: <003601c37cd9$d3f370c0$79092244@parkvl01.md.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <bk9iqu+qcqm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80992

Deirdre wrote:
> First, doesn't Undercover Percy sound like a FILK set to Alan 
O'Day's
> "Undercover Angel"?
> 
> But I digress.  I think the Percy-is-a-git theme has been building 
since
> Book One.  He's made out to be a laughing stock almost every time 
he comes
> into the book.  I was very satisfied with his portrayal in OoP 
because it
> seemed the next logical step in his development as a character.   
<SNIP>

I agree.  One thing that I have always been impressed by in these 
books is the diversity of the characters.  Saying that Percy has to 
be good because he is a Weasley is the same as saying that Sirius had 
to be secretly bad because he is a Black.  There are "bad eggs" in 
the best of families (and vice versa).  Percy's actions in OoTP were 
exactly what I expected to happen before the book came out.  

By the way, the same seems to be true in the magical creature 
arena... Dobby, Kreacher, Firenze, and Grawp all seem to be enigmas 
of their race/ breed (not sure which word is appropriate here).

But then it all comes down to DD's statement about the choices we 
make rather than birth being the deciding factor in our lives (CoS).  

Kelly




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 12:26:44 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 12:26:44 -0000
Subject: Hermione's career
In-Reply-To: <C7C67C0B-E8FA-11D7-9E6B-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bk9ju4+g4s5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80993

> Laura:
> 
> If I may paraphrase Sirius, reading between the lines, mate, I'd
> guess you're not fond of Hermione. <g>
> 
> 
> Kneasy:
> I'm  not altogether sure that we're  meant to like her. Sure, she 
> resonates with a lot  of the posters, but  I think  she's meant to 
be an irritant, a speck of grit that *may* produce a pearl, but far 
from perfect for all that. The  generation before mine would refer to 
her as "a right little madam." (Note to US readers - madam does not 
imply she runs a house of ill-repute, but is getting above herself.)
<snip> As to Hermione, what can she do? She'd be a disaster in the 
political field ("How can the majority be right when they disagree 
with me?"). She'd be  very unhappy.
> 
> With her love  of knowledge I see two possibilities for her:
> 
> Either she becomes an academic and writes papers and theses that  
are never read and the WW can safely ignore and file at the back of 
the cupboard,
> 
> or, she wins the  equivalent in the WW of "Who wants to be a 
> Millionaire?" and spreads the money around what she considers to be 
> good causes. That would make her very happy.

Laura:

I'd agree that Hermione has a bit of a chip on her shoulder still, 
although it's considerably smaller than it was when she was 11.  
She's bothered by her muggle heritage more than any of the other 
characters we see who aren't purebloods.  I don't think she feels 
inferior in the way Draco would have it; I think she feels that 
there's information and experience she's missing because she didn't 
grow up in the WW.  And, of course, she's right, and lacking 
knowledge makes her uncomfortable, especially since she knows that 
there is some knowledge that can only be gained through living and 
not through books.  She can never compensate for what she missed 
during the first 10 years of her life.  That may also play into her 
present lack of a specific career ambition-she just doesn't have 
enough experience yet of how the adult WW works.

As for her diplomacy or shortage of it, she has, imo, all the 
necessary components for leadership in the political/policy making 
world:  she's smart, she's observant, she makes connections and she 
has a good sense of what motivates the adults around her (she's weak 
on non-human creatures, to be sure.)  Again, I think the ways she 
plays Skeeter and Umbridge are masterful.  She has a pretty reliable 
sense of who's trustworthy and who isn't-for instance, she's always 
insisted that Snape is one of the good guys.   

What she doesn't have is wisdom-not surprising for a kid her age.  
You're assuming that Hermione will never change, and maybe the kids 
you knew who were like her never did.  But I have great hopes for 
her.  
> 
>Yes, she's far from perfect-but so far I haven't seen anyone in the 
books who gets much closer.  Well, being a cat person I *am* rather 
impressed by Crookshanks...<g> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From keltobin at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 12:34:47 2003
From: keltobin at yahoo.com (Kelly)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 12:34:47 -0000
Subject: Snapes' worst memory/the worst is yet to come
In-Reply-To: <bk7b4e+2ais@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk9kd7+rs4s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80994

Sandy wrote:
> hecate wrote:
> > I am enjoying this debate enormously, but have to say....none of 
> > the other chapter titles seem to be entirely from Harrys' view, 
nor 
> > do they seem cryptic. So, for the reasons seen, the WMPP incident 
> > (complete or not) would be the worst memory.
> <snip>
> > Perhaps Snape really wanted Harry to see these memories so Harry 
> > would "see" what an arrogant twerp James was as telling him was 
> > having no effect.
> 
> I think I said this before: what if "Snape's Worst Memory" refers 
not 
> to anything in the Pensieve but to how he will later regard his own 
> actions around Now-you've-really-pissed-me-off-Potter-no-more-
lessons-
> for-you?
<SNIP>

There is a lot of information in this chapter and I have begun to 
wonder if we are being thrown off by assuming the pensieve incident 
is the memory in question.  If we assume that the title of the 
chapter is telling us that Snape's Worst Memory is contained 
somewhere in the text, we can come up with quite a few 
possibilities.  I think your idea is on target.  Another possibility 
for a "worst memory" (one that throws a bit of a sinister light on 
Snape) is that he had to give Umbridge fake veritaserum, thereby 
protecting Harry and Sirius.




From quigonginger at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 12:43:41 2003
From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 12:43:41 -0000
Subject: Mungojerrie and Rumpleteazer?
In-Reply-To: <001601c37c3d$21185d40$4442983e@rcomputer>
Message-ID: <bk9ktt+ns5q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80995

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Maria Gromova" <gromm at c...> 
wrote:
> Has anyone attempted to write a filk about Fred and George to the 
song
> 'Mungojerrie and Rumpleteazer' from 'Cats'? Mungojerrie and 
Rumpleteazer are
> just like Fred and George, IMO.
> Maria.

Yup-it's on CMC's page (a laugh a minute for anyone who has a few 
hours to kill) and it's 
athttp://home.att.net/~coriolan/students/weasleys.htm#Frederic_Weasley
_and_George_Weasley

Oh, my goodness!  I finally figured out the cut and paste thing!  I 
did it!  
Sorry, as you were.
Ah, look at all the filking people. 
Ginger




From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 12:58:50 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 12:58:50 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy
In-Reply-To: <bk9iqu+qcqm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk9lqa+rthl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80996

reply to post 80992

Kelly snipped Deirdre:

I think the Percy-is-a-git theme has been building since Book One... 
I was very satisfied with his portrayal in OoP because it seemed the 
next logical step in his development as a character.   

Kelly replied (snip):
Saying that Percy has to  be good because he is a Weasley is the same 
as saying that Sirius had to be secretly bad because he is a Black.  
Percy's actions in OoTP were  exactly what I expected to happen 
before the book came out.  

hg replies:

Kelly and Deirdre are reading the series with their Occam's razors in 
hand, meaning, the simplest answer is most likely correct:  "It 
seemed the next logical step" and "exactly what I expected to happen" 
are how they see it.
As I've read the series, the simplest explanation is not usually the 
truest.  And as far as I've read most of the discussion surrounding 
Percy, I don't recall anyone using the argument that "Percy is a 
Weasley, ergo he can't be a git." 
We've seen since book 1 that Percy can be a pain in the neck, 
annoying, pedantic, strict, seeking a position of authority, etc, and 
as far as we know the Weasleys, I think it's safe to assume he's an 
anomaly in that regard.  
Kelly said that "it all comes down to DD's statement about the 
choices we  make rather than birth being the deciding factor in our 
lives (CoS)."  I totally agree.  Percy could have been faced with 
making a very difficult choice: hiding something important from his 
family and pretending to disown them, for the sake of a greater 
cause.  

I can't call your interpretation into question, Kelly or Deirdre, but 
only counterpoint that with JK, there's often more than meets the eye.

I'm moving on now, to post 80988, where  deedee88 brought up several 
issues I must address: 
 
1)DeeDee said that Percy could have sent word to his dad that the 
trial time had changed, but if you read the section, Arthur had no 
idea that the time or place had changed, and actually got Harry there 
late.  It's all in the book.

2)Regarding the strange wording of Percy's letter:  

DeeDee wondered if we had another writing sample from Percy.  Yes, 
please reread GoF p. 549, American, hardback.  
I would like to again point to my post 80225 in which I quote Percy's 
first letter, from GoF.  This writing sample is a clear divergence 
from the style or content of the letter in OoP.  Someone pointed out 
(forgive me for not recalling who) that in the same chapter, Harry is 
writing a cryptic letter to Sirius, and we can draw a parallel to 
that.  I think that's a likelihood.  DeeDee says:  "IF we say Percy 
is a spy for DD....How can Percy tell Ron to do something that DD 
ENcourages--namely his friendship with Harry."  But the inference 
with the Percy/Spy theory is that we are NOT to read the letter 
literally.

If, indeed, the Percy/Wormtail theory is correct, we can assume that 
the letter is a bit of unprovoked goading on Wormtail's part, an 
opportunity he can't pass up, much like he couldn't keep himself from 
talking with Bertha Jorkins when he bumped into her.  And that he 
would be itching to rub it in that the Death Eaters were on the loose.

3)Percy leaving Dumbledore's office:  DeeDee says, "did he leave 
because he was a spy...or did he leave sooner because his conscience 
was so torn between MOM and Hogwarts....and was becoming too much for 
him."

No, he left because Fudge told him to.  It says so in the book.  

4)DeeDee says, "Percy could, in fact pass information....but if he 
was in the passing info business, then we'd have heard from him 
earlier regarding the crouch incident."

This has been addressed also.  If indeed he has gone undercover, with 
only Dumbledore's awareness or the awareness of only Arthur and 
Dumbledore (and MAYBE Molly), it wouldn't have happened until after 
the Triwizard Tournament school year had ended, right around the time 
Arthur and Percy's fight.

All of DeeDee's points saying why Percy has potential to be a spy but 
cannot be one yet are the exact reasons anyone cites when considering 
that he IS a spy.  Returning the sweater, slamming the door, etc.

One more thing:  Percy's name isn't Percival.  It's Percy.  It's says 
so in the book, in the trial scene.

What's vexing to me is that so many of these points are answered -- 
by reading the books.

hg.






From vinnia_chrysshallie at yahoo.co.nz  Wed Sep 17 13:03:37 2003
From: vinnia_chrysshallie at yahoo.co.nz (=?iso-8859-1?q?Vinnia?=)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 01:03:37 +1200 (NZST)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Penelope (was: "Percy")
In-Reply-To: <bk7g75+70jl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030917130337.85858.qmail@web41206.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80997

Sandy aka "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at yahoo.com> wrote:

I have one question: where is Penelope Clearwater?

Now me <Vinnia>:
I think Percy dumped Penny when he joined the
Ministry. Evil or not, Percy is definitely very
ambitious. It would not do for him to have a
muggle-born girlfriend, not with Fudge as MoM.

Recall in GoF Molly said that Arthur had been held
back because he lacks "proper wizarding pride" (GoF
chapter the Parting of the ways). But he's a
pureblood, and he marries a pureblood. His only
relation to muggles is his fondness for their ways of
living. If Percy still dates Penny, and Fudge finds
out, Percy would probably still writing reports about
cauldron-bottom.

Just MHO.

Vinnia

http://search.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Search
- Looking for more? Try the new Yahoo! Search



From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Wed Sep 17 13:18:30 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 13:18:30 -0000
Subject: Prophecy placing process
In-Reply-To: <bk9387+mif2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk9mv6+int6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80998

TIA, madeyemood wrote:
> Is anyone familiar with the process by which a prophecy is funnelled 
> into a crystal sphere?

The answer (unless this world is much more weird than I give it credit 
for) is no, since it has never been mentioned in the books, and no-on 
ehere that I know can transform real prophecies into glowing balls at 
the flick of a wand. That said, I have a pretty nice theory about it.

> DD meets with Sybil, realizes he's heard a real prophecy...there's a 
> ball at the Department of Mysteries with the prophecy inside. 
> 
> What might be the steps between?
> 
> TIA,
> madeyemood

Dumbledore hears the prophecy. Say he writes it down (to not forget). 
Goes to his office and uses a recording spell that works exactly like a 
muggle recorder, only in this case the words spoken are kept in a round 
ball. Then goes to the ministry and does the same (he keeps the first 
in his office). The Ministry officials put it in the department of 
mysteries and place protection charms on it. After a while, they decide 
Harry and Voldemort are the ones the prophecy refers to and the DoM 
changes the protection so only Voldemort and Harry can remove it from 
its place without braking it.

I don't think there is anything particularly complicated about it, 
evidently. The fact that other prophecies were broken in the fight 
shows that the defenses are not that great, and since we already know 
of spells that record voice (howlers) it is not a stretch to imagine 
others.

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf





From jferer at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 14:07:26 2003
From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 14:07:26 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy
In-Reply-To: <bk9lqa+rthl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk9pqu+foc3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 80999

Hermione Gallo (hg:" As I've read the series, the simplest explanation
is not usually the truest. And as far as I've read most of the
discussion surrounding Percy, I don't recall anyone using the argument
that "Percy is a Weasley, ergo he can't be a git."

I disagree on two counts ? about simple explanations not being true,
and that no one's used the argument that "Percy's a Weasley, so he
can't be a git."

I've done it.

I cheerfully admit that the Weasley-as-mole theory is possible and
would even make sense if Percy would do it, but I doubt it. I think
Percy was a disgusting apparatchik toady sycophant this year.

I think this was/is Percy's rebellion. I'm guessing he was stung by
his family's relative poverty and blames his father for it, whose
career and status at the Ministry suffered because Arthur went his own
way. Percy was determined not to do that, so he decided to get along
by going along.

We've seen Percy go further and further down that road. As Hermione
became more and more her own person and no longer a slave to rules and
conformity (although rules still matter to her), Percy became more and
more a slave. He turned his thinking and conscience over to his bosses.

I think Percy will come back to his family, probably with the help of
an intermediary, perhaps even Dumbledore. He knows which way the wind
is blowing, and he might be having a crisis of conscience now he's
seen his boss disgraced.

Kelly, as quoted by hg:" Kelly said that "it all comes down to DD's
statement about the choices we make rather than birth being the
deciding factor in our lives (CoS)."

Hg in reply:"I totally agree. Percy could have been faced with making
a very difficult choice: hiding something important from his family
and pretending to disown them, for the sake of a greater cause."

Dumbledore's `choices we make' speech was in a very different context.
 The "Weasleys can't be bad" argument is neither provable nor
absolute, but it matters.  Few people who grow up in a loving family
like that go astray, and I believe Percy will eventually turn around.
 Hg's argument that Percy might have made the choice to alienate his
family to keep a secret vital to the good side is plausible.  I'd
prefer it to Percy being the idiot he appears.  We'll just have to
wait and see.

Jim Ferer





From jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 14:09:31 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 14:09:31 -0000
Subject: The Future Divine (a filk)
Message-ID: <bk9pur+4cn4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81000

This is a filk of the song "Quarter To Nine" from the musical
"Forty-Second Street" titled "The Future Divine."  It is the ninth
filk (not yet the penultimate filk, nor even the antepenultimate filk)
in the new filk-musical "At 12 Grimmauld Place."

This filk is dedicated to Constance Vigilance, in the hope that it
will persuade her to write some more of her delightful Wizarding
nursery rhymes.

Italics are noted by asterisks.


                      The Future Divine

SCENE:  The new Divination Professor, Firenze, explains to his class
why he doesn't set much store by teacups, pink *or* blue, palmistry,
or the crystal ball, and relies almost exclusively on Astrology. 

FIRENZE:
Divinations I can find high up in the night sky, 
Oracles to help answer the question, "Why?"
>From morning until twilight,
My talent doesn't thrive, 
But I know it gets dark at eight forty-five..

The stars are gonna twinkle and shine
This evening,
About a quarter to nine.
The planets, too 
Are gonna give us the sign 
Above us, and we'll the future divine.

I know I won't be late,
'Cause at half past eight 
I'm gonna hurry there.
I'll be waitin' for the show to start,
Waitin' for foreknowledge to impart.                   
And then a prophecy'll be mine,
This evening, we will the future divine.

I know I won't be late, 
'Cause at half past eight 
I'm gonna hurry there.
I'll await the signs of revelations,
Nebulas, stars and constellations.
To help the time-to-come to define,
This evening, we will the future divine.

-Haggridd





From rsteph1981 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 14:10:58 2003
From: rsteph1981 at yahoo.com (Rebecca Stephens)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 07:10:58 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Undercover Percy
In-Reply-To: <bk9iqu+qcqm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030917141058.91909.qmail@web20005.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81001


--- Kelly <keltobin at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Deirdre wrote:
> > First, doesn't Undercover Percy sound like a FILK
> set to Alan 
> O'Day's
> > "Undercover Angel"?
> > 
> > But I digress.  I think the Percy-is-a-git theme
> has been building 
> since
> > Book One.  He's made out to be a laughing stock
> almost every time 
> he comes
> > into the book.  I was very satisfied with his
> portrayal in OoP 
> because it
> > seemed the next logical step in his development as
> a character.   
> <SNIP>
> 
> I agree.  One thing that I have always been
> impressed by in these 
> books is the diversity of the characters.  Saying
> that Percy has to 
> be good because he is a Weasley is the same as
> saying that Sirius had 
> to be secretly bad because he is a Black.  There are
> "bad eggs" in 
> the best of families (and vice versa).  Percy's
> actions in OoTP were 
> exactly what I expected to happen before the book
> came out.  

You know, the majority of people are not saying Percy
has to be good because he's a Weasley.  We are saying
that the he seems vastly out of character in OOTP and
this is a possible, or probable, reason.


Rebecca

=====
http://wychlaran.tripod.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Wed Sep 17 14:23:57 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 14:23:57 -0000
Subject: Prophecy placing process
In-Reply-To: <bk9mv6+int6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk9qpt+9vcl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81002

>> TIA, madeyemood wrote:
>> Is anyone familiar with the process by which a prophecy is 
funnelled into a crystal sphere? <<

> Grey Wolf responded:
> I have a pretty nice theory about 
it. Dumbledore hears the prophecy. Say he writes it down (to not 
forget). Goes to his office and uses a recording spell that works 
exactly like a muggle recorder, only in this case the words spoken
are kept in a round ball. Then goes to the ministry and does the same 
(he keeps the first in his office). The Ministry officials put it in 
the department of mysteries and place protection charms on it. After
a 
while, they decide Harry and Voldemort are the ones the prophecy 
refers to and the DoM changes the protection so only Voldemort and 
Harry can remove it from its place without braking it.
I don't think there is anything particularly complicated about it, 
evidently. The fact that other prophecies were broken in the fight 
shows that the defenses are not that great, and since we already know 
of spells that record voice (howlers) it is not a stretch to imagine 
others.
> Grey Wolf <


I had always imagined that either the seer's memory of the prophecy 
was extracted as in our pensieve scenes and deposited in a magically 
spelled crystal ball, or that the original prophecy itself was made 
with the use of a crystal ball (as Professor Trelawney mentioned in 
her 1st POA class) which then contained it. I like the latter.

Either way, my assumption was that this crystal ball would contain
the prophecy; the memory of the prophecy would not remain with the 
seer at all. Thus, LV has not gone after Trelawney to our knowledge, 
because she doesn't even remember the prophecy.

Since they are held in crystal balls in the MoM, we know that 
prophecies exist outside the seer who delivers them. I think that 
during this "channeling," the seer is merely putting into words the 
prophecy as best they can see it. Obviously not easy. Or complete. I 
think the prophecy in its pure form (as in the crystal ball) is 
actually *specific* about its subjects. So Harry and LV's prophecy
was *always* about them, but Trelawney couldn't see that clearly when 
she delivered it.

But since The Prophecy *is* specifically about HP/LV, the crystal
ball that holds it *could* have been accessible only to them from the 
very moment it was uttered by Trelawney. That would be part of the 
magic of the crystal ball--it responds only to the true subjects of 
the prophecy it contains. Perhaps even to the point of showing their 
initials on its label.

Of course, the prophecy was never "read" by Harry before the crystal 
ball broke, so there are still many unanswered questions surrounding 
it.

-Remnant




From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 17 14:36:15 2003
From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 14:36:15 -0000
Subject: Brand-New Beginning (filk)
Message-ID: <bk9rgv+6m64@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81003

Brand-New Beginning (GoF, Chap. 37)

The final A!Kedavra filk to the tune of Beautiful Morning (reprise), 
from Rodgers and Hammerstein's Oklahoma!

Dedicated to all HP filk mavens everywhere


THE SCENE: Platform 9.75. HARRY, GEORGE & FRED emerge from the 
Hogwarts Express. The platform is otherwise deserted.

HARRY:
Oh, it's a brand-new beginning
It's the dawn of a new day 
I've won a thousand galleons
I'm going to give them away

I want new jokes and pranks for the fifth book
I want new jokes and pranks for the fifth book
I'm facing Delores and Voldemort, too
So I'll be in need of a good gag or two

ALL THREE:
Oh, it's a brand-new beginning
The onset of many a Wheeze
Gryffindor will be delighted
Hermy will be none too pleased

GEORGE & FRED:
There's Extendible Ears in the fifth book
There'll be Portable Swamps in the fifth book
A Skiving Snackbox that will help make you sick
And we'll make our grand exit `midst pyrotechnics

ALL THREE:
It's all to be in our fifth book
Full of both sorrow and cheer.
Readers, there's only one problem
You'll have to wait for three years
You'll have to wait for three years!

(Several seconds of silence)

GEORGE (spoken): Is this it?

HARRY: At the end of a musical, isn't there usually something more ? 
uh - ceremonial?

FRED: Yeah, like a curtain falling, applause, bouquets of roses for 
the stars
.

(Enter SIRIUS BLACK and Buckbeak, the former distributing sheet music)

SIRIUS: Yes, you're absolutely right, lads, but yours wasn't the true 
finale. We decided that something more grandiose was in order, so 
we've shamelessly ripped off an idea used by Veresna Ussep in her CoS 
musical

http://home.att.net/~coriolan/soundofmagic.htm#JKR

 
..OK, take it from the top
.

J!K. Rowling (to the title tune of Oklahoma! ? reprise)

(The entire cast of GoF swarms out of the Hogwarts Express, right 
down to the Skrewts, dragons, and the Sphinx. Setting aside their 
differences for a moment, Slytherins join hands with Gryffindors, 
Death Eaters unite with OOP members to pay tribute to Rowling)


SNAPE (music):
Gonna bottle fame up, glory be a-brewin'

HERMIONE
Pages by the hundreds oft to be reviewin'

DUMBLEDORE & McGONAGALL
Architect of Hogwarts who gives us employ

IRISH & BULGARIAN QUIDDITCH TEAM & ALL ATTENDEES OF THE QWC
Author of the game that brings such joy

VOLDEMORT & DEATH EATERS
Plen'y of turns and plen'y of twists!

GRYFFINDORS
Plen'y of shocks and plen'y of ships!.

ALL
J!K. Rowling, when your quill comes sweepin' down the page
As your epic quest meets ev'ry test
Of a work that will transcend the age!
J!K. Rowling, we live due to your creative spark
Ranging from the heights of sheer delight
To the bleakest depths of evil's dark.
 
We know we are Pantheon-bound 
And for centuries we'll be renowned!
And when we say 
Yeeow! Ayipioeeay!
We're only sayin'
You're doin' fine, J!K. Rowling
J!K. Rowling, One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, Seven!
J!K. Rowling!
Yeeow!

(Applause. Bouquets of roses presented to all the stars. Curtain 
falls)

    -	CMC

HARRY POTTER FILKS 
http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm 

The complete musical will be posted on HPF when I do the next update. 
The first six songs (first 6 to be written, not first six 
narratively) are on the New Filks page on the link above.





From hpfanmatt at gmx.net  Wed Sep 17 14:50:25 2003
From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 14:50:25 -0000
Subject: Snape-Harry Detente & Dumbledore
In-Reply-To: <bk8efr+42p4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk9sbh+9eb2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81004

Just a little discrete piece here; I'll jump in 
on the rest of the thread in a separate post....

--- "Karen" asked (with reference to the Pensieved
Snape memory of the 5th-yr bullying incident):

> [W]hy was [Snape] so embarrassed by that? I 
> understand needing to remove the memory to help 
> him control his anger, but if the memory was 
> removed, why was Snape still angry about it? 
> If the memory is gone, wouldn't the emotions 
> connected with it also be gone? 

We don't know exactly what happens when Snape
(or DD in GF) needs to enter the Pensieve world
to pull Harry back out.  In GF, Dumbledore
seems (from Harry's POV) to show up next to him
in the memory scene.  

By analogy then, in order to pull Harry out in
OP, Snape may need to dive into the memory
himself.  If, in doing so, he re-experienced
the feelings he had during the original incident,
it would help explain his difficulty in 
controlling his anger.  (There is a counter-
argument that viewing the memory in the Pensieve
is supposed to give the viewer distance -- hence
DD's comment in GF about examining things from
a more objective perspective -- but the exper-
ience may differ when the viewer actually enters
the Pensieved memory.)

Going back to Snape's trouble controlling his
anger, it occurs to me that we see Snape lose
control rather often around Harry *for someone
who takes such evident pride in controlling his
emotions*.  Possibly, that is part of what so
infuriates him about Harry.  Snape is able to
keep his cool around LV, for goodness' sake, and
yet this little fledgling wizard is able to get 
Snape's goat every time.  

(OK, "every time" is rather a gross exaggeration,
but I'm thinking of the scene near the end of
PA when Snape is reduced to near-blithering, 
and if I went through in more detail, I feel sure
I'd find at least once per book where Snape is
goaded into doing something that he can't 
possibly be proud of.)





From liliana at worldonline.nl  Wed Sep 17 15:02:53 2003
From: liliana at worldonline.nl (laylalast)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 15:02:53 -0000
Subject: Mistaken identity - part three
In-Reply-To: <040401c37c63$51fa23a0$0a02a8c0@DianaPC>
Message-ID: <bk9t2t+57gf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81005

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Diana Williams" <diana at s...> 
wrote:
> From: "laylalast" <liliana at w...>
> 
> And then on to the age of Bertha at the time of the kissing scene:
> 
> >"K":
> I think it's important to remember the age of Bertha at the time she
> was snooping as we will see later.
> 
> GoF/Ch 30 Instantly, a figure rose out of it, a plump, scowling girl
> of about sixteen...
> 
> Lilian:
> 
> This is what Harry sees, he sees a girl who HE guesses is about
> sixteen. That does not set it as canon that Bertha was actually
> sixteen at the moment. She might have been younger, she might have
> been older. 
<snip>
 
> Me (Diana):
> Yes, but in GOF, Sirius states that Bertha was a couple of years 
older than
> they were.  Even if Bertha was in her 7th year and, assuming 
the "couple"
> means 2 so that Snape/Sirius/James were in their 5th year, we know 
from PoA
> that the "prank" took place in their 6th year.  Bertha was gone by 
then.
> And I doubt that Sirius would wait a whole year to get around to 
taking
> revenge on Snape by setting up the prank.
> 
> Diana W.

Lilian:

In GOF, Sirius actually says that Bertha was "a few years above your 
dad and me." Whether he refers to her age or classes above him, I 
find difficult to tell.

In Part Two of my thread Mistaken Identity I speculated that the 
Prank could have taken place shortly after 'Snape's worst memory' so 
at the end of the fifth year. Why? Because I have checked POA (and 
also PS/SS and GOF) on whether the Prank took actually in their 5th 
or 6th year, but all I could find was Snape saying to Dumbledore that 
Sirius was sixteen when trying to kill him (Snape).  
Students (Hermione being the only exception we know of) are 11 when 
coming to Hogwarts, so they are 15 when starting their 5th year. 
During the 5th year most students will celebrate their 16th birthday, 
so it is not unlikely that Sirius was 16 when sitting his OWLS 
(Harry's identification of his father as 15-year old in Snape's 
memory is IMO based on the fact that he himself is still 15). 
Examples that come to mind: Angelina, who entered her name in the 
Goblet while in her sixth year, Ron's birthday (March 1), Gred and 
Forge turning 17 too late to enter the TWC.

But my take on the timeline for the events to take place is:
Halfway June 5th year: Snape's worst memory and the kissing scene 
with Florence directly after;
Summer holidays: Snape wading in happy memories of Florence while 
Sirius is brooding over Bertha's gossip (who has now left Hogwarts) 
at his not so-pleasant home;
September/October 6th year: Sirius lures Snape into the Prank.

If you can direct me to the passage in the books where it is stated 
for sure that the Prank took place in their 6th year at Hogwarts, I'm 
grateful. I haven't managed until now, although I've seen in the 
Lexicon that the timeline also places the Prank in the 6th year (why 
oh why?)

Lilian, who has acquired a vessel and a snazzy name for it and even 
has discovered what CARP's are!




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Wed Sep 17 15:28:21 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 15:28:21 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy 
In-Reply-To: <bk9lqa+rthl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bk9uil+9rfs@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81006

First I wanted to comment on post 80982 from Deidre saying that 
the "Percy as a git" theme has been building since Book 1, and Jim in 
post 80999 who stated:

"We've seen Percy go further and further down that road. As Hermione
became more and more her own person and no longer a slave to rules and
conformity (although rules still matter to her), Percy became more and
more a slave. He turned his thinking and conscience over to his 
bosses."

That is exactly how I first read Percy's character in OOTP, and it's 
*exactly* the reason why I think the "Percy as a Git" theme should 
come into question now. 

We are being led to believe Percy's character in OOTP was just the 
natural progression for him.  Not too long ago, we were led to 
believe Snape was the bad guy in PS/SS, Draco was the heir of 
Slytherin in COS, Sirius was a murderous traitor in POA, and Fake!
Moody was really on Harry's side in GOF.  None of these proved true 
and I was surprised every single time (well, maybe not with Draco!).

His personality as a git *has* been building: He was definitely a 
sufferable know-it-all and toady in GOF, and it's very possible the 
humiliation he suffered from the inquiry over Crouch, Sr. was enough 
to send him over the edge and into Fudge's office. 

There are also omissions and other evidence that don't add up, and 
could be explained by Undercover!Percy (not all ideas are mine, just 
summarizing this thread and "Percy" thread):

1.  How did Percy get promoted after an inquiry at work over the 
Crouch, Sr. affair?

2.  Who notified Dumbledore about the change in trial date?

3. The Letter--option 1: Code Letter. The Letter to Ron is sent at 
night when Percy states Ron will be "alone." Huh? Since when? No, 
night is the time when no teachers or high inquisitors are around. 
The Letter also contains odd phrases, discrepancies (i.e., Umbridge's 
role at Hogwarts) and happens to appear in the same chapter where 
Harry sends a "code letter" to Sirius. 

4.  The Letter--option 2:  Tampered with by Umbridge.  Even though 
she hasn't passed her decree to that effect yet, Umbridge is already 
trying to tamper with mail (i.e., the dung bomb tip to Filch when he 
tries to catch Harry sending his letter to Sirius).  

5. Isn't it interesting Percy's Letter is sent after Harry's Letter 
and before Sirius appears in the fire? Percy is in Fudge's office and 
knows that if he wants to send a letter to Hogwarts, now is the time 
before communication is essentially cut off. And he would also know 
Umbridge might already be trying to intercept mail.

6.  Percy's respect for Dumbledore--canon.

7. Percy and Penelope--we are given a clue she's Muggle-born in COS 
since she is petrified (it could be wrong-place, wrong-time, but we 
don't know). "Percy the git" theory would say he broke up with her to 
further his grab for power. Wouldn't we hear about that though, as 
further evidence for his complete break with his past life and 
continuing "git-ness?" What better example could F/G give for Percy 
going over the edge than him breaking up with a girl because she's a 
Muggle. 

I'm sure there's more--hg chime in, please--but this is getting long 
and looking suspiciously like a TBAY...I'll close with a good quote 
by hermionegallo:

> Kelly said that "it all comes down to DD's statement about the 
> choices we  make rather than birth being the deciding factor in our 
> lives (CoS)."  I totally agree.  Percy could have been faced with 
> making a very difficult choice: hiding something important from his 
> family and pretending to disown them, for the sake of a greater 
> cause.  

Jen Reese






From meltowne at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 15:59:37 2003
From: meltowne at yahoo.com (meltowne)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 15:59:37 -0000
Subject: Prophecy placing process
In-Reply-To: <bk9qpt+9vcl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bka0d9+cmr2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81007

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "boyd_smythe" 
<boyd.t.smythe at f...> wrote:

> But since The Prophecy *is* specifically about HP/LV, the crystal
> ball that holds it *could* have been accessible only to them from 
the 
> very moment it was uttered by Trelawney. That would be part of the 
> magic of the crystal ball--it responds only to the true subjects of 
> the prophecy it contains. Perhaps even to the point of showing 
their 
> initials on its label.
> 
> Of course, the prophecy was never "read" by Harry before the 
crystal 
> ball broke, so there are still many unanswered questions 
surrounding 
> it.

The protection based on the subjects of the prophesy only apply to 
removing it from the shelves.  Neville was the one who carried around 
the department of mysteries - or are you suggesting that Neville is 
really the subject of the prophesy?

I doubt LV would have had any of his "messengers" try to listen to 
the prophesy - he only wanted them to deliver it to him, and it would 
respond to him.  

Melinda




From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Sep 17 16:02:29 2003
From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?udder=5Fpen=5Fdragon?=)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 17:02:29 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione's career (will she survive?)
In-Reply-To: <bk9ju4+g4s5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030917160230.10814.qmail@web60203.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81008



jwcpgh <jwcpgh at yahoo.com> wrote:
<snip> 

U_P_D

I have snipped everything because I am far from certain that she will survive book 7. It is certain that Harry will have to face Voldermort before the end of book 7. I do not see him dooing this on his own, IMO if he does he is dead and LV isn't and that won't be a satisfactory conclusion for anybody. If the trio face LV (with or without additional assistance) then any of many outcomes are open. Who survives can be a new Subject, if we could know who was at the final showdown.

If she has one, I see Hermione's career as becoming a professor, teacher, Hogwarts Head. I don't see what else would suit or satisify her, except maybe Minister of Magic after those H'wts H'd.

Udder pen Dragon

 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



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. 



---------------------------------
Want to chat instantly with your online friends??Get the FREE Yahoo!Messenger

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 16:02:36 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 16:02:36 -0000
Subject: Prophecy placing process
In-Reply-To: <bk9mv6+int6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bka0is+eg93@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81009

Grey Wolf wrote:
> Dumbledore hears the prophecy. Say he writes it down (to not 
> forget). Goes to his office and uses a recording spell that works 
> exactly like a muggle recorder, only in this case the words spoken 
> are kept in a round ball. Then goes to the ministry and does the 
> same (he keeps the first in his office). The Ministry officials put 
> it in the department of mysteries and place protection charms on 
> it. After a while, they decide Harry and Voldemort are the ones the 
> prophecy refers to and the DoM changes the protection so only 
> Voldemort and Harry can remove it from its place without braking it.
<snip>

I have talked myself out of and back into your interpretation 
(mostly) since I started this reply; the out of is because the notion 
that there is a "recorder" leaves me with the impression that what 
we'd see if that were true is Dumbledore, who was the person speaking 
to the recorder, recounting what he saw and heard. But then I thought 
of the Pensieve; what we saw when the globes were broken in the MoM 
is exactly like Dumbledore's recreation of Trelawny's prophecy in the 
Pensieve: the "Star Wars/Princess Leia action figure" of the actual 
seer, animated and intoning the actual prediction. Ergo: the (any) 
Pensieve *is* the recording device, and the media, the globe, is the 
result of a particular spell.

Doesn't there also almost have to be a spell allowing any prophecy to 
be "previewed," without having to break the sphere to see what's 
inside? Wouldn't there almost have to be? I mean, what if the fire 
sprinkler system went off in the prophesy room and all the labels 
were washed off (I know, but I hope you get my point. And how was the 
label changed to reflect Harry's name once Voldemort had "marked" him 
if no known individual other than Voldemort was authorized to touch 
it then without suffering madness? I think someone else asked this, 
but if there were any satisfactory answers, I missed them.)

A passage about the prophesy also reminds me of another debate. 
Dumbledore says, "The thing that smashed was merely the record of the 
prophesy kept by the Department of Mysteries. But the prophecy was 
made to somebody, and that person has the means of recalling it 
perfectly." We are shown that means: the Pensieve. Taken as a whole, 
that's a pretty solid argument that Pensieve thoughts (like 
MWPP/Snape) have a higher degree of accuracy than just random 
memories; it would (or could be said to) argue against the notion 
that Pensieve thoughts or memories are skewed by the user's biases.

I had another thought (amazing considering that my head is full of 
gunk): what was it again...oh, yes--when Trelawny made her first 
prophesy, Dumbledore was there. Then when Trelawny made her second 
prophesy, Harry was there. I think the prophesies make themselves 
heard to or are triggered by the presence of persons who are/who are 
to be instrumental/smack dab center stage in the events to come. And 
if that's true, there are some ramifications...like, are they 
*warnings*? What is the magic behind them? That's a mystery I want 
answered by the end of Book 7.

Sandy aka "msbeadsley" who knows she is in arrears with some 
replies/responses but who is a bit under the weather and putting off 
anything not immediately inspiring




From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Wed Sep 17 16:16:53 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 16:16:53 -0000
Subject: MAGIC DISHWASHER (TBAY INTRO): Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die!
Message-ID: <bka1dm+to3u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81010

MAGIC DISHWASHER: Spying Game Philosophy. The Phoenix must die. 

(with TBAY introduction ? if you hate TBAY, skip down to the 
asterisks)

The sun was setting over Theory Bay, and the Safe House was holding 
a barbecue in honour of its shiny new canons. Between canon for 
Dumbledore's undercover agents in the MoM, Dumbledore's announcement 
that he had a plan, the on-screen discovery that Snape is a superb 
actor, positive proof that Dumbledore has been deliberately 
withholding information from Harry and the DE's using the giants to 
try and kill Hagrid, the MD team felt it had something to celebrate. 

Indeed, the rather bemused guests had earlier been treated to an 
impromptu conga line as the Magic Dishwasher Defence Team had danced 
around the house chanting `Albus has a plan, hey! Albus has a plan, 
hey!'

But now the barbeque was in full swing. Grey Wolf had gently placed 
Sneaky, the Safe House Elf, on a lounger so that she could sleep off 
the celebratory ButterBeers. A suspicious looking character called 
Kneasey was eating all the burgers he could lay his hands on, and a 
small boy with dark hair and a dripping nose was managing to smear 
the chocolate he was eating all over his face, hands and hair. 
Pippin had refused the bun, but accepted a very rare burger, Captain 
Cindy was complaining to Derannimer about the lack of Bangs in OOP 
(`she's saving them up, you wait and see. Book Six will have the 
bloodiest ambush *ever*') and Melody was explaining that she was so 
old enough to drink Firewhisky, and would everyone stop offering her 
butterbeer. 

Pip!Squeak, meanwhile, was snoring on another lounger. Occasionally 
a guest would tiptoe too close, and Melody would whisper `Shh! She's 
really tired!'

Kneasey , Grey Wolf and Pippin meanwhile, were having an argument.

"Pippin, I do not understand why you still object to MD,' said 
Grey. `Of all the pre Hurricane Jo theories, MD has probably had the 
most new supporting canon. The Safe House is stronger. We may have 
to build new rooms to put the canon into.'

Pippin made a slurping noise as she sucked her rare 
hamburger. `That's the point, Grey. MD has so much canon support 
that it's been pretty well superseded.`

`Superseded?' Wolf growled. Pippin sniffed. Vampires and werewolves 
aren't usually scared of each other. Though they often don't get on.

`Superseded,' she said firmly. `Events have moved beyond you. It's 
no longer important whether Dumbledore intended Pettigrew to escape 
to Voldemort. The question of whether he stopped Sirius being 
cleared is now dead. Voldemort has shown that he's not as stupid as 
he looks. Whether the DE's supported him before his return or not, 
they're certainly supporting him to the death now. You are 
superseded. You need a new theory. One that takes Order of the 
Phoenix into account.'

`Order of the Phoenix!' shouted Pip!Squeak suddenly, leading to not 
a little confusion in those guests who had difficulty telling Pip!
Squeak from Pippin. Then Pip!Squeak turned over on the lounger and 
snored some more.

`I don't think being suspicious of Dumbledore is likely to be 
superseded,' rasped Kneasey. `Dumbledore is up to something.'

`Suspicious is one thing. Subversion is another,' said Pippin

`This, from the creator of Ever-so-Evil Lupin?' rumbled Grey Wolf.

`How is suspicion of Dumbledore subversion?' said Kneasey. `He 
treats Harry like a chess piece. He has an agenda.'
 
Pip!Squeak seemed to be in the middle of some kind of nightmare. She 
struggled on the lounger, and was heard to mutter `Agenda. 
Dumbledore's agenda.' 

Grey gazed at her sadly. `She's been working too hard, you know,' he 
said. 'It's DOOMSDAY. (Defenders Of Ol' MD Serve Duties Against 
Yahoomort )'.

Suddenly Pip!Squeak sat bolt upright and shouted out `It's a bloody 
PHOENIX! It's a PHOENIX! Why didn't I see it!` She paused. `Who gave 
Melody that Firewhisky!'

A stunned silence descended as Pip!Squeak started to explain


*********************************************************************

Warning: this post requires a cup of tea (or other refreshing 
drink), biscuits/cookies according to nationality, and ideally, 
copies of all five books. It's long.  Oh boy, is it long.

*********************************************************************

In previous posts [see 
http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/faq/hypotheticalley.html#md, post 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/39662 and post 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/40044 ], the 
Magic Dishwasher Defence Team has presented the list with the idea 
that things may not be as they seem. Characters may be acting 
according to an agenda that Harry does not understand. Especially, 
they may deliberately mislead Harry (and by implication, the reader).

Harry is being misled. He thinks that Voldemort is the real threat 
to the WW. Voldemort will destroy the Wizarding World as we know it.

And he's wrong.



This post is slightly different in style to the two previous Spying 
Game posts. They examined character agendas, and series backstory by 
a detailed examination of individual scenes. In this I am examining 
character philosophies rather than scenes. 

However, the MD approach (which is close to Stanislavskian analysis 
of characters) is in operation. See 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/message/12757 for a 
detailed explanation; but briefly, for the duration of this post we 
are no longer looking at the Potterverse from the outside, in. 
Instead we are looking at the Potterverse from the inside viewpoint 
of the characters. And they don't know they're in a book about Harry 
Potter. ;-)

 
**Canon for what Voldemort wants**

`he was getting' himself power, all right. [snip] He was takin' 
over. `Course, some stood up to him - an' he killed `em.' [Hagrid, 
PS/SS Ch. 4 p.45 UK paperback].

`a name that I knew wizards everywhere would one day fear to speak, 
when I had become the greatest sorcerer in the world!' [Diary!
Riddle, CoS Ch. 17, p.231 UK paperback]

`he was taking over everywhere! Wh-what was there to be gained by 
refusing him!' [Peter Pettigrew, PoA, Ch. 19 p.274 UK paperback]

`
the steps I took, long ago, to guard myself against mortal death 
[Voldemort, GoF, Ch. 33 p.562 UK paperback]

`I shall have all my devoted servants returned to me, and an army of 
creatures whom all fear 
' [Voldemort, GoF, Ch.33, p.564 UK 
paperback]

`[Dumbledore] has insisted [snip] that You-Know-Who [snip] is 
recruiting followers once more for a fresh attempt to seize power.' 
[Daily Prophet, OOP, Ch. 38, p. 745 UK hardback]

`Voldemort had the right idea [snip], the purification of the 
wizarding race, getting rid of muggle borns, and having pure-bloods 
in charge.' [Sirius Black explaining that his parents and brother 
supported Voldemort, OOP, Ch. 6,  p. 104]

`There is nothing worse than death
' [Voldemort, OOP, Ch. 36, p.718 ]

So, Voldemort believes in immortality, in fear, in taking over, and 
in purifying the wizarding race. He especially believes in power. A 
one-man, one vote system where he's the man, and he has the vote. 
Forever. 

Note that the only destruction mentioned is the destruction that 
results from opposing El Presidente. Oops, sorry, wrong wanna-be 
fascist dictator. ;-) The Dark Lord. If you're a pure-blood, or 
even `pure-enough' you might well think that you have a lot more to 
lose than gain by refusing to obey Voldemort.

Is this starting to remind anyone of 1930's Germany? Where Hitler 
was elected into power? And when, incidentally, Sir Oswald `Tom' 
Mosley was also setting himself up as the leader of British Fascism.

Keep that thought in mind, and remember that Hitler did *not* want 
to destroy Germany. That bit was a slight mistake. What Hitler 
actually wanted was a Thousand-Year-Reich, which would have power 
over the non-Aryan world. And he would have power over the Reich.

Now look at Voldemort's opponents outside the Order of the Phoenix.

Barty Crouch Sr. Pure blood family. Wants Minister of Magic post. 
Sent Sirius to Azkaban without trial. Authorised use 
of `unforgivables' against DE's. Practiced moral rectitude in public 
by sending his criminal son to Azkaban, then used his position as 
important Ministry member to successfully plot a prison break out. 
Modified Bertha Jorkin's memory so drastically she suffered 
permanent brain damage. Has `no use for a servant who forgets what 
is due to her master' [GoF, Ch. 9, p.124]

Cornelius Fudge. Pure blood family. Dumbledore describes him as 
placing too much importance on purity of blood. Approves (and 
refuses to remove) Dementors at Azkaban, a prison regime that 
results in widespread madness and high suicide rates. Prejudiced 
against half giants. Willing to make up `decrees' as he goes along. 
Willing to arrest and imprison Hagrid without trial. Willing to 
convict Harry on no evidence, and to change the time and place of 
the trial so his defence lawyer/supporter and possibly even the 
defendant doesn't attend [OOP Ch.8 p.128]. Ignores evidence of the 
return of Voldemort because it might threaten his power. 

Is this a struggle between good and evil? Or is this a power 
struggle between people who basically think the same way? Neither 
Crouch nor Fudge have any problem with the `what I say goes' style 
of government (a government of men, not of laws). Neither have any 
problem with `pure bloods on top' [I'm inferring that Barty Jr. got 
his `purebloods rule OK' notions from Daddy]. The main problems with 
Voldemort are that a) he's a bit violent and b) *I* want to be in 
charge, not You-Know-Bloody-Who.

This is not dissimilar to the way Sirius describes his parents. They 
agree with Voldemort. They just got cold feet about what Voldemort 
was prepared to do to get power [OOP. Ch.6 p. 104 ]. Sirius 
describes the WW as having `quite a few people' who agreed with 
Voldemort.

[Note to non-Brits. Brits have a slang of reversing large 
quantities. `Quite a few' translates as `a substantial number'. If 
you hear a Brit telling you `he does have one or two supporters, you 
know', it translates as `you do realise 90% of the country is with 
him?']

How common is racism in the WW? The most obvious racist at Hogwarts 
is Draco, whose father is a friend of the Minister for Magic.  Ron 
shrinks away from a werewolf he's known for a year. Fred and George 
tell Hermione quite seriously that House Elves are happy. Mr Diggory 
doesn't even dignify Winky with a name.  Muggle liaison is regarded 
as such a low status job, applicants only need *one* OWL. The nice 
Mr Weasley regards Muggles with incredible condescension, and even 
Harry's beloved Sirius sees Kreacher as `a servant unworthy of much 
interest or notice' [OOP Ch. 37 p. 735].

Note that while the House Elves at Hogwarts are well treated, *all 
three* major house elf characters are treated badly when *outside* 
Hogwarts.

Meanwhile, the centaurs are quite clearly deeply pissed off with 
humans, the Goblins have revolted regularly, and the Giants are 
having genocide practiced on them by being forced into areas smaller 
than they can cope with.

The wizarding world is also deeply corrupt. It is a world where `who 
you know' gets you off criminal charges. We're supposed to be 
shocked by Willy Widdershins trading information for a reduction in 
his sentence [OOP] ? but the nice Mr Weasley rushes off to Mad-eye 
Moody's house to reduce `Improper Use of Magic' to `Exploding 
dustbins' as a `favour'.[GoF] And unwittingly lets Fake!Moody into 
Hogwarts. Another of Arthur's `favours' includes `smoothing things 
over' for Ludo's brother (which got his family the Top Box tickets). 
[GoF] And he writes loopholes into the law to benefit himself. [CoS]

Arthur clearly doesn't have the faintest notion that these things 
might be wrong. Sirius doesn't see Kreacher as a `real person' who 
has feelings just as he does. That is how deep the racism and the 
corruption has gone. Everyone in the WW is affected by it. Even 
Hermione, herself muggle born, has one or two worrying comments 
about how her parents can `understand' concepts like `prefect'. [OOP 
Ch. 9 p. 151]

Voldemort fits right in, really, doesn't he? Voldemort isn't an 
opponent of the WW ethos ? he's its logical result. 

And this is the society that Harry is supposed to risk his life to 
preserve?

No. As Kneasey so rightly points out, Dumbledore has an agenda.



**Canon for what Dumbledore wants**

`They wanted Dumbledore fer Minister, o'course, but he'd never leave 
Hogwarts' [Hagrid, PS/SS Ch. 5 p.51 ]

`I see myself holding a pair of thick, woollen socks.' [in the 
Mirror of Erised] [Dumbledore, PS/SS Ch. 12 p. 157  ]


 the Stone was really not such a wonderful thing. As much money and 
life as you could want! The two things most humans would choose 
above all - the trouble is, humans do have a knack of choosing 
precisely those things which are worst for them.' [Dumbledore, PS/SS 
Ch. 17 p. 215]

`Father's always said Dumbledore's the worst thing that happened to 
this place. He loves muggle-borns.' [Draco, CoS Ch. 12 p.166]

`Take him away an' the Muggle-borns won' stand a chance!' [Hagrid 
about Dumbledore, CoS, Ch. 14 p.195]

`no Dementor will cross the threshold of this castle while I am 
Headmaster.' [Dumbledore, PoA Ch. 9 p.125]

`Dumbledore, who was of course working tirelessly against You-Know-
Who
' [Fudge, PoA Ch. 10 p.152]

`But then Dumbledore came to Hogwarts and he was sympathetic.' [to 
Lupin the werewolf attending Hogwarts] [Lupin, PoA, Ch. 18, p.258]

`I have no power to make other men see the truth, or to overrule the 
Minister for Magic' [Dumbledore, PoA Ch. 21, p. 287]

`Trusts people, he does. Give's `em second chances 
 tha's what sets 
him apart from other Heads, see. He'll accept anyone at Hogwarts, 
s'long as they've got the talent. Knows people can turn out OK even 
if their families weren' 
 well 
 all that respectable.' [Hagrid, 
GoF Ch. 24 p.395]

`your talk of closer international wizarding links, of rebuilding 
old ties, of forgetting old differences 
' [Karkaroff, GoF Ch. 28, 
p.487]

`I read the muggle newspapers, unlike most of my Ministry friends 
[Dumbledore, GoF Ch. 30 p.522]

`that champion of commoners, of Mudbloods and Muggles, Albus 
Dumbledore' [Voldemort, GoF Ch. 33]

`let you hire werewolves, or keep Hagrid, or decide what to teach 
your students, without reference to the Ministry' [Fudge, GoF, Ch. 
36 P.615]

`The only one against whom I intend to work is Lord Voldemort. If 
you are against him, then we remain, Cornelius, on the same side.' 
[Dumbledore to Fudge, GoF Ch. 36 P. 615]

`Time is short, and unless the few of us who know the truth stand 
united, there is no hope for any of us.' [Dumbledore GoF Ch. 36 p. 
618]

In GoF he offers Dobby 10 Galleons a week and weekends off ;-)

`He's never wanted the Minister's job, even though a lot of people 
wanted him to take it when Millicent Bagnold retired.' [Arthur 
Weasley about Dumbledore, OOP Ch. 5 p. 88]

`Dumbledore says he doesn't care what they do as long as they don't 
take him off the Chocolate Frog cards' [Bill about Dumbledore losing 
his position in the power structure, OOP Ch.5, p.9]

`The statue we destroyed tonight told a lie. We wizards have 
mistreated and abused our fellows for too long, and we are now 
reaping our reward.' [Dumbledore, OOP, Ch.37 p. 735]

Phrases used about him ? a bit mad [Percy in PS/SS], obsolete old 
dingbat, eccentric [Rita Skeeter in GoF], barmy old codger 
[Dumbledore about himself, GoF]



So Dumbledore does not believe in seizing power. Nor does he want 
money or endless life. He does, however, seem to see the Minister of 
Magic as slightly irrelevant to him, personally. He is quite happy 
to organise a secret society, dedicated to doing *something* that 
the Ministry won't approve of. He strongly disapproves of the 
Ministry Dementors. He will let Sirius Black escape. He fights 
Ministry Aurors rather than submit to a legal arrest. He encourages 
Harry to lie to the Ministry and himself tells a direct lie to 
Fudge. [See OOP Chapter 27- Dumbledore's direct lie is on page 545 ]

Dumbledore believes in a person's choices and actions, rather than 
in what they were born.  He also thinks that people can change. He 
supports equal opportunities for the muggle born, *and* for the half 
human/half magical creature wizards like Hagrid (and Lupin).

Dumbledore believes that `we wizards have abused and mistreated our 
fellows for too long, and we are now reaping our reward' [OOP Ch. 
37, p.735]. He thinks that he cannot *make* people see the truth.

And he wants a pair of nice woolly socks. ;-)

It is actually Dumbledore who is the opponent of the WW ethos. 
Dumbledore is the `mad' `eccentric'. Not Voldemort.

And suddenly the question of `why would Dumbledore lead his attack 
on Voldemort from a *school*'  makes perfect sense. If Dumbledore 
wants to change the very ethos of the WW, he has to start with the 
children. Children whose views have yet to be formed. Children who 
can then grow up in a place where muggleborns are treated as equal; 
where a werewolf or half-giant can be your friend.

Dumbledore is not Headmaster at Hogwarts because of Harry Potter. He 
was Headmaster at Hogwarts before Harry's parents had even begun to 
go out together. [See OOP Ch. 28] 

If we look at the structure of the OOP, it appears that a large 
proportion of Dumbledore's Order are his ex-students. Tonks. Lupin. 
Sirius. The Potters. The Weasley sons, who have persuaded their 
father. Possibly the Longbottoms and Sturgis Podmore (who is 
described as `looking young' in the original photo). Hagrid. Snape. 
Even Peter Pettigrew.

Are these people opposed to the WW `pureblood is best, all others 
below' ethos? 

James Potter, of an important WW family (`the last of the Potters' ? 
Sirius Black, GoF) married the muggle-born Lily Evans. He decisively 
rejected the WW ethos.

Tonks is the daughter of a Black who married a muggle-born. She also 
comes from a background that rejects the `pure-blood is best' ethos.

Bill Weasley talks about the Goblins at Gringotts with easy 
familiarity. He treats them as colleagues and his bosses, rather 
than as inferiors. Ragnok obviously feels comfortable enough with 
Bill to make it very clear that he feels anti Wizard. [OOP Ch. 5 p. 
81] and to tell Bill why.

Sirius Black ran away from his family because he couldn't stand them 
and their `pure-blood mania'.

McGonagall expresses disdain at Willy Widdershins getting a reduced 
sentence in return for information. This suggests she doesn't like 
the corruption. [OOP Ch. 27 p.541]. She wears muggle clothes in the 
school holidays [OOP Ch 6. p.109]. Is she possibly muggle born 
herself?

Snape. Difficult to say, but some clues are: he is vicious towards 
the pure-blood Neville, he does not single out the `brought up by 
Muggles' Dean Thomas, and he gave the Muggle-born Hermione Granger 
higher marks in the first year exam than the pure-blood Draco. [CoS]

Lupin is also rather tricky. He's a werewolf ? who picked two pure-
blood friends. I can't actually bring to mind any positive 
expression of rejecting the WW ethos, except where it applies to 
him, personally. Even his comment about `the freedoms we've denied 
them for centuries' is expressed as a comment on why the Goblins 
might be tempted to join Voldemort. [OOP, Ch.5 P 81]. It's tactical, 
rather than an expression of belief.

It's always dangerous to argue that a person who is a victim of 
prejudice must automatically be non-prejudiced. 
[http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/78547 ]

There is prejudice among the members of the OOP. Sirius is trapped 
by his early views on house-elves. He simply doesn't see Kreacher as 
having any feelings worth bothering about. Kreacher's feelings 
aren't important to him. He's a servant, not a real person.

Moody is the stereotypical copper ? once a villain, always a villain.

Hagrid shows in GoF that he dislikes `foreign' wizards simply 
because they are foreign.

But in the major area of treating muggle borns equally, and the 
principle that other races are being treated unfairly by the WW ? 
most of the OOP seem to agree with Dumbledore. When they express an 
opinion, that is [grin].

Looking at the type of people in the OOP, I'm reminded of Abigail's 
excellent post on Snape the Iconoclast. 
[http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/78512 ]

While I disagree with her on the idea that it is *Voldemort* who is 
looking for Iconoclasts, I'd like to quote one of her points.

"Within this atmosphere, being the progeny of an old, wealthy 
wizarding family might be more of a hindrance then an asset. 
These families had benefitted from the social order as it stood 
- the foundations of their status were rooted in the very thing 
that Voldemort proposed to destroy."

Looking at Voldemort's supporters we see that they include Lucius 
Malfoy, of the wealthy pureblood family. Regulus Black, of the 
wealthy pureblood family. Bellatrix Black, of the wealthy pureblood 
family. MacNair, now working at the Ministry. Augustus Rookwood, of 
the Department of Mysteries, who had a network of well placed 
wizards (including Ludo Bagman, the distinctly dim and probably pure-
blooded sports star). Rookwood was important enough to provoke a 
murmur amongst the Wizengamot (I assume it was they in the Pensieve 
scene) and important enough for Bagman to believe he could get him a 
Ministry job. 

Malfoy, especially is described as so well connected and powerful 
that he can delay laws he doesn't want passed and ask for 
many `favours' [OOP, Ch. 9, p. 142]

So in fact, many of Voldemort's supporters appear to be in the WW 
power structure.

What about Dumbledore's?

Lupin is a werewolf. He's out.
Snape and McGonagall are both teachers. They're out.
Arthur Weasley has been shunted into a low status position. MoM, 
yes, but his own son has to choose whether to disown him or spy on 
him to stand a chance of getting anywhere. [Notice that whether 
Percy has chosen to side against his family or not, he has neatly 
chosen a path that means he *cannot* be asked to spy on them].
Moody has been `retired'
Mundungus is a crook. Definitely out.
Mrs Figg is a squib. Extremely out.
Sirius was a member of a wealthy pureblood family, who disowned him.
Tonks is a very junior member of the Auror Team. And not a pureblood.
Bill Weasley has a desk job at Gringotts Bank.
Charlie Weasley studies dragons in Romania.
Kingsley is a more senior member of the Auror Team, but is still on 
individual cases (Sirius) rather than in charge of anything.
Hagrid is a groundskeeper.
Molly is a housewife [UK]/homemaker[US].

 In Voldemort's team  we *know* that several members are either well 
born, influential or both.  Dumbledore's team seems to consist 
largely of those outside the power structure, without much in the 
way of influence.

It is Dumbledore's team who fit the classic `iconoclast' structure. 
Voldemort's team fits the `coup d'etat' structure.

So, Dumbledore stands opposed to the prevailing `pure-blood' rules 
Wizard, Wizard rules everything else' ethos of the WW. His Order of 
the Phoenix is quite definitely fighting a war against Voldemort, 
who supports that ethos, and wants to take it to its logical 
conclusion [with the small variation that *Tom Riddle*, the half-
blood Heir of Slytherin, is going to be the exception to the rule. 
Because he's going to rule].

Will Dumbledore be satisfied if his Order of the Phoenix defeats Tom 
Riddle? No. He tells us that.

`We both know that there are other ways of destroying a man, Tom 
 
Merely taking your life would not satisfy me, I admit ? ` [OOP, Ch. 
36, p.718]

Dumbledore defeated the Dark Wizard Grindlewald in 1945. And 15 to 
20 years later, another Dark Lord had arisen to take his place. 
Dumbledore must have sat down and seen a very bleak vision of the 
world when Lord Voldemort rose for the first time.

`
 it will merely take someone else who is prepared to fight what 
seems a losing battle next time ? and if [the endless succession of 
Dark lords are] delayed again and again, why, [they] may never 
return to power.'

[Original quote in PS/SS Ch. 17, p.216, comments in square brackets 
are my additions]

An endless series of battles against Dark Lords. Because the 
Wizarding world, with its tacit acceptance of bigotry, corruption, 
Dark (or Black) magicians, its feelings of superiority over the 
muggle race it came from, is set up to *produce* Dark magicians who 
will seek power.

House Slytherin is a respected part of Hogwarts. 'Pure-blood' as a 
password and using any means to achieve your ends is respectable. It 
is a house that native-born wizards aspire to [Draco does].  Unless 
you are a bunch of traditional Gryffindors like the Weasley's 
[grin]. 

Harry's first information about Slytherin (outside meeting Draco) 
comes from Hagrid, an Order of the Phoenix member, and Ron, from a 
family that are all in Slytherin's traditional enemy Gryffindor 
House. Other opinions? Well, even the muggle born Hermione doesn't 
announce that she hopes not to get put in Slytherin. [PS/SS Ch. 6 
p.79-80] Perhaps the books she's read don't suggest anything is 
wrong with Slytherin House? Perhaps the people she's been asking 
don't think anything is wrong with Slytherin?

Lucius Malfoy is an honoured guest of the Minister for Magic. Sirius 
Black's grandfather was an Order of Merlin, First Class. Phineas 
Nigellus, former Headmaster of Hogwarts, came from Slytherin House.

As I have said above. Voldemort is not an opponent to the WW. He is 
its logical result. Voldemort wants what a large section of the WW 
wants. He's just prepared to *really* do anything to get it. 

So Dumbledore has seen that the only way to change that endless 
succession of Dark Lords is to change the conditions that make them 
possible. The Slytherin ambition is a fine quality. If it is 
combined with a belief that you should *not* use *any* means. 


Snape, with his blatant favouritism to Slytherin, might possibly 
be `talent spotting' the Slyths who hate their House getting points 
unfairly. [Then again, he could just be a complete git ;-) ] Looking 
for the Slytherins who are ambitious, but want to win fair and 
square. They are the ones that Dumbledore would want. 

Hogwarts includes muggleborns, werewolves and half giants. 
Dumbledore has been sufficiently successful that many of his ex-
students *support* Hagrid when Rita Skeeter `outs' him. [GoF]

House elves are treated kindly and with respect. `Free' house elves 
are accepted and offered wages and time off. 'Unfree' House elves 
are not forced into freedom. [GoF and OOP]

Muggleborns under Dumbledore are freely accepted into the school, 
and treated no differently to any other student. Dormitories are 
mixed race in every sense of the word. Pure blooded students 
obviously don't feel that dating a muggle born will get slogans 
scrawled on their textbooks [or any other nasty tricks]. [James 
Potter felt free to date Lily Evans]

And all this might not be enough. Because if Voldemort wins, 
Hogwarts will be purified. Muggle borns will no longer be accepted. 
The `pure-enough' will probably be educated to believe in their 
second class status. The Hogwarts students will be trained as future 
rulers of the Wizarding Empire [just as the old style British 
boarding school was set up to train rulers of the British Empire].

Voldemort must be beaten. But `merely taking your life' is not 
enough. He must be defeated. Like Hitler, the whole of the UK WW 
must understand that Voldemort must be defeated. That not only must 
he  be defeated, but that what he stands for must be defeated. Must 
believe it so wholeheartedly that they will eventually be prepared 
to let their entire society be changed beyond recognition if only it 
will defeat Voldemort.

The Wizarding World must be prepared to destroy itself in order to 
defeat Voldemort and all his kind for ever. Those who oppose what 
Voldemort stands for must fight those who support his ideas. 


 and none will come after 
 [one of the broken prophecies in the 
Dept of Mysteries].

No more Dark Lords. Never again.

The problem, as Dumbledore undoubtedly knows, is that this is 
unlikely to be anything less than a bloody cataclysm. Removing 
Voldemort by simply killing him is the easy solution. It will work 
for Voldemort. But in twenty years time, there will likely be 
another Dark Lord, willing to use 'any means to achieve their ends' 
[PS/SS Ch. 7 p.88] 

Forcing the Wizarding World to choose their side is the hard 
solution. It is also the right one. People will die in the coming 
war ? but what will then never happen (if Dumbledore's side wins) is 
that `numbers of nameless and faceless people and creatures will be 
slaughtered in the vague future' [p.739, Ch.37 OOP ].

And this is completely in keeping with Dumbledore's ethos. He 
believes in choices. He will not force people to see things his way, 
or force change by becoming Minister for Magic.

He *can* force people to make their own choice. Will you fight what 
Voldemort stands for? Or will you agree that he has the 'right idea' 
and follow him?

And so the Order of the Phoenix is not setting out to defeat 
Voldemort. Instead it will force the WW to choose whether to fight 
him. It is also plotting against the Ministry, (and its pure-blood 
ethos) as Dumbledore cheerfully admits in OOP Ch. 27 p. 545. 

These are the dangers `of which you can have no idea' that Lupin 
talks about [OOP Ch. 5 p.91]. A truly stupid comment to three 
children who have *already* fought Voldemort ? unless just fighting 
*Voldemort* is not what the Order of the Phoenix is about. If the 
Order is fighting the structure of its society, the comment makes 
sense. 

The whole of OOP the book is a story about the Order's attempt to 
bring Voldemort out into the open. They tell Harry only what 
he `needs to know' [OOP Ch.5  p.84]. They don't tell him the details 
of the prophecy, because then Voldemort will then be able to get it 
from Harry's mind. They try and protect him using Occlumency, and 
Snape is `unnerved' and `agitated' when he realises that Harry is 
being shown visions of the Department of Mysteries. [OOP, Ch.24 
pp.474-475]

Only two people can lift that prophecy from the shelf at the Dept. 
of Mysteries without going insane. Harry Potter and Lord Voldemort.

Stop Harry going to the prophecy, and Lord Voldemort must come 
himself. Must reveal himself in the centre of the Ministry. 

Bellatrix knows that this is why Voldemort should not appear at the 
Ministry. `The Dark Lord, walk into the Ministry of Magic, when they 
are so sweetly ignoring his return? The Dark Lord, reveal himself to 
the Aurors 
 ` [OOP Ch. 35 p.694]

And when he does? Dumbledore tells him ? `It was foolish to come 
here tonight, Tom. The Aurors are on their way ? ` [OOP Ch. 36, p717]

The guard duty on the prophecy is not to stop it being stolen. It's 
to raise the alarm when Lord Voldemort comes to steal it. So his 
return becomes undeniable.

So the UK Wizarding World knows it is at war.



The symbol of the Order is a Phoenix. Why?

A phoenix is a symbol of rebirth. But what is often forgotten is 
that before it is reborn, it dies in fire. 

As Fawkes does in the fight against Voldemort.

As the old Wizarding World will, if Dumbledore has his way.

The eleven year old Harry would probably have thought this a bad 
thing. The fourteen year old Hermione was beginning to see that her 
new world needed changing. What will the seventeen year old Trio 
think? 

Is Dumbledore's phoenix fire better than Voldemort's pure ice?


Some say the world will end in fire, 
Some say in ice.
>From what I've tasted of desire
I hold with those who favor fire.

But if it had to perish twice,
I think I know enough of hate
To say that for destruction ice
Is also great
And would suffice.

[Robert Frost, Fire and Ice]



Pip!Squeak



[A minor note: the plot of CoS revolves around attacks on 
muggleborns because of their blood. Dumbledore stands by and lets it 
happen in the hope that the resulting battle can destroy the menace 
of the basilisk for once and all. No wonder JKR said that CoS nearly 
gives it all away]





From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Sep 17 16:35:32 2003
From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?udder=5Fpen=5Fdragon?=)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 17:35:32 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Is Snape a good guy?
In-Reply-To: <bk9uil+9rfs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030917163532.50566.qmail@web60209.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81011


There have been a lot of posters extolling the virtues of SSnape and making him out to be a nice person. 
IMO they are all failing to heed the warnings of his actions (and JKR). He has held a grudge against Harry (and NL) since before he had any reason to treat them any differently to other pupils, not the action of a good guy. 
I believe that he is working to his own agenda and if we skip forward too the OOtP I do not see that he made any attempt to teach Harry occulemency(?) You do not teach anyone to hit a ball by shooting it at them at 100mph, when they are not even ready. He did not want Harry to protect himself, he wanted to humiliate him and annoy him so much that he could not learn. DD said as much towards the end of the book.
I Snape a good guy, I don't think so.
 
Udder pen Dragon

 
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. 





---------------------------------
Want to chat instantly with your online friends??Get the FREE Yahoo!Messenger

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From hpfanmatt at gmx.net  Wed Sep 17 17:33:56 2003
From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 17:33:56 -0000
Subject: Snape-Harry Detente
In-Reply-To: <bk92ct+4191@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bka5u4+ro4k@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81013

OK, with nods to all who've posted on this,
let me start by repeating a little of what I 
wrote in # 80938:

> I think that this scene is the first, hopeful 
> little hint that Harry and Snape are beginning, 
> despite their mutual animosity, to understand
> one another, or at least to think that they do. 
> Not a reconciliation, but perhaps detente.

So, I'm not making a claim for "burgeoning 
mutual respect" (# 80985) -- I agree with you, 
June, it's way too early for that.  

You're also right in pointing out that the scene 
occurs shortly after we hear Harry mentally 
blaming Snape for Sirius' death.  Even without
that juxtaposition -- and moreso with it -- I 
agree with Geoff (# 80983) that Harry intended 
his reply to be "tongue-in-cheek," and a "quiet 
little 'dig' at Snape."  (As I said before, it 
also works as a quiet little dig at Malfoy: two 
birds with one stone).  

I even agree with Sandy (# 80960) and Karen (# 80970) that there is
defiance in what Harry says, *but*, I part ways with you when you call
it "open," "out-there" defiance.  Open defiance would be "I'm cursing
this little twerp, now get out of my way," or "I'm about to turn
Malfoy into a toad.  D'you want to give me deTENtion?" 

The significance of the scene as I read it is that Harry has learned
how to use a quiet dig in place of direct hostility.  Like it or not,
this is the kind of "subtlety" that Harry has never before shown Snape
(we did see a similar interaction once earlier in the book, in the
run-up to the first Quidditch match, when the Slytherins managed to get
under Ron's skin with their little psy-ops, but Harry took it in
stride ("So-and-so's going to knock you off your broom" -- "Oh yeah? 
His aim's so bad I'd be more worried if he was aiming for someone
else!")).  To many of us it would be "less respectful" (Sandy's words,
# 80960) than a hot-headed answer, since it's calculated, rather than
impulsive.  But surely Snape, who places such value on keeping one's
cool, can better identify with the former than the latter.

So, how does Snape react?  Does he, as June suggests (# 80985), snap
"immediately back into character" by trying to dock points?  Normally,
Snape docks Harry points just for giving the wrong answer in class. 
The last time Snape caught Harry dueling with Draco in the halls (the
curses that missed each other and hit Hermione and Crabbe (or was it
Goyle?)), it was detention, no questions asked.  Snape might have
reacted even more angrily this time -- seeing Harry preparing to duel
with Malfoy might naturally enough connect with the subject matter of
the memory that he caught Harry snooping into -- but, instead, Snape
satisfies himself with a snide comment about how there aren't even any
Gryffindor points left to dock.  Maybe Dumbledore has just told him to
lay off Harry a bit.  But maybe, just maybe, Snape is caught a little
off-guard by the smoothness of Harry's reply.

Again, I'm not trying to tear up the scene Rowling wrote and
reconstruct it as though Snape had walked up to Harry, shaken his
hand, and praised him for finally showing some subtlety and restraint.
 Still, I think it's at least fair to observe that both Harry and
Snape are behaving differently than they would have done a few months
earlier. 

By the way, I agree completely with Sandy (# 80960, again) that this
scene also fits in with the admonitions everyone else (from Umbridge
to McGonagall to Hermione, and even at one point to Sirius) has been
giving Harry about controlling his temper and other emotions.  Not
because they all want Harry to turn out like Draco, but because each
in her (his) own way is trying to prod Harry to grow up, to learn
restraint, to pay attention to the perspective that experience can
give him, to stop acting *only* like a Gryffindor and to understand
that he has something to learn and to gain from the Slytherin and
Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff attributes, too.  Yes, a little premeditation
*could* help every once in a while -- planning things out doesn't need
to be a fault -- and a little analysis, and a little more honest
communication with those around him (isn't that the most direct lesson
from DD's failure?).  OK, maybe Dolores doesn't give a hoot about any
of that and just wants to shut Harry up, but that doesn't mean there's
no lesson to be learned from dealing with her.

I'll do a separate post on Dumbledore's reaction about the end of the
Occlumency lessons, which is really another topic.

-- Matt




From emmy_g50 at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 17 15:07:58 2003
From: emmy_g50 at hotmail.com (Emily Grace Blackstone)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 15:07:58 +0000
Subject: The worst is yet to come
Message-ID: <Sea1-F27beM3brlhFzb000166d8@hotmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81014




You know, my problem with the whole Snape/Pensieve thing is this: Why did he 
wait until Harry was in the room to remove his memories? He knew when the 
lesson was scheduled to begin, why didn't he do this 5 mins. before? 
Instead, he waited for Harry to arrive, sat him down in front of his desk 
and rather blatantly removed these (to curious!Harry very mysterious) 
memories. It's almost as though Snape was ASKING for Harry to snoop. Hello, 
this is HARRY we're taling about, Mr. Notorious Meddler. So, why?  I feel 
that Harry was meant to see something.  I don't totally understand how the 
Pensieve works. Is it totally chronolgical? Is it just what happens to be 
swirling aroung at the top? Is it whatever was put in there last? I don't 
really know. And it's entirely possible that Snape wanted Harry to see the 
prank for the reasons Grey Wolf stated: to show Harry that is dad was really 
an arrogant git.  Snape's little revenges on Harry have all been mean enough 
that I wouldn't put it past him. However, Snape's reaction when he found 
Harry was intense enough that I sort of doubt that Snape meant for Harry to 
see that. Any thoughts? Was there something Harry was meant to find? was 
Rowling just trying to give us more about James while making a reason for 
Harry to fail at Occlumency?

EGB
  moving out of her lurker hole at last (Oh, the sun! My, it's bright out 
here!)

_________________________________________________________________
Use custom emotions -- try MSN Messenger 6.0! 
http://www.msnmessenger-download.com/tracking/reach_emoticon





From paulag5777 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 15:43:34 2003
From: paulag5777 at yahoo.com (Paula Gaon)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 08:43:34 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: More OnHermione's Career
Message-ID: <20030917154334.16798.qmail@web40012.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81015

Kneasy wrote:

"Oh,  yes, I had very definite goals when I was 15. They changed later
of course, as the realities of the world impinged onto my imagined
certainty. You find out you don't have the necessary aptitude or
academic leanings..."

I don't know about all of this discussion...  Now that I'm well into middle age and have hardly fulfilled any career goals, I'm prepared to give adolescent wisdom a little more credit.  Sometimes adolescents can see a very clear, simple naive view of their goals and aptitudes.  But society, well-meaning advisors, setbacks, and all of the craziness of life can confuse one so that he loses confidence and gives up on his goals or discredits their merit.  

Remember how   John Lennon put it in his song "A Working Class Hero":

"...They hate you if you're clever and they despise a fool
Till you're so ******* crazy you can't follow their rules...
When they've tortured and scared you for twenty odd years
Then they expect you to pick a career
When you can't really function you're so full of fear..."

Personally, I've come to think that if more of us would stick to our simple, youthful views of ourselves and sometimes listen LESS and follow our own instincts MORE, we'd all be better off. Many of us regret that we didn't do, or at least honestly attempt to realize career dreams.  Some of us are plenty unhappy treading along with the "tried and true".   Remember, JKR based Hermione on herself as a teen, so this "Little Madam" might well be quite a success in the future--just have a feeling!

Paula


ADMIN: When responding to this thread, please remember to focus on canon.  If you'd like to continue to discuss career goals etc. in your own life, please take the discussion to Off-Topic Chatter.  

Thanks!

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hpfgu-otchatter/







From n_longbottom01 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 18:19:15 2003
From: n_longbottom01 at yahoo.com (n_longbottom01)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 18:19:15 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy
In-Reply-To: <20030916222212.20399.qmail@web20006.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bka8j3+tr4b@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81016

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Rebecca Stephens 
<rsteph1981 at y...> wrote:
> 
> --- n_longbottom01 <n_longbottom01 at y...> wrote:
> 
> > On my first, and second read through of OotP, it
> > didn't strike me 
> > that Percy was acting out of character in anything
> > that he said or 
> > did.  
> 
> See, that's strange to me.  Maybe it's because I've
> always been a Percy lover, but from the moment I saw
> him in OOTP the words "something is *wrong*"
> reverberated through my head.  I fully expected some
> explanation before the book was finished.  And, when
> there was no closure at all, I felt that we'd hear
> more in the next book.
> 
> It's interesting sometimes, how differently we can
> read the same book.  So many different impressions and
> interpretations.  That's what makes this list so fun.
> 
> 
> Rebecca
> 

Now me, n_longbottom01:

I don't think I am as far from your "something is *wrong*" with Percy 
interpretation as you might think.  I like Percy too, and I was 
pretty disappointed in him in OotP.  I did see an unpleasant, and 
startling change in Percy's character, like you did.  It's just that 
it didn't occur to me, on my own, that this change was caused by 
anything other than Percy's own ambition.

I guess I saw this change in Percy as the next big step in the path 
he has been on from the beginning.  That's what I meant when I said 
that I didn't think that Percy was acting out of character in OotP. 
There has been a change in Percy's character, but I saw it as a 
progressive change, so it didn't set off my Imperius Curse detector 
as I read through the book.

So, don't get me wrong; when Percy sent back his Christmas sweater, I 
didn't think to myself, "That's Percy for you, what a jerk."  I 
expect better from him, but he is making poor choices.

You are right, Rebecca, differing interpretations are what make this 
list so fun.  Now that I've seen theories like Undercover Percy I am 
holding onto some hope (however small) that the Percy we see in OotP 
isn't as bad as he seems. 




From jferer at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 18:21:07 2003
From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 18:21:07 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy
In-Reply-To: <bk9uil+9rfs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bka8mj+8hgi@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81017

Jen:" We are being led to believe Percy's character in OOTP was just
the  natural progression for him.  Not too long ago, we were led to 
believe Snape was the bad guy in PS/SS, Draco was the heir of 
Slytherin in COS, Sirius was a murderous traitor in POA, and Fake!
Moody was really on Harry's side in GOF.  None of these proved true 
and I was surprised every single time (well, maybe not with Draco!)"

True, but Percy's progression has been longer, more detailed, and more
credible than the others.  All three of the others you name had their
t innocence (or guilt) revealed by the end of the story, and what
we've been watching is a progression in Percy's character and
personality.  

OTOH, that makes Percy a much more credible agent than anyone else
could possibly be.  Dumbledore is very much smart enough to see that
and take full advantage of it.

The strange letter is interesting, but I have a hard time supposing
that the wizarding world couldn't have a better way of secret
communication.

It's also possible that Undercover!Percy is yet to come.  IF Percy was
a git, and IF Percy has seen the error of his ways, and IF Percy is
reconciled to his parents (and Dumbledore and Harry) THEN he could
become a valuable agent in the future.  It seems now that Fudge is
neutralized, but it wouldn't hurt to keep an eye on him, and
Dumbledore is far too smart to believe that all of Voldemort's moles
are gone.

I think Undercover!Percy is plausible.  We're going to have to just
wait to find out how it turns out.

Jim Ferer





From mev532 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 18:36:18 2003
From: mev532 at yahoo.com (Mev532)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 18:36:18 -0000
Subject: The 'Other' in the HP books (was: Harry's Sexual Preference 
Message-ID: <bka9j2+a68g@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81018

This debate has been going on about using characters for political 
action and including homosexual characters in the HP books.

I feel I have to chime in on this debate because it seems like an 
important point is being overlooked. This point explains why I feel 
there shouldn't be stated homosexual characters or sexual activity 
in the Harry Potter books. People have often said that these books 
discuss themes of slavery, death, violence, evil, torture, etc. and 
that sexual themes are no more adult so should not be shied away 
from. 

The crucial different, however, is that the former themes are 
factors that will force themselves on a child or young teenager 
reguardless of age or parental involvement. Many of us lose people 
close to us when we are very young, or have to deal with 
intolerance 
and hatred at school or with peers. Sexual issues, however, do not 
have to be dealt with until a certain age (at least until after 
puberty). This seperates it from the other themes, no matter how 
adult they are.

An twelve year old child understands cruelty, good vs evil, and 
death, even if their understanding is not sophisticated. They have 
encountered these things in their own life. This is why it is 
appropriate (I feel, some adults may not) for the book to discuss 
actions like murder, but not topics such as oral sex or homosexual 
relationships. Children should not be learning about these things 
from Harry Potter books, especially when such topics are beside the 
central story of the book.  Sure, Harry will be sixteen in the next 
book, when many young people (not most) will be sexual active, but 
that does not mean this should be covered.
 

Besides, maybe they have an anti-sexual activity jynx on the 
castle, 
haha.


Big HP fan  Dave






From grannybat at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 17 18:48:04 2003
From: grannybat at hotmail.com (grannybat84112)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 18:48:04 -0000
Subject: MAGIC DISHWASHER (TBAY INTRO): Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die!
In-Reply-To: <bka1dm+to3u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkaa94+s91j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81019

bluesqueak wrote:

<a mind-blowing piece of meta-analysis that culminated in
> 
> Voldemort must be beaten. But `merely taking your life' is not 
> enough. ...not only must 
> he  be defeated, but that what he stands for must be defeated. Must 
> believe it so wholeheartedly that they will eventually be prepared 
> to let their entire society be changed beyond recognition if only  
> it will defeat Voldemort.
> A phoenix is a symbol of rebirth. But what is often forgotten is 
> that before it is reborn, it dies in fire. 
>
> [A minor note: the plot of CoS revolves around attacks on 
>muggle-
> borns because of their blood. Dumbledore stands by and lets it 
> happen in the hope that the resulting battle can destroy the menace 
> of the basilisk for once and all. No wonder JKR said that CoS  
> nearly gives it all away]

I'm one of the thousands of deep-lurkers on HP4Gu who rarely 
surfaces. But I just had to come up from the depths to say...

Amazing.

This essay deserves immediate enshrinement in Fantastic Posts and 
Where to Find Them.

Suddenly everthing makes sense.

Bravo, Bluesqueak.

Dawn




From urghiggi at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 18:59:16 2003
From: urghiggi at yahoo.com (urghiggi)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 18:59:16 -0000
Subject: MAGIC DISHWASHER (TBAY INTRO): Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die
In-Reply-To: <bka1dm+to3u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkaau4+3fi9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81020

Pip!squeak said:
> Voldemort must be beaten. But `merely taking your life' is not 
> enough. He must be defeated. Like Hitler, the whole of the UK WW 
> must understand that Voldemort must be defeated. That not only must 
> he  be defeated, but that what he stands for must be defeated. Must 
> believe it so wholeheartedly that they will eventually be prepared 
> to let their entire society be changed beyond recognition if only it 
> will defeat Voldemort.
> > The Wizarding World must be prepared to destroy itself in order to 
> defeat Voldemort and all his kind for ever. Those who oppose what 
> Voldemort stands for must fight those who support his ideas. 
> > 
 and none will come after 
 [one of the broken prophecies in the 
> Dept of Mysteries].
> > No more Dark Lords. Never again.


Urghiggi replied:
This is a well-argued and highly convincing analysis. (And it's so LOTR -- =
can 
you say "we must DESTROY the ring, we can't just HIDE the ring?") JKR's 
looking more and more like an Inkling to me every day, and Dumbledore's 
looking more & more like Gandalf, pulling the same "we have to overthrow th=
e 
world order" kind of strings.....

Your analysis explains a lot, in particular Ddore's "big picture" orientati=
on, his 
dogged ignoring of Harry in OoP, his willingness to work outside the existi=
ng 
(corrupt) governmental structure, and his curious statement in the climax o=
f 
OoP that just killing LV would be unsatisfying to him. Of course those with=
 a 
subversive big-picture orientation can end up using the "little people" as =

pawns in support of their grand design, which is why JKR's always showing 
the razor-edge challenge of Ddore giving the pawns lots of individual choic=
es, 
all the while subtly deploying them in support of the Big Goal.

This view also sheds light on D'dore's comments in OoP that loving Harry to=
o 
much was going to screw up his grand plan and end up getting a lot of other=
 
folks killed. Because of course the easy choice, if you love Harry that muc=
h, 
and if you're indeed capable of doing it, is to GET RID OF LV before he can=
 
kill the kid you love--and the faceless masses who will be menaced by futur=
e 
Dark Lords, be damned. This is hard to understand w/o your analysis; easy t=
o 
understand WITH your analysis. If your goal is wholesale reform of the wiz =

world, for the greater benefit of the underdogs everywhere -- you can't let=
 
yourself love Harry that much. ("We can't hide the Ring for a few generatio=
ns, 
we have to DESTROY the Ring for all time.") Of course, we as readers are 
meant to identify with and love Harry and want to see him survive, which 
creates a great source of literary/emotional tension.

This also would justify that frustrating sense of inertia that others have =

mentioned before in OoP -- we have all this "harry angst" plot and meanwhil=
e 
there's a sense that LV's not DOING anything and that D-dore's also not 
DOING anything. In other words, little sense of forward motion in the "figh=
t LV" 
plot. BUT if D-dore's primary goal is a revelation that's going to force th=
e entire 
WW to take sides, then the hand-sitting makes sense. 

Your analysis also supports the argument (IMHO) of those who say JKR's 
writing out of her religious background -- the whole notion that some 
principles are so important they're worth turning the world upside down for=
. 
Certainly the notion that existing WW power/social structures are 
irredeemably corrupt and need to be overthrown, even it it requires a sacri=
fice 
that cracks the world open rather than short-term stopgaps, harmonizes with=
 
the idea that the powerless of the world (tax collectors, whores, fishermen=
) are 
worth a dimension-cracking sacrifice.

But I digress. I can't wait to look at these books again with your 
philosophy!glasses on my nose. You are a genius, in or out of TBAY.... Buil=
d a 
new boat, I'm coming aboard.

Urghiggi, chgo







From n_longbottom01 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 19:30:33 2003
From: n_longbottom01 at yahoo.com (n_longbottom01)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 19:30:33 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy: who notified Dumbledore?
In-Reply-To: <bk9uil+9rfs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkacop+tddf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81021

n_longbottom01:

Great post Jen!  I just want to comment on one of the points that 
people have bring up in this Percy discussion:

> 
> 2.  Who notified Dumbledore about the change in trial date?
> 

I see a number of potential answers to this question:

1.  Percy is secretly working undercover for Dumbledore, and he is 
able to pass the trial time change information along to Dumbledore 
shortly before the trial begins.

2.  One of the Aurors who works for the Order could have seen Arthur 
and Harry rushing off to the trial, and then contacted Dumbledore to 
let him know to get over to the MoM right away.

3.  Maybe Arthur had time to contact Dumbledore himself, after he 
sends Harry into the courtroom alone.

4.  Possibly some of the portraits of former Headmasters could have 
been keeping an eye on Harry at the MoM (like the portrait in St. 
Mungo's who does a head-count to make sure everyone who set off to 
visit Arthur in the hospital got there safely).

Number 4 is my favorite, especially if someone can find a reference 
to Harry noticing a portrait on his trip to the MoM that morning.  If 
Percy does turn out to be spying for Dumbledore at this point, 
though, I'll give him credit for passing this info along to 
Dumbledore, even if it isn't explicitly stated in a future book.

So... can anyone narrow down this list, or add to it?  I'm sorry if 
I'm off base on any of them... I don't have access to the book right 
now.

n_longbottom01




From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Wed Sep 17 19:57:17 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 19:57:17 -0000
Subject: The worst is yet to come + Pensive theory
In-Reply-To: <Sea1-F27beM3brlhFzb000166d8@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <bkaeau+7j6u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81022

Emily Grace Blackstone (EGB) wrote:
> You know, my problem with the whole Snape/Pensieve thing is this: Why 
> did he wait until Harry was in the room to remove his memories? He 
> knew when the lesson was scheduled to begin, why didn't he do this 5 
> mins. before?

I can think of two answers to this question. One is that he had just 
arrived himself and he just had had no time to take his memories out 
beforehand (doubtful). The other is that Snape doesn't *really* like 
taking memories out of his head. He prefers to mull them internally 
instead of using the pensieve, which he either mistrusts or simply 
doesn't know how to use (not every muggle can use a VHS - even those 
that are nuclear science experts).

> Instead, he waited for Harry to arrive, sat him down in front of his 
> desk and rather blatantly removed these (to curious!Harry very 
> mysterious) memories. It's almost as though Snape was ASKING for 
> Harry to snoop. Hello, this is HARRY we're taling about, Mr. 
> Notorious Meddler. So, why?

This (call it explanation number three) is of course very possible too 
- as I sort of hinted in a previous post (but I fear EGB misunderstood 
my reasoning - see later).

> I feel that Harry was meant to see something.  I don't totally 
> understand how the Pensieve works. Is it totally chronolgical? Is it 
> just what happens to be swirling aroung at the top? Is it whatever 
> was put in there last? I don't really know. 

Nor does anyone, really. However, lets examine the evidence. Someone 
posted in this thread that it must be random, since it is all swirling 
around. I feel skeptical about that. After all, what use is it if you 
keep getting random memories? No, obviously there is a magical way to 
choose the next one you want to see. I suggested a standard stack 
(first in last out) in which the last you add is the first you see, 
with chance to call up a different one. 

Why do I say this? Well, Dumbledore, in the exposition scene at the end 
of OoP pulls out a memory, puts it in the pensieve and lets it rest a 
little bit (the impression I get is that he's gathering strength to 
hear the prophecy, not because the pensive needs time to process the 
new memory), but once he taps he gets immediate answer. Yes, he's 
Dumbledore and probably has had lots of practice, but still I feel it 
was easy to get it.

Besides, if I was the one doing the pensieve, that's the way I would've 
done it. :D

> And it's entirely possible that Snape wanted Harry to see the 
> prank for the reasons Grey Wolf stated: to show Harry that is dad was 
> really an arrogant git.  Snape's little revenges on Harry have all 
> been mean enough that I wouldn't put it past him.

Ummm... I want to point out that this wasn't exactly what I said. I 
said that Snape had put delicate memories (i.e. memories of his work 
for the OoP or - in case Snape is Ever So Evil - *against* the OoP) 
that he didn't want Harry to see. To protect those memories, he finally 
puts one long one that will stop Harry from getting to the others if he 
leaves, and chooses it as the first to be displayed (notice that how 
the pensieve works is irrelevant now - Harry doesn't make an attempt to 
choose memories, thus whatever Snape chose to be the first still is).

The part about Snape being a nasty evil git comes in when choosing the 
memory to put as a cover for the rest - he chooses one memory that will 
hurt Harry and prove his point at the same time. But not because of 
meaness and just to teach him a lesson, but also to protect the real 
memories they don't want Harry to pass onto Voldemort.

> EGB
>   moving out of her lurker hole at last (Oh, the sun! My, it's bright 
> out here!)

Welcome! I hope your stay here in posting land is very good!

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf, who is always amazed how easily other people borrow his 
handle (not that that's a bad thing)... maybe he should use a less 
friendly one like "bites your leg" :D





From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Wed Sep 17 19:57:26 2003
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 19:57:26 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy: who notified Dumbledore?
In-Reply-To: <bkacop+tddf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkaeb6+lcbs@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81023

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "n_longbottom01" 
<n_longbottom01 at y...> wrote:
 
> 
> 4.  Possibly some of the portraits of former Headmasters could have 
> been keeping an eye on Harry at the MoM (like the portrait in St. 
> Mungo's who does a head-count to make sure everyone who set off to 
> visit Arthur in the hospital got there safely).
> 
> Number 4 is my favorite, especially if someone can find a reference 
> to Harry noticing a portrait on his trip to the MoM that morning. 

Well, there was the portrait of the former headmaster, who found 
Arthur in the Department of Mysteries, after he was attacked. Maybe 
he was walking through the other pictures in the MoM. Harry was near 
the DoM, after all.

Hickengruendler  




From liliana at worldonline.nl  Wed Sep 17 19:58:26 2003
From: liliana at worldonline.nl (laylalast)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 19:58:26 -0000
Subject: MAGIC DISHWASHER (TBAY INTRO): Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die!
In-Reply-To: <bkaa94+s91j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkaed2+sr5u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81024

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "grannybat84112" 
<grannybat at h...> wrote:
> bluesqueak wrote:
> 
> <a mind-blowing piece of meta-analysis that culminated in
> > 
> > Voldemort must be beaten. But `merely taking your life' is not 
> > enough. ...not only must 
> > he  be defeated, but that what he stands for must be defeated. 
Must 
> > believe it so wholeheartedly that they will eventually be 
prepared 
> > to let their entire society be changed beyond recognition if 
only  
> > it will defeat Voldemort.
> > A phoenix is a symbol of rebirth. But what is often forgotten is 
> > that before it is reborn, it dies in fire. 
> >
> > [A minor note: the plot of CoS revolves around attacks on 
> >muggle-
> > borns because of their blood. Dumbledore stands by and lets it 
> > happen in the hope that the resulting battle can destroy the 
menace 
> > of the basilisk for once and all. No wonder JKR said that CoS  
> > nearly gives it all away]
> 
> I'm one of the thousands of deep-lurkers on HP4Gu who rarely 
> surfaces. But I just had to come up from the depths to say...
> 
> Amazing.
> 
> This essay deserves immediate enshrinement in Fantastic Posts and 
> Where to Find Them.
> 
> Suddenly everthing makes sense.
> 
> Bravo, Bluesqueak.
> 
> Dawn

Lilian:

To which I say: amen!

Always've been a fan since I discovered the MAGIC DISHWASHER thread 
but now outright supporter. 




From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Wed Sep 17 20:09:15 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 20:09:15 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy: who notified Dumbledore?
In-Reply-To: <bkacop+tddf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkaf1b+46th@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81025

> n_longbottom01: 
> > 2.  Who notified Dumbledore about the change in trial date?
> > 
> 1.  Percy is secretly working undercover for Dumbledore, and he is 
> able to pass the trial time change information along to Dumbledore 
> shortly before the trial begins.
> 
> 2.  One of the Aurors who works for the Order could have seen Arthur 
> and Harry rushing off to the trial, and then contacted Dumbledore to 
> let him know to get over to the MoM right away.
> 
> 3.  Maybe Arthur had time to contact Dumbledore himself, after he 
> sends Harry into the courtroom alone.
> 
> 4.  Possibly some of the portraits of former Headmasters could have 
> been keeping an eye on Harry at the MoM (like the portrait in St. 
> Mungo's who does a head-count to make sure everyone who set off to 
> visit Arthur in the hospital got there safely).
>
> <snip> 
> 
> So... can anyone narrow down this list, or add to it?  I'm sorry if 
> I'm off base on any of them... I don't have access to the book right 
> now.
> 
> n_longbottom01

I think that the most probable person to tell Dumbledore of the change 
in the time of the trial must have been one of those members of the 
judge panel (Wizengamot) that are still friends with Dumbledore - two 
people come to mind. In chapter 8 they are identified as "two elderly 
witches in the back row [who] raised their hands and waved welcome". 

Later on, we get a better description of them: chapter fifteen talks 
about an article in the newspaper were two elder members of Wizengamot 
leave after the creation of the High Inquisitor. They are Griselda 
Marchbanks and Tiberius Ogden (Griselda is accused of "alleged links to 
subversive goblin groups" that, for all we know, might actually be real 
and by order of Dumbledore, who is using Griselda to contact the 
goblins just as he is using Bill).

I don't think Percy is a spy for Dumbledore, but if he is he's so 
undercover (looking that much of a git means he's *really* undercover, 
IMO) he wouldn't risk blowing it for such a minor matter as a change of 
time for a hearing.

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf





From nansense at cts.com  Wed Sep 17 20:17:10 2003
From: nansense at cts.com (zesca)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 20:17:10 -0000
Subject: Prophecy placing process: amalgamation
In-Reply-To: <bk9qpt+9vcl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkafg6+a08i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81026

madeyemood wrote:
Is anyone familiar with the process by which a prophecy is 
funnelled into a crystal sphere?

Grey Wolf replied:
The answer (unless this world is much more weird than I give it credit for)=
 is 
no, since it has never been mentioned in the books, and no-on ehere that I =

know can transform real prophecies into glowing balls at the flick of a wan=
d. 
That said, I have a pretty nice theory about it.

Madeyemood, in turn, responded:
Thanks for the modification, GW. I was in fact reaching for theories, but i=
t was 
too late at night for my brain to know how to make such a distinction.

Grey Wolf continues with his pretty nice theory (MeyeM adds numbers:
1 Dumbledore hears the prophecy. 
2 Say he writes it down (to not forget). 
3 Goes to his office and 
4 uses a recording spell that works exactly like a muggle recorder, only in=
 this 
case the words spoken are kept in a round ball. 
5 Then goes to the ministry and does the same (he keeps the first 
in his office). 
6 The Ministry officials put it in the department of mysteries and place 
protection charms on it. 
7 After a while, they decide Harry and Voldemort are the ones the prophecy =

refers to and the DoM changes the protection so only Voldemort and Harry 
can remove it from its place without braking it.

I don't think there is anything particularly complicated about it, evidentl=
y. 

Madeyemood:
Perhaps you sell yourself short, GW. I find your theory pretty imaginative.=
 
This 
is what makes HPfGU so great. I can ask a question that my brain's too tire=
d 
to 
work on and a few people out there can share some thoughts that easily 
come to them. The miracle benefits of distributed cognition.

GW again:
The fact that other prophecies were broken in the fight shows that the 
defenses are not that great, 

M.E.Mood:
Perhaps because it's unheard of for wizards to be traipsing into the Dept o=
f 
Mysteries (sort of like a theft from Gringotts?), it wasn't thought that su=
ch 
defenses were needed. (Esp. since Fudge was promoting attitudes of denial 
about LV's return).

GW again:
and since we already know of  spells that record voice (howlers) it is not =
a 
stretch to imagine others.

M.E.Mood:
Good point. It helps to line up these technologies according to type and 
compare, as with the photos, portraits, etc.

GW again:
Hope that helps,

M.E.Mood:
Indeed!

boyd_smythe adds:
(again, M.E.M with the numbers, also stars to indicate preferred theory)
I had always imagined that either 
1a	the seer's memory of the prophecy was extracted as in our pensieve 
scenes and deposited in a magically spelled crystal ball, 
***1b	or that the original prophecy itself was made with the use of a cryst=
al 
ball (as Professor Trelawney mentioned in her 1st POA class) which then 
contained it. ***
I like the latter.

M.E.Mood:
How would Dumbly get the crystal ball away from Sybil? Would she be so 
spaced out from getting the position and coming out of a trance that she 
wouldn't realize that DD had slipped it into his pocket?

boyd_smythe:
Either way, my assumption was that this crystal ball would contain the 
prophecy; 
the memory of the prophecy would not  remain with the seer at all. Thus, LV=
 
has not gone after Trelawney to our knowledge, because she doesn't even 
remember the prophecy.

Since they are held in crystal balls in the MoM, 
M.E.Mood:
How did the ball get from Trelawney to the Department of Mysteries?
boyd_smythe:
we know that prophecies exist outside the seer who delivers them. I think t=
hat 
during this "channeling," the seer is merely putting into words the prophec=
y 
as best they can see it
. the prophecy in its pure form (as in the crystal =
ball) 
is actually *specific* about its subjects. So Harry and LV's prophecy was *=

always* about them, but Trelawney couldn't see that clearly when she 
delivered it.

M.E.Mood:
So the crystal ball, like the pensieve, contains an account that is more 
detailed and reliable than wizard memory. Harry can see things walking 
around in Snape's memory that weren't possible for Snape to have seen at 
the time; the crystal ball contains the prophecy in greater detail than tha=
t 
which DD heard Sybil actually say at the time.

boyd_smythe:
But since The Prophecy *is* specifically about HP/LV, the crystal ball that=
 
holds it *could* have been accessible only to them from the very moment it =

was uttered by Trelawney. That would be part of the magic of the crystal ba=
ll-
-it responds only to the true subjects of the prophecy it contains. Perhaps=
 
even to the point of showing their initials on its label.

M.E.Mood:
It reminds me of the spell DD built into the Mirror of Erised; it could onl=
y show/
manifest the Stone to someone who didn't have the intention of exploiting i=
t. 
That is, there's a magic that keys into ownership.

Melinda /Meltowne adds:
(paraphrase)
While only the person with the initials etched on the prophecy can remove i=
t 
from the shelf, after it's been removed, others can hold. (that's why Nevil=
le 
was carrying it for awhile, and, adds M.E.M, why the DEs wanted Harry to 
give the ball to them once it was off the shelf).

Msbeadsley reaches for another box of kleenex and contributes:
(how the recording mechanism takes down information)
I have talked myself out of and back into your interpretation (mostly) sinc=
e I 
started this reply; the out of is because the notion that there is a "recor=
der" 
leaves me with the impression that what we'd see if that were true is 
Dumbledore, who was the person speaking to the recorder, recounting what 
he saw and heard. But then I thought of the Pensieve; what we saw when the =

globes were broken in the MoM is exactly like Dumbledore's recreation of 
Trelawny's prophecy in the Pensieve: the "Star Wars/Princess Leia action 
figure" of the actual seer, animated and intoning the actual prediction. 
***Ergo: the (any) Pensieve *is* the recording device, and the media, the 
globe, is the result of a particular spell.***

M.E.Mood:
Is anyone familiar with the history of the pensieve? Is there more than one=
 of 
them? Was it invented by DD?

Msbeadsley continues:
Doesn't there also almost have to be a spell allowing any prophecy to be 
"previewed," without having to break the sphere to see what's inside? 
Wouldn't there almost have to be? I mean, what if the fire sprinkler system=
 
went off in the prophesy room and all the labels were washed off (I know, b=
ut 
I hope you get my point. And how was the label changed to reflect Harry's 
name once Voldemort had "marked" him if no known individual other than 
Voldemort was authorized to touch it then without suffering madness? I thin=
k 
someone else asked this, but if there were any satisfactory answers, I miss=
ed 
them.)

M.E.Mood:
As someone who has many a problem with maintaining a filing system I 
amparticularly curious about this. How does one file the future, anyway?

Msbeadsley continues:
A passage about the prophesy also reminds me of another debate. 
Dumbledore says, "The thing that smashed was merely the record of the 
prophesy kept by the Department of Mysteries. But the prophecy was 
made to somebody, and that person has the means of recalling it 
perfectly." We are shown that means: the Pensieve. Taken as a whole, 
that's a pretty solid argument that Pensieve thoughts (like 
MWPP/Snape) have a higher degree of accuracy than just random 
memories; it would (or could be said to) argue against the notion 
that Pensieve thoughts or memories are skewed by the user's biases.

M.E.Mood:
That could prove helpful in a court of law.

Msbeadsley:

when Trelawny made her first prophesy, Dumbledore was there. Then 
when Trelawny made her second prophesy, Harry was there. I think the 
prophesies make themselves heard to or are triggered by the presence of 
persons who are/who are to be instrumental/smack dab center stage in the 
events to come. And if that's true, there are some ramifications...like, ar=
e they 
*warnings*? What is the magic behind them? That's a mystery I want 
answered by the end of Book 7.

M.E.Mood:
I do like this idea of a seer who has no idea when she sees because she's 
blind to her true ability. It reminds me a bit of Luna, although Ms. Lovego=
od 
seems a bit more self-possessed, less prone to hit the sherry.

Thanks again for these theories. I'm glad that something I wrote on the spu=
r 
actually activated an interesting exchange. Gratifying.

Peace out~











From riberam at glue.umd.edu  Wed Sep 17 20:23:19 2003
From: riberam at glue.umd.edu (Maria Ribera)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 16:23:19 -0400
Subject: Nicolas Flamel and the Priory of Sion
In-Reply-To: <1063684856.27813.25715.m15@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <C6D505CC-E94C-11D7-8718-000393987376@glue.umd.edu>

No: HPFGUIDX 81027

Hi! I'm reading the book "The Da Vinci Code", which i'm finding very 
interesting, and i have found two HP related things (and i'm only half 
way through) that i'd like to share.
First, the main character is talking with his editor, i believe, and he 
refers to the biggest bestseller of all time, meaning the Bible, and 
the editor answers something like "What, Harry Potter?"
The second is an enumeration of all the Grand Masters that the Priory 
of Sion (keepers of the secret of the Holy Grail), which includes Da 
Vinci and Newton among others, and guess who is in the list: our dear 
old friend Nicolas Flamel!
Kind of silly message, but i thought i'd pass it along.

Maria




From sofdog_2000 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 20:32:05 2003
From: sofdog_2000 at yahoo.com (sofdog_2000)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 20:32:05 -0000
Subject: Nicolas Flamel and the Priory of Sion
In-Reply-To: <C6D505CC-E94C-11D7-8718-000393987376@glue.umd.edu>
Message-ID: <bkagc5+gbc8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81028

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Maria Ribera <riberam at g...> 
wrote:
> Hi! I'm reading the book "The Da Vinci Code", which i'm finding 
very 
> interesting, and i have found two HP related things (and i'm only 
half 
> way through) that i'd like to share.
> First, the main character is talking with his editor, i believe, 
and he 
> refers to the biggest bestseller of all time, meaning the Bible, 
and 
> the editor answers something like "What, Harry Potter?"
> The second is an enumeration of all the Grand Masters that the 
Priory 
> of Sion (keepers of the secret of the Holy Grail), which includes 
Da 
> Vinci and Newton among others, and guess who is in the list: our 
dear 
> old friend Nicolas Flamel!
> Kind of silly message, but i thought i'd pass it along.
> 
> Maria



Sof:

Flamel has probably been covered in the FAQ's or something. Here's 
what a quick websearch turned up:

http://www.alchemylab.com/flamel.htm




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Wed Sep 17 20:44:16 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 20:44:16 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy: who notified Dumbledore?
In-Reply-To: <bkaf1b+46th@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkah30+bfbv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81030

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Grey Wolf" <greywolf1 at j...> 
wrote:
> > n_longbottom01: 
> > > 2.  Who notified Dumbledore about the change in trial date?
> > > 
> > 

<snipped>

> 
> I don't think Percy is a spy for Dumbledore, but if he is he's so 
> undercover (looking that much of a git means he's *really* 
undercover, 
> IMO) he wouldn't risk blowing it for such a minor matter as a 
change of 
> time for a hearing.
> 


Geoff:
I'm afraid I don't agree at all that this is a "minor matter". I get 
a distinct impression that the change of time and venue had been 
deliberately designed so that Harry would be late which would count 
against him in the eyes of those who supported Fudge and Dumbledore 
would miss the hearing and that it was a plot to discredit Harry and 
also find him guilty. 

Let's take a look at canon.......

"A cold male voice rang across the courtroom. 
'You're late.'
'Sorry,' said Harry nervously, 'I - I didn't now the time had been 
changed.'
'That is not the Wizengamot's fault,' said the voice, 'An owl was 
sent to you this morning. Take your seat'".

"'Very well,' said Fudge, 'The accused being present - finally - let 
us begin....'"

Not guaranteed to help the state of mind of a 15 year old being 
trated as if he was guilty of a triple murder judging by the number 
of Wizengamot members present.

"'Ah,' said Fudge, who looked thoroughly disconcerted. 'Dumbledore. 
Yes. You - er - get our - er - message that the time and - er - place 
of the hearing had been changed then?'
'I must have missed it,' said Dumbledore cheerfully. 'However, due to 
a lucky mistake, I arrived at the Ministry three hours early, so no 
harm done.'
'Yes - well - I suppose we'll need another chair - I - Weasley, could 
you - ?'

My reaction at that point even on first reading was "Liar. You 
weren't expewcting him because you'd tried to stop him. I bet an owl 
never went."

If Dumbledore had not been there, Harry would probably have had to 
try to defend himself and what would the outcome have been? Were they 
preapred to pack him off to Azkaban or just expel him to remove any 
influence he might have?

Definitely smacks of modern totalitarian states......




From pegruppel at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 21:02:51 2003
From: pegruppel at yahoo.com (Peggy)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 21:02:51 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy
In-Reply-To: <bka8j3+tr4b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkai5r+7fma@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81031

Snip, snip
n_longbottom01:
> 
> I don't think I am as far from your "something is *wrong*" with 
Percy 
> interpretation as you might think.  I like Percy too, and I was 
> pretty disappointed in him in OotP.  I did see an unpleasant, and 
> startling change in Percy's character, like you did.  It's just 
that 
> it didn't occur to me, on my own, that this change was caused by 
> anything other than Percy's own ambition.
> 
> I guess I saw this change in Percy as the next big step in the path 
> he has been on from the beginning.  That's what I meant when I said 
> that I didn't think that Percy was acting out of character in OotP. 
> There has been a change in Percy's character, but I saw it as a 
> progressive change, so it didn't set off my Imperius Curse detector 
> as I read through the book.
> 
> So, don't get me wrong; when Percy sent back his Christmas sweater, 
I 
> didn't think to myself, "That's Percy for you, what a jerk."  I 
> expect better from him, but he is making poor choices.
> 
> You are right, Rebecca, differing interpretations are what make 
this 
> list so fun.  Now that I've seen theories like Undercover Percy I 
am 
> holding onto some hope (however small) that the Percy we see in 
OotP 
> isn't as bad as he seems.


Peg here:

I'll agree with both of you--my gut reaction to Percy in OOP 
was "What is wrong here?  Percy is a twit, but I never thought he'd 
be quite *such* a twit."

He's been a major pain in the tuckus, but he's also shown how much he 
cares for his family (Cos--hiding in his dorm when Ginny goes 
missing, GoF when he helps Ron and Harry from the water).

My hunch is that there is much, much more to this than we can see.  
Undercover!Percy hadn't occurred to me until I saw it on the list, 
but Imperio'd!Percy certainly did.  

Ron is almost always wrong, when he's not making a joke.  No, I'm not 
changing topics, just leading up to a little canon:

GoF, American edition, p.534-- 

"Percy would never throw any of his family to the dementors," said 
Hermione severely.
"I don't know," said Ron, "If he thought we were standing in the way 
of his career . . . Percy's really ambitious, you know . . ."

I think Ron's reverse Seer function came into play there.  My money 
(all 2 cents of it) is on Percy being deep undercover or in very, 
very deep trouble.

Peg




From christyj2323 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 21:17:47 2003
From: christyj2323 at yahoo.com (Christy)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 21:17:47 -0000
Subject: Firenze, Trelawney and predictions
Message-ID: <bkaj1r+3tur@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81032

I have a question, that has been nagging me for awhile now, so I'm
hoping that somebody here has a thought.

We know that Sybil predicted the prophesy and Dumbledore tells Harry
that at the time it was predicted it could have applied to either
Harry or Neville (and is still up for debate as to which one it may
currently apply to).

We also have head a couple times from Firenze who says that even the
Centaurs have made mistakes reading the stars.

My question is this: Is it possible that the future is set but it can
also be changed by the actions that people take to the point of
completely changing what would have been(like in the case of the
prediction... one rash act by Voldemort and the entire future is
altered)? Which might help explain further why time-turners have been
banned... What do others think? Am I nuts?

Christy




From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 21:19:49 2003
From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 21:19:49 -0000
Subject: Hermione's career (will she survive?)
In-Reply-To: <20030917160230.10814.qmail@web60203.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bkaj5l+h1mo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81033

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, udder_pen_dragon <udderpd at y...> 
wrote:
> <snip>
> I have snipped everything because I am far from certain
> that she will survive book 7.
> <snip>

to which I (Richard) reply:

JKR has repeatedly stated that Hermione is based upon HER, which 
makes me really wonder if JKR will be ... or ever has been ... 
willing to kill a character that isn't just nearest her heart, but in 
a real sense IS her heart.  True, JKR has said that the deaths will 
continue, and that there is a death in the future that will REALLY 
make her cry, while she writes it, but there are several other 
characters that are near and dear to her, including Dumbledore, 
Hagrid, Ron and (of course) Harry, among others.  (I suspect she has 
a special place in her heart for McGonagall, too.)

My top candidate for closest dead friend is Ron, not Hermione.  As 
things stand, it would hit Harry harder to see RON dead than 
Hermione.  Remember, in one passage of OotP, when Harry is worrying 
about who might get killed, he thinks first of Ron, then Hermione.  
Time and hormones might well change that order, but for now, it is 
Ron that I am more concerned about.

As for your belief that Harry cannot survive facing Voldemort alone, 
you have a canonical problem.  He already HAS faced Voldemort alone, 
and lived to tell the tale, or (in the case of the Godric's Hollow 
encounter) have others tell him something of it.  Further, we know 
from the prophecy that he has the power to vanquish Voldemort.  
Whether he does in fact face Voldemort alone in their final encounter 
is an open question, at least until JKR tells us about it, but saying 
that Harry CANNOT face Voldemort alone and survive misses much.  The 
question is really one of circumstance.

It is interesting to note that Harry has faced the AK curse several 
times, now, and none of them have killed him.  The reasons for this 
are several.  We still don't have the definitive tale of what 
happened at Godric's Hollow, but Lucius Malfoy tried to use it on him 
in the CoS movie, being interupted by Dobby.  Voldemort has taken two 
other shots at him that I can think of, one in the graveyard in GoF, 
and one in the Battle of the Ministry in OotP.  In the former, he 
avoided it by leaving, and in the other a statue took the shot.  All 
this leaves open a very interesting question: will ANY AK curse work 
on Harry, particularly one from Voldemort?  I suspect yes, but there 
may be a reason why JKR has all these potshots being taken at 
Harry ... and missing.  We may be being set up for the big duel, when 
we find out that, thanks to Harry's power (that LV knows not), his 
mother's sacrifice, or whatever, that Harry is IMMUNE to the AK.  
This would certainly set Voldemort back on his heels in shock, giving 
Harry a beautiful opportunity to return the favor ... or curse, in 
this case.






From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Wed Sep 17 21:27:45 2003
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 21:27:45 -0000
Subject: Firenze, Trelawney and predictions
In-Reply-To: <bkaj1r+3tur@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkajkh+nt3p@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81034

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Christy" <christyj2323 at y...> 
wrote:
> I have a question, that has been nagging me for awhile now, so I'm
> hoping that somebody here has a thought.
> 
> We know that Sybil predicted the prophesy and Dumbledore tells Harry
> that at the time it was predicted it could have applied to either
> Harry or Neville (and is still up for debate as to which one it may
> currently apply to).
> 
> We also have head a couple times from Firenze who says that even the
> Centaurs have made mistakes reading the stars.
> 
> My question is this: Is it possible that the future is set but it 
can
> also be changed by the actions that people take to the point of
> completely changing what would have been(like in the case of the
> prediction... one rash act by Voldemort and the entire future is
> altered)? Which might help explain further why time-turners have 
been
> banned... What do others think? Am I nuts?
> 
> Christy

It wouldn't surprise me at all. It is my strong opinion, that people 
take Dumbledore's interpretation of the prophecy way to literally, 
and the outcome will somehow be different from this interpretation. 
And I agree that Firenze's lesson is the clue to this. In this 
chapter, JKR basically says "be careful with trying to read the 
future. It will turn out differently, than you expect." 

Hickengruendler




From greywolf1 at jazzfree.com  Wed Sep 17 21:29:48 2003
From: greywolf1 at jazzfree.com (Grey Wolf)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 21:29:48 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy: who notified Dumbledore?
In-Reply-To: <bkah30+bfbv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkajoc+un6a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81035

Grey Wolf wrote:
> > I don't think Percy is a spy for Dumbledore, but if he is he's so 
> > undercover (looking that much of a git means he's *really* 
> > undercover, IMO) he wouldn't risk blowing it for such a minor 
> > matter as a change of time for a hearing.

> Geoff:
> I'm afraid I don't agree at all that this is a "minor matter". I get 
> a distinct impression that the change of time and venue had been 
> deliberately designed so that Harry would be late which would count 
> against him in the eyes of those who supported Fudge and Dumbledore 
> would miss the hearing and that it was a plot to discredit Harry and 
> also find him guilty. 

We agree on that, but I think you have missinterpreted what I mean by 
minor matter. Lets consider for a moment that Percy is, indeed, an 
undercover agent for Dumbledore. Why is he there? it cannot be for some 
quick spying, certainly. Percy has severed all connections to his 
family (some have suggested that his parents might now he's a spy for 
Dumbledore. I very much doubt it. They certainly don't need to know and 
their knowing it might endanger Percy's cover). This is something you 
do not do lightly. Even if he is a spy, he might never regain the 
confidence of his family once his job is finished.

No, if Percy is there to spy (and again, I think he's just an idiot), 
he shouldn't blow his cover (and contacting Dumbledore as has been 
suggesting *is* a major hit to his cover at that point, one that he 
shouldn't attempt lightly in case he is dicovered) for just Harry's 
trial. Lets see why

> "A cold male voice rang across the courtroom. 
> 'You're late.'
> 'Sorry,' said Harry nervously, 'I - I didn't now the time had been 
> changed.'
> 'That is not the Wizengamot's fault,' said the voice, 'An owl was 
> sent to you this morning. Take your seat'".
> 
> "'Very well,' said Fudge, 'The accused being present - finally - let 
> us begin....'"
> 
> Not guaranteed to help the state of mind of a 15 year old being 
> trated as if he was guilty of a triple murder judging by the number 
> of Wizengamot members present.

Yes, I agree the whole show was trying to bend the rules so they could 
expell Harry from Hogwarts because they knew they had no case.

> "'Ah,' said Fudge, who looked thoroughly disconcerted. 'Dumbledore. 
> Yes. You - er - get our - er - message that the time and - er - place 
> of the hearing had been changed then?'
> 'I must have missed it,' said Dumbledore cheerfully. 'However, due to 
> a lucky mistake, I arrived at the Ministry three hours early, so no 
> harm done.'
> 'Yes - well - I suppose we'll need another chair - I - Weasley, could 
> you - ?'
> 
> My reaction at that point even on first reading was "Liar. You 
> weren't expewcting him because you'd tried to stop him. I bet an owl 
> never went."

This is most certainly not the case. Owls eventually arrive, even if 
they arrive late. If no owl had arrived, Dumbledore could've used that 
to demonstrate that the change had been invalid. Look at the rules you 
quoted:

"That is not the Wizengamot's fault,' said the voice, 'An owl was sent 
to you this morning."

No owl, big trouble. Remember that even if Fudge is running the show, 
the decission rests in Mrs. Bones, who is throughout fully impartial 
and all-around good judge.

> If Dumbledore had not been there, Harry would probably have had to 
> try to defend himself and what would the outcome have been? Were they 
> preapred to pack him off to Azkaban or just expel him to remove any 
> influence he might have?
> 
> Definitely smacks of modern totalitarian states...

OK, now my turn. What, indeed, would have been the result? Harry might 
have been sent to Azkaban, bu that is very doubtful - Fudge is 
dellusional, but not even him is so all-powerful he can send a 15 year 
old to Azkaban. Harry *might* have been expelled, and his wand broken 
indeed, and of all this, only the wand is a big deal since it is a nice 
anti-Voldemort weapon. Dumbledore would have found a way to get Harry 
into Hogwarts, even with Umbridge around. He managed it with Hagrid, 
and he was suspect of murder, after all.

What is more, we know that Dumbledore expected something like that time 
change, which is why he was 3 hours early (he says it is coincidence. 
It is obvious he is lying, but if you have doubts, how is it that a 
squib that doesn't work at the ministry was 3 hours early too?). The 
time change and place change is a hit bellow the waist, but one that 
Dumbledore was expecting, and thus Percy didn't need to blow his cover.

Or maybe you mean Percy knew a couple of days beforeand told Dumbledore 
then. But sincerely, since the very first moment I could tell that 
Fudge would use every dirty trick on the book to get Harry, and 
Dumbledore is much more intelligent than I am (and knows the MoM 
better). Thus, my point: it *is* a minor matter. Dumbledore was keeping 
watch over the entire thing and he had friends inside the judge panel 
and so on. If Percy is the ultimate spy (and he must be, to not 
communicate with the rest of OoP, just with Dumbledore), it is 
downright dangerous that he threatens his cover over this manouvering 
that Dumbledore could probably see coming from a mile away.

Hope that helps,

Grey Wolf





From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 21:38:21 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 21:38:21 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy: who notified Dumbledore?
In-Reply-To: <bkacop+tddf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkak8d+sgce@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81036

 n_longbottom01 (81021):

(snipped)
 Who notified Dumbledore about the change in trial date?

1.  Percy 
 
2.  One of the Aurors who works for the Order could have seen Arthur 
and Harry rushing off to the trial
 
3.  Maybe Arthur had time to contact Dumbledore himself, after he 
sends Harry into the courtroom alone.
 
4.  Possibly some of the portraits of former Headmasters could have 
been keeping an eye on Harry at the MoM 

EXCELLENT points, all of them.  I never considered anyone but Percy 
or Shacklebolt, and I had a hard time crediting Shacklebolt because 
he wouldn't have known beforehand (but he was in the office that 
morning; we saw him speaking w/ Harry and Arthur, so he could have 
seen them, got Dumbledore right away etc.)
Hickengruendler adds there is a portrait of a former headmaster near 
the DoM, right by where the trial takes place.
I actually like the idea of Arthur doing it but wonder if he sat 
right outside the courtroom the whole time.  The portrait makes a lot 
of sense, as does Grey Wolf's idea that it could have been Marchbanks 
or Ogden (although I don't agree that the time and place change was 
a "minor" matter at all).
I don't think we could cite Dumbledore's notification as evidence 
that Percy is acting as spy, because of the clear possibility that 
there are so many others who could have done this job.  Which brings 
me to another point: it seems Dumbledore has eyes and ears all over 
the Ministry already.  If Percy was doing something undercover, what 
else could it be?  It makes me think about what Arthur is up to (oh, 
am I bringing that up again?) -- there are Unspeakables, there are 
Aurors, there's the Order -- and Arthur has been doing something that 
predates the Order and is critical to Dumbledore.  I just don't know 
what.
hg.




From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Wed Sep 17 21:39:20 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 21:39:20 -0000
Subject: Firenze, Trelawney and predictions
In-Reply-To: <bkaj1r+3tur@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkaka8+rcrd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81037

Christy wrote:
> I have a question, that has been nagging me for awhile now, so I'm
> hoping that somebody here has a thought.
> 
> We know that Sybil predicted the prophesy and Dumbledore tells Harry
> that at the time it was predicted it could have applied to either
> Harry or Neville (and is still up for debate as to which one it may
> currently apply to).
> 
> We also have head a couple times from Firenze who says that even the
> Centaurs have made mistakes reading the stars.
> 
> My question is this: Is it possible that the future is set but it 
can
> also be changed by the actions that people take to the point of
> completely changing what would have been(like in the case of the
> prediction... one rash act by Voldemort and the entire future is
> altered)? Which might help explain further why time-turners have 
been
> banned... What do others think? Am I nuts?
> 
> Christy <


Well, one example of a prophecy that went wrong can be found in POA. 
Trelawney looks at Harry's tea leaves on the first day of Divination 
and sees...a Grim! (then everyone freaks out except Hermione, who 
decides not to believe in *any* of Trelawney's predictions)

But if we look closer, Trelawney *saw* a genuine sign. She just 
misinterpreted it. She thought the dog sign was a Grim. It was 
actually Sirius.

So IMO Firenze is saying that the error lies in the observers, not
the signs themselves.

Also note a couple of the other predictions Trelawney made that first 
day that also came true. Neville dropped a teacup. Parvati got
dreaded news on the 16th. Looks like Divination is for real in the
Potterverse (Firenze thinks so), but the interpretation is quite a 
fallible art.

So whether the future can be changed may be a moot point: if the 
interpretation of the signs is imperfect, then the future is never 
predicted with reliability. So at the end of the series, we'll just 
look back at the prophecy and say, "oh, that's what it meant!"

Or maybe these are all just more red herrings from our beloved JKR.

-Remnant, who keeps tartar sauce in his refrigerator just in case




From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 21:48:04 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 21:48:04 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy
In-Reply-To: <bkai5r+7fma@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkakqk+9p8r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81038

post 81031 Peggy (snipped):  "...my gut reaction to Percy in OOP 
was 'What is wrong here?  Percy is a twit, but I never thought he'd 
be quite *such* a twit.' My hunch is that there is much, much more to 
this than we can see. Undercover!Percy hadn't occurred to me until I 
saw it on the list, but Imperio'd!Percy certainly did.  
 
Ron is almost always wrong, when he's not making a joke.   
GoF, American edition, p.534-- 'Percy would never throw any of his 
family to the dementors,' said Hermione severely.
'I don't know,' said Ron, 'If he thought we were standing in the way 
of his career . . . Percy's really ambitious, you know . . .'

My money (all 2 cents of it) is on Percy being deep undercover or in 
very, very deep trouble."

hg replies:
What I like about this, Peggy, is that it includes the theme of the 
CHOICES we make: how does Percy's family CHOOSE to respond to his 
behavior?  Molly is the only one who tries to reach out to him, at 
least twice, as far as we know.  No one seems worried about him 
except her; the rest are angry and assuming the worst.  I think 
that's dreadful.  I caught a glimmer of concern from Ginny, in the 
scene where the kids are filling Harry in on the Percy story, and it 
was such a vague glimmer I can't attribute any specific feeling to it.
hg.





From jdr0918 at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 17 21:52:55 2003
From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 21:52:55 -0000
Subject: The 'Other' in the HP books (was: Harry's Sexual Preference
In-Reply-To: <bka9j2+a68g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkal3n+c42c@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81039

<<<"Mev532" wrote:...This debate has been going on about using 
characters for political action and including homosexual characters 
in the HP books...An twelve year old child understands cruelty, good 
vs evil, and death...but not topics such as oral sex or homosexual 
relationships...>>>

The Sergeant Majorette says

Oral sex --ick, no, but that's not the same thing as a homosexual 
(let's say, rather, same-gender) relationship. My personal feeling is 
that no twelve-year old should know enough about sex to determine 
his/her sexual orientation, but I am reliably informed that children 
begin to explore their options in this matter as early as seven or 
eight; it is valuable therefore to have characters who might be 
homosexual whose sexuality does not disrupt the order of the universe.

Actually, outside of the graveyard scene in GoF (which I thought was 
a bit more gruesome than I would have been comfortable with if I were 
a parent), the violence and death is not terribly graphic, and the 
Big Cho Chang Kiss -- shucks, you could have read that aloud in 
Sunday School.

Nobody wants to see actual sex, homo- or hetero-, in the Harry Potter 
books. I think we more or less all agree, however, that JKR has given 
us enough template characters to which each reader can add 
embellishments that make the story his/her own.

--JDR




From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Wed Sep 17 22:01:01 2003
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 22:01:01 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy: who notified Dumbledore?
In-Reply-To: <bkak8d+sgce@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkalit+jg4d@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81040

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hermionegallo" 
<hermionegallo at y...> wrote:
 
> 
> EXCELLENT points, all of them.  I never considered anyone but Percy 
> or Shacklebolt, and I had a hard time crediting Shacklebolt because 
> he wouldn't have known beforehand (but he was in the office that 
> morning; we saw him speaking w/ Harry and Arthur, so he could have 
> seen them, got Dumbledore right away etc.)
> Hickengruendler adds there is a portrait of a former headmaster 
near 
> the DoM, right by where the trial takes place.
> I actually like the idea of Arthur doing it but wonder if he sat 
> right outside the courtroom the whole time.  The portrait makes a 
lot 
> of sense, as does Grey Wolf's idea that it could have been 
Marchbanks 
> or Ogden (although I don't agree that the time and place change was 
> a "minor" matter at all).

There is another possibility. I got the idea, while I was reading 
Grey Wolfs post about Marchbanks and Odgen. Amelia Bones could have 
notified Dumbledore. She seems to be a pretty fair and reasonable 
woman (as far as we can tell from her short page time). Maybe she was 
shocked, that Harry was made a process in front of the whole 
Wizengamot, as if he was a Death Eater or murderer. So she could have 
sent a message to Dumbledore, to make sure, that Harry at least gets 
some proper defense.

>   Which brings 
> me to another point: it seems Dumbledore has eyes and ears all over 
> the Ministry already.  If Percy was doing something undercover, 
what 
> else could it be?   

None of the other ears of Dumbledore at the Ministry isn't that close 
to Fudge, as Percy is. That means none of them knows as much about 
Fudge's plans as Percy. Even the portraits can't hear everything. 
Having a spy that close to Fudge would be very important from 
Dumbledore, and because is that close to Fudge, Percy is more likely 
to get fired than any other member of the mistry, if Fudge doesn't 
trust him completely. That's the main reason, why I, too, think, that 
undercover Percy is at least possible. But I have big problems with 
his behaviour at Christmas. That's why I think Git!Percy or Imperio'd!
Percy is more likely. Someone kidnapped and replaced was already 
done, as a much more important part of the plot than putting the 
Imperio curse on Krum. I don't think JKR will use another Polyjuiced 
Storyline.

Hickengruendler




From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 22:21:29 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 22:21:29 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy: who notified Dumbledore?
In-Reply-To: <bkalit+jg4d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkamp9+jk8p@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81041

hickengruendler post 81040:

Amelia Bones could have notified Dumbledore. She seems to be a pretty 
fair and reasonable woman (as far as we can tell from her short page 
time). Maybe she was shocked, that Harry was made a process in front 
of the whole Wizengamot, as if he was a Death Eater or murderer. So 
she could have sent a message to Dumbledore, to make sure, that Harry 
at least gets some proper defense.

hg replying:
Yet another excellent point.  And might I add one more that just 
occurs to me?  Dumbledore got to the Ministry, finds he's missed the 
trial, and whips out the trusty ol' time turner.  It would also 
explain how he was able to scramble Arabella up there in time, 
wouldn't it?

hickengruendler:
None of the other ears of Dumbledore at the Ministry isn't that close 
to Fudge, as Percy is. That means none of them knows as much about 
Fudge's plans as Percy, and because [he] is that close to Fudge, 
Percy is more likely to get fired than any other member of the 
ministry, if Fudge doesn't trust him completely. 

hg:
Makes a LOT of sense.  But -- one thing bugs me:
So how would that have come about?  Why would Fudge be offering Percy 
that job after the Inquiry?  Would Dumbledore have prompted Percy on 
how to behave through it all?  I did get the impression that Percy 
was extremely rattled by the whole thing (Molly and Bill talking w/ 
Harry before third TW task).  Could it have been that Fudge saw an 
opportunity to drive a wedge between the Weasleys?  Or that Malfoy 
saw that opportunity and "advised" Fudge to act on it?  And that it 
could have been improved upon by putting the Imperious on Percy?  
Could it have been that Percy was allowed to believe he was in worse 
trouble than he was, but was given an opportunity to "redeem" 
himself?  Could it have been that Percy was Wormtail at that point 
and silkily talked himself out of the Inquiry and into the right-hand-
man spot?
Point being: as much as I love spy/Percy, how would Dumbledore get 
him into that job?  More generally, how did it come about that he got 
it at all?

hg.






From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Wed Sep 17 22:37:54 2003
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 22:37:54 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy: who notified Dumbledore?
In-Reply-To: <bkamp9+jk8p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkano2+4qh3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81042

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hermionegallo" 
<hermionegallo at y...> wrote:
 
> Point being: as much as I love spy/Percy, how would Dumbledore get 
> him into that job?  More generally, how did it come about that he 
got 
> it at all?
> 
> hg.

Fudge offered Percy the job, because he hoped, Percy would spy on the 
Weasley's. But then Dumbledore turned the table and Percy spied on 
Fudge, instead. And Fudge didn't want to fire him, because he is such 
an excellent minion (or rather seems to be).

I have another problem with the spy!Percy theory. Why doesn't the 
truth come out, after Fudge admitts that Voldie is back. No need 
anymore for Percy, to work as a spy. Or maybe Dumbledore still 
doesn't trust Fudge completely and told Percy, to continue his part 
as a spy?

Hickengruendler




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 22:59:57 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 22:59:57 -0000
Subject: TBAY: MAGIC DISHWASHER (Spying Game...) Party "Crasher"
In-Reply-To: <bka1dm+to3u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkap1d+us3e@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81043

"I didn't land on anybody, did I?" Captain Sandy calls out and leans 
over the edge of the AIRSHIP FANCY's gondola and peers anxiously 
around the Safe House's front yard. "I hadn't planned to set down, 
honestly, but I saw the party--" she breaks off abruptly to lunge for 
the collar of an enormous but somehow not entirely tangible black 
dog, which is intent on scrambling over the side.

"Hang on, Snuffles! Yes, I'll ask if there's any barbeque left and if 
anyone is willing to share with you." Captain Sandy pulls off her 
goggles and doffs her hat, then drags her fingers through a very bad 
case of goggle 'n' hat hair. "He's been smelling the meat, you see."

With an abrupt leap, the dog breaks Captain Sandy's hold and begins 
racing in circles through the assembled guests. "Hold on, Snuffles! 
Dammit! Come back here!" she shouts. The dog ignores her utterly, and 
Captain Sandy turns to address a couple of the barbeque attendees.

"Well, he's just excited. I lowered an Extendable Ear, you see, and 
we heard that stuff about Dumbledore and I couldn't get him to stop 
barking, 'I didn't die in vain!'  Thinks he's the ghost of Sirius 
Black's Animagus form, you know. Or something. Thought he'd be 
welcome here, at least to stretch his legs. I guess we're gonna find 
out."

Captain Sandy pulls a swath of balloon silk up out of the bottom of 
the gondola and uses it to scrub the worst of the smudges from her 
face. "I think that upgrade of the MAGIC DISHWASHER is a grand and 
glorious thing. Now there's the industrial model, it's not so likely 
to be affected by, well, anything. Ah...I got a bottle of firewhisky, 
if you're runnin' low...how 'bout a toast?"

[Sandy aka "msbeadsley" aka Captain Sandy, just completely MP'd now]




From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 18 00:14:11 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 00:14:11 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy: who notified Dumbledore?
In-Reply-To: <bkano2+4qh3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkatcj+ofs2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81044

hickengruendler post 80142
"Fudge offered Percy the job, because he hoped, Percy would spy on 
the Weasleys. But then Dumbledore turned the table and Percy spied on 
Fudge, instead. And Fudge didn't want to fire him, because he is such 
an excellent minion (or rather seems to be)."

Okay, I can see that. -- hg.

hickengruendler:
"I have another problem with the spy!Percy theory. Why doesn't the 
truth come out, after Fudge admitts that Voldie is back. No need 
anymore for Percy, to work as a spy. Or maybe Dumbledore still 
doesn't trust Fudge completely and told Percy, to continue his part  
as a spy?"

hg: 
My first response to that would be that there is little time from 
Fudge "getting it" that LV is back, to the end of the book.  
Additionally, Fudge may feel even MORE threatened by Dumbledore now, 
when the Daily Prophet has been calling DD a crazy old loon all year, 
and now look who was right (DD) and who should have been protecting 
us from LV all this time (Fudge).
To take it further, how on earth is Fudge going to respond?  We've 
seen his befuddled announcement to the WW in the DP, will he now 
start wondering about everyone on his staff -- who's playing who and 
all that?  He's going to be a nervous wreck, and that's scary.
hg.





From christyj2323 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 18 01:34:31 2003
From: christyj2323 at yahoo.com (Christy)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 01:34:31 -0000
Subject: Firenze, Trelawney and predictions
In-Reply-To: <bkaka8+rcrd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkb237+7rla@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81045

Remnant pointed out:
 
> But if we look closer, Trelawney *saw* a genuine sign. She just 
> misinterpreted it. She thought the dog sign was a Grim. It was 
> actually Sirius.

My (Christy's) comment:
Good point.

Remnant also points out:
> Also note a couple of the other predictions Trelawney made that first 
> day that also came true. Neville dropped a teacup. Parvati got
> dreaded news on the 16th. Looks like Divination is for real in the
> Potterverse (Firenze thinks so), but the interpretation is quite a 
> fallible art.

And here, (Christy again):
OK, well I'm not so sure that Neville dropping the teacup could be a
prediction. She may have simply honed in on Neville's clumsiness, and
as soon as she said something (which I believe Hermione points out)
Neville got nervous. That may have been a self-fulfilling kind of
prophesy (meaning had she not said anything, Neville wouldn't have
dropped the cup). I also agree with Hermione's point on Parvarti's
dreaded news. Had Trewlaney said horrible news then I could agree. But
Hermione's right. Parvarti wasn't dreading her rabbit dying. Why would
she if it was just a baby?

And Remnant finished with: 
> So whether the future can be changed may be a moot point: if the 
> interpretation of the signs is imperfect, then the future is never 
> predicted with reliability. So at the end of the series, we'll just 
> look back at the prophecy and say, "oh, that's what it meant!"

Finally (Christy one more time!):
Well, I have to admit, I'd say that regardless, cause I'm not real
good at figuring out what will happen in books. But even Firenze says
that the Centaurs can be wrong and this is the point that confuses me.
If the Centaurs put so much time and effort into learning how to
predict the future, I would tend to think that they would get it
right... but Firenze implies that they don't. I'm not so sure it's
just Centaurs being falliable. Maybe I'm wrong though. Thanks for the
points... more to think on!

Christy




From thomasmwall at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 18 01:51:30 2003
From: thomasmwall at yahoo.com (Tom Wall)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 01:51:30 -0000
Subject: MAGIC DISHWASHER (TBAY INTRO): Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die!
In-Reply-To: <bka1dm+to3u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkb332+sj1c@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81046


I want to start out by complimenting Pip and the MDDT on a job well 
done. Much of what they've written strikes me as incredibly 
perceptive and rings with truth; indeed, it is a high compliment to 
Pip that she was able to discern certain key elements of 
Dumbledore's strategy way back before the release of OoP. Some of 
the stuff that she nailed on the head? Well, I'll use her words:

Pip wrote:
"Between canon for Dumbledore's undercover agents in the MoM, 
Dumbledore's announcement that he had a plan, the on-screen 
discovery that Snape is a superb actor, positive proof that 
Dumbledore has been deliberately withholding information from Harry 
and the DE's using the giants to try and kill Hagrid, the MD team 
felt it had something to celebrate."

Indeed, much of the old MAGIC DISHWASHER was affirmed in OoP. I 
recall during my first read of the book being particularly impressed 
(possibly even against my own will) by Pip's early observation that 
Dumbledore was likely to be working on a "need to know" basis; this, 
of course, is something that Molly Weasley confirms, *verbatim* in 
OoP. Well done!

But I think that we have to discuss MAGIC DISHWASHER *itself* a 
little bit here, and by that I am referring to the *original* 
precepts underlying the theory, which, when explained to a friend of 
mine, resulted in the reply: "That's a *bold* theory." I completely 
concur. It was a bold theory; and that's why it received so much 
attention (and yes, also flack) on the list. I completely agree with 
the notion that a theory itself must evolve with the books, or else 
risk becoming obsolete... so, on that note, I'd reiterate the 
repeated calls for updates to old favorites like Evil!McGonagall 
(good luck with *that* one, Elkins), Evil!Lupin, LOLLIPOPS and so 
forth. I myself plan to update DARK LADLES in light of Lupin's clear 
role as a leader within the context of the Order, which indicates 
both Dumbledore's trust in him as well as his possible agency in the 
Shrieking Shack.

However, it needs to be pointed out that one cannot simply *force* a 
theory's evolution without discussing what it *used* to be. 
Otherwise, we're not *evolving,* but instead, *replacing.* Thing is, 
the latest incarnation of MAGIC DISHWASHER sort of, well...

<Tom glances warily at the Wolf in the corner, from whom ominous 
growls are emanating.>

Alright. It *sidesteps* all of the old messy specifics that were the 
cause of the classic debates, many of which are stored (for your 
viewing pleasure) in Fantastic Posts and Where to Find Them.

First off, I want to point out that while the recent post was *so* 
articulate and eloquent, it seems kind of, I dunno, *tautological* 
to me. Let me explain why. 

The fundamental rule of storytelling, according to Robert McKee (the 
delightfully vociferous lecturer in 'Adaptation') is that "your 
characters must change, and that change must come from them." Let's 
take that a step further. As far as I recall, that's basically a 
corollary of the basic premise of epic-telling, namely that the 
characters must change, but also that their *world* must change as 
well. 

Epics are, at base, concerned with fundamental shifts in the status 
quo of whatever world or society with which they're concerned.

So, when we look at any of the great epics in in the past, that's 
precisely what we get: 'The Dark is Rising,' 'The Chronicles of 
Narnia,' 'The Lord of the Rings,' 'Lawrence of Arabia,' 'The Iliad' 
and 'The Odyessy,' 'Beowulf,' 'Star Wars,' 'Braveheart' and so forth 
are focused exclusively on the notion that the world with which the 
story begins is, by the end, going to be replaced with something 
better, but if not wholly better, then at *minimum,* something 
different. Yes, the characters change. But they change the world 
with them. That's what constitutes an epic.

In that sense (and again, I'm not trying to bash the MDDT here - 
that post was really *wonderful*) the recent addition to the Magic 
Dishwasher lore, well... the way I see it, since it's a foregone 
conclusion that Harry Potter is the great epic of our times, it sort 
of... goes without saying. That the Potterverse must change has been 
alluded to repeatedly in the books: goblin rebellions, giant wars, 
house elf slavery, secrecy from muggles, corruption in the Ministry 
of Magic, an underlying racism in the entirety of the WW itself, the 
destruction of the Fountain of Magic Bretheren and Dumbledore's 
commentary on it... *all* of these relate back to the basic epic 
premise, namely that the WW must change by the end.

It cannot stay the same.

I think OoP brought many of us closer to realizing that by the end, 
the house elves (while not freed as a race) will probably be 
presented at least with that choice; that the giants will have to be 
accepted into the society - somehow; the goblins will demand and 
claim the freedoms that the WW has been denying them for centuries; 
the centaurs will seek-out vindication and equal status - and will 
achieve them; muggles may very well become aware of the shift in the 
WW, and even become largely aware of the very WW *itself*; 
werewolves and, indeed, *all* half-breeds (including muggle-born 
wizards and witches) will inevitably be established firmly as on 
equal footing with the rest of the society's entrenched pure-bloods. 
Countless characters, and even Harry himself may die.

But, to return to the point, Magic Dishwasher (Mysterious Agendas 
Generate Interesting Conclusion: Dumbledore Is Secretly Hatching 
Ways to Assure Superiority for Harry in the Emerging Resolution), if 
this latest post is meant to be an addition to its extensive and 
well-defended library of thought, is now something of a misnomer. I 
thought it was sort of a misnomer before (see the posts related to 
DARK LADLES and SUNLIGHT ULTRA), but now, as Fictional!Pippin 
pointed out, it's progressed beyond itself. It really has been 
almost superceded by OoP, which takes for granted spy-lore and 
covert activities. 

*These* were some of the most important premises for the old theory.

Now, it' largely a commentary on the WW ethos, and less focused on 
its original planks. I think, in a way, this is to its own 
detriment, and least as far as continuity between novels is 
concerned.

So, I suppose that we need to ask for a bit of clarification. The 
old theory used to revolve around several basic precepts: one, that 
Snape was in the Shrieking Shack as an agent, acting on behalf of 
Dumbledore, in order to: two) ensure that Pettigrew escaped to 
Voldemort, thereby: three) facilitating (via his severed hand) a 
flaw in the potion "Flesh, Blood, and Bone," which Voldemort used to 
bring himself back to life, therefore: four) this flaw in the potion 
would enable Harry to ultimately triumph over the Dark Lord. Other 
corollaries sprang up over time: that the tasks in PS/SS were 
specifically designed for the Trio+Neville, and so forth. I couldn't 
possibly go into all of them now.

But this latest post doesn't address these at all. What about the 
Prophecy? Hasn't it nullified the "flaw in the potion" line of 
thought, unless we construct an argument that might run thusly: 
that "Albus loves Harry, and Harry's love is the power that the Dark 
Lord knows not, therefore Albus created the flaw due to love for 
Harry and so the flaw in the potion (which is still ultimately going 
to be Voldemort's demise) is completely in line with the prophecy." 
Unless we're using some kind of argument to this effect (or better, 
even) then that's not what canon tells us. It tells us that 
Voldemort will go down because 'the One' has the power to vanquish 
him. We're not even positive that 'the One' *is* Harry; Fallible!
Dumbledore opens up a whole new world of possibilities. 

My point is that the prophecy mentions nothing about a flaw in the 
potion engineered by Dumbledore. And unless we take it very 
liberally and with much salt, the Prophecy seems to nullify a great 
deal of the old MAGIC DISHWASHER in the same fashion that it's 
hobbled 'Heir of Gryffindor.'

The latest post also didn't touch on the questions of agency in the 
Shrieking Shack, as well. Was Snape the agent? Was Lupin? Were they 
coordinating? (See posts #51835 and #52129 for these variations) It 
didn't touch most of the objections to the theory from listies that 
were here long before myself, which, again, I can't go into now as 
there are far too many to do them justice.

I'd say that this is a brilliant analysis of the stories plot-
trajectory, it really is, guys. I've already sent it to a few of my 
friends. The prose is exquisite, the analysis astute and touching, 
the MDDT's understanding of the story's symbolism is both 
comprehensive and admirable. But in my opinion, and if I have any 
understanding of the original basics for it, then it's no longer 
Magic Dishwasher, but something entirely new... which is welcome, 
don't get me wrong, but still, I confess that I was really looking 
forward to the post in which the MDDT would take the canon in OoP 
and make it fall in line with the old theory. Instead, what happened 
is that they took the old theory and made it fall in line with OoP. 

It's just not the same. And in a way, Pip's analysis seems to me to 
be sort of distinct from MD, in that as I pointed out earlier, it 
sort of underlies the basic concept of epics: the world that the 
characters inhabit must undergo a fundamental change; the status quo 
cannot remain.

So, high props for your analysis, guys. Really well done; and that's 
not a clumsy attempt at sarcasm, I promise. ;-) 

But, when you have a chance, do you think that you could address all 
of the *other* stuff that's been bubbling around in our collective 
mind since OoP came out, namely how does the *Prophecy* work with 
the flaw in the potion? If you can work that into MAGIC DISHWASHER, 
then it will have truly and deservedly evolved.

-Tom




From prof_uloth at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 17 15:42:08 2003
From: prof_uloth at hotmail.com (Fred Uloth)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 07:42:08 -0800
Subject: Snape Vampire Theory
In-Reply-To: <bk7jls+okie@eGroups.com>
References: <bj30jq+ju8q@eGroups.com>
 <bk7jls+okie@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <6.0.0.22.0.20030917064726.023b3f38@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 81047

At 10:10 AM 9/16/2003, davidseppi wrote:
><snip>For me, the greatest evidence that Snape is
>indeed a vampire is in POA when Lupin is sick and Snape is covering
>his class for him.  Snape has the class write parchment in how you
>can tell a werewolf.  He does this with obvious contempt towards
>Lupin.  When Lupin "recovers" and is covering for Harry in Snape's
>office after the Hogsmead visit, Lupin refers to their essay on
>vampires in Snapes presence.  I believe this is done to get back at
>Snape for his obvious insult towards Lupin.  Just some thoughts.
>Again, forgive me if this has already been covered, I'm a newbie.

This has been a very popular theory as it pops up quite often. There has 
even been debate as to whether the pickled things in jars are Snape's past 
meals.

The classic arguments for vampire!snape are:
- The bat-like descriptions he is given
- The possible Lupin retaliation mentioned above

The classic rebuttals against vampire!Snape are:
- The bat-like descriptions are just to give characterization and should be 
taken too literally
- Lupin is above such pettiness as retaliating for the werewolf essay

Additional anti-vampire!Snape:
- We've seen Snape outside during the daylight
- He appears to eat food
- There aren't any reference to fang-like teeth whenever he bears his teeth 
or sneers

The problem of course is that we have no way of knowing what Vampires are 
like in the Potterverse until Hermione starts spouting off about them. So 
the anti-vampire stuff may not be significant. As I've never really 
followed this thread before, I have probably missed some of the juicier 
pro-vampire theories and anti-vampire theories.

Welcome to HP4GUs!
Jason (who likes to pretend that he is Fred) 




From caseys_mom at comcast.net  Thu Sep 18 00:46:09 2003
From: caseys_mom at comcast.net (yukonpup)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 00:46:09 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy: who notified Dumbledore?
In-Reply-To: <bkalit+jg4d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkav8h+3k9r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81048

 "hickengruendler said

> None of the other ears of Dumbledore at the Ministry isn't that 
close 
> to Fudge, as Percy is. That means none of them knows as much about 
> Fudge's plans as Percy. Even the portraits can't hear everything. 
> Having a spy that close to Fudge would be very important from 
> Dumbledore, and because is that close to Fudge, Percy is more 
likely 
> to get fired than any other member of the mistry, if Fudge doesn't 
> trust him completely. That's the main reason, why I, too, think, 
that 
> undercover Percy is at least possible. But I have big problems 
with 
> his behaviour at Christmas. That's why I think Git!Percy or 
Imperio'd!
> Percy is more likely. Someone kidnapped and replaced was already 
> done, as a much more important part of the plot than putting the 
> Imperio curse on Krum. I don't think JKR will use another 
Polyjuiced 
> Storyline.
> 
now me, Laurie

What if Percy agreed to be Imperio'd by DD?  Would he then be the 
perfect spy?  And would Percy and DD agree to this without Mr and 
Mrs Weasley and the fam knowing?





From furkin1712 at aol.com  Thu Sep 18 00:46:05 2003
From: furkin1712 at aol.com (furkin1712 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 20:46:05 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape's OTHER Worst Memory
Message-ID: <54.18ffb652.2c9a5a4d@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81049

Speaking of Snapes worst memories, we all know Harry never finished seeing 
the first memory...... but Snape put 3 thoughts into the jar. What could the 
other 2 possibly be? 
Remember they may not be obvious to us now, if JKR is as good as I think she 
is she'll have us guessing until the very last word, which happens to be 
'scar'.
Blue Eyes


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 18 02:50:35 2003
From: psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com (psychobirdgirl)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 02:50:35 -0000
Subject: MAGIC DISHWASHER
In-Reply-To: <bkb332+sj1c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkb6hr+efu7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81050

Perhaps this is totally missing the point but I've just had a 
thought 
concerning Magic Dishwasher, what it stood for(acronym) and all of 
the new things added.  Perhaps we could add to the safe house a 
MAGIC REFRIGERATOR.  
Meaning: Metamorphically
         Albus
         Gets
         Idea for
         Change

         Real 
         Evil 
         Fuels
         Revolution;
         Idea
         Grants 
         Evil      
         Reign;
         Aimed 
         Toward
         Opening 
         Reciprocity.


     I think that Dumbledore was sitting contemplating the rise of a 
new dark lord when the idea came to him that he must draw the new 
dark lord into power in order to reveal to the people the result of 
their prejudiced ways, and by doing so reform the society to make 
everyone equals and therefore eliminate the possibility of a new 
dark lord.
      Although I think that such a plan is inherently flawed (i.e. 
perfection is impossible, and even if possible evil would still 
manifest itself.) I do believe that with the evidence brought forth 
by bluesqueak this theory might be supported.


         --Hoping not to be totally wrong and hoping for friendly    
advice rather than hateful argument :)


                           psychobirdgirl

   





From president0084 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 20:21:36 2003
From: president0084 at yahoo.com (president0084)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 20:21:36 -0000
Subject: Snape giving Occlumency lessons
Message-ID: <bkafog+gueg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81051

I for one find it hard to believe that Snape is the only person in 
the order that could off possibly taught Harry Occlumency.

everyone I think are in agreement that Snape is a spy. the fact that 
he reported to the Order during the summer aswell as harry 
saying "spying of Voldemort, that you job isn't it" don't have book, 
but it was something along that line.

So at present the think is that Snape put information that can't fall 
into Voldemorts hands into the pensieve. All except that Voldermorts 
Loyal Death Eater is helping The Boy Who Lived. We have seen 
Voldemort punish his supporters for much less, If this fact was 
discovered it would mean Snape Death.

So the only way I can make any sense in having Snape (only spy in 
Voldemorts ranks) give Harry the lessons is to PROVE to voldemort 
that he is loyal. By weaking Harrys mind. Thus securing himself 
within Voldy's trusted servents and prove he is indeed Loyal?

As for the memory Harry seen, I think he wanted Harry see it? Would 
you leave a child, teenager, in his room. With dangerous potions 
around, and his memorys lying less than 5 feet away. Bare in mind he 
suspects Harry of Stealing from him. COS & GOF. With it not make more 
sense to have Harry walk out of the roon before Snape.

Thanks for reading my 2 cent
Jim





From prof_uloth at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 17 21:03:21 2003
From: prof_uloth at hotmail.com (Fred Uloth)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 13:03:21 -0800
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Thestrals and seeing death (was:
  Deaths at Hogwarts?)
In-Reply-To: <bk80ju+6l3k@eGroups.com>
References: <bk7tf7+7bvj@eGroups.com>
 <bk80ju+6l3k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <6.0.0.22.0.20030917125753.023a3518@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 81052

At 01:50 PM 9/16/2003, president0084 wrote:
><snip>But here is the kicker, in 4th year there is no reason
>why he shouldn't have seen them unless it didn't really count if he
>was an infant with not been able to remember or understand what was
>happening.
>
>So Harry's been able to see the thestrals happened by either the
>event of the 3rd task or seeing the memory of his mother dieing.

You've covered all their arrivals, but what about departures? He should 
have seen them at the end of book four after they said bye to Krum and 
Fluer. What is the anti-Flint argument there? Harry hadn't come to terms 
with the death? He was overcome by Fluer's veela magic? As shocked as he 
was to see them in OoP I can't believe he wouldn't have noticed them at the 
end of GoF.

Jason




From historygrrl1 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 18 06:02:53 2003
From: historygrrl1 at yahoo.com (historygrrl1)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 06:02:53 -0000
Subject: Snape giving Occlumency lessons
In-Reply-To: <bkafog+gueg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkbhqd+6218@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81053

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "president0084" 
<president0084 at y...> wrote:
> I for one find it hard to believe that Snape is the only person in 
> the order that could off possibly taught Harry Occlumency.
> 
> everyone I think are in agreement that Snape is a spy. the fact 
that 
> he reported to the Order during the summer aswell as harry 
> saying "spying of Voldemort, that you job isn't it" don't have 
book, 
> but it was something along that line.
> 

I don't know if this issue has been discussed before or not, but I am 
not at all certain that Snape is spying on Voldemort.  

In Book 1, Snape worked against Quirrell, and therefore against 
Voldemort, who was riding around on the back of Quirrell's head.  
Snape may be able to sheild his thoughts against Voldemort's 
intrusion, but he can hardly sheild Voldemort's own memories.  At the 
end of Book 1, Voldemort tells Harry it was convenient to have Snape 
providing an evil-looking distraction, but it must also have been an 
obstacle to V's goals.  Quirrell/Voldemort knew that that Snape was 
directly thwarting him in a variety of ways, including guarding the 
Philosopher's Stone.  I don't see how Snape could walk in to a 
gathering of Death Eaters and pass himself off as a loyal supporter.  
Surely, even if Snape didn't actually encounter Lord V in the process 
of spying on him, V would pass the word to his loyal followers to be 
on the lookout.  If Snape is spying on Voldemort, he must be doing it 
in some sort of disguise or from hiding.  Occlumency alone wouldn't 
be enough.

That said, I think Snape's exceptional abilities as an Occlumens are 
probably a large part of what makes him valuable to the Order.  
Whatever he's doing, it seems to involve risk of contact with 
Voldemort.  But should that contact ever happen, I don't think Snape 
has any chance of making Voldemort believe that he's still loyal.  
The best he'll be able to do is protect what he knows about the Order 
and its plans.  I think Snape's main function as a secret agent is 
probably something like sabotage or analysis, with intelligence 
gathering taking a back seat.  He could be monitoring known DE 
gathering spots, but it seems unlikely that he is working as a double 
agent. 

(Have to add, there are ways to be a spy without being a double 
agent, but as Snape is one of the few people who can lie to 
Voldemort, his sources are likely to be forced to give him away and 
it doesn't seem like a particularly viable option.)

I think Snape was picked to teach Occlumency to Harry for three 
reasons:
1) Dumbledore couldn't do it himself - Voldemort and the MoM were 
both looking to exploit his connection with Harry.
2) It had to be someone at Hogwarts, with whom Harry could have 
regular contact in an unremarkable way.
3) It also had to be a member of the Order.

So Snape is pretty much the only available candidate.  Even if 
McGonagall is any good at Occlumency (and nothing that we know about 
her indicates that she is or isn't), Harry does just fine in her 
class and it would be difficult for her to explain his regular non-
class-related visits to her office.

Just my thoughts,
-Ellen          





From prof_uloth at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 17 21:18:47 2003
From: prof_uloth at hotmail.com (Fred Uloth)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 13:18:47 -0800
Subject: Undercover Percy
In-Reply-To: <003601c37cd9$d3f370c0$79092244@parkvl01.md.comcast.net>
References: <1063766824.12125.28292.m10@yahoogroups.com>
 <003601c37cd9$d3f370c0$79092244@parkvl01.md.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <6.0.0.22.0.20030917131205.023ac890@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 81054

At 09:09 PM 9/16/2003, Deirdre F Woodward wrote:
>First, doesn't Undercover Percy sound like a FILK set to Alan O'Day's
>"Undercover Angel"?

I've been humming that all day...but I can't get past:
      Undercover Percy In Fudge's Ministry
Mainly because I've forgotten the tune and the words.

I've also been having cheesy trailers for "Undercover Brother" come to 
mind. I'm picturing Percy with the Ronald McDonald style afro.

I agree with Deirdre that Percy is a Git acting of his own volition...no 
imperious, no switching spell, and no polyjuice. Not that these ideas are 
not fun or inventive...I just think that Percy serves a different purpose.....

Jason/Fred 




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Thu Sep 18 09:51:22 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 09:51:22 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy: who notified Dumbledore?
In-Reply-To: <bkajoc+un6a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkbv6q+tkrr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81055

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Grey Wolf" <greywolf1 at j...> 
wrote:
> Grey Wolf wrote:
> > > I don't think Percy is a spy for Dumbledore, but if he is he's 
so 
> > > undercover (looking that much of a git means he's *really* 
> > > undercover, IMO) he wouldn't risk blowing it for such a minor 
> > > matter as a change of time for a hearing.
> 
> > Geoff:
> > I'm afraid I don't agree at all that this is a "minor matter". I 
get 
> > a distinct impression that the change of time and venue had been 
> > deliberately designed so that Harry would be late which would 
count 
> > against him in the eyes of those who supported Fudge and 
Dumbledore 
> > would miss the hearing and that it was a plot to discredit Harry 
and 
> > also find him guilty. 
> 
> We agree on that, but I think you have missinterpreted what I mean 
by 
> minor matter. Lets consider for a moment that Percy is, indeed, an 
> undercover agent for Dumbledore. Why is he there? it cannot be for 
some 
> quick spying, certainly. Percy has severed all connections to his 
> family (some have suggested that his parents might now he's a spy 
for 
> Dumbledore. I very much doubt it. They certainly don't need to know 
and 
> their knowing it might endanger Percy's cover). This is something 
you 
> do not do lightly. Even if he is a spy, he might never regain the 
> confidence of his family once his job is finished.
> 
> No, if Percy is there to spy (and again, I think he's just an 
idiot), 
> he shouldn't blow his cover (and contacting Dumbledore as has been 
> suggesting *is* a major hit to his cover at that point, one that he 
> shouldn't attempt lightly in case he is dicovered) for just Harry's 
> trial. 

<snipped>

Geoff:
I am afraid that I still cannot agree with you that the summoning of 
Dumbledore in time for the Wizengamot hearing is a "minor matter". 
Obviously, since he did get there, other scenarios are a matter for 
conjecture but, if he had not arrived in time, there could have been 
potentially serious consequences for the Wizarding World.

I still suspect Fudge. His behaviour when Dumbledore arrived was that 
of a child caught with its hand in the sweetie jar ? or  pulling the 
cat's tail. Although I get the feeling that Amelia Bones is a typical 
judge ? she is severe but totally impartial ? I feel that Fudge 
thought he had got the case sewn up for Harry to be expelled and have 
his wand taken away and would be able to sway the Wizengamot members 
his way. Dumbledore, by being there, was able to blow a whole series 
of holes in Fudge's carefully constructed prosecution of Harry as a 
law breaker and liar.

What would have happened in the worst case scenario - Harry is out of 
Hogwarts? There are two places where he is considered to be at his 
safest ? Little Whinging and Hogwarts. He arrives back at Privet 
Drive. Vernon, in particular, blows a whole bank of fuses and even 
threatens to send him to the local state school to get Harry out of 
his hair. We already know that outside the house, he is under threat. 
Petunia might insist on him staying in the house but what effect 
would that have had on Harry? I'm not sure I can see Dumbledore being 
able to let Harry stay on the Hogwarts site, no longer being a 
student; it raises too many problems. Which leaves probably Grimmauld 
Place. So he joins Sirius, probably "confined to barracks" in the 
same way so there would be two cheesed-off, wound-up guys getting in 
everyone's way.

And Voldemort? Comparisons have been drawn between him and Hitler. 
The latter could be pretty good at locating safe houses and raiding 
them, Could the same happen at Grimmauld Place? Harry no longer has a 
wand. Although OOTP spends a lot of time looking at the fact that 
Voldemort wants to know what is in the prophecy because of the 
disaster which befell him when he attacked baby Harry, the fact is 
that he is still prepared to risk an personal attack and by the end 
of OOTP, he has made two more attempts directly to kill Harry 
himself; after the Triwizard Tournament when Harry only escaped by 
getting to the Portkey first and in the Ministry battle where the 
enchanted statue intercepted the spell.

No. If the hearing had gone against Harry, Voldemort might have been 
prepared to try to launch another direct attempt to kill him or, he 
could have come out more openly, knowing that a disarmed Harry was a 
much reduced threat.

Fudge? I doubt in his thinking he saw this. I believe he was trying 
to protect his own position and power by silencing or rubbishing 
voices opposed to his "we have everything under control" approach. It 
smacks of Neville Chamberlain's appeasement policy with Hitler in the 
late 1930s. Interestingly, the voice which was being ignored was that 
of Winston Churchill, who went on to become Prime Minister; is there 
a parallel here?





From kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 18 10:04:23 2003
From: kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com (Kewpie)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 10:04:23 -0000
Subject: Snape giving Occlumency lessons
In-Reply-To: <bkbhqd+6218@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkbvv7+ur2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81056

Ellen wrote:
> I don't know if this issue has been discussed before or not, but I 
> not at all certain that Snape is spying on Voldemort.  
> In Book 1, Snape worked against Quirrell, and therefore against 
> Voldemort, who was riding around on the back of Quirrell's head.  
> Snape may be able to sheild his thoughts against Voldemort's 
> intrusion, but he can hardly sheild Voldemort's own memories.  At 
<snip>
>  If Snape is spying on Voldemort, he must be doing it 
> in some sort of disguise or from hiding.  Occlumency alone wouldn't 
> be enough.

Joan:
To assume that Snape must be going back to spy either on Voldemort or 
DE is really as straighforward and obvious guess as you can get, even 
Harry clearly stated this very same guess at the end of GoF...which 
means it should be unlikely. Maybe something along the line there but 
with a total unexpected twist that probably none of us would ever 
come close to (prior of OOP, who would have thought of Occlumency?). 
So yes I agree with Ellen there has to be something else. I don't 
know if anyone notice, but JKR seems to have "given" Snape new 
abilities or have him introducing some new skills that always turns 
out being pretty crucial/essential in the climax finale in almost 
every book (I mean, compare to other Order members or teachers. Snape 
introduced us Expelliarmus, Wolfsbane, Veriserum, Occlumency, 
etc....pretty much tells you Snape's character played a pretty major 
and significance role that made him stood out among most adult 
characters). Therefore I'm not surprised if Snape were to reveal some 
new skills/abilities in book 6 or 7 that explain what it is that he 
is "prepared to do" by Dumbledore that seems to have related in.

Ellen: 
> I think Snape was picked to teach Occlumency to Harry for three 
> reasons:
> 1) Dumbledore couldn't do it himself - Voldemort and the MoM were 
> both looking to exploit his connection with Harry.
> 2) It had to be someone at Hogwarts, with whom Harry could have 
> regular contact in an unremarkable way.
> 3) It also had to be a member of the Order.

May I add:
4) *It has to be Snape* because the whole "probing/exchanging 
emotions and memories" Occlumency thing is a very convenient and 
clever device to give us insights on Snape's past, which is something 
JKR felt is important to reveal to us, possible setup for future 
revelations.  

5) *It has to be Snape* because then we'd have the Penseive scenario 
happened, thus providing information on Harry/readers about MWPP and 
Lily's Hogwart days, and most importantly to shatter Harry's Saint 
James fantasy, which is of course, another important information 
needed to be reveal to readers. 
 
6) As some people here have speculated, this exchange of memories 
between Snape and Harry could be potential for a future possible 
understanding (hence comes tolerance) between the two characters. 

It is just SO easy for JKR to have just about anybody from the Order 
teaching Harry; she could have just assigned the Occlumency ability 
to whoever she likes (she always said Lupin is her ideal teacher; if 
her purpose is only to have "someone to teach Harry" she could have 
easily created Lupin the "superb Occlument" and have a Lupin & 
Harry's perfect training session. Everyone would be happy then and 
all well ends well). But what purpose would that served? What does it 
mean if McGonagall or Lupin were to teach Harry? What drama would 
that create? What tension would that provoke? What consequences would 
that lead to? The Occlumency lesson are not just about "oh! time for 
Harry to adopt a new skills". The significance of having Snape 
specifically to teach Harry is meant to be crucial for the plot built-
up and characters' development. 

Joan






From president0084 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 17 20:49:19 2003
From: president0084 at yahoo.com (president0084)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 20:49:19 -0000
Subject: Interesting Fact
In-Reply-To: <bkagc5+gbc8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkahcf+7m5h@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81057

In 1983 a comic was printed, a very small run, about a boy wizard 
with a scar over his head, he also wore black rimmed glasses. He had 
a faithful owl called Hedwig but she turned into a person and wasn't 
used to carry letters.

The comic was based around this wizard who went on adventures. I'm 
afraid I only read the first one and haven't been able find any more.

If you are Irish, the comic is avaible in Forbidden Planet in Dublin: 
they've still got a few copies left.

In the Art Life during the summer a whole article was written on 
this. Can't find it now but maybe when there website is finished they 
might put it up.

Overall is was balanced, saying how JK pulled different stories 
together,  bit like Homer, and made children read again. And who 
cares if she was inspired by a comic? Who knows maybe she's never even 
seen the comic. 

Jim





From greatraven at hotmail.com  Thu Sep 18 11:03:35 2003
From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 11:03:35 -0000
Subject: Snape giving Occlumency lessons
In-Reply-To: <bkbvv7+ur2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkc3e7+u4bk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81058

> 
> Joan:
>  What does it 
> mean if McGonagall or Lupin were to teach Harry? What drama would 
> that create? What tension would that provoke? What consequences 
would 
> that lead to? The Occlumency lesson are not just about "oh! time
for 
> Harry to adopt a new skills". The significance of having Snape 
> specifically to teach Harry is meant to be crucial for the plot 
built-
> up and characters' development. 
> 
> Joan

I agree and would like to add that if it had been Lupin or
McGonagall, 
Harry would have been happy to learn the Occlumency and would have 
built up a successful mindblock and then maybe Sirius wouldn't have 
died and I assume it's essential to the plot of the series that he 
*did* die.
Sue B




From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Thu Sep 18 11:20:36 2003
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 11:20:36 -0000
Subject: Thestrals and seeing death (was: Deaths at Hogwarts?)
In-Reply-To: <6.0.0.22.0.20030917125753.023a3518@localhost>
Message-ID: <bkc4e4+kr19@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81059

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Fred Uloth <prof_uloth at h...> 
wrote:
 
> You've covered all their arrivals, but what about departures? He 
should 
> have seen them at the end of book four after they said bye to Krum 
and 
> Fluer. What is the anti-Flint argument there? Harry hadn't come to 
terms 
> with the death?  

This is exactly JKR's explanation. The death has to sink it. She also 
explained, that the real reason for him not seeing the Thestrals was, 
that she couldn't make him see the horses and then let it completely 
unexplained until book 5. Imagine our reaction, if Harry suddenly has 
seen mysterious creatures in the very last chapter. I know it would 
have annoyed me, and I am satisfied with JKR's explanation. The only 
thing I am not happy with, is, that she explained it in an interview, 
and not in the book.

Hickengruendler




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 18 11:58:32 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 11:58:32 -0000
Subject: MAGIC DISHWASHER (TBAY INTRO): Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die!
In-Reply-To: <bka1dm+to3u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkc6l8+b4u0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81060

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bluesqueak" <pipdowns at e...> 
wrote:
> MAGIC DISHWASHER: Spying Game Philosophy. The Phoenix must die.

Laura_

Ah...ice preserves, fire purifies...Pip, this was masterful.  I 
fervently hope you're right!




From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 18 11:58:53 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 11:58:53 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy: who notified Dumbledore?
In-Reply-To: <bkav8h+3k9r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkc6lt+eth4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81061

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "yukonpup" <caseys_mom at c...> 
wrote:
>  "hickengruendler said 'I have big problems with his behaviour at 
Christmas. That's why I think Git!Percy or Imperio'd!Percy is more 
likely. Someone kidnapped and replaced was already done, as a much 
more important part of the plot than putting the Imperio curse on 
Krum. I don't think JKR will use another Polyjuiced Storyline.'"


yukonpup:
now me, Laurie

"What if Percy agreed to be Imperio'd by DD?  Would he then be the 
perfect spy?  And would Percy and DD agree to this without Mr and 
Mrs Weasley and the fam knowing?"

hg replies:  
I've been thinking about the Imperious Curse option for Percy since 
so many people seem to like it, and while I don't think there's much 
reason to rule out any option at this point, I should add that I'm 
doubting this one, simply because his behavior was so extreme, almost 
stylized.  I'm fairly certain that someone under the Imperious would 
be far more perfunctory and less showy.  My 2 knuts.
What do you think?
hg.






From altered.earth at ntlworld.com  Thu Sep 18 14:32:51 2003
From: altered.earth at ntlworld.com (digger)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 15:32:51 +0100
Subject: Undercover Percy: who notified Dumbledore?
In-Reply-To: <003601c37cd9$d3f370c0$79092244@parkvl01.md.comcast.net>
References: <1063766824.12125.28292.m10@yahoogroups.com> <003601c37cd9$d3f370c0$79092244@parkvl01.md.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <3F69C213.3040401@ntlworld.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81062

Deirdre F Woodward wrote:
> I think the Percy-is-a-git theme has been building since
> Book One.  He's made out to be a laughing stock almost every time he comes
> into the book.  I was very satisfied with his portrayal in OoP because it
> seemed the next logical step in his development as a character.   He's
> young, impressionable, pretentious, ambitious, and naive -- the perfect
> person to get sucked into Fudge's moronic plan to ignore/foil Dumbledore.
> 
> I thought the letter to Ron about Harry was pure Percy.  It showed all of
> his vanities and weaknesses in the worst possible light.  I don't think the
> letter was soley for us to hate Percy.  I think it has a specific purpose --
> Percy needs a crisis of faith, and his split with his family opens up that
> occasion.  He will need to examine why he was so ready to sacrifice friends
> and family for career, and he will be forced to either accept his character
> and move on (a future Umbridge) or face his character and change (a future
> member of the OoP, perhaps?).
> 
> I don't think Percy is under any curse or spell, nor do I think Percy was
> acting under orders from someone else.  *aims canon towards the PINESAP ship
> and another others in the bay*
> 
> Deirdre who is beginning to realize she's a killjoy
> 

digger writes:

I agree with the above. I think Percy's moral choices so far are totally
in keeping with his character developement.  Percy is acting in a
ruthless manner for his own good, ie his future career, wealth and
power, and the consequences of his actions on the wizarding community
don't appear to come into his calculations. His ruthlessness could be
seen as a Slytherin trait, but I see it as a example of courage used in
a negative way. Going for what is good for you, at the expense of
alienating your family, is selfish and short-sighted, but it is also a
consequence of growing up in a large family. As a "good boy" he would
have needed far less attention from Mrs Weasley, than the twins, his
immediate sibling rivals, who must have needed watching closely at all
times. I see those two as getting up to mischief from the day they could
crawl!
Percy's character and actions are a means for JKR to illustrate a
meta-theme: the sad consequences of selfish actions, and how acting
selfessly and with compassion, for the good of society rather than the
individual, is best, but not easy.

"digger"





From entropymail at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 18 14:46:29 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 14:46:29 -0000
Subject: Snape giving Occlumency lessons
In-Reply-To: <bkafog+gueg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkcgg5+gm0c@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81063

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "president0084"
<president0084 at y...> wrote:
> I for one find it hard to believe that Snape is the only person in 
> the order that could off possibly taught Harry Occlumency.


Probably not, but Snape had a couple of things going for him:

(1) He is closer to Harry than anyone else in the Order (physically
speaking, not emotionally), which gives him the advantage of being
able to teach Harry occlumency every few days.
(2) He is very skilled at occlumency and legilimency...moreso,
perhaps, than anyone else except Dumbledore.  Which leads us to...
(3) He's not Dumbledore (who, we've learned, was trying to keep his
distance from Harry)

:: Entropy ::




From odilefalaise at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 18 15:11:35 2003
From: odilefalaise at yahoo.com (Odile Falaise)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 08:11:35 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Interesting Fact
In-Reply-To: <bkahcf+7m5h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030918151135.11267.qmail@web13103.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81064

Jim wrote:
<<<In 1983 a comic was printed, a very small run, about a boy wizard with a scar over his head, he also wore black rimmed glasses. He had a faithful owl called Hedwig but she turned into a person and wasn't used to carry letters.The comic was based around this wizard who went on adventures. I'm afraid I only read the first one and haven't been able find any more.>>>

<snip>
 
Odile here:
I believe the comic you are thinking of is DC Comics' "Books of Magic," which was started by the venerable Neil Gaiman.  Here is a link to an article I found on the ABC News website:
 
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/entertainment/DailyNews/potter2_000706.html


Although I recall seeing a link on the Leaky Cauldron as well that pointed to Neil Gaiman's own site about this issue (and how he basically said, "More power to ya, JKR.")
 
<<<In the Art Life during the summer a whole article was written on this. Can't find it now but maybe when there website is finished they might put it up.>>>
 
Which newspaper? 

<<<Overall is was balanced, saying how JK pulled different stories together,  bit like Homer, and made children read again. And who cares if she was inspired by a comic? Who knows maybe she's never even seen the comic. >>>

Odile <--who loves comic b--- er, "graphic novels."  ^_^



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From two4menone4you88 at aol.com  Thu Sep 18 15:38:16 2003
From: two4menone4you88 at aol.com (yairadubin)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 15:38:16 -0000
Subject: Fred and George Weasley
Message-ID: <bkcjh8+2jos@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81065

I was just rereading OOP and a horrible thought popped into my mind.  
Fred and George are always portrayed as the ultimate twins throughout 
the books.  They crack "identical evil grins" (GOF), they finish each 
others sentences, they start a business together...basically they're 
portrayed as one character split into two people.  Right??? Well, 
people can't do that forever.  How many grownup twins do you know who 
are like that?  So, eventually, they're going to have to untwin.  But 
as the present circumstances stand, I don't know how that would 
happen, except...if one of them dies!!!! (dramatic noise in the 
background)  It would be horrible but the one who lives would evolve 
into his own person and we'd still have a funny character left, and 
JKR would be able to kill a beloved character for emotional response 
from the readers, but she's still be able to leave us with part of 
him.  Anyway, those were just my thoughts...Anyone else?
                                LUV,
                                  *Yaira*




From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 18 15:55:08 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 15:55:08 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy: who notified Dumbledore?
In-Reply-To: <3F69C213.3040401@ntlworld.com>
Message-ID: <bkckgs+1m81@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81066

post 81062, digger replies to Deirdre's post 80982:



Deirdre F Woodward wrote (snip):
I think the Percy-is-a-git theme has been building since Book One.  
He's made out to be a laughing stock almost every time he comes
into the book.  


hg replies:
It is precisely this that makes me think his brothers' impression of 
him is what the Percy-is-a-git folks are concentrating on, and not 
Percy's actions or words.

Deirdre:
I thought the letter to Ron about Harry was pure Percy.  It showed 
all of his vanities and weaknesses in the worst possible light.  

hg:
The letter sounds NOTHING like Percy, but very much like his brothers 
make him out to be.  I will, again, direct readers to Percy's letter 
in GoF, which was far different from the letter we saw in OoP.

Deirdre:
I don't think the letter was soley for us to hate Percy.  

hg:
I don't either.  We get plenty of reason if we listen to Ron, Fred 
and George.  The purpose of the letter will correlate to the 
explanation of Percy's behavior in OoP.


Deirdre:
I don't think Percy is under any curse or spell, nor do I think Percy 
was acting under orders from someone else.  *aims canon towards the 
PINESAP ship and another others in the bay*

hg:
As far as I see it, there isn't any canon to aim at PINESAP or other 
theories, such as Percy being a spy.  The best we can come up with to 
knock down ideas such as those is assumptions and opinions from his 
brothers.

digger writes (snipped):

I agree with [Deirdre]. Percy is acting in a ruthless manner for his 
own good, ie his future career, wealth and power, and the 
consequences of his actions on the wizarding community don't appear 
to come into his calculations. His ruthlessness could be seen as a 
Slytherin trait, but I see it as a example of courage used in a 
negative way. Going for what is good for you, at the expense of 
alienating your family, is selfish and short-sighted, but it is also 
a consequence of growing up in a large family. 

hg: 
I see nothing "courageous" about being ruthless, selfish, or short-
sighted, and there isn't any natural consequence of growing up in a 
large family that would necessitate fostering these qualities in 
oneself.
hg.






From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Thu Sep 18 16:24:31 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 16:24:31 -0000
Subject: Reaction to MAGIC DISHWASHER (TBAY INTRO) 
In-Reply-To: <bka1dm+to3u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkcm7v+j6kd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81067

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bluesqueak" <pipdowns at e...> 
wrote:
> 
> A phoenix is a symbol of rebirth. But what is often forgotten is 
> that before it is reborn, it dies in fire. As Fawkes does in the 
fight against Voldemort.As the old Wizarding World will, if 
Dumbledore has his way.
> 
> The eleven year old Harry would probably have thought this a bad 
> thing. The fourteen year old Hermione was beginning to see that her 
> new world needed changing. What will the seventeen year old Trio 
> think? 
> Is Dumbledore's phoenix fire better than Voldemort's pure ice?


Jen Reese:

I couldn't bear to snip your ending because it is so eloquent and 
says so much about the imagery of the Phoenix.

I read your post three times with three different reactions: My first 
reaction was much like the 11 year-old Harry might have felt --Who 
cares if the WW is destroyed by fire OR ice if you are going to take 
away my (Harry's) escape from the dreadful Muggle World, where they 
can't see magic if it hits them in the face. Depressing...

The second time I realized how beautiful your ending truly is--yes, 
it's still bleak, but since we all must change, why not go down in 
the fires of transformation rather than the suffocation of ice?

The third time--anger--if this is true, then Dumbledore needs to go.  

Because if this scenario is true, then we aren't talking about a 
battle between Good and Evil anymore, this is more like a morally 
compromised battle of egos and agendas--is it really better to 
sacrifice the WW of today for the "nameless, faceless" WW of 
tomorrow? If you believe Good and Evil are Yin and Yang, as I do, 
then evil never truly dies--you can't truly know Good without an 
introduction to Evil and you can't know Death if you don't know Life.

So, if indeed Dumbledore plans to sacrifice the WW for his ideal, no 
matter how noble and perfect, he needs to realize that there are a 
lot of different ways to "force" an agenda on other people besides 
the brute force of Voldemort (including never letting them in on the 
agenda in the first place) and he needs to make his Exit, posthaste.

Jen, climbing off her soapbox to write her next post entitled, "Why 
Lucius is a Spy" based on an acceptance of the MAGIC DISHWASHER as 
the underlying theme of the HP series...who said I can't play both 
sides? ;)






From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Thu Sep 18 16:37:50 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 16:37:50 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's BADD ANGST (was: MAGIC DISHWASHER TBAY)
In-Reply-To: <bka1dm+to3u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkcn0u+r8va@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81068

The party was in full swing, with firewhiskeys all around the hulking 
monstrosity, as the tiny boat came into view. The group turned as
they heard its tiny engine backfiring, nearly dying, then returning 
valiantly to the fight.

"Ahoy, there, MDDT! Remnant here! May I tie my vessel to join y'all 
for a few minutes?"

Taking their questioning looks for agreement, the man unsteadily 
dismounted the craft, which proved to be an old, leaky rowboat that 
appeared to have been cobbled together from odd leftover parts of old 
vessels.

"I've just come from the GARBAGE SCOW on my new boat. Isn't she a 
beaut? Anyway, I wanted to discuss that," and he pointed to the 
once-regal MAGIC DISHWASHER. As someone offered him a firewhiskey in 
silence, he laughed, "oh no, I try not to play with canon after 
drinking. After all, I am here to use yours against you as I defend
my worthy ship, the BADD ANGST. All's fair, right?"

And then he told his tale.

****************************************

First, bravo MDDT! Please repeat the type of performance in your 
recent post as often as you like. In the opinion of this Remnant,
this new (Tom is quite convincing) theory should certainly be 
enshrined in Fantastic posts.

Second, it is unfortunately wrong. Not entirely, mind you, but in its 
central thesis: Dumbledore's primary target is not to change the 
WW-although he'd like that, too-but to defeat LV, as we've been told 
numerous times. Now, please forgive me if I don't do this 100% by the 
established norms, but I'll try. On to the canonical discussion!

> MDDT: In previous posts [see 
http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/faq/hypotheticalley.html#md, post 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/39662 and post 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/40044 ], the
Magic 
Dishwasher Defence Team has presented the list with the idea that 
things may not be as they seem. Characters may be acting according to 
an agenda that Harry does not understand. Especially, they may 
deliberately mislead Harry (and by implication, the reader). <

OOP enshrines this aspect of MD as canon; outstanding 
prediction/analysis by the MDDT!


> MDDT: Harry is being misled. He thinks that Voldemort is the real 
threat to the WW. Voldemort will destroy the Wizarding World as we 
know it. And he's wrong.
>snip<
> [R]emember that Hitler did *not* want to destroy Germany. That bit 
was a slight mistake. What Hitler actually wanted was a 
Thousand-Year-Reich, which would have power over the non-Aryan world. 
And he would have power over the Reich.
>snip<
> Voldemort fits right in, really, doesn't he? Voldemort isn't an 
opponent of the WW ethos - he's its logical result. And this is the 
society that Harry is supposed to risk his life to preserve? <

Yes, but I don't think that the concept of LV wanting to truly
destroy the WW ever had many adherents. It seemed obvious that LV 
wanted absolute, everlasting power. But next we'll reach our first 
point of disagreement. (Apologies in advance for the heavy snippage-I 
didn't want to snip much, but the length was growing crazy.)


> MDDT: No. As Kneasey so rightly points out, Dumbledore has an 
agenda.
> **Canon for what Dumbledore wants**
> `They wanted Dumbledore fer Minister, o'course, but he'd never
leave 
Hogwarts' [Hagrid, PS/SS Ch. 5 p.51 ]
>snip<
> `Father's always said Dumbledore's the worst thing that happened to 
this place. He loves muggle-borns.' [Draco, CoS Ch. 12 p.166]
> `Take him away an' the Muggle-borns won' stand a chance!' [Hagrid 
about Dumbledore, CoS, Ch. 14 p.195]
>snip<
> `But then Dumbledore came to Hogwarts and he was sympathetic.' [to 
Lupin the werewolf attending Hogwarts] [Lupin, PoA, Ch. 18, p.258]
>snip<
> `Trusts people, he does. Give's `em second chances 
 tha's what
sets 
him apart from other Heads, see. He'll accept anyone at Hogwarts, 
s'long as they've got the talent. Knows people can turn out OK even
if 
their families weren' 
 well 
 all that respectable.'
[Hagrid, GoF Ch. 
24 p.395]
> `your talk of closer international wizarding links, of rebuilding 
old ties, of forgetting old differences 
' [Karkaroff, GoF Ch.28, 
p.487]
> `I read the muggle newspapers, unlike most of my Ministry friends 
[Dumbledore, GoF Ch. 30 p.522]
> `that champion of commoners, of Mudbloods and Muggles, Albus 
Dumbledore' [Voldemort, GoF Ch. 33]
> `let you hire werewolves, or keep Hagrid, or decide what to teach 
your students, without reference to the Ministry' [Fudge, GoF, Ch. 36 
P.615]
>snip<
> `The statue we destroyed tonight told a lie. We wizards have 
mistreated and abused our fellows for too long, and we are now
reaping our reward.' [Dumbledore, OOP, Ch.37 p. 735] <

Now here's the meat of our disagreement. While you read that 
wonderfully compiled canon as support that Dumbledore's *main* goal
is to change society, I do not. I read it simply to say that he has a 
different moral code regarding "others" that he does not force others 
to conform to. This is a subtle but important point: I do not see 
changing society as his *main* goal. He simply has his own set of 
views that he does not try to impose on the WW at large. To do so 
would be against his/JKR's value of personal choice. Allow me to use 
your own canon against you (possibly bad form, but you did leave it 
right there on the battlefield).

'I read the muggle newspapers, unlike most of my Ministry friends 
[Dumbledore, GoF Ch. 30 p.522]
`Trusts people, he does. Give's `em second chances 
 tha's what
sets him apart from other Heads, see. He'll accept anyone at
Hogwarts, s'long as they've got the talent. Knows people can turn out 
OK even if their families weren' 
 well 
 all that
respectable.'
[Hagrid, GoF Ch. 24 p.395]

Does he say that he has tried to make or even convince others to read 
muggle newspapers? Or that he has attempted to convince the 
headmasters of other schools to conform to his beliefs? No. Here's 
more.

`The statue we destroyed tonight told a lie. We wizards have 
mistreated and abused our fellows for too long, and we are now
reaping our reward.' [Dumbledore, OOP, Ch.37 p. 735]

Note that he does *not* say that he has repeatedly warned the WW of 
this, or that he has tried to use his influence at the MoM to change 
it. He has apparently actually *done* nothing that we have ever seen 
in canon to change everyone else's beliefs. With one exception:

`Father's always said Dumbledore's the worst thing that happened to 
this place. He loves muggle-borns.' [Draco, CoS Ch. 12 p.166]

Yes, Dumbledore exposes his students to his beliefs by 'hir[ing] 
werewolves, or keep Hagrid, or decide what to teach your students, 
without reference to the Ministry.' Of course, Hogwarts is his
school. He is the headmaster and may hire and teach in accordance
with his own set of beliefs, right? Whether parents send their 
children to his school is their choice. There's always Durmstrang and 
Beauxbaton if they have a problem with that. So is he imposing his 
beliefs on others here? No. He respects others' boundaries. Haven't
we 
had that drilled into us again and again?

Boundaries. Why not tell Harry about Lupin or Sirius or Snape?
Because the secrets they have are theirs, not his to give. Why not 
help Harry more at school with bullies and taunting? Because those
are Harry's problems until Harry asks for help. Why not go run the 
MoM, as '[t]hey wanted Dumbledore fer Minister
?' Because then
he'd 
have to insert himself into others' business via lawmaking and 
enforcing. (Plus, he apparently likes Hogwarts, teaching, students,
et 
al.) But above everything else, Dumbledore is an embodiment of
respect 
for others' Boundaries.

Now who in the WW has the least respect for boundaries? Voldemort. 
What is so bad about the Unforgivables? They horribly infringe on 
others' boundaries. So what is the one thing that Dumbledore will
rise up and fight against? LV and the AK-ing DEs. How do we know that 
LV is his one true target? To whit:

'The only one against whom I intend to work is Lord Voldemort. If you 
are against him, then we remain, Cornelius, on the same side.' 
[Dumbledore to Fudge, GoF Ch. 36 P. 615]

Does he say, 'Cornelius, you should be against all who are racist?' 
No. Does he say, 'Fudge, you're often unfair to muggles, mudbloods
and non-humans, so you're my enemy.' No. He says the common enemy is 
Voldemort. Period.

Occam's Razor has been much used of late, so I hope it's still sharp 
enough for my purposes, but I'd like to posit that the simplest
answer is, in this case, still true. Dumbledore is plotting LV's 
downfall. If the MoM supports him, so much the better.


Now a few follow-ups.



> MDDT: Will Dumbledore be satisfied if his Order of the Phoenix 
defeats Tom Riddle? No. He tells us that.
> `We both know that there are other ways of destroying a man, Tom

 
Merely taking your life would not satisfy me, I admit - ` [OOP, Ch. 
36, p.718] <

My view, this is just saying that DD needs to destroy Riddle's soul
so he never comes back again. And I'm considering yellow flags for 
each of the following.

> MDDT: `
 it will merely take someone else who is prepared to
fight 
what seems a losing battle next time - and if [the endless succession 
of Dark lords are] delayed again and again, why, [they] may never 
return to power.' [Original quote in PS/SS Ch. 17, p.216, comments in 
square brackets are my additions] <
> But in twenty years time, there will likely be another Dark Lord, 
willing to use 'any means to achieve their ends' [PS/SS Ch. 7 p.88] <

You've changed these way past their initial intent. Nearly a yellow 
flag.

> MDDT: Well, even the muggle born Hermione doesn't announce that she 
hopes not to get put in Slytherin. [PS/SS Ch. 6 p.79-80] Perhaps the 
books she's read don't suggest anything is wrong with Slytherin
House? Perhaps the people she's been asking don't think anything is 
wrong with Slytherin? <

No canon here at all.


> MDDT: The symbol of the Order is a Phoenix. Why?

Why, you ask? Well, canon doesn't state the origins of the name, but
I like the group's courage or courageous fight against LV will never 
die. Also, it sounds cool. Frankly, Dumbledore's Army had little to
do with DD or an army, so OOP could have just been named after
Fawkes, for all we know.


> MDDT: [A minor note: the plot of CoS revolves around attacks on 
muggleborns because of their blood. Dumbledore stands by and lets it 
happen in the hope that the resulting battle can destroy the menace
of the basilisk for once and all. No wonder JKR said that CoS nearly 
gives it all away] <

A possibility, I'll grant. But we don't actually know. Perhaps it 
shows that Harry is the Heir of Gryffindor <groan> or that Fawkes and 
the Sorting Hat are sentient, or that LV started as just another 
Hogwarts student, or that LV injected some of his power into Harry
and now they even look alike. But I do appreciate your tying the 
theory in with other puzzles.

**********************************

And, his attack complete, he shouted, "In conclusion, nicely done, 
MDDT! A round of butterbeers for all of you! But I fear we must agree 
to disagree on this day.

"By the way, Boundary-Respecting!Dumbledore might worry constantly 
over whether others will do the right thing without ever saying or 
doing anything. That's why I've called my proud vessel BADD ANGST!

Boundaries
Always
Drive
Dumbledore's
Actions
Now
Go
Stop
Tom!"

-Remnant




From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au  Thu Sep 18 16:38:17 2003
From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 16:38:17 -0000
Subject: Changing Secret Keepers (Theory)
Message-ID: <bkcn1p+893o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81069

We have seen Memory Charms that can be given with few people around, 
if any, realising the mind has been altered. I refer to Marietta 
Edgecombe. Her memory was modified by a timely Obliviate spell from 
Shacklebolt while Fudge and other MoM aurors were in the room. (OotP)

Minor alterations may not need the flourish of wands a full Memory 
Charm like Lockhart prefered (CoS). 

If so, did someone hit Sirius with a memory charm? -A suggestion that 
influenced him to swap secret keepers? The way the Potters' died 
would be impossible without switching secret keepers, and the choice 
of Wormtail was just TOO convenient for many mystery writers.

This may appear in book 6 or 7.

The memory charm would need to be done by someone close to Padfoot. 
Very likely, the same spy that kept giving OotP secrets to Voldemort. 

Pettigrew was called "talentless" by Sirius (POA) and "Hero-worshiped 
Black and Potter. Never quite in their league, talent-wise. I was 
often rather sharp with him...Stupid boy...Foolish boy...He was 
always hopeless at dueling..." by Minerva McGonagall.

The Death-Eaters would not accept Wormtail easily since he lacked 
ability, so I suppose there was a 2nd spy within OotP - Again, that 
gets me suspicious about Snape. .... aussie




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Thu Sep 18 16:38:25 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 16:38:25 -0000
Subject: Lucius and the Spying Game (Re: MAGIC DISHWASHER (TBAY INTRO)
In-Reply-To: <bka1dm+to3u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkcn21+veqa@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81070

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bluesqueak" <pipdowns at e...> 
wrote:
>
> [A minor note: the plot of CoS revolves around attacks on 
> muggleborns because of their blood. Dumbledore stands by and lets 
it 
> happen in the hope that the resulting battle can destroy the menace 
> of the basilisk for once and all. No wonder JKR said that CoS 
nearly 
> gives it all away]


Jen Reese:

This minor note is intriguing and provides a framework for my own pet 
theory: If if indeed this is DD's agenda  "Dumbledore stands by and 
lets it happen {COS} in the hope that the resulting battle can 
destroy the menace of the basilisk," then I'm proposing Lucius Malfoy 
is actually the Spy instead of (or with) Snape, and here's the 
evidence:

1. Lucius also knows Tom Riddle is Voldemort, unlike apparently most 
of the WW.

2. He is in possession of Riddle's "old school things."

3. Lucius plants the diary in Ginny's cauldron.

4. Lucius ensures that the Governors oust Dumbledore so DD has an 
excuse not to be present during the COS battle.

5. Lucius is a "loyal" DE, a powerful figure in the MOM and one of 
the governors of Hogwarts--the only person with the ability to know 
everyone's agenda.

6. Lucius either has his own pawn in Draco, whom he has "sacrificed" 
for the WW by training him to be a mudblood hater and eventual 
incitor of Harry; OR

7. Draco has been trained like his father to be a double agent--his 
role is to provide cover for his Dad and spy on the Slytherins.  This 
fits into the theory that Dumbledore is using the school as the base 
for the "transformation of the WW."

8. Lucius had Kreacher lure Sirius to the MOM on DD's orders so 
Sirius could be taken out of the picture.

9. Lucius prolongs the quest for the prophecy at the MOM and ensures 
Harry isn't killed by the DE's until LV makes his appearance at the 
MOM for his offical coming out party.


That's my evidence. Speculation? Flames? Contradictory canon? Bring 
it on!--Jen





From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com  Thu Sep 18 16:49:56 2003
From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 16:49:56 -0000
Subject: Snape's OTHER Worst Memory
In-Reply-To: <54.18ffb652.2c9a5a4d@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bkcnnk+lck1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81071

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, furkin1712 at a... wrote:
> Speaking of Snapes worst memories, we all know Harry never finished 
seeing 
> the first memory...... but Snape put 3 thoughts into the jar. What 
could the 
> other 2 possibly be? 
> Remember they may not be obvious to us now, if JKR is as good as I 
think she 
> is she'll have us guessing until the very last word, which happens 
to be 
> 'scar'.
> Blue Eyes
>

The great Red Scharlach has already discovered one of them.....

http://home.att.net/~coriolan/phoenix.htm

  - CMC




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Thu Sep 18 16:53:04 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 16:53:04 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's BADD ANGST (was: MAGIC DISHWASHER TBAY)
In-Reply-To: <bkcn0u+r8va@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkcntg+qhu0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81072

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "boyd_smythe" 
<boyd.t.smythe at f...> wrote:
> And, his attack complete, he shouted, "In conclusion, nicely done, 
> MDDT! A round of butterbeers for all of you! But I fear we must 
agree 
> to disagree on this day.
> 
> "By the way, Boundary-Respecting!Dumbledore might worry constantly 
> over whether others will do the right thing without ever saying or 
> doing anything. That's why I've called my proud vessel BADD ANGST!
> 
> Boundaries
> Always
> Drive
> Dumbledore's
> Actions
> Now
> Go
> Stop
> Tom!"


Jen Reese:  Requesting to climb aboard BADD ANGST, Captain Remnant!! 
Hope you have some room... Please see my post 81067 where I expressed 
my *strong* desire that Dumbldore leave the premises immediately if 
he's truly the character proposed by MAGIC DISHWASHER. 

Your theory is more what I *hope* will be the true, because I'm not 
quite ready to sacrifice Dumbledore as the flip side of the Voldemort 
coin ....Jen




From paulag5777 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 18 10:54:11 2003
From: paulag5777 at yahoo.com (Paula Gaon)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 03:54:11 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Hermione'sCareer
Message-ID: <20030918105411.17292.qmail@web40005.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81073


18Sept03

On17Sept03 Laura wrote:

"...As for her diplomacy or shortage of it, she has, imo, all the
necessary components for leadership in the political/policy making
world: she's smart, she's observant, she makes connections and she
has a good sense of what motivates the adults around her (she's weak
on non-human creatures, to be sure.)"

Paula: Really right on comments!  

Laura:" Again, I think the ways she plays Skeeter and Umbridge are masterful. She has a pretty reliable
sense of who's trustworthy and who isn't-for instance, she's always
insisted that Snape is one of the good guys."

Paula: Yes, I totally agree.  We see that Hermione is not totally lacking an understanding of people.  She does indeed seem to have a sixth sense of sorts.

Laura: "What she doesn't have is wisdom-not surprising for a kid her age.
You're assuming that Hermione will never change, and maybe the kids
you knew who were like her never did. But I have great hopes for
her..."

Paula: But remember how quickly and easily Hermione solved the riddle of the potions in P/S?  A clear analytical mind like that is a rare and wonderful talent.  I'm still hoping she will fully exploit this talent in the future instead of stepping into the duplicity and confusion of the political arena.  I have great hopes for what JKR will decide for Hermione.

Paula



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Thu Sep 18 16:57:45 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (B Arrowsmith)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 17:57:45 +0100
Subject: Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die!
Message-ID: <39F3EFDE-E9F9-11D7-9ECE-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81074

"Heh, heh," chuckled Kneasy, "As fine a piece o' sophistry as I've seen 
in many a year. An idealist is he? This Dumbledore chappie o' yourn? 
Tsk, tsk, tsk. Them's the sort as causes trouble, you mark my words."

Well, we were warned, a couple of weeks  back. We've  been waiting with 
bated breath and here it is - Pip's Theory of Everything.

Of course,  I  don't totally agree with everything you say (would you 
expect me to?) and I've a feeling you're skating on very thin ice in 
one or two spots. But we're not playing Postman's Knock (you post 'em, 
I knock 'em); this is much more fun. Synthesis by analysis if we're 
lucky. You do  the personal philosophies, I'll try the matching 
motivations and possible outcomes. Or not, as the case may be.

What larks, Pip! What larks!

Let's play  with the words!

Pip:
So, Voldemort believes in immortality, in fear, in taking over, and in 
purifying the wizarding race. He especially believes in power........If 
you're a pure blood, or even 'pure enough' you might well think that 
you have a lot more to lose than gain by refusing to obey Voldemort.

Kneasy:
Well, yes. Useful stuff, immortality - superficially at least. If he 
gets true immortality he can't lose. He can always wait everybody else 
out. Put his feet up, start another long Russian novel, they'll all die 
soon enough, of natural causes too! Look! Clean hands!  So why the 
rush? Why now? Especially as he seems to be approaching immortality one 
way or another already.

It's the Philosophers Stone.  DD had (has?)  it. Why? Safekeeping, so 
they say. Oh, really? DD has it because he was Nick Flamel's partner. 
And why would these two  have one of those, unless to  use it? Flamel 
did, we know that. What about DD?

Voldy wants the stone as much to deny it to Albus as he does for his 
own use. If DD uses it, then he wins by default instead of Vodemort. 
Voldy doesn't trust anybody. He certainly doesn't trust the general 
perception that DD is a simple, kind-hearted, may the best man win, 
Queensbury Rules softy who would never, ever use the stone. Oh, no. DD 
intends to  win. However he can.

Power comes in many forms.  Economic, military, political, magical.  
The last of these trumps the rest.  He who has the magical power can do 
  what he damn well pleases. Why else would DD scorn the Minister of 
Magic post? Because it's meaningless. If you've got the power, it's 
just a title; if you haven't got the power, you're a puppet.

At fairly frequent intervals throughout the books, Voldy  claims to be 
the most powerful wizard, sorcerer, whatever. Just as frequently 
someone pops up with "Oh, no, you're not. Dumbledore is!"
This is a struggle between two wizards for who wields ultimate  power. 
Voldemort would actively use the power, Dumbledore passively - maybe.

Pureblood -  mudblood would be irrelevant. It is largely irrelevant. 
It's a way of keeping score. Feelings and expressions of superiority / 
inferiority happen no matter how just the society. It is innate in our 
nature. If we don't use one set of criteria, we'll use another. We 
always have done, we always will. Sex, money, age, chattels, race, 
religion,  intelligence, employment, even body shape. They've all been 
used, are used, even today. DD will change human nature, give the WW a 
utopian equality? I  don't think so.

If Voldy won, what would happen to Hogwarts? Pureblood only? Like Hell! 
Selected, very carefully selected students only. Constantly monitored - 
  as would be the curriculum. Can't have some whippersnapper thinking 
they can follow the same career path, especially not those 
untrustworthy Slytherins!

Pip  likens the war  to  '30s Germany. Nothing like, in my opinion. I 
prefer comparison with some of the later Roman Emperors. Say, if 
Vespasian had faced up to Tiberius. (Not that he did.)
Voldemort as  Tiberius; one of the 'in' crowd. Corrupt, cruel, 
arbitrary.
Dumbledore as Vespasian; an outsider; gets there on merit and 
calculation, cleans up  the mess left by others. Gets things sorted.

But both are rulers. To run things, much the same chores have to be 
done on a day-to-day basis. The  Empire has to  be kept going, no 
matter what. The ruling classes are just the surface scum. It's all a 
matter of degree, not a dichotomy of function. Was  the ordinary man on 
the Ostia carriers cart affected by all this? Not so's you'd notice. He 
still ate, slept, worked. His money just had a different head on it, 
that's all.

Pip:
Dumbledore does not believe in seizing power.

Kneasy:
Well, if he wins, he's got it. It's an adjunct of victory. So what does 
he do with it?
Abdication is not an option. Human nature being what it is, someone is 
sure to come along and think "Why not me?" Then we're back where we 
started.
Give it away? Not possible. Not magical power. It resides within 
Dumbledore; nowhere else.
If he retires, sets up a new government, it'll only form factions, each 
appealing to him  for support. It all gets very messy.

The idea that he can change the ethos of the WW from within the school 
pre-supposes that he will  be around for long enough to have a 
permanent effect. Certainly 30 years is not enough, as is evidenced by 
the current state of things. Maybe he'll need the Philosophers Stone 
after all.

This is where  the extrapolations start.

Pip:
An endless series of battles against  Dark Lords. Because the WW, with 
it's tacit acceptance of bigotry, corruption, Dark (or Black) 
magicians, it's feelings of superiority over the muggle race it came 
from, is set up  to  *produce* Dark magicians who will seek power.

House Slytherin is a respected part  of  Hogwarts. "Pureblood' as a 
password and using any means to achieve your ends is respectable. It is 
a house that native born wizards aspire to.

Kneasy:
What  happens if Voldemort wins? More of the  same, I expect. When 
you've got ultimate power people do what they're told. Even supporters. 
Maybe a demonstration of power every now and again, just to remind 
everybody what's what. No need to go berserk. Who wants to rule a 
wasteland? Just like the Roman Empire.

What would happen if Dumbledore wins? Any  changes?

Many  posters have asked  "Why is Slytherin?" Good question. Old Sally 
left these many centuries past. Yet Godric Gryffindor's hat still 
recognises his adherents. Why? Well, every society is a dynamic; there 
must be a conflict of ideas for progress to be measured and justified. 
But is this the best way of doing it? How about  getting rid  of that 
damn hat and with it Slytherin, Gryffindor and the rest. After all, 
Slytherin has been a  training ground, a nursery for the pureblood 
superiority ethic since forever. And a great place to make contacts 
with the like-minded. Dilute the poison. Spread 'em around. Maybe you 
can dilute them enough to make a homeopathic mix.

Alternative: Close down Hogwarts. Start afresh. New school, new 
philosophy.

Alternative: Remove magic from the world. That'd do it. While there's 
magic there'll be a Voldemort.

Pip:
.....and none will come after...
No more Dark Lords. Never Again.

"Do I believe in magic? No, I don't."   JKR, Albert Hall interview.


Kneasy.
Oh, Pip - only one 'e' in Kneasy please; otherwise it isn't an anagram 
of Sneaky.





From annemehr at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 18 17:00:45 2003
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 17:00:45 -0000
Subject: TBAY:  "I See London, I See France!"
In-Reply-To: <bk2rfl+8olm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkcobu+evah@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81075


Annemehr made her way into the bar for the first time.  She felt she
needed to get out for a while, as she had spent many hours holed up in
her room in the Safe House, staring at her computer, and typing
messages to some group called "OTC."  Later, she'd be attending a
barbeque, but for now she wanted a more quiet atmosphere.

She sat down near Cindy at the bar, and waited for an opportunity to
catch George's attention.  He was engaged in a very lively
conversation with Captain Cindy, however, so she waited.  Actually,
she sat there and *stared* at them; if George wasn't going to take any
notice of a new customer, at least he and Cindy could amuse her while
she waited.  They were discussing the lack of "bang" in any pivotal
scene in OoP.

> Cindy threw George a scornful look.  "No, I mean the pivotal scene that
> isn't *completely dreadful.*"
> 
> "Oh, OK.  That has to be the scene where James torments Snape,
> culminating in a flash of Snape's underwear."  George rested his
> elbows on the bar.  "Yep, that was a classic.  Snape endured the
> Ultimate Humiliation in that scene."
> 
> "Ya think?"  Cindy said icily.  "You think that's the Ultimate
> Humiliation for a person in Snape's position at Hogwarts as
>Designated Victim? This is supposed to be Snape's *worst*
> memory.  We know about the Prank, when Snape was in mortal danger. 
> This underwear scene is supposed to be the most horrid thing that ever
> happened to Snape.  And what does JKR choose as the Ultimate Insult to
> Snape?"  She reached for a tattered copy of OoP and began to read:
> 
> "James whirled about; a second flash of light later, Snape was hanging
> upside down in the air, his robes falling over his head to reveal
> skinny, pallid legs and a pair of graying underpants."
> 
> "What's wrong with that?" George asked, his eyes narrowed.
> 
> "Well, it's the *underpants,* frankly," Cindy said, closing the book
> with a snap.  "Having others see your underwear isn't a lot of fun, I
> guess, but it is hardly the worst thing that can ever happen to a
> person.  Not by a long shot.  It's not even *close.*"

"Wait a minute!" Annemehr interrupted, unable to containg herself any
longer.  Cindy and George looked over suddenly, as if just noticing
she was there.

Annemehr went on, "How bad it is to have your underwear exposed
depends on who you are.  Sure, some people could take it in stride. 
But Snape?  I don't think so.

"I think this is *exactly* the sort of thing Snape would hate the
most.  He doesn't seem to lack courage; the man who became a DE and
then turned against Voldemort to work against him must have plenty of
it.  Physical danger might be bad, but some people are excited by it,
and I doubt that for Snape it would be the *worst* thing.  Having his
underwear exposed might be."

Cindy looked incredulous.  "It was an instance -? and
> there are several in OoP ?- " she said, "where JKR chooses to write
a scene of
> drama and suspense, but she includes something rather childish or
> lighthearted in the scene as well, which *ruins* it for me.  Underwear
> is often considered a bit of a gag, really.  Mildly embarrassing, to
> be sure, but hardly the climax of what is supposed to be Snape's worst
> memory ever.  Worse than being a DE.  Worse than the Prank.  Worse
> than whatever he did for Voldemort at the end of GoF."

"Mildly embarrassing for you, maybe," continued Annemehr with
conviction, "but think about it.  If there's one thing that Snape has
lots of, it's pride.  I don't mean dignity or self assurance, I mean
an all-consuming desire to be perceived as competent, deserving of
respect, admirable.  To have the ability to inspire fear in his
students with a mere look.  His whole bearing during the time period
of the books suggests he has carefully cultivated this persona.  He
insists on being spoken to with respect.  He can't stand the thought
that Harry could ever get the best of him (as in the end of PoA), and
when he wants to goad Harry with his father's shortcomings, he accuses
James of *arrogance* -- that James could actually think himself better
than Snape.  It's not that James did "impedimenta" and "scourgify,"
it's more the fact that he *struts* that Snape can't tolerate.  And
remember how furious he was, though it did him no real harm, that
Neville's Snape!Boggart was made to look rediculous in Neville's
gran's clothes."

Annemehr took a sip of the rum that George had set down before her. 
Amazing how that man could look at you and know what you wanted to
drink...

"Yes, that's it exactly the right analogy,"  she continued,
thoughtfully.  "A boggart.  It wants to inspire fear in its victims,
and in a way, Snape does, too.  He wants to be respected for how
"dangerous" he can be.  In his youth, he persued that by learning
curses.  And now I think it's telling that, when he wants to effect a
fearful respect in Harry or any of the other students, he does it by
*humiliating* them.  It puts the unfavored ones in their place and
earns him the admiration of the Slytherins.

"And the worst thing for him, as for a boggart, is being laughed at. 
Being upside-down, with your off-color underwear showing for all to
see, is definitely rediculous."

Cindy didn't look too certain about all of this, and still looked a
bit grumpy.

"That's not even the worst of OoP," she said.  "It's the bang deficit.
 It's completely unsatisfying."

"Yes,"  put in George, refilling her drink.  He was trying (with
difficulty) to look sympathetic, even though he obviously didn't see
things her way.  "It's a completely different book than the kind of
books JKR would write if she were doing it just for *you.*"

> "Yeah," Cindy said with a thin smile.  "Gripping, disturbing books
> that are way too much for kids.  
> 
> "*Bangy* books, in other words."

They sat in silence for a few minutes.  Annemehr admitted to herself
that there really weren't any true bangs, and tried to figure out
exactly why she did *not* find this disappointing.  She emptied her
glass, and then turned to Cindy.

"Does it really have to have a bang?" she said.  "Couldn't there be
other things just as, well, *compelling*?"

Cindy looked pityingly at her, but said nothing.  She did appear to be
listening, however, so Annemehr went on.

"A *bang*," she said, "is the sudden catastrophe, the surprising
revelation, like the lash of a whip.  But there are other things that
can, to say the least, demand a character's full attention.  There's
the slow, relentless turning of the rack.  Or, being pressed between
two boards, struggling for breath, as first one stone is piled on top,
then another, and another, and another...

"Yes, that's it.  That's what's been happening to Harry in OoP.  He
expressed (and that's the perfect word) part of it himself, in chapter
twenty-five: 'It seemed to Harry that Umbridge was steadily depriving
him of everything that made his life at Hogwarts worth living: visits
to Hagrid's house, letters from Sirius, his Firebolt, and Quidditch.
He took his revenge the only way he had: redoubling his efforts for
the D.A.'

"And after that, of course, he lost more: the D.A. itself,
Dumbledore's, Hagrid's, and McGonagall's very presence in the school,
not only letters from Sirius, but Sirius himself, and finally being
told the prophecy.  All this on a boy who *began* the book damaged. 
Stone upon stone, weighing down on him until he was all but crushed. 
Exactly how close to crushed he was, we won't really find out until
the next book."

Annemehr paused, then said, "you know, I think the loss of Sirius and
hearing the prophecy were meant to be bangy for Harry.  I mean, they
weren't for us, because we either saw them coming or were well
prepared for them, here on the 'BAY -- but we were exceptionally well
prepared here, compared to the average reader, weren't we?  And Harry
wasn't prepared, at all.  So, even if *you* didn't feel the bang, we
might still get to see the aftermath of one, when the next book comes
out."

"Another rum, please, then, George,"  she said, "and get the Captain
another of whatever she's having."

--Annemehr--




From nianya_c at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 18 15:26:50 2003
From: nianya_c at yahoo.com (nianya_c)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 15:26:50 -0000
Subject: Snape giving Occlumency lessons
In-Reply-To: <bkafog+gueg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkcirq+brjt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81076

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "president0084" 
<president0084 at y...> wrote:
> I for one find it hard to believe that Snape is the only person in 
> the order that could off possibly taught Harry Occlumency.

I'm going out on a limb since I've lurked here for awile, but never 
posted......forgive me if this theory has been discussed and 
rejected.....


IMHO Dumbledore "set up" Harry so that he would have to go and 
retreive the prophecy......if Harry doesn't go get it for the 
order....LV's eventually going to go get it himself.

The occlumency lessons only made Harry's visions stronger to the 
point where he knew exactly where to go in MOM to get the prophecy. 
Dumbledore had to know that Harry wasn't going to learn to block the 
visions by working with Snape.....maybe he even wanted Harry to 
learn something about the history of Snape/Harry's parents'.

Also the scene in Dumbledore's office with the smoke snake that 
splits in two, he says something like "in essense divided" ie. the 
snake is in LV and in Harry or part of its power is in each; Harry 
wants to attack Dumbledore; Dumbledore avoids him so Harry can't 
find out why.

It seems like Harry has to get closer to LV's thoughts b/c that will 
be a key part of the final "confrontation".

Okay that puts me on the precarious edge of the limb so feel free to 
knock me off.

Nia

who faithfully believes that ALL the dead will arise in some form or 
fashion before the end. Death must not be such a bad place in 
Harry's world since there are tons of references to the hereafter.





From teseddon at kpmg.ca  Thu Sep 18 15:54:17 2003
From: teseddon at kpmg.ca (voldermort_is_harry)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 15:54:17 -0000
Subject: Bill & ...that veela chick.
Message-ID: <bkckf9+bnnn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81077

From: #80591

>Erin waved her arms around over her head and declared loudly "Ron is 
>not the only Weasley child to be mentally incapacitated in OoP!"

This line got me thinking about the succeptibility of the Weasely 
Familly, and whether there is other proof in canon.

In OoTP, Ginny tells Harry about what it was like to be possessed by 
V.  ("Long period of blackouts", or something like that)  However, 
when Harry is really and truly possessed, he retains his faculties.   

Now, I know it has been suggested that the two "possessions" are of a 
different nature and could have produced a different effect on both.  
Also, Harry's training in resisting the Imp. curse could have 
influenced how much he was effected.   But, what if the real reason 
was that Ginny was more susceptible (i.e.. genetically, or whatever 
passes for it in the WW), and therefore the possession had a 
different effect on her?

Staying with the alcohol analogy, some people can drink all night 
with no (seeming) ill effects and some are under the table after the 
first beer.

Ironically, this may also be the reason why it was Ginny who slammed 
the music box shut when they were cleaning up Grimsalde, as she was 
more "sensitive" to the effects of "mind control" and recognized the 
danger faster.  (It should also be stated, though, that she did 
succeed in fighting Riddle/V enough to be able to throw away the 
diary.   I don't believe that this screws up this theory, as this is 
not a true "addiction", in the chemical sense.)






From yswahl at stis.net  Thu Sep 18 17:38:07 2003
From: yswahl at stis.net (samnanya)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 17:38:07 -0000
Subject: Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die!
In-Reply-To: <39F3EFDE-E9F9-11D7-9ECE-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bkcqhv+q84n@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81078

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith <arrowsmithbt at b...> 
wrote:
> "Heh, heh," chuckled Kneasy, "As fine a piece o' sophistry as I've 
seen 
<<<whack>>>>

uhhhh exactly what post were you trashing there ?





From feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca  Thu Sep 18 17:49:30 2003
From: feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca (feetmadeofclay)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 17:49:30 -0000
Subject: Snape's OTHER Worst Memory
In-Reply-To: <54.18ffb652.2c9a5a4d@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bkcr7a+5m81@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81079

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, furkin1712 at a... wrote:
> Speaking of Snapes worst memories, we all know Harry never finished 
seeing 
> the first memory...... but Snape put 3 thoughts into the jar. What 
could the 
> other 2 possibly be? 
> Remember they may not be obvious to us now, if JKR is as good as I 
think she 
> is she'll have us guessing until the very last word, which happens 
to be 
> 'scar'.
> Blue Eyes
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

You can't have "other worst memories".  Once one memory has been 
declared to be your worst, semantically it sits alone. It either is 
or isn't.  

You can certainly have a collection of worst memories.  But JKR did 
not entitle the chapter.  "One of Snape's Worst Memories" or "Snape's 
Horrible Memory" or a million other titles that would have suggested 
ambiguity.  The only way for it to be supplanted is for Snape to 
create a memory that is worse than the one we saw. 

This IS Snape's worst memory according to JKR.  She said. It is 
canon.  

Golly





From s_karmol at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 18 18:01:12 2003
From: s_karmol at yahoo.com (s_karmol)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 18:01:12 -0000
Subject: Undercover Percy: who notified Dumbledore?
In-Reply-To: <bkckgs+1m81@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkcrt8+ofpc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81081


> 
> I agree with [Deirdre]. Percy is acting in a ruthless manner for 
his 
> own good, ie his future career, wealth and power, and the 
> consequences of his actions on the wizarding community don't 
appear 
> to come into his calculations. His ruthlessness could be seen as a 
> Slytherin trait, but I see it as a example of courage used in a 
> negative way. Going for what is good for you, at the expense of 
> alienating your family, is selfish and short-sighted, but it is 
also 
> a consequence of growing up in a large family. 
> 
> hg: 
> I see nothing "courageous" about being ruthless, selfish, or short-
> sighted, and there isn't any natural consequence of growing up in 
a 
> large family that would necessitate fostering these qualities in 
> oneself.
> hg.

Stephanie's Reply:

Do you think that Percy was put into Gryffindor house because at 
that time he did exude all the qualities that a Gryffindor student 
should have?
JKR is constantly repeating that life is about choices.  Percy could 
have very well had the best intentions while at school and just made 
the "wrong" choices in regards to his career.  
Crouch, who was a man so obsessed with finding and locking up Death 
Eaters, that he actually had Death Eater qualities himself(just my 
opinion..Umbridge was the same way), actually stated in Book 4 that 
Percy was a little too eager.
For a man like Crouch to say something like that...well it made me 
immediatly think that Percy would turn against DD and his family.
So, with that said, his personality in Phoenix did not surprise me. 
In fact, I am waiting for Percy to realize the mistake he made, but 
unfortunatly, I fear he won't realize it until it's too late (maybe 
the death of a family member due to him withholding important info)
Percy has tunnel vision at this point in his life, he sees only what 
is good for him and his career. He has something to prove.  With a 
family that big, you need to stand out in one way or another and 
Percy always loved talking about his job at the MOM in book 4..it 
made him feel important.
 I even think he ended it with Penelope b/c she couldn't see his 
vision.  MOM has always been Percy's goal, and I think he will do 
everything in his power to achieve his goal.
What's interesting is what Percy will be like in Book 6, now that we 
know the MOM has accepted the fact the V is back.  I don't see him 
comming home with his tail between his legs...I think he's going to 
cut off his nose to spite his face.
Soory if this is random.  So many thoughts...
Comments??...please let me know what you think...I've been thinking 
about this since before Phoenix!
Stephanie





From dvsdaughter at yahoo.ca  Thu Sep 18 18:08:30 2003
From: dvsdaughter at yahoo.ca (dvsdaughter)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 18:08:30 -0000
Subject: Interesting Fact
In-Reply-To: <20030918151135.11267.qmail@web13103.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bkcsau+3drm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81082

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Odile Falaise 
<odilefalaise at y...> wrote:
> Although I recall seeing a link on the Leaky Cauldron as well that 
> pointed to Neil Gaiman's own site about this issue (and how he 
> basically said, "More power to ya, JKR.")


Vi: Gaiman never implied any personal support of JKR as an author or 
her work.  He merely commented that JKR had probably not ripped Harry 
Potter off of Tim.  He said that he thought if JKR had stolen Tim 
Hunter, she would have altered him a little at least - by perhaps 
making him fair.  And that he that he thought they had both ripped 
off TH White.  

I have never seen any implied support of Rowling's work. 

Vi




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Thu Sep 18 18:16:18 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 18:16:18 -0000
Subject: Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die!
In-Reply-To: <bkcqhv+q84n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkcspi+donj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81083

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" <yswahl at s...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith <arrowsmithbt at b...> 
> wrote:
> > "Heh, heh," chuckled Kneasy, "As fine a piece o' sophistry as I've 
> seen 
> <<<whack>>>>
> 
> uhhhh exactly what post were you trashing there ?

Titles at the top.
Just missed off the TBAY bit.

And it's not trashing. Try the O.E.D.

Sophistry: Specious or over-subtle reasoning. That's what we
all  do when not sticking  strictly to ccanon.

Kneasy




From erinellii at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 18 18:21:00 2003
From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 18:21:00 -0000
Subject: Fred and George Weasley
In-Reply-To: <bkcjh8+2jos@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkct2c+6g8j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81084

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "yairadubin" 
<two4menone4you88 at a...> wrote:
> I was just rereading OOP and a horrible thought popped into my 
mind.  
> Fred and George are always portrayed as the ultimate twins 
throughout 
> the books.  They crack "identical evil grins" (GOF), they finish 
each 
> others sentences, they start a business together...basically 
they're 
> portrayed as one character split into two people.  Right??? Well, 
> people can't do that forever.  How many grownup twins do you know 
who 
> are like that?  So, eventually, they're going to have to untwin.  
But 
> as the present circumstances stand, I don't know how that would 
> happen, except...if one of them dies!!!! (dramatic noise in the 
> background)  It would be horrible but the one who lives would 
evolve 
> into his own person and we'd still have a funny character left, and 
> JKR would be able to kill a beloved character for emotional 
response 
> from the readers, but she's still be able to leave us with part of 
> him.  Anyway, those were just my thoughts...Anyone else?
>                                 LUV,
>                                   *Yaira*


If you read carefully, you'll see that they are slightly different. 
Fred is more sadistic.  George is a wee bit more mild-mannered.  I 
doubt that Rowling ever plans to "untwin" them, unless, as you say, 
one of them dies.  I hope not, though.

Erin




From jdr0918 at hotmail.com  Thu Sep 18 18:35:22 2003
From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 18:35:22 -0000
Subject: Possible JKR "Inspirations" (was Re: Interesting Fact)
In-Reply-To: <bkcsau+3drm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkctta+j17s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81085

<<<In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dvsdaughter" wrote:...Gaiman 
never implied any personal support of JKR as an author or her 
work...I have never seen any implied support of Rowling's work...>>>

The Sergeant Majorette says

At the end of the article, it says that Gaiman ends the "Books of 
Magic" series by having his main character's stepbrother going off to 
Hogwarts, as a little salute to JKR. The other author cited very 
graciously supposes that JKR read her books when she was a child and 
metabolized them.

--JDR







From dvsdaughter at yahoo.ca  Thu Sep 18 18:47:28 2003
From: dvsdaughter at yahoo.ca (dvsdaughter)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 18:47:28 -0000
Subject: Possible JKR "Inspirations" (was Re: Interesting Fact)
In-Reply-To: <bkctta+j17s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkcuk0+8q3r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81086

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jdr0918" <jdr0918 at h...> wrote:
> <<<In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dvsdaughter" wrote:...Gaiman 
> never implied any personal support of JKR as an author or her 
> work...I have never seen any implied support of Rowling's work...>>>
> 
> The Sergeant Majorette says
> 
> At the end of the article, it says that Gaiman ends the "Books of 
> Magic" series by having his main character's stepbrother going off 
to 
> Hogwarts, as a little salute to JKR." 
> 
> --JDR

A salute is one way to put it.  But note his stepbrother is an evil 
little snot. I took it as satire.   

Gaiman didn't write that issue.  Gross did.  The Books of Magic 
serial was written mostly by Peter Gross.  I don't know how much 
Gaiman had to do with its text.  Gaiman created the character and 
wrote the original miniseries.  
 

This is what Gaiman says on Potter - and he usually doesn't say much. 
It is the kindest comment and the only one that addresses his 
feelings on the books.  

"I'm one of those people who's been reading kids' books all along. 
When people have asked me what I think of JK Rowling, I say that 
she's a fine, solid children's book writer, but when they're shocked 
and say, 'But she's changing the rules!' - I have to say that's she's 
not. She writes good, solid children's books, but just read Diana 
Wynne Jones!" 

"good, solid children's books" is hardly "You go girl!"

Vi
  




From erinellii at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 18 19:00:27 2003
From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 19:00:27 -0000
Subject: Possible JKR "Inspirations" (was Re: Interesting Fact)
In-Reply-To: <bkctta+j17s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkcvcb+uhcc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81087

JDR:
> At the end of the article, it says that Gaiman ends the "Books of 
> Magic" series by having his main character's stepbrother going off 
to 
> Hogwarts, as a little salute to JKR. The other author cited very 
> graciously supposes that JKR read her books when she was a child 
and 
> metabolized them.
> 
> --JDR


Dianna Wynne Jones would be that author, and, actually, I thought 
that was pretty funny, because I've read most of hers and they are 
the least like Harry Potter of the three authors mentioned in that 
article.  They are about witches and wizards, and one of them (Witch 
Week)takes place in a boarding school.  That's it.  The boarding 
school isn't even specifically for wizard kids, just some kids in it 
happen to be wizards.  Well, first off, half the classic books 
written in Britain have boarding schools.  More than half, most 
likely.  That's just normal over there.  And there are many, many 
books about wizards and magic as well.  
  That's not to say that her books aren't very good.  They are.  But 
she also says that they take longer to read than the HP books, which 
is just pure nonsense.  I finished each of the Chrestomanci books in 
an hour, an hour and a half, tops.  She's done a very good job of 
capitilizing on the HP wave, but she is not one of JKR's sources. 
   JKR has been pretty upfront about books that influenced her as a 
child. For instance, read "The Little White Horse" by Elizabeth 
Goudge if you want to understand more about Luna Lovegood and her 
possible role in Books 6 & 7.  Luna is like a straight-up tribute to 
the heroine of that book.  And read "Emma", by Jane Austen, which JKR 
also has said influenced her enormously.

Erin




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 18 19:09:54 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 19:09:54 -0000
Subject: FF:  Flight of (the) Fancy 6; Sirius' Death-Journal cont'd
In-Reply-To: <bk58uv+atbt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkcvu2+gcg2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81089

Sirius Black, death-journal entry dated deathday plus ?; entry #6

Well. Some time has gone by since I last thought to set anything down 
for posterity, or what passes for posterity here, or for future 
reflection backwards. Since I haven't slept, or let's say, knocked 
myself unconscious lurching headlong into impossibilities, I don't 
really have a sense of days anymore.

I've been busy. That's so odd to say! And so good. I have a body 
again, although I'm fully aware it's a self-driven construct. It 
seemed to come with clothes I'm comfortable wearing. I have 
surroundings, after considerable trial and error: a modest flat of 
two rooms, one of which is library/workspace/lounging area with a few 
pieces of boring furniture, and the other of which was something I 
thought up out of self-defense: Mac's domain, which is too taken up 
with his concerns (and racket) to be of much other use to me. No 
kitchen, no bath; I don't get hungry or need facilities. Although I 
might try to arrange something eventually along those lines, I don't 
really feel the lack so far.

I have fingers again, now, too. Mac proved it to me not long ago by 
chewing on them with rather more enthusiasm than I cared for. (I 
*think* he meant it affectionately.) He really is an amazing amount 
of company; he makes me laugh, and is very emotional and responsive, 
even sometimes when I'd rather be concentrating on self-constructing 
myself some scenery which includes more than the insides of four-
walled rooms; I'm thinking eventually I may try to illusion myself a 
seaside resort. For now I'm illusioning parrot food (nuts, seeds, and 
fruit), unillusioning bird droppings, and reconstructing the chair 
Mac keeps chewing to bits which I keep on his half of the flat.

I have caught myself wondering if I could write a letter and have Mac 
deliver it to someone else on this side of the veil. Right now I am 
content with what I have managed up to now. I don't doubt I'll have 
more ambition shortly, but for now I don't. And I am trying to 
remember all the words to that song, although I don't think I can 
teach it to Mac; he shows absolutely no inclination to speak in 
anything but macaw, in spite of the close attention he pays me when I 
speak. He is particularly fascinated when I laugh and makes a sort of 
barking noise (another bond between us) in response, which I think is 
his version of joining in. I have sung a bit of lyric to him a time 
or two, and he bobs his head in time with the (I use the term 
loosely) music. Very silly, very excitable. And very useful in 
keeping my spirits (ha!) up. (How can anyone be blue in the face of 
all that unapologetic *red*?) It is slowly coming to me just how much 
pain I was in, just how isolated I was, and for how long.

S.B.

[Sandy aka "msbeadsley"]




From jdr0918 at hotmail.com  Thu Sep 18 19:28:30 2003
From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 19:28:30 -0000
Subject: Possible JKR "Inspirations" (was Re: Interesting Fact)
In-Reply-To: <bkcvcb+uhcc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkd10u+96jd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81090

<<<"erinellii" wrote:...Dianna Wynne Jones would be that 
author...That's not to say that her books aren't very good.  They 
are.>>>

The Sergeant Majorette says

Better than the top fanfics? Worth buying or just a trip to the 
library? Did you read them before or after Harry Potter?

Anybody read both the Chrestomanci series and the Books of Magic? How 
would you rate them alongside JKR?

I don't think I can stand being a Potter junkie at my current level 
of intensity for two more years. I'm looking for some metaphoric 
methadone here...

--JDR




From erinellii at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 18 19:45:53 2003
From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 19:45:53 -0000
Subject: Bill & ...that veela chick.
In-Reply-To: <bkckf9+bnnn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkd21h+hmiv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81091

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "voldermort_is_harry" 
<teseddon at k...> wrote:
>  >Erin waved her arms around over her head and declared loudly "Ron 
is not the only Weasley child to be mentally incapacitated in OoP!"
> 
> This line got me thinking about the succeptibility of the Weasely 
> Familly, and whether there is other proof in canon.


Erin:
   Whoa, boy, is there ever!  The one you mentioned, Ginny & Tom 
Riddle's diary, is definitely one of them.  For all the others (too 
numerous to list here), go to post# 40168, in which most of them are 
brilliantly outlined by Elkins.  A couple more are included in post# 
45290.


>   But, what if the real reason 
> was that Ginny was more susceptible (i.e.. genetically, or whatever 
> passes for it in the WW), and therefore the possession had a 
> different effect on her?


Erin: 
This is one of the central ideas of Imperio'd!Arthur, or LAW CAMERA 
(Lovable Arthur Weasley Controlled And Manipulated by Evil Riddle 
Anagram) a theory that Arthur was placed under an Imperius curse 
during Voldemort's first rise to power, outlined in #40168.  Go check 
it out.  It's well worth your time.  


> Ironically, this may also be the reason why it was Ginny who 
slammed  the music box shut when they were cleaning up Grimsalde, as 
she was  more "sensitive" to the effects of "mind control" and 
recognized the danger faster.  

Erin: 
This is a truly excellent bit of canon, and one which, to my 
knowledge, hasn't been mentioned before in connection with Imperio'd!
Arthur. (If someone has, and I missed it, my apologies) Thanks for 
pointing this one out.


Erin- newest crew member of the Imperius!Arthur trimaran 






From erinellii at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 18 19:57:14 2003
From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 19:57:14 -0000
Subject: Possible JKR "Inspirations" (was Re: Interesting Fact)
In-Reply-To: <bkd10u+96jd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkd2mq+6hna@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81092

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jdr0918" <jdr0918 at h...> wrote:

> (Diana Wynne Jones)
> Better than the top fanfics? Worth buying or just a trip to the 
> library? Did you read them before or after Harry Potter?

I read them after GoF came out but before OoP.  I haven't read the 
Dark Lord of Derkholm series yet, but the Chrestomanci and other 
assorted individual books are good.  I'd go to the library for the 
first one and see how you like it.  You know, I may have been too 
hasty in saying absolutely that they didn't inspire JKR.  There is 
one... "Dogsbody", that is definitely worth buying, and reminded me 
of HP, especially with OoP additions.  Buy that one!  I'm not sure 
when it was published, though, it may be one of her newer ones and 
been itself inspired by Harry.  I'll check on that.
 





From hpfgu_elf at hotmail.com  Thu Sep 18 20:01:56 2003
From: hpfgu_elf at hotmail.com (hpfgu_elf)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 20:01:56 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: Off-list Messages
Message-ID: <bkd2vk+20o7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81093

Midweek at HPFGU, and all seemed calm on the surface. For a few list 
members, however, the waters have not been calm, lately . . . 

"BANG!"

With a loud crack, a small but fiesty elf appears, wearing a purple 
tea towel. She unrolls an official-looking scroll, clears her 
throat, and begins to read:

"It has recently come to our attention that someone is targeting 
some members of our community with abusive off-list messages. If you 
have received an offlist message which is patently offensive, please 
contact the list admin team at hpforgrownups-owner@ yahoogroups.com. 
It would also be helpful if copies of any such messages could be 
forwarded to us, so we can continue to investigate the situation. If 
you suspect that a message may contain a virus, please write to us, 
and we will send you a protected address where you can forward it 
for us to examine without fear of contamination.

"Remember, if at any time you are concerned with the tone or content 
of a message related to this group - onlist or offlist - feel free 
to contact the list admin team or your own personal elf. This list 
is for all of us to enjoy. We want it to remain a place where 
listmembers can discuss HP in an open, friendly spirit, and we hope 
that all our members will do their part to maintain this pleasant 
atmosphere.

"We are here to help you with any problems, questions or concerns.

"Sincerely,

"Hebby Elf, 

"Newly-recruited elf-in-training for the list admin team"

She nods her head, hoping that she is leaving peace and reassurance 
in her wake, and with another loud "CRACK", the elf disapparates 
away again.




From spinelli372003 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 18 19:38:02 2003
From: spinelli372003 at yahoo.com (spinelli372003)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 19:38:02 -0000
Subject: Possible JKR "Inspirations"
Message-ID: <bkd1iq+5p00@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81094

Not sure where this post started but has anyone read any of the "So 
you want to be a wizard?" series.  I read them last winter.  Actually 
got the first one while waiting for a potter book to come out.  
thought that they were new.  And as I read them I thought "Oh my god 
this girl is going to get into trouble for copying JKR.  But 
interestingly enoughth the Wizard series was actually started in the 
70's.  There are some similarities.   sherry





From feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca  Thu Sep 18 20:36:45 2003
From: feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca (feetmadeofclay)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 20:36:45 -0000
Subject: Diana Wynne Jones did not capitalize on Potter  (was Re: Interesting Fact)
In-Reply-To: <bkd10u+96jd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkd50t+avr3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81095

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jdr0918" <jdr0918 at h...> wrote:
> <<<"erinellii" wrote:...Dianna Wynne Jones would be that 
> author...That's not to say that her books aren't very good.  They 
> are.>>>
> 
> The Sergeant Majorette says
> 
> Better than the top fanfics? Worth buying or just a trip to the 
> library? Did you read them before or after Harry Potter?

Golly: OK FIRST! Diana Wynne Jones has been writing books for 40 
years. She has 30 books to her name. The only book she has published 
since HP is The Merlin Conspriacy.


I read a few them after HP and I have to say her work is FAR AND AWAY 
better than Rowling.  I know I am noted for being hard on Rowling, 
but I really think that Wynne Jones has more skill with prose.  That 
being said she's had fourty years and 30 books to develop it.  I 
think in some ways Charmed Life isn't as good as Prisoner, but I like 
it better PS which is more of a straight off fairy tale.  Nothing is 
ever straight off with Jones.  But she doesn't have the stunning 
revalations of Rowling either.  It is more like constantly shifting 
ground.  

I note also that Diana Wynne Jones did not wait until Eric Chant was 
15 to have him be angry about his fate and have his mentor to make 
mistakes and hide things from him for his own good.

Diana Wynne Jones did NOT capitalize on the HP wave.  The only one to 
capitalize was Harper Collins who noted similarities and bought her 
stock. Good for Diana Wynne Jones and the rest of us.

For me it is not the plot similarties.  It is the tone and the 
approach to magic. There are definite similarties in the way they 
view magic.

And no it is not exactly the same.  Diana Wynne Jones does not have 
wands and quidditch and such...  I don't think any of those who note 
the similarities 

> 
> Anybody read both the Chrestomanci series and the Books of Magic? 
How 
> would you rate them alongside JKR?

Golly: I read Books of Magic before.  I noted the physical 
similarties to Harry right away.  They should have gotten the artist 
who drew the illustrations to be HP's illustrator.  I like it but 
remember it is something different than HP.

Though I love Diana Wynne Jones, I didn't love Charmed Life.  But I 
did like a lot. I would definitely recommend the stuff.  I would 
advise anything by DWJ.  

I particularly loved Howl's Moving Castle.  

The best Chrestomanci books IMHO are The Lives of Christopher Chant 
and Witch Week.  Both are packed full of charming characters and 
Diana Wynne Jones never waits to remind you everyone has flaws. The 
Living Goddess blows both Hermione and Ginny out of the water.   

If you're looking for something more in line with the darker aspects 
of OOTP. I would recommend The Dark Lord of Derkholm or Fire and 
Hemlock. 

Golly





From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 18 21:13:37 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 14:13:37 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] ADMIN: Off-list Messages
In-Reply-To: <bkd2vk+20o7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030918211337.86193.qmail@web20507.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81096

> This list is for all of us to enjoy. We want it to 
> remain a place where listmembers can discuss HP in 
> an open, friendly spirit, and we hope that all our 
> members will do their part to maintain this pleasant

> atmosphere.
> 
> "We are here to help you with any problems,
> questions or concerns.
> 
> "Sincerely,
> 
> "Hebby Elf, 

Aw, you look so *cute* in your ickle elf uniform with
the matching nightstick! (Thanks!) ^--^

Sandy et al

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Thu Sep 18 21:38:03 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 21:38:03 -0000
Subject: Reaction to MAGIC DISHWASHER (TBAY INTRO)
In-Reply-To: <bkcm7v+j6kd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkd8js+92un@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81097

Pip!Squeak:
I'm combining replies to Jen and Remnant in the same post.

[See http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/81010 for 
the post referred to as 'the original post']

Jen Reese wrote:
The third time--anger--if this is true, then Dumbledore needs to go. 

Because if this scenario is true, then we aren't talking about a 
battle between Good and Evil anymore, this is more like a morally 
compromised battle of egos and agendas--is it really better to 
sacrifice the WW of today for the "nameless, faceless" WW of 
tomorrow? If you believe Good and Evil are Yin and Yang, as I do, 
then evil never truly dies--you can't truly know Good without an 
introduction to Evil and you can't know Death if you don't know Life.

Pip!Squeak:
There we have a clash of philosophies, because I do not believe in 
Good and Evil as Yin and Yang. My philosophy is that evil cannot 
create, only destroy. It is a parasite, a cancer, a destructive 
force. It takes what good has created and tries to destroy or 
corrupt it. If good sometimes seems to come out of evil, it is only 
because good is so powerful that it can repair what evil has done.

Death is not necessarily evil; it can be a transformation. 

This is the canonical view of death, incidentally. Sir Nicholas 
talks about lacking the courage to `go on'. [OOP Ch. 38, p. 759]. 
Dumbledore talks about death as `the next great adventure' [PS/SS 
Ch. 17 p.215] Luna is convinced that she'll meet her mother again 
when she dies [OOP Ch. 38, pp.760-761]

Making someone choose is not evil. What is evil would be to force 
them to choose a particular path. Voldemort is evil partly because 
his philosophy does not allow for choice. Follow him or die. 

And yes, if the WW is irredeemably evil, it is better to sacrifice 
it for the future. That is a decision that has been made before. You 
may well be right that the new society won't be perfect (people 
being irritatingly inclined to choose `those things which are worst 
for them'). But a society set up to disapprove of evil, and which 
believes in actively opposing evil is going to be a lot better for 
people to live in. The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is 
for good people to do nothing. [I apologise that I don't know who 
originally said that]

Jen:
So, if indeed Dumbledore plans to sacrifice the WW for his ideal, no 
matter how noble and perfect, he needs to realize that there are a 
lot of different ways to "force" an agenda on other people besides 
the brute force of Voldemort (including never letting them in on the 
agenda in the first place) and he needs to make his Exit, posthaste.

Pip!Squeak:
But as I argue in the original post, Dumbledore has already tried 
the route of simply defeating the Dark Lord. He defeated Grindelwald 
in 1945. He's been working on educating the children of the UK since 
either the 40's (if you count  his time as Transfiguration Professor 
[CoS]) or the 70's [Lexicon estimate based on Lupin's likely age].

There is a significant section of the Wizarding World (judging by 
the DE support in the Quidditch World Cup, the support given to 
Voldemort in the first war by people like the Blacks, the section of 
Slytherin House who don't toast Harry for fighting Voldemort ) who 
support Voldemort. 

If Voldemort truly dies, will they go away? Will their ideals go 
away? 

I think the canon I quoted in the original post shows that many 
people could probably give a good breakdown of 
Dumbledore's `agenda'. What the Order of the Phoenix represents are 
the people who've worked out that they're going to have to fight to 
get it.

Jen:
Jen, climbing off her soapbox to write her next post entitled, "Why 
Lucius is a Spy" based on an acceptance of the MAGIC DISHWASHER as 
the underlying theme of the HP series...who said I can't play both 
sides? ;)

Pip!Squeak:
That's quite a convincing post, actually [grin].



Remnant says:

In the opinion of this Remnant, this new (Tom is quite convincing) 
theory

Pip!Squeak: No, it's part of MD. Or you might see it more clearly if 
you think of it as part of the Spying Game, rather than the potion 
bit. This part of the theory could be subtitled `Why we fight'. 

Up to GoF, we've been analysing tactics, because that's the canon we 
have. OOP gives much more background. We know much more about 
Dumbledore's team, for one thing. But the war being fought is still 
undercover. Literally so; Voldemort spends most of the book trying 
to work so deeply undercover that most people think he doesn't exist 
at all.

If I had to make a prediction about Book Six, it will be that this 
will be the book that will see the Mysterious Agendas finally out in 
the open. The `dishwasher phase' will end (though it may be very 
close to the end of book 6).

Remnant::
He [Dumbledore] simply has his own set of 
views that he does not try to impose on the WW at large. To do so 
would be against his/JKR's value of personal choice.

Pip!Squeak:
I think that like Jen you are getting confused between `imposing 
views' and `forcing people to make a choice'.

Dumbledore is *not* forcing his views on people. He is forcing them 
to recognise that a choice must be made. 

If those who believe in choice face those who believe in no choice, 
what do you do?

Remnant:
He respects others' boundaries. Haven't we had that drilled into us 
again and again? 

Yup. He respects their right to make a choice.  However, the WW has 
chosen to ignore the return of Voldemort. Does he respect that 
choice? Or does he make his own choice about the best route to 
follow?

The MoM chooses to arrest him, as they legally can do. Does he 
respect that boundary? Or does he impose his belief that ` I can 
think of a whole host of things I would rather be doing' [OOP Ch. 27 
p.546 ] by attacking law enforcement officers and the political head 
of the UK WW and departing via Phoenix Airlines?

The thing about choices is that they often conflict. Respecting the 
boundaries of those who respect your boundaries is a virtue. 
Respecting the boundaries of those who impose their views on others 
is not. 

Random:
Occam's Razor has been much used of late, so I hope it's still sharp 
enough for my purposes, but I'd like to posit that the simplest
answer is, in this case, still true. Dumbledore is plotting LV's 
downfall. If the MoM supports him, so much the better.

Pip!Squeak:
It is the simplest answer. Why, then, is Dumbledore admitting 
that `Merely taking your life would not satisfy me' [OOP, Ch. 36, 
p.718]

If he's *just* plotting LV's downfall, why is he not satisfied with 
killing him? 

Remnant::
My view, this is just saying that DD needs to destroy Riddle's soul
so he never comes back again.

Pip!Squeak:
::Blinks:: There we do have a philosophical difference, because to 
me destroying a person's soul, however evil they may be and whatever 
crimes they have committed, would make Dumbledore the most evil of 
Evil!Dumbledores.

At least, I assume that by 'soul' you refer to whatever ghosts are 
made of - considering that agreeing on a soul definition might prove 
to be a tad difficult on such a varied list as this one

Forgive me, but I think I'll stick with a Dumbledore who just wants 
to force people to choose between good and evil.

**Yellow flag violations**

A `yellow flag violation' is a speculative theory based in 
significant part on anything that is not canonical. 

Remnant quotes me:
what seems a losing battle next time - and if [the endless 
succession of Dark lords are] delayed again and again, why, [they] 
may never return to power.' [Original quote in PS/SS Ch. 17, p.216, 
comments in square brackets are my additions] <

> But in twenty years time, there will likely be another Dark Lord, 
willing to use 'any means to achieve their ends' [PS/SS Ch. 7 p.88] <

Remnant:
You've changed these way past their initial intent. Nearly a yellow 
flag.

Pip!Squeak:
I'm not sure that the first part you quote (where I add my own 
comments in the square brackets) is a yellow flag violation. 
Firstly, I say what I'm doing. Secondly I give the reference to the 
original quote. People can then decide for themselves whether my 
interpretation is the correct one. 

Secondly, the quote 'any means to achieve their ends' [PS/SS Ch. 7 
p.88] is a direct quote from the Sorting Hat's description of 
Slytherin, which (so Hagrid says) Voldemort went to. 

Remnant:
Oh, and in the following quote:
Pip!Squeak: Well, even the muggle born Hermione doesn't announce 
that she hopes not to get put in Slytherin. [PS/SS Ch. 6 p.79-80] 
Perhaps the books she's read don't suggest anything is wrong with 
Slytherin House? Perhaps the people she's been asking don't think 
anything is wrong with Slytherin? <

Remnant: No canon here at all.

Pip!Squeak:
Uh, I thought there was a reference to  [PS/SS Ch. 6 p.79-80]? That 
sounds like canon to me. ;-)

The exact quote is:
`Do either of you know which House you'll be in? I've been asking 
round and I hope I'm in Gryffindor, it sounds by far the best, I 
hear Dumbledore himself was one, but I suppose Ravenclaw wouldn't be 
too bad
'

So, no mention from Muggle born Hermione that she wants to avoid 
Slytherin House. 

People *not* mentioning something is often more revealing than 
mentioning it. The entire LOLLIPOPS theory has been built on Snape 
*not* mentioning Lily Evans.

So they're not yellow flag violations. 

Inference from canon is allowed. That is, I am allowed to reach a 
conclusion by reasoning about canon evidence. Having inferred, I am 
allowed to use that inference to reach further conclusions.


And finally:

Remnant:
OOP could have just been named after Fawkes, for all we know.

Pip!Squeak:
Uh, yeah. It could.

Do you know who `Fawkes' is probably named after?

Guy Fawkes (or Guido Fawkes), who on 5th November 1605 attempted to 
blow up the English Parliament, together with much of the government.

Still think I'm wrong about Dumbledore?

Pip!Squeak
 









From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 18 21:40:22 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 21:40:22 -0000
Subject: Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die!
In-Reply-To: <39F3EFDE-E9F9-11D7-9ECE-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bkd8o6+hb2b@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81098

Pip:
The Wizarding World must be prepared to destroy itself in order to 
defeat Voldemort and all his kind for ever. Those who oppose what 
Voldemort stands for must fight those who support his ideas...And so 
the Order of the Phoenix is not setting out to defeat 
Voldemort. Instead it will force the WW to choose whether to fight 
him. It is also plotting against the Ministry, (and its pure-blood 
ethos) as Dumbledore cheerfully admits in OOP Ch. 27 p. 545. 
> 
Kneasy:
"Heh, heh," chuckled Kneasy, "As fine a piece o' sophistry as I've 
seen in many a year. An idealist is he? This Dumbledore chappie o' 
yourn? Tsk, tsk, tsk. Them's the sort as causes trouble, you mark my 
words."

> Pip:
> Dumbledore does not believe in seizing power.
> 
> Kneasy:
> Well, if he wins, he's got it. It's an adjunct of victory. So what 
does he do with it?  Abdication is not an option. Human nature being 
what it is, someone is sure to come along and think "Why not me?" 
Then we're back where we started. Give it away? Not possible. Not 
magical power. It resides within Dumbledore; nowhere else.  If he 
retires, sets up a new government, it'll only form factions, each 
> appealing to him  for support. It all gets very messy.
> 
> Many  posters have asked  "Why is Slytherin?" Good question. <snip> 
Well, every society is a dynamic; there must be a conflict of ideas 
for progress to be measured and justified. But is this the best way 
of doing it? How about  getting rid  of that damn hat and with it 
Slytherin, Gryffindor and the rest. After all, Slytherin has been a  
training ground, a nursery for the pureblood superiority ethic since 
forever. And a great place to make contacts with the like-minded. 
Dilute the poison. Spread 'em around. Maybe you  can dilute them 
enough to make a homeopathic mix.
<snip>

Laura:

Well, I must say, Kneasy, I expected a more violent reaction from you 
about Pip's theory, since she agrees with your "DD is up to 
something" line of thought and then turns it around to make him the 
savior of the WW, if not all of humanity.  But people are always full 
of surprises, aren't they?  

If I understand your argument right, I don't think it's sophistry 
you're accusing ESE!Pip (that would be Ever So Eloquent :-))of.   
It's not the argumentation with which you're taking issue, it's the 
premise.  Pip's premise is that humanity can be redeemed, that we're 
capable of fundamental behavioral change, and that's what DD is 
working towards.  She suggests that DD is willing to provoke a war 
between good and evil that may destroy (perhaps must destroy) the WW 
as it currently exists in the Potterverse.  But destroying that world 
doesn't necessarily mean destroying everyone in it, and DD hopes that 
some of his students will be left to create "a cleaner, better, 
stronger land...when the storm has cleared."  (That's from "His Last 
Bow", the final Sherlock Holmes story.) 

You don't agree. You say that it's human nature to attach value 
judgements to individuals or groups based on their differences from 
each other, and that will never change even if every muggle-hating, 
pure-blood-loving person in the WW dies.  So this war would be 
fruitless.  The best that DD could do is to acknowledge this 
propensity towards prejudice and try to weaken and control it.  

Am I right in reading your post as suggesting that DD has no choice 
but to be a leader of the magical world?   If in fact power resides 
in him and everyone knows it, he will wield it no matter what he does 
or where he is, just because others will follow him, if for no other 
reason.  And unlike Aragorn, DD has long since come to terms with 
that reality and decided to be proactive.  (Aragorn's also a lot 
sexier than DD-but maybe that's movie contamination...:-))

Clarifications, corrections and further expounding welcome!




From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Thu Sep 18 22:36:54 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 22:36:54 -0000
Subject: Reaction to MAGIC DISHWASHER (TBAY INTRO)
In-Reply-To: <bkd8js+92un@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkdc27+7mc7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81099

I am definitely enjoying this thread--and while I do not agree with 
this latest incarnation of MD, I admit I also cannot fully disprove it 
through canon. But, hey, I'll try anyway, since BADD ANGST is clearly 
the sturdiest structure around. More to come on that in future 
posts, I'm sure. ;)

> Pip!Squeak:
> No, it's part of MD. Or you might see it more clearly if you think 
of it as part of the Spying Game, rather than the potion bit. This 
part of the theory could be subtitled `Why we fight'. <

OK, you're still MD, fine. :) I just didn't know whether you thought 
(as Tom suggested) that the heart of MD was in its interpretation of 
very specific events or the assumption that DD was plotting and 
planning out of view until OOP. Obviously the latter, which was always 
the most intriguing aspect to me, as well. And, again, kudos on that 
being correct!

> Pip!Squeak:
> If I had to make a prediction about Book Six, it will be that this 
will be the book that will see the Mysterious Agendas finally out in 
the open. The `dishwasher phase' will end (though it may be very close 
to the end of book 6). <

Again, we're in general agreement. Although I could also see JKR 
simply having everyone acting in the open in 6&7 without explaining 
what was going on in the background before. Hopefully, she'll drop at 
least a few clues for us!

> Pip!Squeak:
> I think that like Jen you are getting confused between `imposing 
views' and `forcing people to make a choice'. Dumbledore is *not* 
forcing his views on people. He is forcing them to recognise that a 
choice must be made. If those who believe in choice face those who 
believe in no choice, what do you do? <

OK, here we part ways just as before. I understand the distinction 
between imposing and forcing people to face a choice. Honest. I simply 
don't think that DD is doing *either*. IMO he is only defending 
himself and the WW against a force that removes people's choices 
(including his own) by killing them if they don't serve him.

If I may speak metaphorically, you think he's stoking a fire to force 
others to see it and decide to put it out. I think he's simply trying 
to put it out. Period. I think he'd do it by himself if he could. But 
for reasons we don't yet fully understand, Harry is necessary. And he 
needs some help primarily for information-gathering, so he can thwart 
LV's subversive efforts. I don't believe there is any canon that 
explicitly states that he is trying to do anything more than just 
destroy LV.

> Pip!Squeak:
> Yup. He respects their right to make a choice.  However, the WW has 
chosen to ignore the return of Voldemort. Does he respect that choice? 
Or does he make his own choice about the best route to follow?
> The MoM chooses to arrest him, as they legally can do. Does he 
respect that boundary? Or does he impose his belief that ` I can think 
of a whole host of things I would rather be doing' [OOP Ch. 27 p.546 ] 
by attacking law enforcement officers and the political head of the UK 
WW and departing via Phoenix Airlines? <

So he's trying to keep LV from getting too strong. What are some good 
ways he can do that? Get the MoM to recognize that LV is back, so they 
can arrest his DEs and protect the WW; that's why he lures LV to the 
MoM. Also, he needs to be available for the fight, so when the MoM 
tries to arrest him on charges that are patently stupid (even if 
technically legal), he refuses. Besides, they have infringed on his 
ability to make choices, not he theirs. Yes I realize that any 
criminal could say the same thing, but in the Potterverse JKR makes it 
clear that we are to think DD is good and knows more than the MoM.

> Pip!Squeak:
> The thing about choices is that they often conflict. Respecting the 
> boundaries of those who respect your boundaries is a virtue. 
> Respecting the boundaries of those who impose their views on others 
> is not. 

Good, so we agree!


> Remnant::
> My view, this is just saying that DD needs to destroy Riddle's soul 
so he never comes back again. <
<then> 
> Pip!Squeak:
> ::Blinks:: There we do have a philosophical difference, because to 
me destroying a person's soul, however evil they may be and whatever 
crimes they have committed, would make Dumbledore the most evil of 
Evil!Dumbledores. <

I'm simply saying that killing LV's body did not defeat him before, so 
DD needs to truly destroy him now. Whether that means destroying his 
soul, making him see the wrong of his ways (that'd be big and bangy!), 
or merging with Harry or something has not yet been canonized.

OK, on to the most serious matters.

> Pip!Squeak:
> **Yellow flag violations**
> 
> A `yellow flag violation' is a speculative theory based in 
> significant part on anything that is not canonical. 
> 
> Remnant:
> You've changed these way past their initial intent. Nearly a yellow 
> flag.
> 
> Pip!Squeak:
> I'm not sure that the first part you quote (where I add my own 
> comments in the square brackets) is a yellow flag violation. 
> Firstly, I say what I'm doing. Secondly I give the reference to the 
> original quote. People can then decide for themselves whether my 
> interpretation is the correct one. 
> 
> Secondly, the quote 'any means to achieve their ends' [PS/SS Ch. 7 
> p.88] is a direct quote from the Sorting Hat's description of 
> Slytherin, which (so Hagrid says) Voldemort went to. 

That's why I called them *nearly* yellow flags. I did feel you misled 
our audience a bit by quoting phrases and changing their 
context/intent substantially. Attributing them is good, but might also 
make our audience think that their 'enhanced' intent is canon. That's 
why I thought about yellow flags. I did *not* throw them. Frankly, I'm 
too much a neophyte to do that, anyway. And just for clarification, 
the Sorting Hat's quote was, as you say, not about future dark lords, 
but Slytherins. Again, I know you pointed this out, but moving their 
context/intent isn't helping your cause, IMHO.

> Pip!Squeak: Well, even the muggle born Hermione doesn't announce 
> that she hopes not to get put in Slytherin. [PS/SS Ch. 6 p.79-80] 
> Perhaps the books she's read don't suggest anything is wrong with 
> Slytherin House? Perhaps the people she's been asking don't think 
> anything is wrong with Slytherin? <
> 
> Remnant: No canon here at all.
> 
> Pip!Squeak:
> Uh, I thought there was a reference to  [PS/SS Ch. 6 p.79-80]? That 
> sounds like canon to me. ;-)
> 
> The exact quote is:
> `Do either of you know which House you'll be in? I've been asking 
> round and I hope I'm in Gryffindor, it sounds by far the best, I 
> hear Dumbledore himself was one, but I suppose Ravenclaw wouldn't be 
> too bad
'
> 
> So, no mention from Muggle born Hermione that she wants to avoid 
> Slytherin House. 
> 
> People *not* mentioning something is often more revealing than 
> mentioning it. The entire LOLLIPOPS theory has been built on Snape 
> *not* mentioning Lily Evans.
> 
> So they're not yellow flag violations. 

My apologies. I still think it's a big stretch to say that on our 
first day at Hogwarts, having muggle-born Hermione *not* mention 
Slytherin's relative qualities implies that Slyth does not have 
negative connotations.

> Remnant:
> OOP could have just been named after Fawkes, for all we know.
> 
> Pip!Squeak:
> Uh, yeah. It could.
> 
> Do you know who `Fawkes' is probably named after?
> 
> Guy Fawkes (or Guido Fawkes), who on 5th November 1605 attempted to 
> blow up the English Parliament, together with much of the 
government.
> 
> Still think I'm wrong about Dumbledore?
> 
> Pip!Squeak

I'll say it again, *great* post. Like the best, it can be neither 
proven nor disproven, only debated. As for Fawkes, he's probably a 
hero of JKR's, since she's clearly somewhat anti-establishment. That 
does not, however, mean that Dumbledore's goal is te overthrow of the 
WW government as we know it.

'Til next time!

-Remnant
"Tripe, Sybill?"




From pokeypokey at comcast.net  Thu Sep 18 22:37:12 2003
From: pokeypokey at comcast.net (angelberri56)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 22:37:12 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore and how he knew about Ginny's possession
In-Reply-To: <bhg1c2+csjg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkdc2o+4kmv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81100

 
> > > > Dumbledore has claimed to have watched Harry "closer 
than he 
> > > > realizes" during his years at Hogwarts.  The best 
explanation 
> to 
> > > how 
> > > > he knows so much is that he was there when the 
incidents 
> > happened.  
> > > I 
> > > > personally favor the idea that Dumbledore is (yet another) 
> > > > unregistered animagus.  I think he's the wasp we see 
during 
> > Harry's 
> > > > transfiguration OWL.
> >  Fran

Now me: 

Wow, what a great theory! I thought briefly of Dumbledore being 
an animagus, but I didn't see how it could fit in. But DD 
transforming into a wasp is perfect, as we know that 
Dumbledore's name means "bumblebee". I know a wasp isnt 
the exact same thing as a bumblebee, but it's pretty close, and 
maybe JKR thought it would be too much a give-away if he was 
an actual bee. 

-angelberri56







From pokeypokey at comcast.net  Thu Sep 18 22:37:20 2003
From: pokeypokey at comcast.net (angelberri56)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 22:37:20 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore and how he knew about Ginny's possession
In-Reply-To: <bhg1c2+csjg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkdc30+gfjc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81101

 
> > > > Dumbledore has claimed to have watched Harry "closer 
than he 
> > > > realizes" during his years at Hogwarts.  The best 
explanation 
> to 
> > > how 
> > > > he knows so much is that he was there when the 
incidents 
> > happened.  
> > > I 
> > > > personally favor the idea that Dumbledore is (yet another) 
> > > > unregistered animagus.  I think he's the wasp we see 
during 
> > Harry's 
> > > > transfiguration OWL.
> >  Fran

Now me: 

Wow, what a great theory! I thought briefly of Dumbledore being 
an animagus, but I didn't see how it could fit in. But DD 
transforming into a wasp is perfect, as we know that 
Dumbledore's name means "bumblebee". I know a wasp isnt 
the exact same thing as a bumblebee, but it's pretty close, and 
maybe JKR thought it would be too much a give-away if he was 
an actual bee. 

-angelberri56







From constancevigilance at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 18 23:41:33 2003
From: constancevigilance at yahoo.com (Susan Miller)
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 23:41:33 -0000
Subject: Filks from the Young Wizard's Songbook, part 3
Message-ID: <bkdfrd+69u9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81102

Constance Vigilance, being constantly vigilant, has been helping Mad-
Eye Moody clean out his trunk. At the bottom of one drawer 
labelled "School Things", they find a battered old schoolbook with 
most of the pages missing. The broken spine reads

The Young Wizard's Songbook.

"Oh," says Constance, "this must be where those random pages have 
been coming from. I thought I saw a couple fly out the window 
recently. This book is in really bad shape. There are only a few 
pages left intact."

They carefully open the book and it begins to sing:


Little Mike Corner

Little Mike Corner
Ginny lovelorner
With redheads he likes to be seen.
He got grumpy and crossed
When his Quidditch team lost.
And so now Ginny's chumming with Dean.


Hickory Dickory Grawp

Hickory Dickory Grawp
Loves Hagrid but gives him a pop.
Another love token,
Another rib broken.
Hickory Dickory Grawp.


Oh Where, Oh Where

Oh where, oh where have my belongings all gone?
If you please, please return them to me.
The items I've missed
I write here on this list.
Signed Luna Lovegood, Sincerely.


"Hmm," says Mad-Eye. "I wonder if there are any more pages loose 
somewhere in this trunk?"

"Dunno," responds Constance noncommittally. "We'll just have to see 
what turns up. Hey, look at this! The Hogwarts Big Book of Limericks!"

~ Constance Vigilance, who has finally got a CD of 42nd Street!




From Malady579 at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 19 00:50:31 2003
From: Malady579 at hotmail.com (Melody)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 00:50:31 -0000
Subject: Lucius and the Spying Game 
In-Reply-To: <bkcn21+veqa@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkdjsn+2jqo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81103

Jen Reese wrote:
>If indeed this is DD's agenda  "Dumbledore stands by and lets it 
>happen {COS} in the hope that the resulting battle can destroy the 
>menace of the basilisk," then I'm proposing Lucius Malfoy is actually 
>the Spy instead of (or with) Snape, and here's the evidence:

Hehehe.  You know, I like how your mind works, Jen.  Pip do we have
some dishwasher detergent we can label her theory?  :D

May I add canon and pick at it a bit though?


> 1. Lucius also knows Tom Riddle is Voldemort, unlike apparently most 
> of the WW.

Fair assertion.  Backed up by Dumbledore in CoS, Ch18 "Very few people
know that Lord Voldemort was once called Tom Riddle."  Therefore,
Lucius is amongst the few...


> 2. He is in possession of Riddle's "old school things."

Only problem I have here is that Lucius was selling other "dark magic"
items in Knockturn Alley.  He does not know Harry is there, so it is
not for show to "convince" Harry Lucius is bad.  Lucius wants to be
discreet in his selling too.  Though it could be argued he is saying
that so that Mr. Borgin *does* whisper that Malfoy is selling things.    


> 3. Lucius plants the diary in Ginny's cauldron.

He does.  Which makes me wonder why then, since Lucius is on
Dumbledore's orders, *Dumbledore* chose her.  Also I wonder why
Dumbledore had Lucius do it, when Dumbledore could have planted the
diary in her room himself.  Assuming he can get up that
slide/stairwell.  :D


> 4. Lucius ensures that the Governors oust Dumbledore so DD has an 
> excuse not to be present during the COS battle.
 
Hmm.  I like this point.  Effective.


> 5. Lucius is a "loyal" DE, a powerful figure in the MOM and one of 
> the governors of Hogwarts--the only person with the ability to know 
> everyone's agenda.

Well he is sacked from the governors now after CoS.  He is in good
with Voldie though.  I think that can be assumed from OoP safely.


> 6. Lucius either has his own pawn in Draco, whom he has "sacrificed" 
> for the WW by training him to be a mudblood hater and eventual 
> incitor of Harry; OR

Ok.  This point.  That does not make him a spy.  That makes him God. 
He is sacrificing his son to save the world.  Maybe there *is* more
Christian symbolism than meets the eye.  :D


> 7. Draco has been trained like his father to be a double agent--his 
> role is to provide cover for his Dad and spy on the Slytherins.  
> This fits into the theory that Dumbledore is using the school as the
> base for the "transformation of the WW."

Hmm...like father like son?  We already think that with the Malfoys,
so that is a rather an easy jump.  :D


> 8. Lucius had Kreacher lure Sirius to the MOM on DD's orders so 
> Sirius could be taken out of the picture.

Umm...may I ask why?  Did I miss the thread where this was decided
confirmed?  As far as I am concerned, Dumbledore did not want Sirius
snuffed.  Dumbledore has not *ordered* anyone killed or directly
placed in the lie of fire for the distinct purpose to *be* killed. 
Dumbledore will not even kill Voldie.


> 9. Lucius prolongs the quest for the prophecy at the MOM and ensures 
> Harry isn't killed by the DE's until LV makes his appearance at the 
> MOM for his official coming out party.

Oh, so *that* is what his shrieks--to get the prophecy and not kill
Harry *until* he learns the prophecy is broken, then he decides it is
ok to kill, stupefy...whatever Harry--are for.  

Oh and being cursed by Tonks was a cover too I guess.  Clever.


Still, no direct canon to contradict since everything that could
contradict can be deferred to "acting" and "spying".  

But by saying Dumbledore would allow a child's mind to be possessed by
Riddle, I just wonder if that is too far.  As far as I am concerned,
Dumbledore never put that piece in the puzzle until he saw the four
(Harry, Ron, Lockhart, and Ginny) with the diary in McG's office after
the basilisk died.  He knew the basilisk was being controlled somehow,
but not sure.  

And in that uncertainty, he allowed the school to stay open to solve
the mystery.  Not because he put the diary there to possess a young
mind, release a young virile dark-lord-to-be Riddle, so he then can
take control of the basilisk, so Harry can be a hero, and the basilisk
can be gone.  Err...really long run on sentence.  Sorry.  ::blush::

But if Lucius is a spy, then he is a *damn* good spy.  

Nice bang there for later books, though.


Melody




From Malady579 at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 19 01:32:45 2003
From: Malady579 at hotmail.com (Melody)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 01:32:45 -0000
Subject: Reaction to MAGIC DISHWASHER
In-Reply-To: <bkdc27+7mc7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkdmbt+9jvh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81104

Remnant wrote:
>OK, you're still MD, fine. :) I just didn't know whether you thought 
>(as Tom suggested) that the heart of MD was in its interpretation of 
>very specific events or the assumption that DD was plotting and 
>planning out of view until OOP. Obviously the latter, which was
>always the most intriguing aspect to me, as well. And, again, kudos
>on that being correct!

I think you are being a bit unfair here.  We have not discounted that
MD has to be thoroughly looked over and examined with the new canon
given (favorable and unfavorable canon with regards to MD...prophecy
with long thoughts as to what MD!Dumbledore thinks it means and what
*we* think it means...).  We are just not doing it right now.  Mostly
because we three see a good strong MD still running.  No rush.  :D

But do not be anxious.  We will.  We dearly love our little
dishwasher.  We will explore the canon in OoP with the good old
fashion MD from the previous books.  It is just...we kind of wanted to
have a life...you know.  In the real world.  :) 

But time has past, and the ooo's and ah's and glow of the first read
is passing, and now we can get past the initial "oh my, she killed
Sirius."  So for the first official MD post, Pip wanted to post her
new turn on MD.  And frankly, it is not so simple and obvious as you
said.  And of course, it can be mixed and matched with other theories.

See, the original MD (formed after GoF) was shaped around bring a
Vapour!mort to a Body!mort.  That happened.  Now Pip is exploring
*why* Dumbledore wanted that in the first place.  Meaning: what does
he want a Body!mort for.

And she says it is not just to kill the guy.  He flat out tells Voldie
that.  Now I know we have proof he lies now, but if Dumbledore wanted
to kill him, I think he would have.  He had a clear shot.  

But if Dumbledore had fired a spell to kill Voldemort that day, what
would have happened?  

Nothing.

The MoM could have hid the body and lied to the public to save face. 
Umbridge would still run Hogwarts then.  The DE's would be leaderless,
but Bellatrix is quite strong herself.  She could rise.  Or Lucius. 
The environment is still there.  

You cannot blame Dumbledore for wanting to clean this out and do it
well.  It is the wiser decision.  Racism will, of course, *never* be
wiped out completely.  As long as there is fear there will be the
racism "defense".  It is deep within human nature, but what can be
stopped is the ease at which this extreme of human nature is allowed
to nurture.  

Two strong dark wizards in 50 years.  The environment is rather
nurturing, in my opinion.

That is what I see Dumbledore is doing, and that is not exactly
spelled out in OoP.  It is after Pip shows us...::big grin::  

It is one thing to kill a "king".  It is a whole other thing to run
the kingdom afterwards.  Dumbledore is working to have a kingdom,
after the "Lord Voldemort" is gone, that does not need a "Lord
Protector".  If he wanted to rule the Magic World, where he would have
the power to destroy Voldie, he could have had it.  But he refused. 
And Pip is saying for a higher degree of power really.  The power, and
available time, to change the world without the legal red tape.

But back to my other idea.  Do not despair.  MDDT will get around to
address the Shrieking Shack (though a lack of Peter Pettigrew in OoP
makes it kind of hard) and the Graveyard interpretation MD makes.  But
each books has added bits to the basic MD.  I added a philosopher
stone variation actually, that does not have to work with MD (i.e. it
runs without it) but does nicely run with in, in my opinion.  

Yes, Pip's new addition can work with other theories.  I am sure she
does not mind others mixing and matching with it, but as far as we are
concerned with MDDT, it works *very* well with MD.  It just is not
exclusive in its fitting.  

And since it is her theory, I think she can say what is a part of the
dishwasher and what is additives.


Melody
on her own as a third of MDDT




From jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 19 02:01:25 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 02:01:25 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?The_Final_End_Of_Cho=92s_Infatuation_(a_filk)?=
Message-ID: <bkdo1l+6qsu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81105

This is a filk of the song "A Funny Side To Ev'ry Situation" from 
the musical "Forty-Second Street."

This filk is dedicated to Caius Marcius, in honor of his 
masterpiece  "A!Kedavra."

             The Final End Of Cho's Infatuation
SCENE:  Hermione is trying to explain to Harry how girls think, and 
why they do the things they do.


HERMIONE: 
Sing tra la la la la la la la,
Another girl will come your way,
Sing tra la la la la la la la,
Believe me when I say


On  this Valentine's Day,
You made some mistakes and now you'll pay,
That's the final end of Cho's  infatuation,
And the same applies to you,
So you shouldn't feel so blue,
At the final end of Cho's infatuation.

When she spoke about Ced,
And how sad she was that he was dead,
All you had to do was show commiseration. 
When she said go and see me 
Should've smiled and stayed for tea.
Cho's infatuation has come to an end.

Sing tra la la la la la la la,
A girl may smile at you and wink,
But tra la la la la la la la,
They don't say what they think..



When they say they don't care
It's like sending up a bright red flare 
It's a sign they want to see your adoration.
So, when Cho said you should go,
That's the time you holler, "No!"
Cho's infatuation has come to an end.
Cho's infatuation has come to an end.

-Haggridd




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Fri Sep 19 02:23:48 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 02:23:48 -0000
Subject: MAGIC DISHWASHER (TBAY INTRO): Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die!
In-Reply-To: <bka1dm+to3u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkdpbk+9mm8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81106

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bluesqueak" <pipdowns at e...> 
wrote:
> There we have a clash of philosophies, because I do not believe in 
> Good and Evil as Yin and Yang. My philosophy is that evil cannot 
> create, only destroy. It is a parasite, a cancer, a destructive 
> force. It takes what good has created and tries to destroy or 
> corrupt it. If good sometimes seems to come out of evil, it is only 
> because good is so powerful that it can repair what evil has done.
>Death is not necessarily evil; it can be a transformation {good 
canon views of death here that are snipped}. 


Jen:  That's a good point, and I see where our philosophies differ. I 
think patially it's my use of the term Yin and Yang when "duality" 
would be a better word. 

So I'll try again: If Good Creates and Evil Destroys, how is that 
*not* duality ?  Evil will never be truly vanquished; it must exist 
if the Power of Transformation can ever take place. If Evil is 
vanquished, how can we distinguish Good? There is no choice to make, 
no free will, if both do not exist.

Also to clarify my views, I didn't intend to equate Evil=Death. I was 
merely using Life and Death as an analogy for why things cannot exist 
in a vacuum--we must have one to have the other.  I see Death as a 
natural part of the life-cycle which includes birth, growth, decay, 
death and rebirth.  Good and Evil exist within the life-cycle, but 
don't supercede it.

 
Pip!Squeak:

Making someone choose is not evil. What is evil would be to force 
> them to choose a particular path. Voldemort is evil partly because 
> his philosophy does not allow for choice. Follow him or die. 
> 
> And yes, if the WW is irredeemably evil, it is better to sacrifice 
> it for the future. That is a decision that has been made before. 
You 
> may well be right that the new society won't be perfect (people 
> being irritatingly inclined to choose `those things which are worst 
> for them'). But a society set up to disapprove of evil, and which 
> believes in actively opposing evil is going to be a lot better for 
> people to live in. 



Jen:
I, like you, believe a society set up to disapprove of evil is a 
better society. Any society that chooses to transform Evil to Good is 
making the better choice. And I don't believe the WW is irredeemably 
evil.

The problem I have with MD is that it doesn't set up Voldemort as 
Evil and Dumbledore as Good; It sets them both up as Evil, but in 
different ways.  

Voldemort denies his followers a choice in a very straightforward 
manner--"follow me or die."  

Dumbledore (as presented in MD)also denies choice, but in a covert 
way--"follow me even though you don't know the extent of my agenda." 
Perhaps many people in the Order know his agenda and are willing to 
die for it, as Sirius was. But do the students at Hogwarts who DD's 
allegedly initiating into his agenda, know? Do Stan Shupike and Ernie 
MacMillan know?  If they knew, would they also freely choose to die 
by the Fires of Transformation?  Or would they prefer to keep their 
families and friends and live in an imperfect society? In that 
society, they would at least have the chance to transform Evil into 
Good.

I accidentally snipped the last thought I wanted to respond to. It 
was something to the effect that Dumbledore already tried to 
eradicate Evil once by defeating Grindelwald, and that he won't go 
that route again because "just killing" Voldemort won't eradicate the 
evil present in the WW. 

My response is: Dumbledore knows and accepts that *truth*. He's 150+ 
years old--talk about someone who has seen the full spectrum of the 
lifecycle--and he knows vanquishing Voldemort will not end Evil. But 
it's the best chance they've got. 

Dumbledore *does* want so much more for the WW--I totally agree with 
you there--but I don't think he's willing to endlessly sacrifice the 
whole WW to get there. That would be a form of genocide on the same 
level as Voldemort's. So if you *do* believe Dumbledore is willing to 
go that far, then he is Evil and needs to move on down the road just 
like Voldemort :).

I really believe Dumbledore's trying to impart an age-old wisdom 
about the Imperfect World when he tells Harry: "It will merely take 
someone else who is prepared to fight what seems like a losing battle 
next time--and if he is delayed again, and again, why, he may never 
return to power." 

So in the end, is Fire really better than Ice? Robert Frost doesn't 
think so: In the beginning, he holds with "those who favor fire" but 
in the end, Ice would suffice. 

Jen


  












From lily_paige_delaney at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 19 02:24:17 2003
From: lily_paige_delaney at yahoo.com (lily_paige_delaney)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 02:24:17 -0000
Subject: Human transfiguration coming in book 6?
Message-ID: <bkdpch+cjn5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81107

Hi all,

I am slowly but surely reading HP aloud to my daughter and you really 
do pick up some interesting stuff when you read out loud.  We are up 
to GoF and the chapter on the second task.  Something that grabbed me 
in this chapter is that the trio are desperately searching the 
library for a way for Harry to breathe underwater and Ron (I think)
says its a shame that Harry can't transfigure himself into a frog.  
Hermoine of course dismisses this by saying they won't learn human 
transfiguration until the 6th year.

So I wonder what's coming in Book 6!

LPD




From jdr0918 at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 19 03:56:16 2003
From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 03:56:16 -0000
Subject: Filks from the Young Wizard's Songbook, part 3
In-Reply-To: <bkdfrd+69u9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkdup0+ti1i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81108

<<<Constance Vigilance wrote:..."Hmm," says Mad-Eye. "I wonder if 
there are any more pages loose somewhere in this trunk?"...>>>

The Sergeant Majorette (poking under a Clifford-the-Big-Red-Crup My 
First Sneakoscope) says

Here's one:

Percy? Mercy! Ministry hack!
Gave his Christmas jumper back
When his siblings heard of it
They all chorused "What a git!"

--JDR




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Fri Sep 19 04:10:17 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 04:10:17 -0000
Subject: Lucius and the Spying Game and back to MD TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bkdjsn+2jqo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkdvja+gd08@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81109

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Melody" <Malady579 at h...> wrote:
> 
> Hehehe.  You know, I like how your mind works, Jen.  Pip do we have
> some dishwasher detergent we can label her theory?  :D
> 

Jen: Hehe (whispers)I *am* a conspiracy theorist at heart. :)

Not to mention that I was capitalizing on MAGIC DISWASHER to throw 
out one of my pet theories for a little look-see (Lucius would be so 
proud). But, alas, you found the weak spots. Not even *I* believe in 
#8: "Lucius had Kreacher lure Sirius to the MOM on DD's orders so 
Sirius could be taken out of the picture." So, back to the drawing 
board.

But you did mention something in relation to MAGIC DISHWASHER that I 
want to ask about....  

Melody said:
But by saying Dumbledore would allow a child's mind to be possessed by
> Riddle, I just wonder if that is too far.  As far as I am concerned,
> Dumbledore never put that piece in the puzzle until he saw the four
> (Harry, Ron, Lockhart, and Ginny) with the diary in McG's office 
after
> the basilisk died.  He knew the basilisk was being controlled 
somehow,
> but not sure.  
> 
> And in that uncertainty, he allowed the school to stay open to solve
> the mystery.  Not because he put the diary there to possess a young
> mind, release a young virile dark-lord-to-be Riddle, so he then can
> take control of the basilisk, so Harry can be a hero, and the 
basilisk
> can be gone. 

And in the MD TBAY Pip!Squeak said:
[A minor note: the plot of CoS revolves around attacks on 
muggleborns because of their blood. Dumbledore stands by and lets it 
happen in the hope that the resulting battle can destroy the menace 
of the basilisk for once and all. No wonder JKR said that CoS nearly 
gives it all away].


Jen Reese: You are both arguing the same idea, that Dumbledore stood 
by and let the attacks on Muggleborns continue in the hopes that the 
menace of the basilisk would be gone forever. 

Then Melody wonders in this post if it is "going too far" for 
Dumbledore to have initiated the release of the basilisk, ensure the 
diary got in Ginny's hands and allow her to be possessed by LV.

How far is "too far" for Dumbledore to further his agenda? That's the 
part about MD I think I'm misunderstanding.  If DD is knowingly 
allowing Muggleborns to be attacked in the hopes of saving future 
generations from the basilisk, is that OK? DD has no assurances that 
the Muggleborns will only be petrified, not killed (if that even 
matters).  

I can understand in SS/PS where Harry speculates, "I think 
{Dumbledore} sort of wanted to give me a chance....I reckon he had a 
pretty good idea we were going to try, and instead of helping us, he 
just taught us enough to help...It's almost like he thought I had a 
right to face Voldemort if I could....." (US, pg. 302) YES! that is 
DD's philosophy at work--Harry and Co. are working on the mystery, 
*by their own choosing* and Dumbledore accepts their choice and tries 
to help.

But in COS--I seriously doubt any of the Muggleborns are choosing to 
be attacked, in fact they are mortally afraid, and if Dumbledore is 
standing by and allowing the attacks to happen....Isn't that the form 
of Evil Pip!Squeak talked about in answering my other post "evil 
triumphs when good men do nothing?" 

Please tell me if I'm not getting the gist of MD and I will go back 
for a fourth, fifth, sixth reading, I promise......

Jen










From acoteucla at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 19 04:21:59 2003
From: acoteucla at hotmail.com (acoteucla)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 04:21:59 -0000
Subject: MAGIC DISHWASHER (TBAY INTRO): Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die!
In-Reply-To: <bkb332+sj1c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bke097+mfhm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81110

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tom Wall" <thomasmwall at y...> 
wrote:
> But, when you have a chance, do you think that you could address 
all 
> of the *other* stuff that's been bubbling around in our collective 
> mind since OoP came out, namely how does the *Prophecy* work with 
> the flaw in the potion? If you can work that into MAGIC DISHWASHER, 
> then it will have truly and deservedly evolved.

I first discovered MAGIC DISHWASHER after reading book 5, and I 
didn't think there was any problem meshing the prophecy with the 
theory.  The flaw in the potion has something to do with the life-
debt that Peter owes Harry.  So Peter still has a role to play - he 
is going to DO something which brings this flaw to the surface.

What will cause Peter to act?  One idea I've had is that Harry will 
come to understand Peter a bit better, and perhaps feel pity for him 
rather than disgust.  Dumbledore claims that "love" is the power the 
Dark Lord knows not - LV has never shown pity or love for Peter.  I 
bet the original Potter-squad never did either.  How will Peter react 
if Harry is the first one to do so?  This may bring about the flaw in 
the potion while at the same time utilizing Harry's power to defeat 
LV.




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 19 05:29:27 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 05:29:27 -0000
Subject: Fred and George Weasley
In-Reply-To: <bkcjh8+2jos@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bke47n+es6m@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81111

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "yairadubin"
<two4menone4you88 at a...> wrote:
> ... Fred and George are ,,, portrayed as the ultimate twins ..... 
> Well, people can't do that forever.  ...So, eventually, they're going 
> to have to untwin.  But ..., I don't know how that would happen, 
> except...if one of them dies!!!!  ...edited...
>
> LUV,
> *Yaira*

bboy_mn:

...or they could get serious girl friends and eventually get married.
Nothing like a steady and willing (if you know what I mean) girl
friend to take a guys mind of is best buds.

Although, I don't think the story will quite take it that far.
Remember, in a manner of speaking, their lives all end in two more
story years; they end when the story ends. However, fan fiction will
carry them forward for decades.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 19 05:51:05 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 05:51:05 -0000
Subject: Changing Secret Keepers (Theory)
In-Reply-To: <bkcn1p+893o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bke5g9+58ar@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81112

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Hagrid" <aussie_lol at y...> wrote:
>
> ...edited...
> 
> If so, did someone hit Sirius with a memory charm?
> 


bboy_mn:
 
Why a memory charm? Memory Charms make you forget, but what would it
be that Sirius would forget under the influence of a memory charm, and
how would that cause Peter to be selected in his place?

More likely would be a Confundus Charm. Remember the end of POA Snape
and Fudge are convinced that Sirius used a Confundus Charm on Harry,
Ron, and Hermione to convince them that the story they were telling
was true.

Or perhaps the Imperious Curse to force Sirius to make Peter the
Secret Keeper.

> Aussie continues:
> 
> Pettigrew was called "talentless" by Sirius (POA) ...edited...
> 
> The Death-Eaters would not accept Wormtail easily since he lacked 
> ability, ...edited...
>
> aussie

bboy_mn:

James and Sirius were a couple of the most talented wizards to ever
come through Hogwarts; everyone in that school, and for decades on
either side of them, was not up to the standards of James and Sirius.

So while Peter may not have been among the best, I don't think it is
fair to imply, as many people have, that he was an incompetent wizard.
 I don't think being critisized by McGonagall makes you talentless
since she pretty much critisizes everyone. 

Compared to Michael Jordan, the best high school basketball player
look significantly less competent. But that is a relative judgement,
the high school basketball player may still be talented enough to get
an athletic scholarship to a fine university. Again, these things are
relative.

In reference to Peter, I think we have already seen that he is at
least a competent wizard. 

Just a thought.

bboy_mn






From jdr0918 at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 19 06:11:13 2003
From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 06:11:13 -0000
Subject: Fred and George Weasley
In-Reply-To: <bke47n+es6m@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bke6m1+it7i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81113

<<<In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: ...or they could 
get serious girl friends and eventually get married.>>>

The Sergeant Majorette says

Or they could marry Parvati and Padma and be fixtures at twin 
conventions all over the world and be so lethally adorable that 
Voldemort would wither and dissolve into a puddle like the Wicked 
Witch of the West...

--JDR




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Fri Sep 19 10:48:10 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 10:48:10 -0000
Subject: Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die!
In-Reply-To: <bkd8o6+hb2b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkemta+3d1b@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81114

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
> Laura:
> 
> Well, I must say, Kneasy, I expected a more violent reaction from you 
> about Pip's theory, since she agrees with your "DD is up to 
> something" line of thought and then turns it around to make him the 
> savior of the WW, if not all of humanity.  But people are always full 
> of surprises, aren't they?  


Kneasy:
Violence? From me? You must be confusing me with  someone else.
Just because I think DD is up to  something doesn't necessarily
make him a baddy. But by the same token, DD may *want* every-
thing to end up sweetness and light, but  is it possible? He may be
forced by events to take a less happy path. I  think this is the way
it's going. As Pip states, the WW is in a moral mess. Root and 
branch changes are needed, there will be resistance from 
entrenched interests (like the Ministry) to radical change. DD will
probably be the sole individual who can bring about what changes
are possible. Only he will have the power.


Laura: 
> If I understand your argument right, I don't think it's sophistry 
> you're accusing ESE!Pip (that would be Ever So Eloquent :-))of.   
> It's not the argumentation with which you're taking issue, it's the 
> premise. 


Kneasy:
Sophistry is the life and soul of the site. We all do it as  soon as we
stray  from strict canon. It is not a fault, it is exercising  the
imagination. Pip's  premise is as valid as anyone's and more valid
than most. It's how you support it that  creates sophistry.
We think of an  idea, a theory. Then we  go looking for canon
support. We find a passage or two  that we  can  quote if we're
lucky. But does the character quoted know what we know?
Doubtful, in most  cases. We build a case on  the suppositions 
of characters that do not have definitive knowledge. That's a 
specious argument, sophistry.
And  it's lovely! Can't do  without it.

> Pip's premise is that humanity can be redeemed, that we're 
> capable of fundamental behavioral change, and that's what DD is 
> working towards.  She suggests that DD is willing to provoke a war 
> between good and evil that may destroy (perhaps must destroy) the WW 
> as it currently exists in the Potterverse.  
> snip>
> You don't agree. You say that it's human nature to attach value 
> judgements to individuals or groups based on their differences from 
> each other, and that will never change even if every muggle-hating, 
> pure-blood-loving person in the WW dies.  So this war would be 
> fruitless.  The best that DD could do is to acknowledge this 
> propensity towards prejudice and try to weaken and control it.  
>

Kneasy:
Yes. I don't  believe people are perfectable. It may be possible, with 
a struggle,  to  change a particular pattern of behaviour, say towards
mudbloods or muggles, but change what is in effect an innate, basic
competitive drive? No, I don't  think so.  Comparisons may be unfair
or invidious, but they are always being made. She is better than him
because, they are not nice, I don't like her - comparisons that 
become fixed and rationalised and  then generalised. Sad but true.
You  can enforce a standard of public behaviour, but you cannot
enforce thought change. How would it be possible to  convince
Umbridge that there's  nothing wrong with half-breeds or centaurs? 
No, I don't think it could be done.

Laura: 
> Am I right in reading your post as suggesting that DD has no choice 
> but to be a leader of the magical world?   If in fact power resides 
> in him and everyone knows it, he will wield it no matter what he does 
> or where he is, just because others will follow him,
>snip>

Kneasy:
To the anti-Voldy camp he already is the de-facto leader. Who else 
can lead? Magical power cannot be  considered in the same way as
political power.  It's not possible to vote away DD's magical powers.
He  cannot delegate them. No-one can inherit  them. They're his alone.
It's the old joke of where does a 600 lb gorrilla sit? Wherever he likes.
He has powers, he will  have them till the end. What matters  is how  
he uses them. If you're  in a magical war, impressive magical powers
will probably be the deciding factor. And in any post-war settlement.
Dumbledore is stuck with it, unless he dies. A  distinct possibility and
an acceptable way out of the impasse.








From Malady579 at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 19 11:02:14 2003
From: Malady579 at hotmail.com (Melody)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 11:02:14 -0000
Subject: Possible end goal to MD (was: Spying Game Philosophy)
In-Reply-To: <bke097+mfhm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkennm+ehp6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81115

acoteucla wrote:
>What will cause Peter to act?  One idea I've had is that Harry will 
>come to understand Peter a bit better, and perhaps feel pity for him 
>rather than disgust.  Dumbledore claims that "love" is the power the 
>Dark Lord knows not - LV has never shown pity or love for Peter.  I 
>bet the original Potter-squad never did either.  How will Peter react 
>if Harry is the first one to do so?  This may bring about the flaw in 
>the potion while at the same time utilizing Harry's power to defeat 
>LV.

Hmm.  That is an interesting twist on the need for Peter.  See though,
a part of MD is that any three of the remaining Marauders could have
been the one to receive the life dept.  Dumbledore was not sure which
one actually betrayed James and Lily.  So he did not focus solely on
Peter.

That being said, the wizard that immerged from the Shrieking Shack to
run off to Vapour!Mort would be the one that Harry, according to your
theory, has to learn to love.  

Do you think he can?  Dumbledore, so far, has just taught Harry
defending skills and acceptance for those who assumptions are made
unfairly.  Peter *is* a evil wizard.  He *is* in the league of
Voldemort.  He *is* the one that betrayed the Potters.  Peter *is* the
one that killed Cedric and then stabbed Harry with the dagger. 
Personally, I see Harry having a harder time than anyone to love Peter.  

Pity Peter.  yes.
Love Peter.  no.

But maybe Dumbledore will teach Harry a crash course in how to love
your enemy.  Hey!  I found another possible biblical parallel.  :)

Oh, and Peter has been loved.  Ron did love Scabbers...in his young
boy way.  Scabbers went everywhere with Ron nestled in his pocket next
to his heart.  And Peter is the one that chose to leave.


Melody





From altered.earth at ntlworld.com  Fri Sep 19 11:43:29 2003
From: altered.earth at ntlworld.com (digger)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 12:43:29 +0100
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must
 die!
In-Reply-To: <bkemta+3d1b@eGroups.com>
References: <bkemta+3d1b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F6AEBE1.806@ntlworld.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81116


> 
> Kneasy:
> To the anti-Voldy camp he (Dumbledore) already is the de-facto leader. Who else
> can lead? Magical power cannot be  considered in the same way as
> political power.  It's not possible to vote away DD's magical powers.
> He  cannot delegate them. No-one can inherit  them. They're his alone.
> It's the old joke of where does a 600 lb gorrilla sit? Wherever he likes.
> He has powers, he will  have them till the end. What matters  is how 
> he uses them. If you're  in a magical war, impressive magical powers
> will probably be the deciding factor. And in any post-war settlement.
> Dumbledore is stuck with it, unless he dies. A  distinct possibility and
> an acceptable way out of the impasse.

digger:

Someone refresh my ageing and ailing memory: what kind of magic have we 
seen Fudge doing? Apparating into the ministry atrium is about all I can 
recall. Hmmmmmmmm. Umbridge is distinctly below par in the magical 
powers department in my view. Percy? not sure, we don't see him doing 
much but apparating either.

Are those seeking *political* power in the WW trying to make up for 
their lack of *magical* power? I'm obviously excluding Aurors and other 
folk like Shaklebolt and Arthur Weasley, who are manifestly NOT seeking 
political power, though they work for the Ministry. Is this why Fudge 
and his office staff have such a fear of Dumbledore, because has 
possibly the greatest magical power of all living wizards?

digger




From scootingalong at bellsouth.net  Fri Sep 19 11:56:52 2003
From: scootingalong at bellsouth.net (scooting2win)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 11:56:52 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: Off-list Messages
In-Reply-To: <20030918211337.86193.qmail@web20507.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bkequ4+ja4v@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81117

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, msbeadsley <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> > This list is for all of us to enjoy. We want it to 
> > remain a place where listmembers can discuss HP in 
> > an open, friendly spirit, and we hope that all our 
> > members will do their part to maintain this pleasant
> 
> > atmosphere.
> > 
> > "We are here to help you with any problems,
> > questions or concerns.
> > 
> > "Sincerely,
> > 
> > "Hebby Elf, 
> 
> Aw, you look so *cute* in your ickle elf uniform with
> the matching nightstick! (Thanks!) ^--^
> 
> Sandy et al
> 
And is that elf-cuffs on her belt, do you think they can really lock 
up someone's keyboard? I'm going to hide back here in the shadows 
for awhile until things cool down. 
Lori *hiding behind the couch*




From severusbook4 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 19 13:47:22 2003
From: severusbook4 at yahoo.com (severusbook4)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 13:47:22 -0000
Subject: Half-breed Umbridge
Message-ID: <bkf1da+rfbn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81118

I know this has been discussed some what but never really hit on 
what I want to ask.  Umbridge is described as short, wide, froggish 
with sharp pointed teeth, she is not much taller standing as when 
she is sitting.  Also as BBoy pointed out, she has a hatred for half-
breeds that rivels LV's hatred of mugbloods.  Could she be half 
goblin? I can't seem to find a real clear desciption of a goblin, 
but then all of my books are out on loan except OotP.  In SS (the 
movie) the goblins fit the short, with sharp teeth, and froggish 
mouth description, but can't find that in the books since I don't 
have them at this point.  A friend of mine and I are discussing this 
possibility, but have come to a screeching halt for lack of canon.  
Any help would be, well, helpful.

Sevvie, this woman makes me look positively lovable, Snape    




From severusbook4 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 19 13:59:43 2003
From: severusbook4 at yahoo.com (severusbook4)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 13:59:43 -0000
Subject: Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die!
In-Reply-To: <3F6AEBE1.806@ntlworld.com>
Message-ID: <bkf24f+v41a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81119

--- digger:
> 
> Someone refresh my ageing and ailing memory: what kind of magic 
have we 
> seen Fudge doing? Apparating into the ministry atrium is about all 
I can 
> recall. Hmmmmmmmm. Umbridge is distinctly below par in the magical 
> powers department in my view. Percy? not sure, we don't see him 
doing 
> much but apparating either.
> 
> Are those seeking *political* power in the WW trying to make up 
for 
> their lack of *magical* power? I'm obviously excluding Aurors and 
other 
> folk like Shaklebolt and Arthur Weasley, who are manifestly NOT 
seeking 
> political power, though they work for the Ministry. Is this why 
Fudge 
> and his office staff have such a fear of Dumbledore, because has 
> possibly the greatest magical power of all living wizards?
> 
> digger

Severely snipped.

Severus here:

If I recall correctly, Percy was head boy, and to receive that I 
would think you would have to do very well on your O.W.L.'s and 
N.E.W.T.'s.  In order to be considered for a position in the MOM, I 
would think you would need to be very well versed in the use of your 
magic abilities.  Now, that is not saying you are powerful, as DD 
obviously is, but you can perform the standard spells, just with out 
the push behind them.  So in the case of Umbridge, Fudge, (wasn't he 
also an Auror?), and Percy, I think they could be formitable enemies 
if they are seduced by the dark arts.

Sevvie




From persephone_kore at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 19 14:17:43 2003
From: persephone_kore at yahoo.com (persephone_kore)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 14:17:43 -0000
Subject: Possible JKR "Inspirations" (was Re: Interesting Fact)
In-Reply-To: <bkd2mq+6hna@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkf367+irc4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81120

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "erinellii" <erinellii at y...> wrote:

> I read them after GoF came out but before OoP.  I haven't read the 
> Dark Lord of Derkholm series yet, but the Chrestomanci and other 
> assorted individual books are good.  I'd go to the library for the 
> first one and see how you like it.  You know, I may have been too 
> hasty in saying absolutely that they didn't inspire JKR.  There is 
> one... "Dogsbody", that is definitely worth buying, and reminded me 
> of HP, especially with OoP additions.  Buy that one!  I'm not sure 
> when it was published, though, it may be one of her newer ones and 
> been itself inspired by Harry.  I'll check on that.

No, that one's been out for quite a while. 

In "Eight Days of Luke," David's family might be strongly suspected of
knowing the Dursleys. Of course unpleasant relatives are also
something of a classic, but Rowling's description of Harry and how he
prefers being at school to at "home" echoes Jones's description of
David's attitude, although David was not trying and failing to do
homework. ;)

PK




From sharana.geo at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 19 14:32:40 2003
From: sharana.geo at yahoo.com (sharana.geo)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 14:32:40 -0000
Subject: What happened with the OoP Chapter Discussions?
Message-ID: <bkf428+q2i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81121

Hi!!

It's been a couple of months since I last posted (between work and 
vacations), although I have been checking my e-mail regularly to see 
what's going on around here (just too occupied to post).

I was wondering what happened with the OoP Chapter Discussions? I 
think the last chapter discussed was Chapter 3: The Advance Guard, 
and that was over a month and a half ago.

I understand the HP4GU team members are taking turns in preparing 
each Chapter, and of course it takes up a lot of time and extra 
work. 

I just wish to know if the Chapter Discussions are going to continue 
or if the project has been droped.

Cheers...

Sharana




From jestahijinx at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 19 14:33:08 2003
From: jestahijinx at hotmail.com (Jesta Hijinx)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 14:33:08 +0000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Love vs. eros (was Harry Potter is a CHILDREN'S BOOK)
Message-ID: <BAY7-F24aLWAM9eEUwq00005d9d@hotmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81122


>
> > Sue: "Why is it that it's ok for JKR to write about war, death,
> > racism, oppression, torture, cruelty etc etc, but some people seem to
> > think that it's not ok for her to write about sexuality?">>
>
[a lot of good stuff snipped]
Urghiggi
>
>As adults we're all (presumably) pretty danged interested in eros. But 
>we'r=
>e
>not the primary targets for the message. That we love it and are 
>fascinated=
>  by
>it seems to indicate to me that we, too, have some kind of thirst for 
>model=
>s of
>true philea and agape love -- as well as an obsessive interest in bizarre 
>p=
>lot
>twists and obscure predictive clues, of course.
>
>urghiggi, chgo
>
This has been a very interesting thread - and I think these two remarks from 
Sue and Urghiggi are great jumping off points for what I want to say:  first 
of all, I agree with Sue that dealing with sexuality would be a healthy 
twist (and *is* a healthy twist) when set alongside violence - considered a 
suitable theme for young people to be exposed to.

Urghiggi comments on the adult nature of being interested in eros.  I'd 
state that while that is present, an essential part of an 
adult/mature/maturing viewpoint as well is the ability to experience the 
other types of love discussed - philea, agape, caritas - without 
experiencing the "need" to express every one sexually.  Likewise, if JKR 
were to explore a more sexual theme, I'd really like to see her do so while 
emphasizing the importance of the emotional aspect of it = truly love, as 
opposed to sexuality as purely experimentation.  My objection to the media 
bombardment of us with sexual/eros messages is not that sexuality is 
unnatural but that the emphasis seems to be on the exploitative/acquisitive 
nature of human sexuality, and not the emotional side - the need to hold off 
on the sexual expression until the emotional aspect is present in order to 
build and maintain lasting bonds, for example.

I believe that a writer with JKR's skill and finger on the pulse of how 
young people work could explore this theme skillfully and tastefully; if she 
chooses to do so, I can think of no author writing today who could handle it 
better.

Felinia

_________________________________________________________________
Get a FREE computer virus scan online from McAfee. 
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963




From persephone_kore at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 19 14:33:06 2003
From: persephone_kore at yahoo.com (persephone_kore)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 14:33:06 -0000
Subject: Possible JKR "Inspirations"
In-Reply-To: <bkd1iq+5p00@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkf432+cunn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81123

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "spinelli372003"
<spinelli372003 at y...> wrote:
> Not sure where this post started but has anyone read any of the "So 
> you want to be a wizard?" series.  I read them last winter.  Actually 
> got the first one while waiting for a potter book to come out.  
> thought that they were new.  And as I read them I thought "Oh my god 
> this girl is going to get into trouble for copying JKR.  But 
> interestingly enoughth the Wizard series was actually started in the 
> 70's.  There are some similarities.   sherry

The Young Wizards series (as it came to be called most likely because
"So You Want to Be a Wizard" gets rather cumbersome about the fifth
time...) began publication in 1983 -- thus the publication this year
of a 20th-anniversary edition of the first one. :) There are *some*
similarities, yes, in that you have a villain nobody wants to name
(although with somewhat better reason, since the one in YW actually
has a moderately good shot at hearing you) who gets referred to as
"you-know-who" (no capitalization) occasionally -- not that any of
this is terribly odd -- and wizards getting started at around age 11
to 13 or so, a certain amount of secrecy, and a self-driving car. On
the other hand, the characters, families, cosmology, nature of
wizardry, introduction of wizards to wizardry, and plot structure are
all pretty much completely different. 

Well, there is the death of a parent/parental figure in the fifth
book, but barring the unlikely possibility that they are secretly
plotting to weird us out, I seriously doubt either one influenced the
other there. :)

I admit, though, I've been expecting for quite a while for somebody to
get confused about the original publication dates and take the fact
that the bully in SYW is named Joanne as some sort of dig. 

OT, but Diane Duane seems to be quite nice, incidentally. She runs and
funds a discussion forum for the series herself, and drops in to
respond to threads occasionally. Though not the plot-speculation ones,
of course. ;)

PK




From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Fri Sep 19 14:50:43 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 14:50:43 -0000
Subject: Reaction to MAGIC DISHWASHER
In-Reply-To: <bkdmbt+9jvh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkf543+2vbl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81124

> Melody wrote:
> So for the first official MD post, Pip wanted to post her new turn 
on MD.  And frankly, it is not so simple and obvious as you said. <

I agree now that it is neither simple nor obvious. :)

> Melody
> See, the original MD (formed after GoF) was shaped around bring a 
Vapour!mort to a Body!mort.  That happened.  Now Pip is exploring 
*why* Dumbledore wanted that in the first place.  Meaning: what does 
he want a Body!mort for.
> And she says it is not just to kill the guy.  He flat out tells 
Voldie that.  Now I know we have proof he lies now, but if Dumbledore 
wanted to kill him, I think he would have.  He had a clear shot. <

OK, I disagree again. We've been led to believe by the prophecy and 
Dumbledore himself in OOP that only Harry can vanquish LV. And I 
believe that. I believe that DD could have, at best, killed LV's 
current body. But then we'd have another Vapor!mort or something and 
LV would just come back later. After doing this a half dozen times, DD 
would get too old for all this, and then LV would win.

Yes, in some ways that's not so different from Pip's latest 
incarnation of MD, except that she talks about recurring Dark Lords 
(plural). I simply refer to a recurring LV (until his soul is dealt 
with).

> Melody
> Two strong dark wizards in 50 years.  The environment is rather 
nurturing, in my opinion. <

OK, I have a big concern about this line of thought: what do we really 
know about other Dark Lords?

* Do we know that there have been other Dark Lords anywhere close to 
being as strong and unkillable as LV?
* Do we know that they had as much WW support as him?
* Do we know that there are not also Dumbledores born once a 
generation to defeat them?

Canon says virtually nothing on these points, so for all we know LV is 
an unprecedented evil. In fact, I can cite canon on my side here: the 
WW has been in existence for thousands of years (ancient Egyptian 
wizards are mentioned in POA). Yet it has not been destroyed or turned 
into a totalitarian state by a deathless Dark Lord yet. And if this 
type of thing happened all the time, wouldn't it be mentioned 
somewhere by now? Wouldn't someone have said, "Boy this Voldemort is 
every bit as bad as so-and-so was"? Wouldn't Binns have mentioned a 
procession of Dark Lord wannabes throughout the ages?

So either LV is unique or somehow the WW always beats his type before 
he does too much damage. Either way, where's the big need to stop the 
"cycle"?

> Melody
> But back to my other idea.  Do not despair.  MDDT will get around to 
address the Shrieking Shack (though a lack of Peter Pettigrew in OoP 
makes it kind of hard) and the Graveyard interpretation MD makes.  
> Melody <

You tease! :)

-Remnant




From persephone_kore at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 19 14:54:31 2003
From: persephone_kore at yahoo.com (persephone_kore)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 14:54:31 -0000
Subject: Changing Secret Keepers (Theory)
In-Reply-To: <bke5g9+58ar@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkf5b7+v74i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81125


> > Aussie continues:
> > 
> > Pettigrew was called "talentless" by Sirius (POA) ...edited...
> > 
> > The Death-Eaters would not accept Wormtail easily since he lacked 
> > ability, ...edited...
> >
> > aussie
> 
> bboy_mn:
> 
> James and Sirius were a couple of the most talented wizards to ever
> come through Hogwarts; everyone in that school, and for decades on
> either side of them, was not up to the standards of James and 
> Sirius.
> 
> So while Peter may not have been among the best, I don't think it is
> fair to imply, as many people have, that he was an incompetent 
> wizard. 

<snip>

> In reference to Peter, I think we have already seen that he is at
> least a competent wizard. 

Thank you, Steve.

I think that the perception of Peter as incompetent is one that we're
led into but also one that we're shown clearly (once we think about
it) is misleading. 

When people talk about Peter, they invariably seem to think of him as
incompetent. (Also as a tagalong, but that's in part a separate
issue.) McGonagall is one of the more famous; Sirius refers to his
being selected because nobody would think of him as a possibility;
Voldemort sneers at him even when dependent on him. He snivels and
cringes a lot. 

I'm not sure if McGonagall criticizes /everybody/, but I can certainly
see her doing it. Likewise, being sneered at by Voldemort doesn't
really seem to be all that indicative. Sirius... Sirius was,
understandably, very angry at the time and not inclined to remember
the positive; he was also, I should think, inclined to hit where he
might know of an open or poorly healed wound, and given McGonagall's
comments and his hanging around some of the most brilliant students in
his year, I can imagine a dig at Peter's ability could be pretty
effective. (Is it just me, or are the HP characters really good at
getting people mad at them?)

Now, what we know of what Peter has /done/. 

He became an Animagus at 15. 

Evidently this didn't come as easily to him as to James and Sirius,
but evidently everything school- or magic-related came /exceptionally/
easily to James and Sirius. 

Never mind "Peter needed help when the other two didn't." Try "Peter
mastered a difficult piece of Transfiguration not in the ordinary
curriculum at that point (and possibly considered off limits until age
17, like Apparition) in independent study, with help only from two
fellow students." 

He performed a curse that blew up half a street and killed a dozen
Muggles. 

Okay, so wizards seem to regard Muggles as a bit fragile, relatively
speaking, and perhaps not without reason, since wizards may have some
instinctive-level magical protection from falls and collisions. Still,
twelve people. I'd suppose an explosion is more haphazard than the
Killing Curse and probably easier to produce, but this was still quite
an effective spell!

He performed the spell to re-embody Voldemort.

This was with explicit instruction, but I'd imagine it's fairly
advanced magic -- and having explicit instructions does not always
mean you get something right on the first try. 

Every time, in fact, that we are given information on Peter /actually
doing magic/, he seems to do pretty well.

PK




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 19 15:06:23 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 15:06:23 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: Off-list Messages
In-Reply-To: <20030918211337.86193.qmail@web20507.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bkf61f+ance@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81126

> Aw, you look so *cute* in your ickle elf uniform with
> the matching nightstick! (Thanks!) ^--^
> 
> Sandy et al

[I did *not* post this to the main board; I replied to this as an 
email in my mail box, and what must have happened is that the source 
address WAS the main board address...(I interact with list on web 
site, not via email, and did not realize.)

Sandy <hanging head, quite disgusted with self, kicking the @#$% out 
of soap box>.]




From LadyClio16 at netscape.net  Fri Sep 19 03:08:21 2003
From: LadyClio16 at netscape.net (Clio)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 03:08:21 -0000
Subject: Snape's OTHER Worst Memory
In-Reply-To: <bkcr7a+5m81@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkdrv5+13pc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81127

 You can certainly have a collection of worst memories.  But JKR did 
> not entitle the chapter.  "One of Snape's Worst Memories" or "Snape's 
> Horrible Memory" or a million other titles that would have suggested 
> ambiguity.  The only way for it to be supplanted is for Snape to 
> create a memory that is worse than the one we saw. 
> 
> This IS Snape's worst memory according to JKR.  She said. It is 
> canon.  

Snape never actually calls it "his" worst memory, even though JKR
does. I think viewing that memory is worse for Harry than remembering
it is for Snape. My interpretation of it is that it's the worst thing
Harry could have found out about his father. That he was human and
made mistakes. To Harry it's the worst memory he could have viewed.
It's worse than seeing Snape torture muggles as a death eater. It was
something he never expected. The book is from Harry's POV. Everything
is colored with his opinions and interpretations. So I think to Harry
it was the worst memory of Snapes he could have seen. In my mind it's
not the worst one he has.

I read through OotP pretty quickly the first time and now I'm reading
it more slowly for a second turn. I noticed something this time around
that I didn't really remember from my first reading.

During the Occlumency Lessons, when Harry actually manages to use and
shield charm and block Snape. He gets a view into Snape's memories.
One of those memories is presumably Snape seeing his father beat his
mother, while a young Snape sits in the corner crying. How is that not
worse than his school rival embarassing him what 20 years ago?

That made me wonder why Snape didn't remove that. 

I mean he might not have even known that memory was in there. It could
have been one occassion where his father flipped out and hurt his
mother, never happening again.

Or perhaps this abuse occured so frequently there was no way to remove
all those memories without taking a good chunk of his childhood with
it. So maybe he just removed some of the worst incidents.

Or maybe there were some instances of abuse, but not a lot and he
removed some of them, but didn't know that one was there.

Presuming that Snape knew that memory was there. Why wouldn't he
remove it, but would remove that incident of humiliation in high school?

I started wondering if he didn't take that out to protect Harry. To
keep Harry from seeing what his father had been like. Perhaps it was a
small act of kindness. Telling Harry his father was an arrogant jerk
and Harry seeing it first hand are two different things. It's not like
it's the first time Snape has protected Harry. I'm not exactly sure
why he would protect Harry from that. Other than just a small moment
of kindness on his part. I had originally assumed that Snape was
protecting himself from further humiliation, but maybe he was
protecting Harry. It's a far fetched idea I admit. I can't see why he
wouldn't want Harry to know just what a jerk his father could be.
Still, maybe it was a repayment to James. He might still feel as if he
hasn't repaid his debt to him. 


Then again he might have put it in the pensieve knowing that Harry's
curiosity would get the better of him and he'd look in there at the
first opportunity. So Snape prepared for that. Specifically put that
memory in that to show Hary what a jerk his dad was. As a punishment
for sticking his nose where it didn't belong. Which sounds just like
Snape.

Just a couple of possibilities that came to me last night while I was
rereading those passages again.

Clio

  


 





From tkj_etal at bellsouth.net  Fri Sep 19 05:13:26 2003
From: tkj_etal at bellsouth.net (Tim Johnson Family)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 00:13:26 -0500
Subject: TBAY: DAVY JONES'S LOCKER
References: <1063744330.8594.40139.m3@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <000201c37ea7$4f6408e0$6973d6d1@oldcomputer>

No: HPFGUIDX 81128

DAVY JONES'S LOCKER


        A clear sky hung over Theory Bay; a few ships floated in the harbor,
drifting as far as their anchors would allow them. The only moving things in
sight were a couple of sunbathers on a ship flying the LOLLIPOPS flag, a few
yellow-flag pelters polishing their OotPs for another season of refereeing,
and a remote-controlled jet ski going gaga. Despite the somnolent state of
the bay, out of the Safe House strolled a teenager, lugging an Aqua-Lung,
intent on exploring the bottom of Theory Bay.
        Wow, thought RTJ, as the waters swirled around her. The bay floor
was crowded with the skeletons of sunken ships. Some had sunk because of
poor design, others were swamped with yellow flags, but most looked as
though they had been pelted with a cannon shooting projectiles the exact
size and shape of a 870-page children's book.
        But something that didn't blend in with the scenery came into view.
It looked to RTJ like a house built out of scraps from ships. One wall was
the hull from a sunken Memory-Charmed!Neville ship; the roof was a cabin
door cast off while SILK GOWNS was being constructed. Front and center,
where the entrance would have been, was what looked like a round, plastic
bubble.
        RTJ swam closer. She could see through the bubble's convex
distortion that there was someone inside. She kicked her flippered feet and
extended her hand; the moment her fingers touched the surface of the bubble,
she felt a force grab hold of her arm, and she was sucked through the bubble
with a strange squelching sound.
         RTJ's knees buckled when she hit the floor. Her arms flew through
the air until she found her balance. Peeling soggy strands of hair from her
face, RTJ blinked water from her eyes and found herself inside a small,
cramped room. A painting of Neville Longbottom hung on the wall, a table was
covered in immaculately clean dishes, and a smudged plan for an
Evil!Penelope ship was pinned above a very complicated diagram showing
various wizards connected to Voldemort. RTJ stared, fascinated, at the low
resolution of the diagram when a rough voice spoke from the corner.
        "Finally. Knew somebody would be interested."
        RTJ spun around. In the corner was a man--she had never seen him
before-but the grizzled hair, the patch over the eye, the scarred face and
lopsided grin, the wooden leg--
        "Mad-Eye Moody?" RTJ gasped.
        The man glared, pulled a pipe out of his pocket, and wagged it at
her.
        "That's Davy Jones to you. This is my Locker."
        "Davy Jones's Locker? What does that stand for?"
        "Simple," said Davy, pausing to light his pipe. "Dumbledore Aims at
Voldemort. Young James's Offspring Not Elected by Sibyll. Son of Longbottoms
Obviously Chosen to Kill Evil Riddle."
        For one moment, RTJ had the sensation of the world turned upside
down, of everything inverse, like the negative of a photograph (a sensation
she recognized from reading OotP). Then orientation returned, and she
laughed.
        "What's that?" growled Davy.
        "No wonder you're here at the bottom of the bay! All the serious
theories are floating," she said, giggling, and began to unbuckle the heavy
oxygen tank.
        "Serious? Hah!" muttered Davy, glaring at the smoke wafting from the
end of the pipe. "LOLLIPOPS. FLIRTIAC. They're up their Shipping around, and
I'm the paranoid one, the one who's suspicious of everything, the one who
sees shadows on the wall. Censorship! That's what it is! They don't want me
to talk!"
        RTJ, dumping her scuba equipment on the floor, looked up. Someone
was censoring Theory Bay? "Who?" she asked. "Who are they?"
        Davy studied her for a moment, then took a drag from his pipe.
"Everyone," he said with a puff of smoke.
        RTJ's alarm bled away into nothing; she could see the Flying
Hedgehog badge now, on the tattered striped shirt Davy wore. Nodding as if
she understood, she sat on the edge of the table.
        "I'm perfectly sure everyone's very interested in DAVY JONES'S
LOCKER," she said.
        "Oh?" growled Davy, giving her a sideways look. "Are you?"
        RTJ considered. "Does it have anything to do with Snape?"
        "No," Davy admitted. "I tried to add a bit of discarded LOLLIPOPS,
but it wouldn't fit. I'm mostly bits and pieces of Neville wrecks--I've
borrowed a big bit from SILK GOWNS, and pretty much everything in here's
been through the Magic Dishwasher. I'm working on something--maybe a
submarine--that'll prove Snape isn't spying on the Death Eaters, and there's
a new arsenal coming, called WAG, but that's another story entirely."
        RTJ raised her eyebrows, impressed. "I can't believe I've never
heard of you, Davy. I had no idea you were down here."
        "I am bitterly aware of that fact, and that's Mr. Jones to you,
gal."
        RTJ grinned. "So how did you end up down here?"
        "That, my girl, is too long a tale to tell. I can just tell you what
the Locker is all about." Davy Jones drew on his pipe. RTJ noticed he was
smoking tar-free seaweed.
        "Now: end of Harry's fifth year. Harry has proven he's one tough
teen, and has a built-in Anti-Possession Protection. But Dumbledore knows
the scar-link is up and operational. There's no reason to assume that,
because Voldy can't possess Harry, he won't be accessing his mind anymore.
So Dumbledore goes back to doing what he does best-misinforming.
        "Remember," Davy said, leaning forward and lowering his voice, "this
is Magic Dishwasher Dumbledore we're talking about. He tells Harry most of
the truth-but when it comes to the Prophecy, he knows that it's very
important. So he shows Harry a fabricated Pensieve memory. Notice how he
sighs before he starts playing it? He's thinking, 'Here I go again, lying.'"
        "Okay, but if you say that Dumbledore was lying, there's nothing to
indicate what the real Prophecy said. Yellow flag."
        "No," said Davy, a mad glint in his eye. "Dumbledore is speaking to
Voldemort, right? The details of the Prophecy must jibe with what Voldemort
knows. So all details are true, except one line of the Prophecy itself: And
the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have a power the Dark
Lord knows not."
        "I noticed the shift in style there!" exclaimed RTJ. "The meter is
messed up-something about the poetry . . . I thought it was a bit of a
Flint."
        "It was something much darker," Davy said. "Dumbledore made up that
line on the spot, to make it seem like the Prophecy referred to Harry. The
true Prophecy pointed to Neville."
        "But why would Dumbledore put Harry in danger?" said RTJ, wringing
the water out of her hair.
        "Harry is in danger anyway. Neville hasn't shown much chutzpah
yet-at least as far as Dumbledore can see. Protecting Neville and putting
Voldemort off track is more important than making Harry feel good." Davy
smiled with grim satisfaction.
        RTJ examined her reflection in a shining dinner plate for a moment,
then looked at Davy. "So what did the Prophecy really say?"
        Davy turned the pipe over in his hands. "This isn't essential to
DAVY JONES'S LOCKER," he said, stuffing more seaweed into his pipe. "The
foundation of the Locker is the idea that the Prophecy is false, and Neville
the Chosen One."
        RTJ grinned. "Go on, I want to hear."
        Davy took a deep breath, and let it explode out again. But
excitement had crept into his black eyes. "I think the Prophecy points to a
boy who, if he defeats Voldemort, will revenge and reawaken his parents.
That's what gives Dumbledore a pause. Surely Harry can revenge his parents.
But can he reawaken them? Dumbledore's heaviness, when he tells Sirius and
Harry that no spell can reawaken the dead, is the heaviness of a guy who has
thoroughly researched the matter and has met a brick wall. It can't be Harry
because his parents are gone."
        "But it can't be Neville's parents either," said RTJ quickly,
"because it was Bella, Barty, Rabby, and Rudolph who attacked them, not
Voldemort! And they're insane!"
        "Way back in 1981, Dumbledore had some hard decisions to make
regarding Harry and Neville," Davy said. "Harry was easy to protect.
Dumbledore sends him to the Dursleys. But Neville had no blood protection,
no mother dead to save him--what to do?
        "Well, y'see, Dumbledore reckoned the best way to protect the
Longbottoms was to remove their memory of the Prophecy. So he Memory Charmed
them."
        RTJ nodded. This was old territory, but she had a feeling that he
was aiming at SILK GOWNS.
        "One year later, Bellatrix and gang attack the Longbottoms, trying
to recover the text of the Prophecy. They put the Imperius Curse on them to
force them to tell. Only they soon run into the Memory Charm. So the resort
to the Cruciatus Curse, trying to do as Voldemort did to Bertha Jorkins and
break through the Charm."
        "And the curse drives them mad!" RTJ said, nodding. "That's canon
enough. But why do we need--"
        "Don't interrupt!" Davy growled, knocking ash from his pipe. "Bella
and Co. are sent to Azkaban. But the Imperius Curse remains on the
Longbottoms--it is that which makes them appear insane. They were not
tortured to insanity. No one except Dumbledore recognizes the subtle
differences between an Imperio'd and a genuinely insane person. It makes him
realize that the Longbottoms can be cured."
        "But how--"
        "Hold your sea horses!"
        Davy beckoned RTJ closer, and dropped his voice so she could hardly
hear it, his excitement barely contained on his face.
        "Some people think the reason Voldemort didn't die when his Avada
Kedavra backfired was that he was connected to his Death Eaters. Now, I like
that idea, but I think that it's more than that. I think that, to sustain
somebody's life, the connection must be more than just a skin-grafted
Protean Charm. I think that, at some metaphysical level, the Death Eaters
and Voldemort share their souls--a collective consciousness, if you will.
        "Now, if Bella, Barty, Rabby, and Rudolph collectively put an
Imperius Curse on the Longbottoms, then this would be more than a simple
enchantment. It would be a connection existing on the same level as the Dark
Mark connection. The Death Eaters haven't had easy lives while Voldemort was
a miserable, super-concentrated ghost--and neither have the Longbottoms.
Their tortured psyche may be connected to his."
        Davy went back to his pipe, speaking in a normal tone now. "The easy
answer is, when Neville kills Voldemort, the Death Eaters will all die, and
the Imperius Charm will be lifted."
        For a moment, silence filled the Locker, punctuated by the
shwooshing noise of the water, and the occasional curse from Davy when his
pipe went out.
        Finally RTJ spoke up. "But--"
        "Enough, girl! I don't have time to explain everything!"
        "But what canon is there behind this?"
        "Find it yourself. One important bit is the fact that Harry *can't*
kill people--see the second last chapter of Order of the Phoenix. That's a
clear indicator that the end won't be as straightforward as Dumbledore
says."
        RTJ suppressed her smile. Something was tickling her past endurance.
Davy saw her expression, and raise an eyebrow.
        "You know this is all pretty silly?" RTJ said, still trying not to
grin and failing. "The whole point of the end of Phoenix is that Dumbledore
has told Harry the truth. Do you really think that Rowling will go back on
that? Do you really believe that Dumbledore is lying, and that Harry is not
really the Chosen One?"
        Davy smiled sheepishly, looking at the ground. "Well  . . ." he
said. "Not really . . . but it's lots of fun . . . and I've already made a
couple of important discoveries. Look at this!" he said, leaping to his feet
and running to a small display case. He opened it, and lifted out a ship in
a bottle. "Look! The Motive (For the Attack on Neville's Parents)! I just
finished it-and The Metaphysical Connection! Here," he extended it to her,
"take a look. These are canon-proof, I'm sure of it."
        RTJ looked from the intricately detailed model ship, to the
childlike glow on Davy Jones's face. "These are wonderful ships, Davy," she
said.
        "I know," Davy said, cradling the bottle. He reverently put it back
into the display case, and shut it. There was a moment of silence.
        "Listen, somebody said they were going to start throwing flags at
the Magic Dishwasher, and I promised I'd be there to defend it. Want to
come?"
        "No," Davy growled, his own grim self again. "Let the Dishwasher
take care of itself. I'm going to figure out this Snape thing . . . the
acronym is the hard part . . . they don't want me up there anyway."
        He slunk into a corner, muttering darkly about flamingoes and cats.
RTJ smiled at him for a moment, feeling real affection for this paranoid
pirate. Then she strapped on the Aqua-Lung, and jumped through the Bubble
Charm, ready to swim to the surface and tell all her friends about the mad
man hiding in Davy Jones's Locker.

DAVY JONES: Dumbledore Aims at Voldemort. James's Son Not Elected by Sibyll.
DAVY JONES'S LOCKER: Dumbledore Aims at Voldemort. James's Son Not Elected
by Sibyll. Son of Longbottoms Chosen to Kill Evil Riddle.

--Posted by RTJ





From tkj_etal at bellsouth.net  Fri Sep 19 05:48:21 2003
From: tkj_etal at bellsouth.net (Tim Johnson Family)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 00:48:21 -0500
Subject: Snape's worst memory
References: <1063711584.6502.85709.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <000601c37ea7$58b98fa0$6973d6d1@oldcomputer>

No: HPFGUIDX 81129

Many of you have speculated that the "graying underpants" Pensieve memory
cannot be Snape's worst memory. Wouldn't torturing Muggles or the other
attrocities he must have committed under Voldemort be worst? I am inclined
to take the chapter at face value: the graying underpants memory is indeed
the number 1 worst memory.

There's something magnificent about the Snape who shows the Dark Mark to
Fudge in the presence of people to whom he was emotionally vulnerable. This
is the Snape who turns spy against Voldemort "at great personal risk," and
who tells Karkaroff, "Flee--I will make your excuses. I, however, am
remaining at Hogwarts." This Snape has stayed loyal to Dumbledore for
sixteen years, and made himself content with a job he doesn't really want.
This is how Snape wants to be seen: heroic, brave, cunning, maybe a little
romantically dark and brooding.

In Harry's presence, this Snape falls apart as rapidly as the potions Harry
messes up in class. Harry and his friends spoil Snape's plans, egg him into
trouble, harrass him into losing his temper, tease him, irritate him, and
humiliate him. Snape doesn't see that most of this is unintentional, or that
his attacks on Harry were uncalled for--Snape only sees himself being shown
up by a kid over and over.

The last thing Snape wants to remember--the worst thing--is being a
helpless, unpopular, greasy-haired, clueless nerd. Snape despises weakness
and stupidity, and his teenage self was full of both. The memories of him
being a Death Eater have a certain showiness--Snape was one of a group of
elite wizards, and he was well-respected by them. The deeds he did inspired
fear, not laughter.

Snape can't forgive James, he can't forgive Sirius, or Lupin, or even
himself for being a helpless victim. Snape's lack of grace makes me worry.
Forgiveness is the first step to healing. Snape can never heal unless he can
forgive.

--RTJ





From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Fri Sep 19 15:38:52 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 15:38:52 -0000
Subject: Lucius and the Spying Game and back to MD TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bkdvja+gd08@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkf7uc+ofvs@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81130

> Jen Reese: 
> I can understand in SS/PS where Harry speculates, "I 
think {Dumbledore} sort of wanted to give me a chance....I reckon he 
had a pretty good idea we were going to try, and instead of helping 
us, he just taught us enough to help...It's almost like he thought I 
had a right to face Voldemort if I could....." (US, pg. 302) YES! that 
is DD's philosophy at work--Harry and Co. are working on the mystery, 
*by their own choosing* and Dumbledore accepts their choice and 
tries to help. <

Jen, it sounds like you're almost ready to turn to...BADD ANGST! :o

> But in COS--I seriously doubt any of the Muggleborns are choosing to 
be attacked, in fact they are mortally afraid, and if Dumbledore is 
standing by and allowing the attacks to happen....Isn't that the form 
of Evil Pip!Squeak talked about in answering my other post "evil 
triumphs when good men do nothing?" 
> Please tell me if I'm not getting the gist of MD and I will go back 
for a fourth, fifth, sixth reading, I promise.....
> Jen <

Letting people choose for themselves *without* hatching a plot to 
force them to do so? Very ANGST-y!

And I agree with your concerns! One interpretation of COS is that DD 
stands by letting a monster try to kill chuldren. But I don't like 
that interpretation. IMO, that would be an evil thing to do. Not very 
Dumbledore-ish.

My preferred, BADD ANGST-friendly interpretation is that Dumbledore 
just didn't know exactly what was going on and how to stop it. So he's 
not evil, just imperfect. And I don't think he lets Harry & gang do 
the sleuthing in COS to respect their choice--after all, the other 
children at Hogwarts have been placed in his care. I think he tries to 
solve the mystery himself unsuccessfully and mostly out-of-sight of 
Harry.

**Yellow Flag Alert**
Disclaimer: The following sentence is *not* part of BADD ANGST and I 
have already throw a yellow flag at it, so proceed with caution!

Maybe DD even knows that only Harry can defeat LV, even in LV's COS 
incarnation as Riddle?

Yep, that's random, but so is COS. We still have little hard knowledge 
of where, if anywhere, COS fits in.

-Remnant
wondering if bloodsicles are frozen or just, you know, very coagulated




From phoenixtears at fuse.net  Fri Sep 19 16:59:31 2003
From: phoenixtears at fuse.net (phoenixmum)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 16:59:31 -0000
Subject: Snape giving Occlumency lessons
In-Reply-To: <bkcirq+brjt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkfclj+uoaq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81132

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nianya_c" <nianya_c at y...> 
wrote:
> 
> IMHO Dumbledore "set up" Harry so that he would have to go and 
> retreive the prophecy......if Harry doesn't go get it for the 
> order....LV's eventually going to go get it himself.
> 
> The occlumency lessons only made Harry's visions stronger to the 
> point where he knew exactly where to go in MOM to get the prophecy. 
> Dumbledore had to know that Harry wasn't going to learn to block 
the 
> visions by working with Snape.....maybe he even wanted Harry to 
> learn something about the history of Snape/Harry's parents'.
>> Okay that puts me on the precarious edge of the limb so feel free 
to 
> knock me off.
> 
> Nia

Reply:

Well, since you asked:

Despite all the theories posted about Dumbledore's possible 
duplicity, having a long-term stategy that necessitates him lying 
repeatedly to Harry and others, I believe Dumbledore is meant (by 
JKR) to represent a higher moral standard.(Ex: it is DD who decries 
the prejudice in the wizarding world.)  When DD talks to Harry after 
the confrontation in the MOM, the whole tone of the scene is truth 
revealed, and genuine remorse by DD that he *withheld* information 
from Harry.  In the hospital scene at the end of PS/SS, DD tells 
Harry he may not answer  certain questions, but he will not "of 
course" lie to him. DD explains why he used Snape for the lessons 
instead of himself, and describes this decision as a mistake.  While 
JKR has a running theme of characters not being what they seem at 
first glance, I also think her stated (in numerous interviews) theme 
of good versus evil requires that someone like DD be present to 
counter the evil of Voldemort.  For DD to be revealed in the end as 
manipulative and duplicitous would undermine his moral authority.

Phoenix




From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au  Fri Sep 19 17:27:48 2003
From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 17:27:48 -0000
Subject: Changing Secret Keepers (Theory)
In-Reply-To: <bkf5b7+v74i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkfeak+mc7l@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81133

--- "persephone_kore" wrote:
> He performed a curse that blew up half a street and killed a dozen
> Muggles. ... this was still quite an effective spell!
> > 
> Every time, in fact, that we are given information on Peter actually
> doing magic, he seems to do pretty well.
> 
> PK

The explosion that killed and cratered was very impressive magic. 
That was the opinion of Fudge in POA Chap 10. 

QUOTE: "You don't know what you're talking about, Hagrid," said Fudge 
sharply. "Nobody but trained Hit Wizards from the Magical Law 
Enforcement Squad would have stood a chance against Black once he was 
cornered. I was Junior Minister in the Department of Magical 
Catastrophes at the time, and I was one of the first on the scene 
after Black murdered all those people. I -- I will never forget it. I 
still dream about it sometimes. A crater in the middle of the street, 
so deep it had cracked the sewer below. Bodies everywhere. Muggles 
screaming. And Black standing there laughing, with what was left of 
Pettigrew in front of him... a heap of bloodstained robes and a few --
a few fragments --"

It seems odd to me that Peter never proved himself greatly, and then 
produced an awe inspiring killer blast. No-one expected Peter to be 
able to do that. 

Peter couldn't, but Sirius Black could ... or Severus Snape could.
******************************
My money is still on Snape. I think SNAPE:
- was Voldemort's spy
- recruited Peter Pettigrew to the DE
- has kept close to Dumbledore for years on Voldemort's orders
- didn't take Scabbers to Dumbledore, but threatened to take Sirius 
to dementors. (No-one has been able to interagate Peter about his 
time in OotP)
- delayed several hours before sending Harry help in MoM(OotP)

Also, Snape could have gone with Peter and Voldemort to Godric 
Hollow. (LV liked an audience)
Snape could have shadowed Peter and blown up the street so no-one 
could question Peter about why he joined DE. - aussie




From phoenixtears at fuse.net  Fri Sep 19 17:34:01 2003
From: phoenixtears at fuse.net (phoenixmum)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 17:34:01 -0000
Subject: The 'Other' in the HP books (was: Harry's Sexual Preference
In-Reply-To: <bka9j2+a68g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkfem9+m8k3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81134

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Mev532" <mev532 at y...> wrote:
> This debate has been going on about using characters for political 
> action and including homosexual characters in the HP books.
> 
> I feel I have to chime in on this debate because it seems like an 
> important point is being overlooked. This point explains why I feel 
> there shouldn't be stated homosexual characters or sexual activity 
> in the Harry Potter books. People have often said that these books 
> discuss themes of slavery, death, violence, evil, torture, etc. and 
> that sexual themes are no more adult so should not be shied away 
> from. 
> 
> The crucial different, however, is that the former themes are 
> factors that will force themselves on a child or young teenager 
> reguardless of age or parental involvement. Many of us lose people 
> close to us when we are very young, or have to deal with 
> intolerance 
> and hatred at school or with peers. Sexual issues, however, do not 
> have to be dealt with until a certain age (at least until after 
> puberty). This seperates it from the other themes, no matter how 
> adult they are.
> 
> An twelve year old child understands cruelty, good vs evil, and 
> death, even if their understanding is not sophisticated. They have 
> encountered these things in their own life. This is why it is 
> appropriate (I feel, some adults may not) for the book to discuss 
> actions like murder, but not topics such as oral sex or homosexual 
> relationships. Children should not be learning about these things 
> from Harry Potter books, especially when such topics are beside the 
> central story of the book.  Sure, Harry will be sixteen in the next 
> book, when many young people (not most) will be sexual active, but 
> that does not mean this should be covered.

Reply:
Thanks for an excuse to include something I just read on the Leaky 
Cauldron website (in their archive of JKR interviews).  JKR
said:
"Now, if I get the tone right, I do believe that your 9 year old will 
still be interested in a 14 year old Harry. Obviously, it is 
inappropriate in books like these, it would be totally alien to the
tone of these books if I got into too brutally realistic of an area --
-- you know, we''re not going to be looking at teenage pregnancy 
here, we''re not going to be looking at drug taking here, you
know. 
This would be totally alien to the spirit of these books. However, I 
do want Harry to grow up in a realistic way."plus
"I don't think its going to be faithful to the tone of the books if 
Hermione goes off and finds herself pregnant at age 13. No. Because 
they're not that kind of books. Frankly, Harry, Ron, and Hermione 
have quite enough to deal with without starting to dabble with 
illegal substances."
the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/2000/0700-cbc-solomon.html
the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/199/1099-
connectiontransc.html

I think sexual orientation and sexuality will not be addressed 
because this issue is similar to the issues of teen pregnancy and 
drug abuse: too complex, too "real world," and probably too 
controversial for JKR,given that she says she wants to maintain a 
certain tone in the books.There is an acknowledgement in her 
interviews that, while she wants Harry to grow up over the course of 
the books, she seems interested in keeping the books accessible to 
the younger end of her audience.

Phoenix
>




From Yahtzee63 at aol.com  Fri Sep 19 17:28:20 2003
From: Yahtzee63 at aol.com (yahtzee55555)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 17:28:20 -0000
Subject: Snape's worst memory
In-Reply-To: <000601c37ea7$58b98fa0$6973d6d1@oldcomputer>
Message-ID: <bkfebk+beeb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81135


> This is how Snape wants to be seen: heroic, brave, cunning, 
maybe a little
> romantically dark and brooding.


I buy your reasoning as to why this is the memory that Snape 
would least want revealed, and therefore why it is in the 
Pensieve when darker memories are not.  So I agree with it, 
plot-wise. But I still have trouble saying that it is his WORST 
memory. The memory that causes you the most pain isn't 
necessarily the same as the memory that you most want to keep 
secret. 


Yahtzee





From erinellii at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 19 17:42:29 2003
From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 17:42:29 -0000
Subject: Possible JKR "Inspiration" Diana Wynne Jones
In-Reply-To: <bkf367+irc4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkff65+1npk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81136

PK:
> In "Eight Days of Luke," David's family might be strongly suspected 
of knowing the Dursleys. Of course unpleasant relatives are also
> something of a classic, but Rowling's description of Harry and how 
he prefers being at school to at "home" echoes Jones's description of
> David's attitude, although David was not trying and failing to do
> homework. ;)
> 
> PK


 I think most unpleasent relative scenerios nowadays are sort of 
inspired by Dickens, myself.  Probably where both Jones and Rowlings 
came from.  And anyone who is abused as a child (I know several 
people who were, including my best friend) will tell you that they 
would rather have been at school than at home.  That's standard in 
abuse cases.  And considering the type of Home life vs. school life 
Harry has, I don't see how Rowling could have NOT said Harry prefers 
school to home.

Erin




From sydpad at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 19 17:48:10 2003
From: sydpad at yahoo.com (Sydney)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 17:48:10 -0000
Subject: Snape's OTHER Worst Memory
In-Reply-To: <bkdrv5+13pc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkffgq+m9rq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81137



--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Clio" <LadyClio16 at n...> wrote:

> 
> During the Occlumency Lessons, when Harry actually manages to use and
> shield charm and block Snape. He gets a view into Snape's memories.
> One of those memories is presumably Snape seeing his father beat his
> mother, while a young Snape sits in the corner crying. How is that not
> worse than his school rival embarassing him what 20 years ago?
> 
> That made me wonder why Snape didn't remove that. 

I think there's a couple of possible reasons why Snape removed that
specific memory.

1-- it was the bad memory closes to the surface and likeliest to break
out.  Harry was likely to bring up memories of James.  

2-- it was the 'worst memory' for Harry to witness, in Snape's
opinion.  As several other people have pointed out, Snape doesn't care
if he's seen as a nice guy-- he just wants to be the scary guy.  He
DEFINITELY doesn't want to be the pathetic geek guy.

> I mean he might not have even known that memory was in there. It could
> have been one occassion where his father flipped out and hurt his
> mother, never happening again.

Snape is so screamingly obviously from an abusive household, though...

> 
> Or perhaps this abuse occured so frequently there was no way to remove
> all those memories without taking a good chunk of his childhood with
> it. So maybe he just removed some of the worst incidents.

Well, if he took out only three memories, I think that's an attractive
but not likely theory.  Abusive relationships usually have more than
two incidents!  As all the memories of Snape's we see were fairly
innocuous (considering it's Snape) I imagine Harry only broke through
his most basic protective layer.  To deal with Voldemort he probably
has several layers of security going on.

I think all three memories he removed for the sessions specifically,
have something to do with Harry or his parents, which brings me to:

3--.  It's Snape's worst memory not because it's the worst incident of
bullying, but the worst incident involving Lily.  Just from my own
personal recollections, memories that really make me wince aren't of
the dreadful things that happened to me, but of the events where I
really wish I'd acted differently.  If only I'd said... if only I
hadn't...  As a proud possessor of a huge, multicoloured LOLLIPOP
(TM), this is my favored explanation!

 
> I started wondering if he didn't take that out to protect Harry. To
> keep Harry from seeing what his father had been like. Perhaps it was a
> small act of kindness. Telling Harry his father was an arrogant jerk
> and Harry seeing it first hand are two different things. 

I'm a raving Snape fan, but frankly if Snape could shove Harry's nose
in a memory of his dad being an asshole, WITHOUT also featuring Snape
as helpless victim, I think he'd do it in a second.

> Then again he might have put it in the pensieve knowing that Harry's
> curiosity would get the better of him and he'd look in there at the
> first opportunity. So Snape prepared for that. Specifically put that
> memory in that to show Hary what a jerk his dad was. As a punishment
> for sticking his nose where it didn't belong. Which sounds just like
> Snape.

If Snape would willingly have Harry see him literally with his pants
down, getting his ass kicked by James, I will eat this keyboard!  

Sydney-- who thinks in the next two books we'll take another trip into
Snape's pensive.. but have a look at the memories he's trying to keep
from Voldemort.




From hedwigstalons at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 19 06:01:59 2003
From: hedwigstalons at yahoo.com (hedwigstalons)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 06:01:59 -0000
Subject: Want Post R.E. Seven Stages Corresponding to Books Plz!
Message-ID: <bke64n+2v81@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81138

I'm searching for the   post about the seven stages that Harry has to 
go through -- how the books each correspond to one of the stages, 
etc. It was SOOO interesting, and I should have printed it out. 
Please let me know the # of the post or e-mail it to me.
THanks a million!
Emily (HedwigsTalons at yahoo.com)





From hedwigstalons at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 19 06:08:36 2003
From: hedwigstalons at yahoo.com (hedwigstalons)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 06:08:36 -0000
Subject: Changing Secret Keepers (Theory)
In-Reply-To: <bke5g9+58ar@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bke6h4+75t3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81139

> > Aussie continues:
> > Pettigrew was called "talentless" by Sirius (POA) ...edited...
> > The Death-Eaters would not accept Wormtail easily since he lacked 
> > ability, ...edited...
> > aussie
> 
> bboy_mn:
> In reference to Peter, I think we have already seen that he is at
> least a competent wizard. 

Right, since Peter performed the spell that brought LV back into a 
body. That can't be such a simple spell, eh? 

HedwigsTalons





From tkj_etal at bellsouth.net  Fri Sep 19 05:26:06 2003
From: tkj_etal at bellsouth.net (Tim Johnson Family)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 00:26:06 -0500
Subject: Snape Is Not A Spy
References: <1063711584.6502.85709.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <000301c37ea7$54fcd5c0$6973d6d1@oldcomputer>

No: HPFGUIDX 81140

I have a proposal to make: the formation of, not a ship, but a club, of
those who believe that the idea of Snape rejoining the Death Eaters and
spying on them is NOT TRUE.

SINAS: Snape Is Not A Spy.

--RTJ (Who can defend her position with canon)





From wabtm at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Sep 19 12:58:19 2003
From: wabtm at yahoo.co.uk (Toni)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 12:58:19 -0000
Subject: James Potter = Voldemort
Message-ID: <bkeuhb+20b9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81141

A friend of mine told me yesterday that Harry's Dad turns out to be 
Voldemort himself.  Is that possible?

Surely Dumbledore would have known if that were true.

Or did she mean that Voldemort and Harry's mum had an affair?

Anyone know where I can read up on this theory and if it has been 
discussed on here before then what are the message numbers.

Thanks
Toni





From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 19 18:32:15 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 18:32:15 -0000
Subject: Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die!
In-Reply-To: <39F3EFDE-E9F9-11D7-9ECE-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bkfi3f+82vl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81142

> Kneasy:
> Well, yes. Useful stuff, immortality - superficially at least. If 
> he gets true immortality he can't lose. He can always wait 
> everybody else out.

Sandy:
But then he's dealing with a whole new set of "everybody else." And 
Voldemort knows the value of knowing his enemies; as Bellatrix (then 
identified in the narrative as "a harsh female voice") says when 
Harry comes charging into the MoM after Sirius, "The Dark Lord always 
knows!"

> Kneasy:
> Put his feet up, start another long Russian novel, they'll all die 
> soon enough, of natural causes too! Look! Clean hands!  So why the 
> rush? Why now? Especially as he seems to be approaching immortality 
> one way or another already.
> 
> It's the Philosophers Stone.  DD had (has?)  it. Why? Safekeeping, 
> so they say. Oh, really? DD has it because he was Nick Flamel's 
> partner. And why would these two  have one of those, unless to  use 
> it? Flamel did, we know that. What about DD?

Sandy:
I seem to remember that JKR said in an interview that Dumbledore had 
not worked on the Stone with Flamel in spite of having been his 
alchemy partner. It's not clear that "those two" had the stone. Canon 
says it was Flamel's; so Dumbledore had merely provided security. 
Canon seems to express that Dumbledore is not 600+ years old: in Cos, 
Riddle's diary shows Dumbledore just fifty years earlier with "long, 
sweeping auburn hair." By the opening of PS/SS, Dumbledore's hair 
is "silver." If Flamel has been taking the Stone's elixir long enough 
to attain 600+ years, then why hasn't Dumbledore? Or does one go from 
red fox to silver over fifty years even with it? (One Greek myth 
about immortality is a wink, wink, nudge, nudge: the goddess who 
wanted her mortal love to live forever was granted his immortality, 
but forgot to ask for his eternal youth...and ended up with something 
as curled up and wispy as a grasshopper.)

> Kneasy:
> Voldy wants the stone as much to deny it to Albus as he does for 
> his own use. If DD uses it, then he wins by default instead of 
> Vodemort. Voldy doesn't trust anybody. He certainly doesn't trust 
> the general perception that DD is a simple, kind-hearted, may the 
> best man win, Queensbury Rules softy who would never, ever use the 
> stone. Oh, no. DD intends to  win. However he can.

Sandy:
Where does canon say that Voldy wants to deny use of the stone to 
Dumbledore? Voldy says in OoP that there's nothing worse than death, 
while in PS/SS Dumbledore says proper thinking frames death as an 
adventure and in OoP that Voldy's belief that there is nothing worse 
than death is his "greatest weakness."

> Kneasy:
> Power comes in many forms.  Economic, military, political, magical. 
> The last of these trumps the rest.  He who has the magical power 
> can do what he damn well pleases. Why else would DD scorn the 
> Minister of Magic post? Because it's meaningless. If you've got the 
> power, it's just a title; if you haven't got the power, you're a 
> puppet.

Sandy:
Does Dumbledore "scorn" the MoM post? Or does he leave it to the 
political animals who are better suited to dealing with the endless 
posturing and pronouncements constituents seem to expect? Regardless 
of how much magic (or money, IMO a RW analog) you have, power in your 
society involves being able to move people: their actions, their 
opinions (which Voldemort does 25% by promise (the "carrot") and 75% 
by threat (the "stick"): percentages are estimated. (What's an 
uberwizard going to do, use a broadbeam "Imperio" over the WW?) Being 
headmaster at Hogwarts is lower profile; it gives Dumbledore more 
privacy for his machinations, more "behind the scenes" geography, and 
what Pip said: influence over the youth. There's also the notion that 
while people may caricaturize their politicos, the person who 
controls the education of their children is someone people have a 
certain investment in trusting. (Just a stray thought on my part.)

> Kneasy:
> At fairly frequent intervals throughout the books, Voldy claims to 
> be the most powerful wizard, sorcerer, whatever. Just as frequently 
> someone pops up with "Oh, no, you're not. Dumbledore is!"
> This is a struggle between two wizards for who wields ultimate  
> power. Voldemort would actively use the power, Dumbledore 
> passively - maybe.

Sandy:
I don't think it's a matter of who uses the power "actively" 
or "passively" (a couple of misnomers, IMO); it's a matter of 
Voldemort having to trumpet his superiority himself, except in rare 
instances; as of his re-embodiment at the end of GoF he is having to 
threaten, hex, speechify, and perform, in order to reassert his power 
base. Even in OoP after his condemned Death Eaters are sprung from 
Azkaban, he is shown threatening dire consequences for any failure to 
succeed/obey. He *has* to exert himself far more to command the same 
degree of loyalty (if he does, except with that sicko bimbo Bella) 
Dumbledore does.

While the Order of the Phoenix and other members of the Eternal Fans 
of Albus Dumbledore Society (EFADS) are proud of their connection 
with Dumbledore; excepting MoM employees who have to keep under the 
radar until Voldemort is "outed," they are quick and fierce in their 
expressions of loyalty. They generally show alacrity, even eagerness 
to follow his instructions to the letter. Is that what you meant 
by "actively" and "passively"?

> Kneasy:
> Pureblood -  mudblood would be irrelevant. It is largely 
> irrelevant. It's a way of keeping score. Feelings and expressions 
> of superiority inferiority happen no matter how just the society. 
> It is innate in our nature. If we don't use one set of criteria, 
> we'll use another. We always have done, we always will. Sex, money, 
> age, chattels, race, religion,  intelligence, employment, even body 
> shape. They've all been used, are used, even today. DD will change 
> human nature, give the WW a utopian equality? I  don't think so.

Sandy:
Dumbledore doesn't want to change human nature: he only wants it to 
experience an object lesson (former teacher, remember?). If the 
lesson is on a grand enough scale, the culture learns...aren't hate 
crimes more severely punished in Germany nowadays than many other 
places whose populations don't so viscerally recall the consequences?

> Kneasy:
> If Voldy won, what would happen to Hogwarts? Pureblood only? Like 
> Hell! Selected, very carefully selected students only. Constantly 
> monitored - as would be the curriculum. Can't have some 
> whippersnapper thinking they can follow the same career path, 
> especially not those untrustworthy Slytherins!

Sandy:
I think the selection process might actually not change much; Muggle-
borns and Mudbloods would be handy subjects for practicing hexes on 
and letting off some of that adolescent angst, at least for house 
Slytherin (otherwise the kiddies might grow into adults who'd want to 
upset the apple cart yet *again*). Give them an illusion of power, 
starting right there in school, while the real power actually stays 
in Voldemort's long, pale hands. (Other houses might shrink with the 
passage of time, however.)
 
> Kneasy:
> Pip  likens the war  to  '30s Germany. Nothing like, in my opinion. 
> I prefer comparison with some of the later Roman Emperors. Say, if 
> Vespasian had faced up to Tiberius. (Not that he did.)
> Voldemort as  Tiberius; one of the 'in' crowd. Corrupt, cruel, 
> arbitrary. <snip>

Sandy:
So you're trying to trade Pip's RW analogy for your RW + IF ("not 
that he did") example? Why am I still inclined to find Pip's the more 
convincing, I wonder?

> Kneasy:
> But both are rulers. To run things, much the same chores have to be 
> done on a day-to-day basis. The  Empire has to be kept going, no 
> matter what. The ruling classes are just the surface scum. It's all 
> a matter of degree, not a dichotomy of function. Was the ordinary 
> man on the Ostia carriers cart affected by all this? Not so's you'd 
> notice. He still ate, slept, worked. His money just had a different 
> head on it, that's all.

Sandy:
When the Third Reich fell, the "cart carriers" still ate, slept, 
worked; but those who had Jewish heritage, were of the intelligensia, 
were gay, or had other targeted attributes they'd been hiding, were 
able to do all those things without the miasma of fear they moved 
through under that regime. Not only that, those who had become "cart 
carriers" in order to duck the Reich's notice could come out of the 
shadows.

<snip>
> Kneasy:
> It resides within Dumbledore; nowhere else. If he retires, sets up 
> a new government, it'll only form factions, each appealing to him  
> for support. <snip> The idea that he can change the ethos of the WW 
> from within the school pre-supposes that he will  be around for 
> long enough to have a permanent effect. <snip>

Sandy:
If Arthur Weasley is the post-Phoenix/transition government MoM (or 
equivalent), followed by, perhaps, Lupin (aided by judicious 
application of the Homorphus charm), who is followed by, say, 
Hermione, I think there is a very good change of the paradigm shift 
sticking without Dumbledore there to hold it in place. Although none 
of those candidates now adhere perfectly to Dumbledore's egalitarian 
philosophies, by the time the Phoenix's pyre is cold, they likely 
will. Anyway, if Harry survives, having conquered Voldemort, what 
exactly do you think the WW will deny *him* for the next, oh, hundred 
years or so? Harry seems to me to pretty well embody that egalitarian 
attitude and appreciation of influence as a double-edged sword. And 
also has a pretty hefty command of "magical power," whose surface 
hasn't even been scratched yet. A big enough "bang" (liked that, some 
of you) can cause, not a permanent change, but a shake up of the old 
order which *can* last long enough for a new paradigm to become the 
new status quo.

> Kneasy:
> Many  posters have asked  "Why is Slytherin?" Good question. Old 
> Sally left these many centuries past. Yet Godric Gryffindor's hat 
> still recognises his adherents. Why? Well, every society is a 
> dynamic; there must be a conflict of ideas for progress to be 
> measured and justified. But is this the best way of doing it? How 
> about getting rid of that damn hat and with it Slytherin, 
> Gryffindor and the rest. <snip>

There does need to be an outlet, a channeling, of ambition. A love of 
power is inherent in the species. Even the pure-blood mania could be 
channeled into Slytherin differently: aren't many descendants of the 
old European aristocracy popular and feted as house party guests in 
spite of not wielding any real power anymore? Pure-blood = equals 
royalty. (We *still* love them, even if they can't summon the power 
to spit!)

> Alternative: Remove magic from the world. That'd do it. While 
> there's magic there'll be a Voldemort.

Sandy:
I think there may come a melt-down scenario: learn to get along, or 
magic dies. No canon for this, but there's room for it, since we know 
so very little about the origins, hows, and whys of magic.

> Pip!Squeak:
> The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is 
> for good people to do nothing. [I apologise that I don't know who 
> originally said that]

Sandy:
Edmund Burke, according to my housemate, the quotes nerd.

> Pip!Squeak:
> I think that like Jen you are getting confused between `imposing 
> views' and `forcing people to make a choice'. Dumbledore is *not* 
> forcing his views on people. He is forcing them to recognise that a 
> choice must be made. If those who believe in choice face those who 
> believe in no choice, what do you do?

> Remnant: OK, here we part ways just as before. I understand the 
> distinction between imposing and forcing people to face a choice. 
> Honest. I simply don't think that DD is doing *either*. IMO he is 
> only defending himself and the WW against a force that removes 
> people's choices (including his own) by killing them if they don't 
> serve him.

Sandy:
I think the drastic and abrupt change in the way Dumbledore relates 
to Fudge after Voldemort is "outed" is canon which may be interpreted 
to support Pip's view. Dumbledore pretty overtly dictates to Fudge 
what is going to happen next, creates an unauthorized Portkey in his 
face and just trods right over Fudge's protests; Dumbledore seems to 
me like a man who is satisfied that he finally has leverage for 
making at least *one* (now formerly?) rather politically pivotal 
person, Fudge, face some pretty obvious choices.

Sandy <hoping I've done something besides further muddying the waters>




From feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca  Fri Sep 19 18:41:58 2003
From: feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca (feetmadeofclay)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 18:41:58 -0000
Subject: Possible JKR "Inspiration" Diana Wynne Jones
In-Reply-To: <bkff65+1npk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkfilm+hfap@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81143

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "erinellii" <erinellii at y...> 
wrote:
>I think most unpleasent relative scenerios nowadays are sort of 
> inspired by Dickens, myself.  Probably where both Jones and 
Rowlings 
> came from.  


I do see Rowling's work as inspired by her love of Dickens (and no 
I'm not using 'Dickensian' - I refuse to). 

Jones' work is also based on her own life experiences.  Apparently 
she had really horrible parents. She says that she has to tone down 
her own experience because no one would believe it in a fictional 
book.   

But her parents span the gambit. She lets the real parents be 
horrible too. Even the good ones make mistakes and are prone to 
fail.  I wasn't that impressed by the Dursleys.  They are basically 
wicked fairytale step parents.  And Harry's made to sleep on the 
firegrate.  

I think my favourite parent in Rowling's books is Amos Diggory.  I 
loved Amos Diggory. He was a much more subtle horrible parent.  
Embarrassing and entirely out of touch with his son's personality.  
The contrast between the modest moral Cedric who wanted to redo the 
Quidditch match in third year, with his braggart father is amazing.  
That one little scene in GOF is one of my favourites. It is a real 
little nugget of life.  

I think my favourite character in any Wynne Jones book so far is Ivy 
from Fire and Hemlock.  She's the Anti-Lily. But she's not a 
charicature either.  She's very real. 

Golly 






From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Fri Sep 19 19:30:20 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 19:30:20 -0000
Subject: Canon for BADD ANGST (Re: Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die!
In-Reply-To: <bkfi3f+82vl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkflgc+aoqc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81144

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> Sandy:
> I think the drastic and abrupt change in the way Dumbledore relates 
> to Fudge after Voldemort is "outed" is canon which may be 
interpreted 
> to support Pip's view. Dumbledore pretty overtly dictates to Fudge 
> what is going to happen next, creates an unauthorized Portkey in 
his 
> face and just trods right over Fudge's protests; Dumbledore seems 
to 
> me like a man who is satisfied that he finally has leverage for 
> making at least *one* (now formerly?) rather politically pivotal 
> person, Fudge, face some pretty obvious choices.
> 

Jen Reese:

Yes, this scene in the MOM does show the path Dumbledore took since 
the "parting of the ways" in GOF. But the above explanation doesn't 
take into account the canon that Dumbledore *attempted* to work 
within the political reality of the WW in the beginning, and that he 
*does* abide by a system of rules, albeit ancient ones that aren't 
always promoted by the MOM (POA and GOF, US versions):

Canon for Dumbledore working within the current WW political system:

POA p. 66: "Dumbledore isn't fond of the Azkaban guards," said Mr. 
Weasley heavily. "Nor am I, if it comes to that....but when you're 
dealing with a Wizard like Black {i.e., at that time considered LV's 
second in command}, *you sometimes have to join forces with those 
you'd rather avoid.*"
 
Emphasis mine. Isn't that DD's philosophy in a nutshell? Battle 
against Evil is a compromise at best--sometimes you have to give a 
little to get a little. DD doesn't want to have to deal with the 
Dementors, but he also has a desire to keep his students safe and see 
Black back in Azkaban. He's working within the system of the current 
WW.
 
p. 707, "Voldemort has returned," Dumbledore repeated. "If you accept 
that fact straight-away, Fudge, and take the necessary measures, we 
may still be able to save the situation."
 
DD once again attempting to working within the WW justice system 
FIRST, before the "parting of the ways."
 
p. 709, "The only one against whom I intend to work ," said 
Dumbledore, "is Lord Voldemort. If you are against him, then we 
remain, Cornelius, on the same side."
 
One final attempt to work with the MOM, within the confines of the 
system. This is also canon for Dumbledore's agenda--he is working 
against Voldemort.  If Fudge takes no side, and thus becomes one of 
those "good men who allow evil to triumph by doing nothing" then yes, 
Dumbledore will indirectly be working against Fudge.


Canon for Dumbledore's philosophy i.e. his *boundaries*:

POA p. 426, Dumbledore: "Hasn't your experience with the time-turner 
taught you anything, Harry? The consequences of our actions are 
always so complicated, so diverse, that predicting the future is very 
difficult indeed....."

Once again, philosophy in a nutshell: We can plan all we want, but 
time and choices constantly change, and thus we have to change with 
them. DD does not sound like someone who thinks he can rid the world 
of all evil!

p. 427, Dumbledore: ".....When one wizard saves another wizard's 
life, it creates a certain bond between them....This is magic at its 
deepest, most inpenetrable, Harry."
 
Philosophy again--the WW is imperfect, there is evil, but there is 
also a deep, underlying mystery that is more important than the 
philosophical differences and poor choices. Even an Evil wizard like 
Pettigrew is held accountable by his life-debt.

p. 256, Dumbledore speaking about the Goblet of Fire: "Once a 
champion has been selected by the Goblet of Fire, he or she is 
obliged to see the tournament through to the end. The placing of your 
name in the goblet constitutes a binding, magical contract." AND
p. 273, The scene where Harry's name comes out of the 
GOF, "Well...through the door, Harry" said Dumbledore. He wasn't 
smiling.

DD's philosopy at work--Dumbledore isn't happy Harry's name came out 
of the cup. Undoubtedly he's worried about him. But Harry is allowed 
to compete because DD works within the boundaries of a deeper mystery 
than his own agenda--a binding magical contract.


So, yes, I hope Fudge is a convert to understanding why they must 
bring Voldemort out in the open in order to "vanquish" him, but no, I 
don't think Dumbledore is going to violate his ethical code to 
transform the entire WW--he'll settle for Voldemort.

Jen 





From lbiles at flash.net  Fri Sep 19 20:11:45 2003
From: lbiles at flash.net (leb2323)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 20:11:45 -0000
Subject: Half-breed Umbridge
In-Reply-To: <bkf1da+rfbn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkfnu1+1vgh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81145

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "severusbook4" 
<severusbook4 at y...> wrote:
> I know this has been discussed some what but never really hit on 
> what I want to ask.  Umbridge is described as short, wide, froggish 
> with sharp pointed teeth, she is not much taller standing as when 
> she is sitting.  Also as BBoy pointed out, she has a hatred for 
half-breeds that rivels LV's hatred of mugbloods.  Could she be half 
> goblin? 
> Sevvie, this woman makes me look positively lovable, Snape


LPD recently reminded us in post #81107 that 6th year students work
on human transfiguration.  Maybe she was a dismal failure or had some 
tragic accident trying to transfigure herself into a toad and what we 
see in her physical descrption is the results of that.  

leb




From editor at texas.net  Fri Sep 19 20:19:08 2003
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 20:19:08 -0000
Subject: James Potter = Voldemort
In-Reply-To: <bkeuhb+20b9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkfobs+2tb7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81146

Toni:

> A friend of mine told me yesterday that Harry's Dad turns out to be 
> Voldemort himself.  Is that possible?

God, I hope not.
 
> Anyone know where I can read up on this theory and if it has been 
> discussed on here before then what are the message numbers.

I don't think it's been discussed in detail, because (I believe) 
someone had speculated Harry/Voldemort kinship somehow, and JKR 
made "that's way too Star Wars" type comments. I am not sure of my 
source or my recollection, but I think that nobody's seriously 
pursued a real theory along these lines for this reason.

Check the interviews on the Lexicon; or maybe someone with more 
mental cohesion or time can point your way.

~Amanda






From editor at texas.net  Fri Sep 19 20:22:16 2003
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 20:22:16 -0000
Subject: Snape Is Not A Spy
In-Reply-To: <000301c37ea7$54fcd5c0$6973d6d1@oldcomputer>
Message-ID: <bkfoho+faf8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81147

RTJ

> I have a proposal to make: the formation of, not a ship, but a 
club, of
> those who believe that the idea of Snape rejoining the Death Eaters 
and
> spying on them is NOT TRUE.
> 
> SINAS: Snape Is Not A Spy.
> 
> --RTJ (Who can defend her position with canon)

Well, bring it on. That's what the list is for.

I presume you mean, he isn't one NOW. I disagree, and sit back to 
await your mustering of support...

~Amandageist





From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 19 20:43:23 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 20:43:23 -0000
Subject: MAGIC DISHWASHER (TBAY INTRO): Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die!
In-Reply-To: <bkdpbk+9mm8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkfppb+403s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81148

> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bluesqueak" <pipdowns at e...> 
> wrote:
 My philosophy is that evil cannot 
> > create, only destroy. It is a parasite, a cancer, a destructive 
> > force. It takes what good has created and tries to destroy or 
> > corrupt it. If good sometimes seems to come out of evil, it is 
only  because good is so powerful that it can repair what evil has 
done.  Death is not necessarily evil; it can be a transformation.> 
> 
> Jen: 
 That's a good point, and I see where our philosophies differ. I 
think patially it's my use of the term Yin and Yang when "duality" 
> would be a better word. 
> 
> So I'll try again: If Good Creates and Evil Destroys, how is that 
> *not* duality ?  Evil will never be truly vanquished; it must exist 
> if the Power of Transformation can ever take place. If Evil is 
> vanquished, how can we distinguish Good? There is no choice to 
make, no free will, if both do not exist.
> 
> Also to clarify my views, I didn't intend to equate Evil=Death. I 
was  merely using Life and Death as an analogy for why things cannot 
exist in a vacuum--we must have one to have the other.  I see Death 
as a natural part of the life-cycle which includes birth, growth, 
decay, death and rebirth.  Good and Evil exist within the life-cycle, 
but don't supercede it.
> 
<snip> 
> I really believe Dumbledore's trying to impart an age-old wisdom 
> about the Imperfect World when he tells Harry: "It will merely take 
> someone else who is prepared to fight what seems like a losing 
battle next time--and if he is delayed again, and again, why, he may 
never return to power." 
> 
> So in the end, is Fire really better than Ice? <snip> 

Laura:

It sounds to me like Pip believes in the idea that humanity can 
perfect itself, whereas Jen believes in the endless duality of 
existence.  It's sort of a Western-Eastern split.  Western religions 
argue for the possibility of redemption (they differ on where and 
how, though).  But my understanding of Eastern religions is that they 
tend to see existence more as a cycle than as a trajectory, with 
events and patterns endlessly repeating themselves.  So while DD's 
remarks above sound like they come from the Eastern perspective, 
Pip's latest incarnation of MD would suggest that DD takes the 
Western view-if I'm understanding all of this right. 





From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 19 20:51:11 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 20:51:11 -0000
Subject: Canon for BADD ANGST (Re: Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die!
In-Reply-To: <bkflgc+aoqc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkfq7v+asqm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81149

> Jen Reese:
> (T)the above explanation doesn't take into account the canon that 
> Dumbledore *attempted* to work within the political reality of the 
> WW in the beginning, and that he *does* abide by a system of rules, 
> albeit ancient ones that aren't always promoted by the MOM (POA and 
> GOF, US versions):

If Dumbledore *is* playing according to a big, bangy end game 
philosophy, he can't show it early on; he has to "be reasonable." I 
can find no canon to deny that.

> POA p. 66: "Dumbledore isn't fond of the Azkaban guards," said Mr. 
> Weasley heavily. "Nor am I, if it comes to that....but when you're 
> dealing with a Wizard like Black {i.e., at that time considered  
> LV's second in command}, *you sometimes have to join forces with  
> those you'd rather avoid.*"

But Mr. Weasley isn't quoting Dumbledore. He is attributing to him 
a "reasonable" philosophy, either out of what he thinks Dumbledore 
believes, or what he has been told to say.

> Emphasis mine. Isn't that DD's philosophy in a nutshell? Battle 
> against Evil is a compromise at best--sometimes you have to give a 
> little to get a little. DD doesn't want to have to deal with the 
> Dementors, but he also has a desire to keep his students safe and 
> see Black back in Azkaban. He's working within the system of the 
> current WW.

I see Dumbledore accepting the dementors as part of his "be 
reasonable" act; the Ministry believes in them as a deterrent and 
Dumbledore allows them to be foisted (not hoisted, you!) on himself 
and Hogwarts and what happens? By the end of PoA *everybody* knows 
what a "deterrent" they turned out to be. Veerrrrrry clever, huh?

> p. 707, "Voldemort has returned," Dumbledore repeated. "If you 
> accept that fact straight-away, Fudge, and take the necessary 
> measures, we may still be able to save the situation."

(I wonder now if Dumbledore endorsed Fudge as MoM; everybody *wanted* 
Dumbledore.) Does Dumbledore know Fudge so well (and it seems to me 
he does) that he says this almost as a private joke to himself, or 
one on Fudge? Besides, I can see Dumbledore as willing to work within 
the system and Dumbledore who is bringing about the end by fire 
easily as attributes of the same man; Dumbledore is like a yoga (no, 
not Yoda!) master: infinitely flexible, but with very clear results 
in mind.

> POA p. 426, Dumbledore: "Hasn't your experience with the time-
> turner taught you anything, Harry? The consequences of our actions 
> are always so complicated, so diverse, that predicting the future 
> is very difficult indeed....."

Yes, and that's why Dumbledore is so flexible; he knows this, that 
the future is a beast to be ridden, hanging on sometimes by your 
fingernails, and other times reined in the direction you want it to 
go (like leading H/H to use the timeturner). IMO, none of this 
damages Apocalypse!Dumbledore.

> Once again, philosophy in a nutshell: We can plan all we want, but 
> time and choices constantly change, and thus we have to change with 
> them. DD does not sound like someone who thinks he can rid the 
> world of all evil!

Who said that? Who said Dumbledore thought he could rid the world of 
evil? I think he is simply orchestrating an unavoidable example for 
everyone of the need to change society in such a way (like by 
splitting up power between wizards and other entities, like goblins) 
that no single evil can never get quite so bloated again.

<snip stuff I can't see as obstructive or counter to new MD>

> Even an Evil wizard like Pettigrew is held accountable by his life-
> debt.

It exists, it has an effect we will see later, but it doesn't get the 
WW's road to hell-in-a-handbasket off the hook it's hanging on (as 
illustrated by Pettigrew's actions in the graveyard). If Dumbledore 
knows enough about "magic at its most impenetrable" to make that 
statement, he may also know it well enough to be following a most 
impenetrable magic of his own.

<snip actual canon, leaving summary>
> DD's philosopy at work--Dumbledore isn't happy Harry's name came 
> out of the cup. Undoubtedly he's worried about him. But Harry is 
> allowed to compete because DD works within the boundaries of a 
> deeper mystery than his own agenda--a binding magical contract.

Dumbledore wants Harry to survive his fourth year, wants him alive to 
face Voldemort, whenever it happens. Dumbledore may *be* bending to 
magic's rules himself here. But again, if he understands magic's 
mysteries better than anyone else (as canon profligately implies), he 
may be better at navigating its "boundaries" than anyone else in the 
WW. What if Dumbledore's agenda *is* the epitome of the laws which 
make magic work? Some law of magicodynamics? Oh, oh, what if it's 
*circular*: the uberest-wizard has the most power, and the most power 
over the people, and what magic consists of is what it is defined by 
in the collective unconscious? (How META would y'all like to get?))

Sandy (who got an email apology (!) yesterday from that 13-year old 
Southern Baptist from Dallas and will soon post about it on OT 
Chatter; having obtained said 13-year old's permission, of course)




From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Sep 19 21:14:18 2003
From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 21:14:18 -0000
Subject: Half-breed Umbridge
In-Reply-To: <bkf1da+rfbn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkfrja+5a3d@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81150

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "severusbook4"
<severusbook4 at y...> wrote:
> I know this has been discussed some what but never really hit on 
> what I want to ask.  Umbridge is described as short, wide, froggish 
> with sharp pointed teeth, she is not much taller standing as when 
> she is sitting.  Also as BBoy pointed out, she has a hatred for half-
> breeds that rivels LV's hatred of mugbloods.  Could she be half 
> goblin? I can't seem to find a real clear desciption of a goblin, 
> but then all of my books are out on loan except OotP.  In SS (the 
> movie) the goblins fit the short, with sharp teeth, and froggish 
> mouth description, but can't find that in the books since I don't 
> have them at this point.  A friend of mine and I are discussing this 
> possibility, but have come to a screeching halt for lack of canon.  
> Any help would be, well, helpful.
> 
> Sevvie, this woman makes me look positively lovable, Snape

Hi,

I've tried to check the earlier references to what goblins look like,
and so far I've only found one: "The goblin was about a head shorter
than Harry. He had a swarthy, clever face, a pointed beard and, Harry
noticed, very long fingers and feet." (PS, Bloomsbury paperback p. 82)
Short, yes, but neither wide nor toad-mouthed (dwarfs and house-elfs
are short too). Umbridge is described as having a pasty face and
stubby fingers. So IMO we need some hard evidence before we decide on
her possible goblin heritage. 
Either way, she's a great villain. I always knew there was something
sinister about lace doilies, dried flowers and china plates with
cutesy blue-eyed kittens. :-)

Alshain








From manawydan at ntlworld.com  Fri Sep 19 21:15:54 2003
From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 22:15:54 +0100
Subject: [HPforGrownups] reaction to MAGIC DISHWASHER
References: <1063995609.102832.32241.m14@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <001701c37ef3$36337300$bb516751@f3b7j4>

No: HPFGUIDX 81151

Remnant wrote:
>
> Canon says virtually nothing on these points, so for all we know LV is
> an unprecedented evil. In fact, I can cite canon on my side here: the
> WW has been in existence for thousands of years (ancient Egyptian
> wizards are mentioned in POA). Yet it has not been destroyed or turned
> into a totalitarian state by a deathless Dark Lord yet. And if this
> type of thing happened all the time, wouldn't it be mentioned
> somewhere by now? Wouldn't someone have said, "Boy this Voldemort is
> every bit as bad as so-and-so was"? Wouldn't Binns have mentioned a
> procession of Dark Lord wannabes throughout the ages?

IIRC, there are a number of mentions of individuals in Binns's lectures who
may be dark rebels, someone will doubtless correct me on the name but I
think one of them was Edric the Intelligent or something similar.

Other contributors have assumed that they were goblins but that's nowhere
explicit.

It could also be argued that the dark/non-dark split goes right back to the
origins of the WW...

Cheers

Ffred

O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon
Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion
Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri





From EBeth0000 at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 19 22:32:02 2003
From: EBeth0000 at hotmail.com (ebeth0000000000)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 22:32:02 -0000
Subject: Half-breed Umbridge
In-Reply-To: <bkfnu1+1vgh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkg052+cmea@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81152

For some reason, I got it in my head she might be a hag, or part 
hag, especially b/c of the description of her baclava (sp?) which is 
mentioned in connection with a hag elsewhere (too tired and lazy to 
look up page numbers for both references.)






From hieya at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 19 22:34:15 2003
From: hieya at hotmail.com (greatlit2003)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 22:34:15 -0000
Subject: Harry & Lupin
Message-ID: <bkg097+cni5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81153

I think that it was significant that Sirius's last gift to Harry was 
a joint gift from him and Lupin (I don't count the mirror as a gift 
because Harry didn't use it and didn't even know about it). Why 
would JKR make them give the gift together to Harry? Lupin could 
have simply given him a box of chocolates or something. To me, it 
symbolizes that Harry is moving from Sirius to Lupin. Lupin has 
never given a gift to Harry, though there was no reason for him not 
to. Back then, I think that JKR did not want to emphasize Harry's 
relationship with Lupin too much because that would conflict with 
his relationship with Sirius. Perhaps Harry will find a better 
father figure in Lupin, one who is not burdened with insecurities 
and depression like poor Sirius was. Lupin and Harry also have more 
in common. They've grown up as outsiders, and are thoughtful and 
sensitive. In fact, I am surprised that Harry has a father and 
godfather who were so unlike him.

greatlit2003




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Fri Sep 19 22:43:09 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 22:43:09 -0000
Subject: Canon for BADD ANGST (Re: Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die!
In-Reply-To: <bkfq7v+asqm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkg0pt+942h@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81154

Sandy, I snipped the parts where we simply disagree on the 
interpretation of canon--You ascribe to MDDT and thus read the quotes 
to support your theory; I suscribe to BADD ANGST and thus read the 
quotes to support my theory (and never the two shall meet, I 
suspect. ;)  

My interpretations on the canon info in the previous post are the 
same, except that I'm willing to scrap the Weasley quote as an 
assumption made by Arthur rather than a direct quote from Dumbledore. 


Now on to the debate!

Sandy:
I can see Dumbledore as willing to work within the system and 
Dumbledore who is bringing about the end by fire easily as attributes 
of the same man; Dumbledore is like a yoga (no, not Yoda!) master: 
infinitely flexible, but with very clear results in mind.
<snip>
Who said Dumbledore thought he could rid the world of 
> evil? I think he is simply orchestrating an unavoidable example for 
> everyone of the need to change society in such a way (like by 
> splitting up power between wizards and other entities, like 
goblins) 
> that no single evil can never get quite so bloated again.
> 

Jen Reese: I don't argue the validity of the MDDT TBAY when it states 
that Dumbledore wants a *transformation* in the underlying structure 
of the WW; Pip!Squeak makes that point admirably and it's supported 
by canon in the original post.

But I am curious about your take on MDDT on *how far* Dumbledore is 
willing to go to "bring about the end by fire."  Do you read it to be 
a symbolic transformation or a literal one? Because here's what Pip!
Squeak says:

PipSqueak:

"And yes, if the WW is irredeemably evil, it is better to sacrifice 
it for the future. That is a decision that has been made before. 
(Response to my Reaction to TBAY post)"

"The Wizarding World must be prepared to destroy itself in order to 
defeat Voldemort and all his kind for ever." (original TBAY).


Jen:
I have a problem believing this is Dumbledore's intent, and that's 
the point I was trying to make with the canon quotes: Dumbledore will 
not sacrifice his commitment to the magical code to transform the WW 
through annihilation. The main reason being we have multiple canon 
examples of Dumbledore's theory on "choice."  He will never get 100% 
of the WW to choose destruction, so destroying the WW without consent 
is an example of force and not choice.


Sandy now:
But again, if he understands magic's 
> mysteries better than anyone else (as canon profligately implies), 
he 
> may be better at navigating its "boundaries" than anyone else in 
the 
> WW. What if Dumbledore's agenda *is* the epitome of the laws which 
> make magic work? Some law of magicodynamics? Oh, oh, what if it's 
> *circular*: the uberest-wizard has the most power, and the most 
power 
> over the people, and what magic consists of is what it is defined 
by 
> in the collective unconscious? 


Jen Reese: Ok, I think I'm getting what you mean--that Dumbledore's 
agenda is the ultimate expression of the ancient magical mysteries, 
(The Code of the Phoenix, perhaps?!?).  Hmmm, that's a very 
interesting thought. It would still be a Hitler-like theme though, 
and wouldn't follow DD's choice theory--a sort of Wizard destruction 
imperative, with Dumbledore forcing destruction of the WW to follow 
the Code to its natural end.  Correct me if I'm interpreting your 
thoughts wrong, though. 


Jen




From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 19 23:21:56 2003
From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 23:21:56 -0000
Subject: Harry & Lupin
In-Reply-To: <bkg097+cni5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkg32k+4lhi@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81155

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "greatlit2003" <hieya at h...> 
wrote:
> I think that it was significant that Sirius's last gift to Harry 
> was a joint gift from him and Lupin (I don't count the mirror as 
> a gift because Harry didn't use it and didn't even know about it). 
> Why would JKR make them give the gift together to Harry? Lupin 
> could have simply given him a box of chocolates or something. To 
> me, it symbolizes that Harry is moving from Sirius to Lupin. Lupin 
> has never given a gift to Harry, though there was no reason for him 
> not to. Back then, I think that JKR did not want to emphasize 
> Harry's relationship with Lupin too much because that would 
> conflict with his relationship with Sirius. Perhaps Harry will
> find a better father figure in Lupin, one who is not burdened with 
> insecurities and depression like poor Sirius was. Lupin and Harry 
> also have more in common. They've grown up as outsiders, and are 
> thoughtful and sensitive. In fact, I am surprised that Harry has 
> a father and godfather who were so unlike him.
> 
> greatlit2003


Most of the time, the simplest explanations are the best, a la 
Occam's Razor.  In this case, the reason the gift was joint may be as 
simple as the facts that Sirius can't leave 12 Grimmauld Place, and 
Lupin is impoverished.  Since Lupin would know that Harry was both 
interested in DADA and good at it, having taught him, and Sirius 
would know this also, thanks to Lupin, conversations with Harry, the 
Tri-Wizard Tournament, the DA, etc., it would be very logical for 
them to both conclude that Harry would appreciate such a gift, and 
that they would do best to go together on it.  Further, as these were 
the two surviving "good guy" Marauders, and thus very good friends, 
it doesn't seem strange at all ....

.... but then JKR does like to throw the occasional kink in the plot 
line, doesn't she ...

Richard, who thinks friends in restricted circumstances are not at 
all surprising when they choose to cooperate.





From zanelupin at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 20 00:06:56 2003
From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 00:06:56 -0000
Subject: Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die!
In-Reply-To: <bkf24f+v41a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkg5n0+6bn1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81156

digger:

<snip> 
>>Are those seeking *political* power in the WW trying to make up 
for their lack of *magical* power? I'm obviously excluding Aurors 
and other folk like Shaklebolt and Arthur Weasley, who are 
manifestly NOT seeking political power, though they work for the 
Ministry. Is this why Fudge and his office staff have such a fear of 
Dumbledore, because has possibly the greatest magical power of all 
living wizards?<<


Severus here:
 
>If I recall correctly, Percy was head boy, and to receive that I 
would think you would have to do very well on your O.W.L.'s and 
N.E.W.T.'s.  In order to be considered for a position in the MOM, I 
would think you would need to be very well versed in the use of your 
magic abilities.  Now, that is not saying you are powerful, as DD 
obviously is, but you can perform the standard spells, just with out 
the push behind them.  So in the case of Umbridge, Fudge, (wasn't he 
also an Auror?), and Percy, I think they could be formitable enemies 
if they are seduced by the dark arts.<

KathyK:

Maybe Percy just tests well? <g>  No, I agree that they have to have 
a decent amount of knowledge and ability in order to have the stuff 
to work for the Ministry.  Especially because of the imbedded 
prejudice in the WW against those without maigc.  Having Ministry 
employees, especially those in powerful positions, without any real 
wizarding talent doesn't make sense, IMO.  

Also, there was Crouch Sr. who, according to Sirius in GoF, 
was "powerfully magical--and power-hungry." (US paperback 526)

Plus Crouch did put that mind-damaging memory charm on Bertha 
Jorkins.  That had some power behind it.

I can't remember whether or not Fudge was ever an auror, but at the 
time of the Potter's death he was a Junior minister in the 
Department of Magical Catastrophies.  And I'm way too tired to go 
digging through books this evening.

KathyK (ever so graciously sharing her birthday with Hermione)




From sydpad at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 20 00:28:49 2003
From: sydpad at yahoo.com (Sydney)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 00:28:49 -0000
Subject: Snape Is Not A Spy
In-Reply-To: <000301c37ea7$54fcd5c0$6973d6d1@oldcomputer>
Message-ID: <bkg701+blld@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81157

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tim Johnson Family"
<tkj_etal at b...> wrote:
> I have a proposal to make: the formation of, not a ship, but a club, of
> those who believe that the idea of Snape rejoining the Death Eaters and
> spying on them is NOT TRUE.
> 
> SINAS: Snape Is Not A Spy.
> 
> --RTJ (Who can defend her position with canon)


Ooh, I'll join-- but if I was good at acronyms, I'd find a good reason
to call it SINAS HEADACHE! If he's NOT spying, what the heck is he doing?

To arm the SINAS canons (I hope I'm not overstepping my bounds on this
vessel, Captain RTJ):

1.  "One, I believe, has left me for ever".  This has evidently been
confirmed as Snape in an unrecorded Q&A session (see message no.
7901).  Snape is darn clever, and this would not in itself be our big
gun, for me that would be:

2.  "It is not up to you to find out what the Dark Lord is saying to
his Death Eaters."
    "No- that's your job isn't it?' Harry shot at him....
    ... there was a curious, almost satisfied expression on Snape's
face when he answered.
    "Yes, Potter," he said, his eyes glinting, "That is my job"

Now from anyone else this would mean... that was his job.  From Snape
though, that 'satisfied exression' is mighty fishy.  What's he so smug
about?  That he has such a cool job?  Or because Harry got it wrong?

3.  Occulomency.  Evidently it's too dangerous for Dumbledore to even
LOOK at Harry, for fear of Voldemort finding stuff out.  Isn't a bit
insane to have supposedly undercover Snape on basically a tapped
direct line during the Occulomency lessons?  Teaching Harry classified
defensive measures?  Couldn't V-mort access that?

4.  Speaking of undercover, what's Order's most super-secret mole
doing having big meetings full of the entire crew?  I'm not an expert,
but isn't that a gaping security hole?  Don't you usually do that sort
of thing only with maximally trusted contacts and secret codes and
things?  

The counter to this is that Snape is a double-agent-- he's supposed to
be pretending to be a spy anyways.  But in that case, why is everyone
so excited after his meetings?  He's not just going in, saying,
"sorry, nothing this week", then giving the real dirt to Dumbledore. 
If there's another Pettigrew lurking, Snape's cover would be blown by
now.  Speaking of which...

5.  His previous role in the Order WAS of the super-secret variety. 
Not only does he not appear in the group photo, but more crucially,
Sirius had no idea Snape had EVER been a Death Eater.  Meaning he did
not know Snape was the Order's spy either, meaning this was not
general knowledge.  This seems a much more sensible system.


I'm happy to acknowledge though, that there are plenty of issues with
the SINAS theory.  I'm not thrilled to be on this boat myself, as I
think Snape spying is terribly cool and Snapey and just what I would
WANT him to be doing.  The principal leaks are:

1.  Lucius Malfoy.  Still in with Snape.  Snape, still making an
effort to be in with Malfoy.  Is Malfoy playing a double game with
Voldemort, or is he just an idiot, or has Snape somehow maintained his
cover after all?  Whatever it is, it HAS to come back to the famous
"sudden movement" at Harry's outing of Lucius to Fudge at the end of GoF.

2.  Plotting.  Scar-O-Vision aside, Rowling could really use a mole of
her own in the Death Eaters, just to be able to have scenes of their
inner workings and to keep a non-pasteboard-cut-out player in there. 
Also, the spy thing is just TOO COOL.  SOMEBODY has to be a spy!  

3.  Snape.  As in still breathing.  Pettigrew spent twelve years as a
rat to evade angry Death Eaters;  and here's Snape just walking around
and having tea with the Malfoys.  Any reader of gangland fiction knows
the informer is always the first one to be bumped off.  Barty Crouch
would have done it with bells on, but he seemed to be distinctly not
sure what to think of Snape's position.  He was actively feeling him
out in the "Egg and the Eye" scene in GoF-- a scene that in retrospect
almost certainly involves some Occulomency... something else to think
about, but anyways, the most serious objection:

4.  What the heck is Snape doing, then?  It seems to involve running
around, giving reports, keeping in with Lucius Malfoy, and risking his
life.  And, um, not spying. 

Surveying the evidence, there has to be some huge misdirection going
on here.  But I simply can't think of anything, nor have I read any
theory, that fits all the facts.

Anybody have cure for a SINAS HEADACHE?

Sydney






From feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca  Fri Sep 19 18:28:46 2003
From: feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca (feetmadeofclay)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 18:28:46 -0000
Subject: Snape's worst memory
In-Reply-To: <bkfebk+beeb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkfhsv+skum@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81158

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "yahtzee55555" <Yahtzee63 at a...> 
wrote:
>But I still have trouble saying that it is his WORST 
> memory. The memory that causes you the most pain isn't 
> necessarily the same as the memory that you most want to keep 
> secret. 

Golly: But Rowling said it was.  She titled the chapter "Snape's 
Worst Memory". She could have entitled it "A very bad 
memory"; "Snape's Miserable Day", "Snape's Outburst"; "Dueling James" 
or a million other titles.  (I guess "Snape's Grudge" was already 
taken...)  Then we would be left to ponder why that memory was put in 
the Pensive. 

If Snape had said it there might be better claim for the idea that he 
is exaggerating - focusing unduly on an embarrassing rather than 
traumatic memory. But I can't take Rowling's titles for her chapters 
as hyperbole. Otherwise I would never be able to believe anything she 
tells us when she's speaking as the author. 

 Are we going to give the authorial voice, this same treatment over 
the whole series?

> >CLIO: How is that not
> > worse than his school rival embarassing him what 20 years ago?
> > 
> > That made me wonder why Snape didn't remove that. 

Golly:  Why should a grown man be embarrassed about crying as a young 
child, while he watched one parent abuse the other. He was uspset 
about his enviroment and the treatment of his mother. 

 Who wouldn't be? That is nothing to be embarrassed about. I don't 
see crying as weakness. Would you think it was still embarrassing if 
he was a girl and not a little boy? 

Golly





From smaragdina5 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 19 19:29:16 2003
From: smaragdina5 at yahoo.com (smaragdina5)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 19:29:16 -0000
Subject: James Potter = Voldemort
In-Reply-To: <bkeuhb+20b9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkflec+hi6o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81159

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Toni" <wabtm at y...> wrote:
> A friend of mine told me yesterday that Harry's Dad turns out to be 
> Voldemort himself.  Is that possible?


Someone actually asked JKR in an interview if Voldemort would turn 
out to be Harry's father, and she replied, "that would be rather Star 
Wars, wouldn't it?" or so. Shouldn't be hard to find.

smaragdina5





From susannahlm at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 20 00:39:04 2003
From: susannahlm at yahoo.com (derannimer)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 00:39:04 -0000
Subject: The Phoenix Must Die
Message-ID: <bkg7j8+uge0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81160

Aarrrr.

-----------

*Great* post, Pip -- it's eloquent, well-argued, and adds some truly interesting points 
that I don't think I've ever seen before. (Like the idea that the OOP was guarding the 
Prophecy *not* to stop Voldemort from stealing it, but to alert the MOM when he did 
-- that's a brilliant notion, and neatly explains that "But *Dumbledore* knew what 
was in the Prophecy -- why didn't he want Voldemort to hear it?" difficulty. 
Dumbledore didn't really care about that end of the thing much at all.)

If I might add a point that could fit in here -- and I know it's just an interview, but 
still -- you know, JKR has said that Christians should be able to guess where the 
series is going. If the Wizarding World must "lose its life to save it," that is a kind of 
thematic resurrection, isn't it? The Christian theme of resurrection; and the Phoenix; 
and the redemption, and subsequent revival, of the WW, all tie rather neatly together 
thematically, don't they? (If we do end up with some variant on 
OutlivesHisDeath!Harry, how might that fit in there? Do people have any ideas?)

But, while I do love this post, I have essentially the same problem in considering it as 
MD, I think, that Tom does: It's not really a theory, for the most part. It's *canon.*

I mean, we all already knew that the Voldemortian ethos was broadly, even mostly, 
accepted in the WW -- we've known that since GOF, with that crowd at the QWC, with 
those hate letters Hermione gets: "Go back where you came from Muggle." 

And we likewise already knew that Dumbledore was the iconoclastic one of the two -- 
Marina wrote, way back in Message Number 38430:

> The poster-boy for non-conformism in the WW seems to be Dumbledore. 
 
And I think that a *lot* of people have assumed ever since the House Elf subplot 
(especially when coupled with the recurrent mentions of goblin riots -- I wonder if 
S.P.U.G. is going to turn out to be ironic foreshadowing?) in GOF that the WW is going 
to have to make a serious change in its treatment of its fellow magical beings. A lot of 
people may have laughed at S.P.E.W., but a lot of people also said they would have 
joined.

And, well, I mean, as Tom said, epic stories almost *always* involve a fundamental 
shift in perceptions on the part of whatever world they take place in -- and it's been 
clear since at least COS that the perception being targeted for authorial elimination/
reduction in the WW is bigotry. Bigotry, and inequality. With the Fountain it has 
become *blatantly* clear that Dumbledore wants to change the nature of the WW's 
politics and broader society; and I think it's a pretty sure bet that, unless the series is 
to end a tragedy, Dumbledore's wishes are going to at least be set in motion, at least 
by the time of the epilogue.

So, while this post is a wonderful and insightful piece of *analysis,* I'm not sure you 
can call it theorization. [1] It's -- just about -- canon. Now, judging from the 
responses on this thread, some would disagree with that assessment -- but I don't 
quite see how they can, given the nature and extent of political commentary in GOF 
and OOP. I'm curious: those of you who disagree with Pip's post, what do you think 
the political/social structure of the WW is going to look like by the end of the series? 

What about the Fountain?

On the subject of one of those responses, btw -- dreadful transition, I know -- 
Kneasy wrote: 

> Well, if [Dumbledore] wins, he's got it. It's an adjunct of victory. So what does 
> he do with it? Abdication is not an option. Human nature being what it is, someone 
> is sure to come along and think "Why not me?" Then we're back where we started.
> Give it away? Not possible. Not magical power. It resides within Dumbledore;            
> nowhere else. If he retires, sets up a new government, it'll only form factions, each 
> appealing to him for support. It all gets very messy.

Ahem. (Hem, hem.)

Kneasy, I hate to break it to you, but Dumbledore ain't gonna be in any position to 
have *any* political power by the end of the series. Because Dumbledore is gonna be 
dead. Dead, dead, dead.




Derannimer, uncomfortably aware that, say, four months ago, she was saying the 
same thing about Hagrid

---------

[1] This is, as you said, a post about motivations; the *actions* that the MD crowd 
attribute to Dumbledore, Spying Game and etc., *are* theorization, and fun 
theorization.




From brightlywoven at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 20 00:17:15 2003
From: brightlywoven at yahoo.com (brightlywoven)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 00:17:15 -0000
Subject: Found: Post  re: Seven Stages Corresponding to Books 
In-Reply-To: <bke64n+2v81@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkg6ab+1ptg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81161

 "hedwigstalons" wrote:
> I'm searching for the   post about the seven stages that Harry has 
to 
> go through -- how the books each correspond to one of the stages, 
> etc. It was SOOO interesting, and I should have printed it out. 
> Please let me know the # of the post or e-mail it to me.
> THanks a million!
> Emily (HedwigsTalons at y...)

You are looking for post #79715.

It is an interesting theory and a the posts and its follow-ups are a 
good read.

Brightly Woven





From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com  Sat Sep 20 00:48:46 2003
From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 00:48:46 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Hooray_for_Lovegood/There=92s_A_Blockade_Set_Down_(filk)?=
Message-ID: <bkg85e+nklk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81162

Hooray for Lovegood/There's A Blockade Set Down (OOP, Chap. 26)

To the tune of Hooray for Hapgood & There's a Parade in Town from 
Sondheim's Anyone Can Whistle

Dedicated to Sondheim fan Roxanne

THE SCENE: The Great Hall. THE TRIO et al. sing the praises of Luna's 
father after HARRY's interview appears on the cover of the March 1996 
issue of The Quibbler.  

THE TRIO, LUNA, FRED & GEORGE (joined by an ever-growing chorus of 
Gryffindor, Ravenclaw & Hufflepuff students)
Hooray for Lovegood,
Just as Luna/I had hinted
Quibbler newly printed's
Out today!...

Hooray for Lovegood,
Learn the facts from Lovegood,
Dark Lord is back says Lovegood,
So are Snorkacks says Lovegood!

You won't be unswayed by Lovegood!
The truth is conveyed by Lovegood!
The Quibbler wins fame for Lovegood!
Harry gives names to Lovegood!
Find all the keys in Lovegood!
Learn of DEs from Lovegood!

(All of this hubbub alerts PROF. UMBRIDGE, who quickly determines 
that HARRY is the source of this disturbance)

UMBRIDGE:
Huh?... Hey!... What!...Students!...
I see crowds, I hear cries
In a cascade of sound!
I see owls, I hear lies
There's a charade around.
You spoke fibs to mislead,
No more trips to Hogsmeade,
I'll make Harry Potter
Use my quill to write lines 
Did you dare? Make no plea!
Oh, how dismayed my frown!
Well, you're out of line, you think you're sneaky,
Our school is betrayed.
You can't evade or go around me 
For I will not be disobeyed!
So!... Ha!...

(Exit UMBRIDGE. All Students take out their copies of The Quibbler)

CHORUS OF GRYFFINDOR STUDENTS
Lovegood has an interview by Skeeter,

CHORUS OF RAVENCLAW STUDENTS
Harry met the Death Eaters,
He tells Rita!

CHORUS OF HUFFLEPUFF STUDENTS
This lays all the facts out for the reader.

(Re-Enter UMBRIDGE, who puts Educational Decree #27 on very public 
display. Students immediately make their Quibblers vanish)

CHORUS OF SLYTHERINS 
Though what Potter says makes us enraged
We now can't admit we've read a page

UMBRIDGE:
I see red, now hear this
There's a blockade set down.
I tell you, sir and miss
Let no Quibbler be found!
My decree's on the wall,
Any Quibbling at all
I will send you packing,
Toss your butt out the door.
Do not read! Do not keep!
I'll send my brigade around
Do not dare to flout me!
Or my blockade slink `round
'Cause I'm so obsessed
I protest that each Quibbler I'll fry.
Now that I have posted these decrees
You will not dare defy!

(Exit UMBRIDGE. As soon as the students are convinced that she has 
actually left, everyone Un-vanishes their Quibbler and resumes 
reading it avidly. Iris out on HERMIONE, giving the thumbs up sign. )

- CMC

HARRY POTTER FILKS
http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm





From ktd7 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 20 01:45:43 2003
From: ktd7 at yahoo.com (Karen)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 01:45:43 -0000
Subject: Snape's worst memory
In-Reply-To: <bkfhsv+skum@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkgbg7+ujid@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81163

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "feetmadeofclay" 
<feetmadeofclay at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "yahtzee55555" 
<Yahtzee63 at a...> 
> wrote:
> >But I still have trouble saying that it is his WORST 
> > memory. The memory that causes you the most pain isn't 
> > necessarily the same as the memory that you most want to keep 
> > secret. 
> 
> Golly: But Rowling said it was.  She titled the chapter "Snape's 
> Worst Memory". She could have entitled it "A very bad 
> memory"; "Snape's Miserable Day", "Snape's Outburst"; "Dueling 
James" 
> or a million other titles.  (I guess "Snape's Grudge" was already 
> taken...)  Then we would be left to ponder why that memory was put 
in 
> the Pensive. 
> 
> If Snape had said it there might be better claim for the idea that 
he 
> is exaggerating - focusing unduly on an embarrassing rather than 
> traumatic memory. But I can't take Rowling's titles for her 
chapters 
> as hyperbole. Otherwise I would never be able to believe anything 
she 
> tells us when she's speaking as the author. 
> 
>  Are we going to give the authorial voice, this same treatment 
over 
> the whole series?
> 
> > >CLIO: How is that not
> > > worse than his school rival embarassing him what 20 years ago?
> > > 
> > > That made me wonder why Snape didn't remove that. 
> 
> Golly:  Why should a grown man be embarrassed about crying as a 
young 
> child, while he watched one parent abuse the other. He was uspset 
> about his enviroment and the treatment of his mother. 
> 
>  Who wouldn't be? That is nothing to be embarrassed about. I don't 
> see crying as weakness. Would you think it was still embarrassing 
if 
> he was a girl and not a little boy? 
> 
> Golly

All of this begs a question I posed a while back that got 
overlooked; if Snape *removed* this memory and put into the 
pensieve, why was he so upset with Harry looking at it? Presumably, 
by taking it out of his mind (literally?), it helped him to be more 
objective and less angry with the son of James Potter, therefore 
better able to teach him one on one. Okay, here's my question once 
again. IF THE MEMORY WAS NOT IN HIS MIND, BUT IN THE PENSIEVE, WHY 
WAS HE SO UPSET? Presumably, he wouldn't remember what he put in the 
bowl, or at the very least, it would not make him that angry! I 
realize it is difficult to figure out how a fictitious magical 
object works, but the only reasonable explanation for him 
withdrawing the memories is to *not* remember them. 

Maybe I'm slipping a cog, here, but I don't understand this whole 
set up. I understood how it worked in Dumbledore's office, but he 
said he used the pensieve to look at things more objectively. We can 
only assume that Dumbledore gave Snape the pensieve to use to help 
him be less prejudice working with Harry.

Karen




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 20 02:15:08 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 02:15:08 -0000
Subject: Canon for BADD ANGST (Re: Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die!
In-Reply-To: <bkg0pt+942h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkgd7c+1vpu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81164

<snip>
Jen:
> I am curious about your take on MDDT on *how far* Dumbledore is 
> willing to go to "bring about the end by fire."  Do you read it to 
> be a symbolic transformation or a literal one? Because here's what 
Pip!Squeak says:

Pip:
> "And yes, if the WW is irredeemably evil, it is better to sacrifice 
> it for the future. That is a decision that has been made before. 
> (Response to my Reaction to TBAY post)"

Sandy:
That clause, "if the WW is irredeemably evil," is key. It's sticky, 
because any statement like that implies that someone has made that 
decision. And that implies a monster, a megalomaniac. No one (except 
some FEATHERBOA wearers, maybe <I keep mine out of sight under a 
loose floor board and visit it now and then>) wants the headmaster to 
turn out to be a Gahan Wilson (lovely man, cartoonist and writer) 
cannibal Santa Claus.

Pip:
> "The Wizarding World must be prepared to destroy itself in order to 
> defeat Voldemort and all his kind for ever." (original TBAY).

Sandy:
In the Christian old testament, rather than ice or fire, we have 
flood. And the survivors behaved, didn't they? Noah and his family 
were quite upstanding, I'm sure, no truck with Lucifer for countless 
generations. And how many billion descendants did they have? Not to 
mention Sodom and Gomorrah. (Living in the bible belt (Kentucky), 
growing up, I thought one of those was NYC and the other was 
Hollywood.)

Just who is Dumbledore? And what religion are most wizards? It's 
pretty obvious they're not pagans; I'm pagan, and they're not...I 
think. So who is the supreme spiritual authority in the WW? Fudge? 
No, it's Dumbledore. He knows more about everything than anybody. I 
have to conclude that if this is the only hope--if the cataclysm, the 
Phoenix pyre is what's left to weigh against NO hope--then yes, the 
end justifies the means. (And if someone not God has to make the 
decision, then is that person even more damned than Voldemort? Even 
if he does it out of love? Dumbledore saves the world by destroying 
it and is stuck for eternity in Azkaban-beyond-the-veil. (Bangy 
enough for you bangers?))

[And here is where for *once* in my life I looked out at all of you 
and showed some sense and refrained from giving Hebby, my dear little 
patron saint of a list elf, a heart attack by explaining how I went 
many years ago from (Southern Baptist) Christianity (Amen!) to 
paganism and how I really should come up with something for which 
HUBRIS is an acronym to describe it.]

But back to Dumbledore. I think the reason we all (me, too) don't 
want to go with manipulating, lying, megalomaniac Dumbledore is that 
we want, we *need* him to be "better" than that. We need him to save 
the world and retain his nobility even if he loses his life. Even if 
he has to sacrifice Harry, or let Harry sacrifice himself. Even 
without a God in the WW, we want to believe that Dumbledore would 
leave the flood, the purge, to Him. Here's a secret--you could ignore 
the entirety of this post and just read the next sentence: What 
happens to a man who sees the need for the flood as clearly as God 
did and yet doesn't command quite that much power? What if he has to 
use the tools at hand?

I thought I had a handle on things HP. Then I read OoP. And Pip's 
post is the first thing that has made me think maybe I can go back 
and read the series through again (thanks, Pip). What I think of as 
the new, industrial MAGIC DISHWASHWER is the only thing that has 
allowed me to incorporate OoP without feeling as if the whole thing 
was ruined. Nothing else makes it all fit for me. If I'm wrong, then 
I give you permission when the book which points it out is released 
to pelt me with ITYS (I told you so: if not a common acronym, let's 
adopt it now and save time later.)

Jen:
> I have a problem believing this is Dumbledore's intent, and that's 
> the point I was trying to make with the canon quotes: Dumbledore 
> will not sacrifice his commitment to the magical code to transform 
> the WW through annihilation. The main reason being we have multiple 
> canon examples of Dumbledore's theory on "choice."  He will never 
> get 100% of the WW to choose destruction, so destroying the WW 
> without consent is an example of force and not choice.

Sandy:
Is Dumbledore then more concerned with adhering to "the magical code" 
(which we don't know the contents of anyway) and the subsequent state 
of his own soul than in saving the world? It's not clear he needs 
to "force" anything; he merely has to make his own choices in such a 
way that others' choices bring on the purge. And it *may* not even be 
necessary. Maybe Harry will win and when Voldemort is finally gone, 
Harry's scar will open and some world-saving dark-lord-preventing and 
let's-all-share-and-get-along previously unknown magical artifact 
will pop out of Harry's head and leave him with a nice, smooth 
forehead. That would be nice. And after OoP, even unlikelier.

Jen:
> Ok, I think I'm getting what you mean--that Dumbledore's agenda is 
> the ultimate expression of the ancient magical mysteries, (The Code 
> of the Phoenix, perhaps?!?).  Hmmm, that's a very interesting 
> thought. It would still be a Hitler-like theme though, 
> and wouldn't follow DD's choice theory--a sort of Wizard 
> destruction imperative, with Dumbledore forcing destruction of the 
> WW to follow the Code to its natural end.  Correct me if I'm 
> interpreting your thoughts wrong, though. 

Heck, sometimes I'm not even sure how *I'm* interpreting my thoughts, 
but I think I answered this somewhere above.

Sandy, peering at her bottle of firewhisky in its compartment inside 
the soapbox and briefly contemplating chemical oblivion




From linlou43 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 20 02:25:11 2003
From: linlou43 at yahoo.com (linlou43)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 02:25:11 -0000
Subject: Book 6 prediction and Hermione's comment
In-Reply-To: <bka1dm+to3u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkgdq7+5me2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81165

 

  Pip!Squeak wrote a superb post. I don't agree with all of it but 
there were only a couple of points I felt compelled to comment on at 
the present. Therefore, I have snipped her astounding extrapolations 
until there was very little left. 


     <HUGE snip>

> The wizarding world is also deeply corrupt. <snip>
>  That is how deep the racism and the 
> corruption has gone. Everyone in the WW is affected by it. Even 
> Hermione, herself muggle born, has one or two worrying comments 
> about how her parents can `understand' concepts like `prefect'. 
[OOP 
> Ch. 9 p. 151]    <HUGE snip>

  
     Although I completely agree with the premise that Voldemort is 
a logical result of wizard society as it currantly operates, I 
disagree with your use of Hermione's statement as support for that 
premise. There was a thread at some point( sorry, with the currant 
volume, I can't even remember how long ago) dealing with Hermione's 
relationship with her parents. It was commented on that she never, 
especially from the end of GOF on, seemed to see her parents. She 
spent both the summer and Christmas breaks at Grimmauld place. 
However, I don't think there is estrangement there. Instead, I can 
see a lot of awkward silences during parent/daughter conversations. 
As muggles with no prior experience of the WW before their 
daughter's invitation to attend Hogwarts, they probably have very 
little in common right now. Recall how uncomfortable they looked at 
Gringotts in COS. Relationships between parents and their teenage 
children can be strained und3er ideal circumstances, and Hermione's 
parents don't even have their own school experiences to draw upon 
for a common ground with their daughter. That's what I think 
Hermione meant with her comment. She doesn't think the WW is 
superior to the muggle world in which her parents lead their lives, 
just that the WW is totally alien to them. They have no frame of 
referance for it. Prefect is something they "can understand" because 
it is within their frame of reference.
         
         
 
Replying to Remant's comments Pip!Squeak added in a later post: 

> If I had to make a prediction about Book Six, it will be that this 
> will be the book that will see the Mysterious Agendas finally out 
in 
> the open. The `dishwasher phase' will end (though it may be very 
> close to the end of book 6).

       
   Very close to the end of book 6? I don't know if it will take 
that long but IMO the process has already begun. Dumbledore's speach 
to Harry in his office illustrates this. Dumbledore admits aloud to 
Harry that he is fallible. There is no placating here, just bald 
admittance. Is not admittance the first step to recovery? Fallible!
Dumbledore in no way invalidates Wise!Dumbledore. The man is not 
stupid. How much of that admittance was not to Harry, but himself. 
Methinks it marks a change in Dumbledore's policies-maybe not his 
desired result , but the way in which he pursues that result.


 Well, I guess that all I wanted to say......for now - linlou






From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Sat Sep 20 03:24:27 2003
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 03:24:27 -0000
Subject: Snape's OTHER Worst Memory
In-Reply-To: <bkffgq+m9rq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkgh9b+smvg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81166

Sydney wrote:

> 3--.  It's Snape's worst memory not because it's the worst 
incident of
> bullying, but the worst incident involving Lily.  Just from my own
> personal recollections, memories that really make me wince aren't 
of
> the dreadful things that happened to me, but of the events where I
> really wish I'd acted differently.  If only I'd said... if only I
> hadn't...  As a proud possessor of a huge, multicoloured LOLLIPOP
> (TM), this is my favored explanation!

Yes, this is my interpretation.  I was going to post more or less 
this in response to Cindy's "I see England, I see France" post, too.

I does strike me that the central event of that whole Pensieve scene 
is Lily's intervention and the way that Snape and James react to it.

However, one doesn't need to be a LOLLIPOPS (Love Of Lily Left Ire 
Polluting Our Poor Severus) fan to adopt this interpretation.  
Snape's regret is, IMO, not that he insulted someone he fancied, but 
that he sees this incident as a crucial point on the path to Death 
Eaterdom.  By reaffirming aloud in a crisis the prejudice he has 
brought from his early life, he sets himself on a path of self-
destruction, from which he is only rescued by an as-yet-unknown 
sequence events.

There is a corollary: that the significance of the prank is not in 
Snape's development, but James'.

David




From phoenixtears at fuse.net  Sat Sep 20 03:32:53 2003
From: phoenixtears at fuse.net (phoenixmum)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 03:32:53 -0000
Subject: Snape's worst memory
In-Reply-To: <bkgbg7+ujid@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkghp5+4h04@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81167

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Karen" <ktd7 at y...> wrote:
>
>  if Snape *removed* this memory and put into the 
> pensieve, why was he so upset with Harry looking at it? Presumably, 
> by taking it out of his mind (literally?), it helped him to be more 
> objective and less angry with the son of James Potter, therefore 
> better able to teach him one on one. Okay, here's my question once 
> again. IF THE MEMORY WAS NOT IN HIS MIND, BUT IN THE PENSIEVE, WHY 
> WAS HE SO UPSET? Presumably, he wouldn't remember what he put in 
the 
> bowl, or at the very least, it would not make him that angry! I 
> realize it is difficult to figure out how a fictitious magical 
> object works, but the only reasonable explanation for him 
> withdrawing the memories is to *not* remember them. 

Reply:
Perhaps what enraged Snape is that Harry was prying into Snape's 
memories; even if at that moment Snape could not remember exactly  
what he put in the pensieve, Snape must remember that whatever he put 
there was something he didn't want Harry to access (either because 
the iformation was dangerous for Harry to have, or humiliating  for 
Snape). If people couldn't remember at least that they put memories 
in the pensieve, than they wouldn't remember to get them back out. 
(Just as a side note, maybe this would be useful for people who want 
to forget things.)

Phoenix




From hebrideanblack at earthlink.net  Sat Sep 20 03:56:37 2003
From: hebrideanblack at earthlink.net (Wendy St. John)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 03:56:37 -0000
Subject: MAGIC DISHWASHER (TBAY INTRO): Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die!
In-Reply-To: <bkb332+sj1c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkgj5l+ncoh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81168

Tom Wall wrote:
 
> 
> First off, I want to point out that while the recent post was *so* 
> articulate and eloquent, it seems kind of, I dunno, *tautological* 
> to me. Let me explain why. 

<snip discussion of why epics by definition involve fundamental 
shifts in the status quo> 

> In that sense (and again, I'm not trying to bash the MDDT here - 
> that post was really *wonderful*) the recent addition to the Magic 
> Dishwasher lore, well... the way I see it, since it's a foregone 
> conclusion that Harry Potter is the great epic of our times, it 
sort > of... goes without saying. That the Potterverse must change 
has been > alluded to repeatedly in the books: goblin rebellions, 
giant wars, > house elf slavery, secrecy from muggles, corruption in 
the Ministry > of Magic, an underlying racism in the entirety of the 
WW itself, the > destruction of the Fountain of Magic Bretheren and 
Dumbledore's > commentary on it... *all* of these relate back to the 
basic epic > premise, namely that the WW must change by the end.
> 

Now me (Wendy):

Well, I don't agree with your point here: that this being part of 
the theory is somehow redundant. If someone has a belief that the 
books are leading towards a epic conclusion of this nature, why not 
mention it as part of a a theory? Nowhere does it state in the 
books, "by the end of Harry's 7th year, the Wizarding World will 
cease to exist as we know it," so I'd say it's an appropriate 
speculation to make. I'm also not sure that it *is* obvious to 
everyone that this is where the books are heading. I happen to agree 
that they are headed in this direction (which is part of why I loved 
Pip's original post, because she said it all so well), but I imagine 
there are loads of people out there who feel this is primarily about 
Harry facing off against Voldemort. So, I don't think it's either 
obvious or redundant to mention it as part of the MD theory.

Tom again:
 
> I think OoP brought many of us closer to realizing that by the 
end, > the house elves (while not freed as a race) will probably be 
> presented at least with that choice; <snip more examples>

Wendy again:

Yes, I think you're absolutely right about this. JKR gave us many 
examples of the discord in the WW, particularly in regards to non- 
and half-humans. We've been getting glimpses of this steadily since 
CoS, and OoP really gave us a clearer picture of the current status 
quo. But once again, saying that it "brought many of us closer to 
realizing" isn't at all the same as saying these things are now 
obvious to everyone who reads the books. 

Something that I've thought a lot about lately is that there are 
many things in the books that now seem overwhelmingly "obvious" to 
me - just because I've discussed or followed discussions about them 
on this list for the past year and a half. But that doesn't mean 
that someone experiencing the books for the first time will 
automatically pick up on these things. I think we're 
reading/interpreting at a pretty high level in here, and for that 
reason our ideas about what is "obvious" may be skewed. So, when 
writing a theory, I think it's a good idea to make it as detailed as 
possible, to make sure that the point the theorist is making is 
accessible to everyone - not just to those who may have already 
analyzed the books to death, or who come to the table with 
preconceived notions about the storyline.


Back to Tom:

<lots of snippage> 
>I > thought it was sort of a misnomer before (see the posts related 
to 
> DARK LADLES and SUNLIGHT ULTRA), but now, as Fictional!Pippin 
> pointed out, it's progressed beyond itself. It really has been 
> almost superceded by OoP, which takes for granted spy-lore and 
> covert activities. 

Now me (Wendy):

Heh heh heh . . . well, wouldn't that just be a good argument for 
the fact that it was a pretty sound theory from the start? We may 
take spy-lore and covert activities for granted now, but the MD team 
were among the first to spot these things happening before they 
became so overt in OoP. <g>


Tom again:

<more snippage> 
>The old theory used to revolve around several basic precepts: one, 
that 
> Snape was in the Shrieking Shack as an agent, acting on behalf of 
> Dumbledore, in order to: two) ensure that Pettigrew escaped to 
> Voldemort, thereby: three) facilitating (via his severed hand) a 
> flaw in the potion "Flesh, Blood, and Bone," which Voldemort used 
to 
> bring himself back to life, therefore: four) this flaw in the 
potion 
> would enable Harry to ultimately triumph over the Dark Lord.
> 
> But this latest post doesn't address these at all. What about the 
> Prophecy? Hasn't it nullified the "flaw in the potion" line of 
> thought, unless we construct an argument that might run thusly: 
> that "Albus loves Harry, and Harry's love is the power that the 
Dark 
> Lord knows not, therefore Albus created the flaw due to love for 
> Harry and so the flaw in the potion (which is still ultimately 
going 
> to be Voldemort's demise) is completely in line with the 
prophecy." 
>> 
> My point is that the prophecy mentions nothing about a flaw in the 
> potion engineered by Dumbledore. And unless we take it very 
> liberally and with much salt, the Prophecy seems to nullify a 
great 
> deal of the old MAGIC DISHWASHER in the same fashion that it's 
> hobbled 'Heir of Gryffindor.'
>

Wendy again:

I don't see any conflict between the idea that Dumbledore wanted 
Voldemort to come back using the "flawed potion," and the fact that 
the prophecy doesn't mention the potion. (This is what you're saying 
here, isn't it)? Dumbledore heard a prophecy that a boy born at the 
end of the seventh month would have the power to defeat the dark 
lord (at least that's one rough interpretation, and it seems to be 
the one Dumbledore is using). Why should the prophecy mention the 
potion at all? I assume the potion was something that occurred to 
Dumbledore independently - he wouldn't need to hear a prophecy 
saying, "a flawed potion will be the key to the dark lord's 
downfall." 

DD knows/believes that Harry is the key to vanquishing Voldemort, 
but he doesn't know just how that is going to happen. He may have 
his suspicions, but I don't believe feels absolutely certain that he 
*knows* what power Harry possesses, or how Voldemort's downfall will 
come about. If Dumbledore knew that there was a way to create a 
flawed potion that would put Voldemort back in a mortal body with a 
weakness of which Voldemort would not be aware, why wouldn't he try 
and pull this off if he had the opportunity? Maybe it wouldn't work, 
but maybe it would. It might even prove to be the key. Harry has 
some power . . . maybe now this power resides in Voldemort as well 
(because of the potion), and that will be what brings about 
Voldemort's downfall in the end. Or maybe not. But why not try? 

This actually makes the MD theory stronger now in my mind. Before 
OoP, I always thought the whole "Dumbledore orchestrated the flawed 
potion" thing was a big stretch. But now, knowing that Dumbledore 
had knowledge of a prophecy which juxtaposes Harry and Voldemort 
like this, it makes much more sense to me that Dumbledore would try 
and capitalize on this relationship if at all possible. In other 
words, that he would pursue the flawed potion idea specifically 
*because* of the bond he believes exists between Voldemort and 
Harry - a bond that he knows about because of the prophecy. 
Dumbledore doesn't know that it will be successful, but I can't see 
how he could be certain that it *wouldn't* be successful, either. So 
why not try and cover all the bases? 

Just a few thoughts,

:-)
Wendy
(Who is fonder now of MD than she was before OoP)
 





From fc26det at aol.com  Sat Sep 20 05:34:30 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 05:34:30 -0000
Subject: Did I Miss Something?
Message-ID: <bkgot6+8mi4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81169

I am reading COS (my new UK edition) and something doesn't make sense 
to me.  If this has been discussed just tell me the post number 
please.

When Harry is in the hospital ward having his bones regrown and they 
bring Colin Creevey in, McGonagall gets Madam Pomfrey.  When Pomfrey 
asks what happened, Dumbledore says that Minerva found him on the 
stairs.  A few lines down, McGonagall says that she shudders to 
think...if Albus hadn't been on the way downstairs for hot chocolate, 
who knows what might have....

Ok what did I miss?  If McGonagall found him, what does that have to 
do with Albus getting hot chocolate?  Did she see something else and 
Albus came along and saved her?  I just don't understand.
Help!
Susan who is shaking her head thinking she is totally daft 




From severusbook4 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 20 05:47:45 2003
From: severusbook4 at yahoo.com (severusbook4)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 05:47:45 -0000
Subject: James Potter = Voldemort
In-Reply-To: <bkeuhb+20b9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkgpm1+rf6i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81170

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Toni" <wabtm at y...> wrote:
> A friend of mine told me yesterday that Harry's Dad turns out to be 
> Voldemort himself.  Is that possible?
> 
> Surely Dumbledore would have known if that were true.
> 
> Or did she mean that Voldemort and Harry's mum had an affair?
> 
> Anyone know where I can read up on this theory and if it has been 
> discussed on here before then what are the message numbers.
> 
> Thanks
> Toni

Severus here:

"Luke, I am your father."  Darth Vader to Luke Skywalker.

Don't think so.  Anyways LV is about 70 years old, and James Potter is, or would be in 
his 30's, maybe early 40's now if he was alive.  The math just doesn't add up.  JMHO.

Sevvie 




From hebrideanblack at earthlink.net  Sat Sep 20 06:35:33 2003
From: hebrideanblack at earthlink.net (Wendy St. John)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 06:35:33 -0000
Subject: Lucius and the Spying Game
In-Reply-To: <bkdjsn+2jqo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkgsfl+r5ev@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81171


Jen wrote:
> 9. Lucius prolongs the quest for the prophecy at the MOM and 
ensures 
> Harry isn't killed by the DE's until LV makes his appearance at 
the 
> MOM for his official coming out party.

And Melody responded:

Oh, so *that* is what his shrieks--to get the prophecy and not kill
Harry *until* he learns the prophecy is broken, then he decides it is
ok to kill, stupefy...whatever Harry--are for. 

Oh and being cursed by Tonks was a cover too I guess. Clever.

Now me (Wendy):

Actually, there was one thing I thought strange in that scene which 
might fit with the Spy!Lucius theory: during the battle, Lupin runs 
in between Lucius and Harry just as Malfoy was raising his wand to 
attack:

(OoP, US, page 804)
"Malfoy aimed his wand at Harry and Neville again, but before he 
could draw breath to strike, Lupin had jumped between him.

"Harry, round up the others and GO!"

Then, Harry and Neville run away and the action follows them . . . 
but I find it curious that a few minutes later Remus and Lucius are 
both still in the action. These two were face-to-face in the heat of 
battle and neither of them managed to get off a curse? It sure 
sounds to me as if they both chose not to attack one another, which 
certainly doesn't fit with what I think we are "supposed" to believe 
about these two characters. This has always struck me as odd - in 
the past I've considered it more potential evidence for Evil!Lupin, 
but I think it works just as well with Spy!Lucius.

So, while I'm not sure I'm completely convinced about this theory 
yet, I am intrigued, and I hope that this little canon will prove 
useful.

:-)
Wendy




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Sat Sep 20 08:41:48 2003
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 18:41:48 +1000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's worst memory
In-Reply-To: <000601c37ea7$58b98fa0$6973d6d1@oldcomputer>
Message-ID: <3F6C9F6C.31678.1636370@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 81172

On 19 Sep 2003 at 0:48, Tim Johnson Family wrote:

> Many of you have speculated that the "graying underpants" Pensieve memory
> cannot be Snape's worst memory. Wouldn't torturing Muggles or the other
> attrocities he must have committed under Voldemort be worst? I am inclined
> to take the chapter at face value: the graying underpants memory is indeed
> the number 1 worst memory.

I have to say I agree. I think many people underestimate the impact 
something like this can have on a person. I was bullied at school - and 
it hurt. It really did. And my worst memory by far, relates to one 
incident of bullying at 13. It far outweighs the death of my father who 
I loved deeply when I was 15. It took me two years to recover from that 
(as much as anyone ever does). It took ten to get over that one incident 
of bullying.

And it wasn't physical (which happened as well - and quite badly at 
times). It was an incident that was simply calculated to humiliate me. 
Basically - and this doesn't come close to describing the way it made me 
feel, or what it meant to me (to give you an idea - well, if I could 
have there and then, I would have killed myself) - three boys peed on me 
in a shower at school after sports. It probably doesn't sound that bad. 
Objectively it wasn't that bad. But it still the most horrifying, most 
traumatising experience I have. And I've seen people killed in front of 
me. And I've faced the death of a parent. And I've been beaten into 
unconciousness, and I suffered horrific abuse.

In an objective sense, things much worse have happened to me - but that 
doesn't make them my worst memory.

What makes a memory bad is complex - and I can easily believe being 
humiliated in front of your peers as a teen is the worst memory that 
Snape has. No matter what evil he has done, I can believe 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 yuiopl at hot.ee  Sat Sep 20 05:56:09 2003
From: yuiopl at hot.ee (yui_olp)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 05:56:09 -0000
Subject: Snape Is Not A Spy
In-Reply-To: <000301c37ea7$54fcd5c0$6973d6d1@oldcomputer>
Message-ID: <bkgq5p+ir8v@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81173

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tim Johnson Family" 
<tkj_etal at b...> wrote:
> I have a proposal to make: the formation of, not a ship, but a club, of
> those who believe that the idea of Snape rejoining the Death Eaters and
> spying on them is NOT TRUE.
> 
> SINAS: Snape Is Not A Spy.
> 
> --RTJ (Who can defend her position with canon)

I completely agree with that.

1. Snape being a spy would be Too Obvious. Rowling has kept Snape's task  
a mystery for 2 books, it must be something worth it.

2. Voldemort "saw" from under Quirrel's turban Severus saving Harry's life 
during that Quiddich game. Snape's only possible apology - "Someone 
sitting next to me knew that I knew the counter-jinx and asked me to use it, 
and I had to although I didn't want to". Sorry, Voldemort would never buy it.





From catlady at wicca.net  Sat Sep 20 10:11:05 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 10:11:05 -0000
Subject: Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die!
In-Reply-To: <39F3EFDE-E9F9-11D7-9ECE-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bkh93p+5l9s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81174

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith <arrowsmithbt at b...>
wrote:

<< What happens if Voldemort wins? More of the same, I expect. When
you've got ultimate power people do what they're told. Even
supporters. Maybe a demonstration of power every now and again, just
to remind everybody what's what. No need to go berserk. Who wants to
rule a wasteland? Just like the Roman Empire. >>

I don't agree. I suppose that in general people who lead a coup 
d'etat or a revolution to make themselves dictator *intend* to keep
the country and its economy functioning, so that they have something 
worth ruling (as you said). But it seems to me that even the ones who
intend to keep society alive often f*** it up due to incompetence or
bad temper or greed. 

Anyway, I am not at all convinced that *Voldemort* intends to keep
society alive, being as how he is obviously quite insane. It would be
pretty stupid of him to make himself immortal and then, you know,
destroy all life on Earth and spend eternity hanging around a burnt
rock (our planet's remains) with nothing to eat and no one to serve
him, but to me it seems quite in line with his type of insanity not 
to realise that it was stupid until after he's done it. He's full of
hate and anger, and his greatest ambition is to be feared, and he 
gets off on destroying things and killing people, and oops there's
nothing left to rule over ...

<< An idealist is he? This Dumbledore chappie o' yourn? Tsk, tsk, 
tsk. Them's the sort as causes trouble, you mark my words." >>

How does your attitude toward idealism affect your reaction to the HP
books? To me, they seem to be pro-idealism.




From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Sat Sep 20 10:12:26 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 10:12:26 -0000
Subject: Did I Miss Something?
In-Reply-To: <bkgot6+8mi4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkh96a+t94d@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81175

Susan wrote:
> I am reading COS (my new UK edition) and something doesn't make 
> sense to me.  <Snip>
> When Harry is in the hospital ward having his bones regrown [Ch. 
10]and 
> they bring Colin Creevey in, McGonagall gets Madam Pomfrey.  When 
> Pomfrey asks what happened, Dumbledore says that Minerva found him 
> on the stairs.  A few lines down, McGonagall says that she 
> shudders to think...if Albus hadn't been on the way downstairs for 
> hot chocolate, who knows what might have....
> 
> Ok what did I miss?  If McGonagall found him, what does that have 
> to do with Albus getting hot chocolate? <Snip>

Pip!Squeak:
Oooh, you've found an interesting point!

It may be as simple as Professor McGonagall thinking that whatever 
had just petrified Colin was going to come back and finish Colin 
off. Judging by her age (sprightly 70, in a JKR interview), she may 
have been in her final year at Hogwarts when the previous attacks 
happened. If so, she remembers that someone died - she didn't get 
the 'accident' version that Diary!Riddle talks about.

However, it might tie in with Minerva McGonagall being a perfectly 
normal Scottish muggle name when Professor McGonagall was born, and 
the fact that she wears a muggle coat and dress in OOP.

Looking at the coat and dress reference [OOP Ch. 6, p.109 UK 
hardback], I note that while Harry thinks she looks odd in a muggle 
dress and coat, he *doesn't* note that she's got the muggle costume 
wrong.

This is in contrast to the wizard-born adults, who always seem to 
get muggle costume subtly wrong. Mr Weasley, for example, wears pin-
striped trousers with a bomber jacket in OOP.

I've argued this before, but I think Professor McGonagall is muggle 
born. That's why she wears muggle clothing in the holidays *and* 
gets it right. In PS/SS she talks about 'their news', but obviously 
does recognise that a voice floating out of the Dursley's window 
might be from the TV/radio. [Chapter 1]

So, she *may* have said 'if Albus hadn't been on his way downstairs 
for hot chocolate, who knows what might have ...' because, quite 
simply, she is also a target.

Colin is lying there petrified. If Albus hadn't been on his way 
down, the muggle born teacher who'd found him might have been the 
next victim.

And she might have been found dead.

Pip!Squeak




From sylviablundell at aol.com  Sat Sep 20 11:15:52 2003
From: sylviablundell at aol.com (sylviablundell2001)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 11:15:52 -0000
Subject: Snape's Worst Memory
Message-ID: <bkhct8+rugc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81176

 I would agree with previous posters that Snape probably put this 
memory into the Pensieve in order to clear his own mind of something 
which, for any number of reasons, he didn't want Harry to see. It is 
nowhere mentioned in canon, as far as I can remember, that Snape knew 
that Harry had any knowledge of what a pensieve was, so felt quite 
safe in leaving him alone with it.  When he returns and finds that, 
not only does Harry know exactly what it is, but is actually using it 
and thus witnessing the scene Snape most wants him not to witness, he 
is naturally livid. Is there any authority for believing that Snape 
does know that Harry knows about the Pensieve?
Sylvia (who thinks Snape was perfectly justified in throwing things 
at Harry)




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Sat Sep 20 12:11:35 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 12:11:35 -0000
Subject: Snape Is Not A Spy
In-Reply-To: <000301c37ea7$54fcd5c0$6973d6d1@oldcomputer>
Message-ID: <bkhg5n+hhcn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81177

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tim Johnson Family" <tkj_etal at b...> 
wrote:
> I have a proposal to make: the formation of, not a ship, but a club, of
> those who believe that the idea of Snape rejoining the Death Eaters and
> spying on them is NOT TRUE.
> 
> SINAS: Snape Is Not A Spy.
> 
> --RTJ (Who can defend her position with canon)


I agree wholeheartedly.

But I'd better remain in the background cheering quietly from the gods.
 
Whenever I openly back an interpretation it immediately falls apart.

Kneasy




From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au  Sat Sep 20 12:47:49 2003
From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 12:47:49 -0000
Subject: Book 6 prediction - Regulus Black
In-Reply-To: <bkgdq7+5me2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkhi9l+l0t6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81178

There are obvious personalities from the Death Eaters that are 
touching the emotions of Dumbledore's Army. (eg: Lestrange attacked 
Harry's godfather and Neville's parents)

My query is about another DE victom. Regulus Black, Sirius's younger 
brother. 

- Which witch or wizard killed Regulus?
- Was this done with the Dark Lord's approval?

If he wasn't killed on LV orders, then:-
... Regulus would have been a year or two behind Sirius in Hogwarts, 
and would have known his brother's friends and rivals ... that means 
either Peter Pettigrew killed Regulus, or Severus Snape did.




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Sat Sep 20 12:56:03 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 12:56:03 -0000
Subject: Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die!
In-Reply-To: <bkh93p+5l9s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkhip3+70sa@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81179

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" 
<catlady at w...> wrote:
> 
> How does your attitude toward idealism affect your reaction to the HP
> books? To me, they seem to be pro-idealism.


It doesn't. The  books are fictional.

Therefore I can sit back and  not worry. The  books will probably end
leaving most readers  satisfied and with little or no  view into the 
future to show us long term effects, good or bad. That's usually
where the trouble occurs - The Law of Unintended Consequences
creeps up and mugs you just when you think it's all OK.

So no, my views on idealism can be used to spice up a post or two,
put a view for discussion,  maybe provoke one or two who  take it a
bit more seriously than I do. Everyone has views based to a 
certain extent on their philosophical stances. We're guessing how
HP will finally be explained. There's no resolution in sight yet so
it's a big  playground with lots of possibilities. But I'm enough of
a realist to know that what I  think will have no effect on what is
a fictional construction.

Have to admit, I do wonder if a few of the posters accept the
same inevitability that we say is irrelevant.

Kneasy




From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au  Sat Sep 20 13:09:26 2003
From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 13:09:26 -0000
Subject: Snape Is Not A Spy
In-Reply-To: <bkgq5p+ir8v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkhji6+bh7j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81180

--- "yui_olp" wrote:
> > 
> > SINAS: Snape Is Not A Spy.
> > 
> 2. Voldemort "saw" from under Quirrel's turban Severus saving 
> Harry's life during that Quiddich game. 
> Sorry, Voldemort would never buy it.

aussie says:

Snape can argue loyalty to the Dark Lord. 

He prtended to change sides and join the Order to give LV a spy close 
to Dumbledore. 

He has kept his faithful position to LV all these years making 
dumbledore trust him more.

He has never brought suspition upon himself unless he is sure it is 
an action that LV wants.

Snape didn't know it was Voldemort trying to kill Harry that 
quidditch match ... he thought it was p-p-poor, st-stuttering Prof 
Quirrel. LV never revealed himself to Snape that year, or Snape 
wouldn't have threatened Quirrel with, "You don't want me as your 
enemy, Quirrell" and "... decided where your loyalties lie."

Quirrel seemed to be after the PS/SS for himself or maybe the Gold 
producing aspect. LV didn't know at that time if he could tell Snape 
the truth while he was in such a vulnerable state.

Neither Barty Couch JR, Snape nor Scabbers moved a hand against Harry 
without LV giving specific orders even though they all had their 
chance at Hogwarts.




From entropymail at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 20 13:25:31 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 13:25:31 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore in the Hog's Head
Message-ID: <bkhkgb+2k4o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81181

Don't know why I never noticed this before. Let me know if it's been
mentioned. Dumbledore was the barman in the Hog's Head during that
first DA meeting:

"The barman sidled toward them out of a back room. He was a
grumpy-looking old man with a great deal of long gray hair and beard.
He was tall and thin and looked vaguely familiar to Harry."

A crowd of Hogwarts students entered. "The barman had frozen in the
act of wiping out a glass with a rag...Possibly he had never seen his
pub so full."

"The whole group seemed to have held its breath while Harry spoke. 
Harry had the impression that even the barman was listening in."

So, Dumbledore's keeping a closer eye on Harry than I thought!

:: Entropy ::




From elfundeb at comcast.net  Sat Sep 20 13:51:53 2003
From: elfundeb at comcast.net (elfundeb2)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 13:51:53 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Philosophy (WAS:  MAGIC DISHWASHER: Spying Game Philosophy 
In-Reply-To: <bkdpbk+9mm8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkhm1q+896m@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81182

First of all, compliments to Pip for a very thought-provoking post, 
which pulls together a lot of observations that have been made over 
the last year or so and reworks them in light of OOP.  I think she's 
right on about Dumbledore's goals, though I think her observations 
stand on their own independently of MD.

Jen Reese wrote, regarding Pip's suggestion that Dumbledore allowed 
the basilisk attacks to proceed to further his agenda: 

How far is "too far" for Dumbledore to further his agenda? That's the 
part about MD I think I'm misunderstanding. If DD is knowingly 
allowing Muggleborns to be attacked in the hopes of saving future 
generations from the basilisk, is that OK? DD has no assurances that 
the Muggleborns will only be petrified, not killed (if that even 
matters). 

Debbie:  

It does seem odd that he doesn't tell the students how to protect 
themselves from the basilisk, though I think his knowledge that 
there's a basilisk comes partly from performing legilimency on Harry 
(witness the scene in Dumbledore's office after Justin is attacked).  
However, Dumbledore cannot counter the basilisk alone.  Because he is 
not a parselmouth, he can't simply go down to the Chamber of Secrets 
himself.  Harry, as a parselmouth, is the only weapon he has, and 
it's to Dumbledore's credit, I think, that he doesn't use him as 
such.  

Dumbledore really has very little choice but to carry on as is.  If 
he told the students that a basilisk was after the muggleborns, isn't 
it likely that many of them would be terrified enough to pack up and 
leave?  If so, Slytherin would have accomplished his mission of 
ridding the school of muggleborns.  Closing the school would protect 
muggleborn students from attack by the basilisk, but it would not 
protect them from being targeted at some future date by a Voldemort-
controlled regime.  Pureblood wizards probably can secure a magical 
education from elsewhere, but where do the muggleborns go?  (IIRC, 
Draco remarks that Durmstrang doesn't accept muggleborns.)  Closing 
the school would most hurt the same students that the closing would 
be designed to protect.  It would also be a tragedy for the future of 
the WW, because, as Pip pointed out, it's the place where young 
witches and wizards are exposed to Dumbledore's ideals.  

Harry seems to have always understood this.  In PS/SS ch. 16 he tells 
Ron and Hermione, "Don't you understand?  If Snape gets hold of the 
stone, Voldemort's coming back!  There won't be any Hogwarts to get 
expelled from!"  On the other hand, when Riddle takes Ginny into the 
chamber, McGonagall decides to send all the students home, 
saying "This is the end of Hogwarts."  This seems to be a sign of 
weakness (or that she was ESE), and is one of the reasons I was 
surprised to find that McGonagall was in the Order.

Kneasy pointed out:
Yes. I don't believe people are perfectable. It may be possible, with 
a struggle, to change a particular pattern of behaviour, say towards
mudbloods or muggles, but change what is in effect an innate, basic
competitive drive? No, I don't think so. 

Debbie:

Very true, as to adults.  But Dumbledore has taken young 
impressionable minds, and provides a setting where all ? regardless 
of species of origin or disability or unsavory connections ? will be 
exposed to Dumbledore's philosophy.  He doesn't *teach* the 
philosophy, though.  Dumbledore does not believe in pedantry.  He 
gives them an experience, which they can accept or reject.  Again, 
Pip herself quoted Dumbledore, "I have no power to make other men see 
the truth . . . ."  

Jen Reese:

I can understand in SS/PS where Harry speculates, "I think 
{Dumbledore} sort of wanted to give me a chance....I reckon he had a 
pretty good idea we were going to try, and instead of helping us, he 
just taught us enough to help...It's almost like he thought I had a 
right to face Voldemort if I could....." (US, pg. 302) YES! that is 
DD's philosophy at work--Harry and Co. are working on the mystery, 
*by their own choosing* and Dumbledore accepts their choice and tries 
to help.

Debbie:

Yes!  As a leader, Dumbledore uses a laissez-faire approach.  
Dumbledore's dilemma is that his best weapon is Harry, a living human 
being.  He does not manipulate others into doing what he wants them 
to do, and certainly not Harry.  To give Harry all the information at 
the beginning ? or even as soon as he asked ? would be manipulative.  
Because of the nature of the prophecy, it would be the equivalent of 
telling Harry exactly what's expected of him.  It would be an attempt 
to control a weapon that he cannot control.  The best Dumbledore can 
do is to provide Harry with the tools he will need if he chooses to 
take on the role.   As I see it, this is Dumbledore's entire plan:  
to keep Harry alive until he could decide for himself.

In fact, one of the reasons I hated chapter 37, The Lost Prophecy, 
was because I didn't ? and still don't ? see Dumbledore's decision 
not to tell Harry about the prophecy sooner as a mistake.  What 
Dumbledore now sees as a *mistake* was to treat Harry as a human 
being and not as a weapon.

"'Do you see the flaw in my brilliant plan now?  I had fallen into 
the trap I had foreseen, that I had told myself I could avoid, that I 
must avoid. . . . . I cared about you too much,' said Dumbledore 
simply.  `I cared more for your happiness than your knowing the 
truth, more for your peace of mind than my plan, more for your life 
than the lives that might be lost if the plan failed..  In other 
words, I acted exactly as Voldemort expects we fools who love to 
act. . . .What did I care if numbers of nameless and faceless people 
and creatures were slaughtered in the vague future, if in the here 
and now you were alive, and well, and happy?'"

I think Dumbledore overstates his error here; it is the lament of one 
grieving the loss of Sirius.  The DEs were astonished to discover 
that Harry did not know about the prophecy, because they cannot 
conceive that Dumbledore would treat Harry as more than a weapon.  
Were it not for his and Harry's grief, I don't think he would ever 
assert that caring for Harry for himself was a mistake, because 
that's the great divide that separates good from evil.  And only a 
short time later, Dumbledore says this:

"'There is a room in the Department of Mysteries,' interrupted 
Dumbledore, `that is kept locked at all times.  It contains a force 
that is at once more wonderful and more terrible than death, than 
human intelligence, than the forces of nature. . . . it is the power 
held within that room that you possess in such quantities and which 
Voldemort has not at all. . . . It was your heart that saved you."

And isn't it Dumbledore's heart that allowed Harry the freedom to 
grow in the understanding that leads him to make the choices he 
makes?  Dumbledore lets others learn things for themselves because he 
values them as human beings and not as occupiers of particular 
roles.  Harry was no exception.  Dumbledore's refusal to use Harry in 
the way the DEs expected him to may have resulted in Sirius' death, 
but it may have saved Harry, and will save countless others down the 
road if the end result is to vanquish Voldemort in the future.  If 
Dumbledore had simply told Harry at age 11 what he was expected to 
do, Harry might have rebelled.  Why should he sacrifice himself for 
Dumbledore, whose idea of TLC was to leave him with the Dursleys?  
And in OOP, Harry *did* rebel, in large part because he thought 
Dumbledore didn't care about him.

I've never been part of the MD camp, and don't get there after OOP, 
notwithstanding Dumbledore's references to his plan.  See, I think 
Dumbledore's plan was to keep Harry alive until he gained enough 
understanding to choose for himself whether to accept the 
responsibility of being the weapon.  The lie that Pip points out 
(claiming that Dumbledore's Army is his own creation) is made to 
protect Harry at nobody's expense but his own.  And I also think 
Dumbledore has done it exactly right, notwithstanding his own 
protestations to the contrary.

The conflict between our love of humanity and our love for 
individuals has always existed, and being a leader means that 
sometimes very hard choices must be made.  Dumbledore has told Harry 
something he did not want to have to tell him because he cared about 
him.  But if a plan to improve the condition of humanity is not 
combined with a love of those humans as individuals, then people are 
nothing more than weapons.  Dumbledore won't make Harry his weapon; 
Harry must choose that for himself.  To be honest, Harry seems to 
have chosen to be the weapon even without Dumbledore's information.

Debbie

An added aside:  When I first read The Lost Prophecy chapter, I 
couldn't seem to get the song "Easy to be Hard" from the 1960's 
musical Hair (revealing my age, here) out of my head.  Its lyrics are 
very trite compared to Robert Frost, but here's what a member of the 
tribe crusading against social evils says:   "How can people be so 
heartless?  How can people be so cruel?  Especially people who care 
about strangers ? who care about evil and social injustice?  Do you 
only care about the bleeding crowd?  How about a needing friend?"





From june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk  Sat Sep 20 13:54:28 2003
From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 13:54:28 -0000
Subject: Snape's worst memory
In-Reply-To: <bkfhsv+skum@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkhm6k+tf72@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81183

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "feetmadeofclay" 
<feetmadeofclay at y...> wrote:
> --- 

> Golly:  Why should a grown man be embarrassed about crying as a 
young 
> child, while he watched one parent abuse the other. He was uspset 
> about his enviroment and the treatment of his mother. 
> 
>  Who wouldn't be? That is nothing to be embarrassed about. I don't 
> see crying as weakness. Would you think it was still embarrassing 
if 
> he was a girl and not a little boy? 
> 
> Golly

I take issue with the idea that a grown man shouldn't be embarrassed 
in these circumstances.  Perhaps he shouldn't be - but he would be 
is all.  One of the very worst aspects of abuse is that it 
is "shameful" and often "secret".  This is why it goes on unchecked -
 women and children often don't wish to talk  about this - ever.  
The thinking is that if you don't talk about it - you can pretend 
even to yourself it never happened. 

Professor Severus Snape, top hardass teacher at Hogwarts, the Demon 
Potions Master, former Death Eater, possible superspy - crying?  Do 
you think being seen as a small and frightened child or as a 
pathetic supernerd is part of his PR?  

No, people shouldn't be ashamed of this kind of thing - but I am 
sorry to say they are.  That's precisely the kind of thing the 
abuser often depends upon.  And I'm sorry to say, I've been in 
exactly the same situation as Mrs Snape.  I cannot possibly 
exaggerate the horror of being trapped in a domestic situation like 
that.  Ashamed?  Don't make me laugh.  You'd die rather than have 
people know what goes on at home.  You'd do anything to keep up the 
pretence that things are normal at home.  Keeping up outward 
appearances is the only thing that keeps you out of the St Mungo's 
Incurables Ward.  Only difference is, as far as I can tell, she 
stuck it out, I didn't - which is hopefully why my daughter is not 
going to end up a psychological basket case like him.  Small wonder 
Snape's spending his leisure hours blasting flies dead (and I just 
bet he was calling them "Dad" in his head)- if someone had given me 
a wand and magic power at that point in my life... well.

It's often even worse for the child in question because a very 
common outcome of scenes like this is that the child feels in some 
way to blame.  "I am being shouted at - what did I do, I must have 
done something" - or "My mum and dad are arguing again, what did I 
do to upset them?"

I think it is scenes like this and the pensieve scene that are the 
key to why Snape occasionally does lose emotional control so 
totally - inside of him (and probably kept in a very deep place 
indeed) is a child who is still terribly hurt and angry. 
Incidentally, you can add any guilt he may feel at failing to 
protect his mother.  Furthermore, being called such charming 
nicknames as "Snivellus" at school would hardly have helped 
the "inner child Snape" either.  Crying is wrong, emotion is wrong - 
look what happens when emotions run high - best keep them under 
control.  Of course, ultimately emotion will out.  

All of the time, inside him, the little kid must be wondering just 
what he had deserved to get this life. Former Death Eater and 
possible - no, probable murderer, a teacher who is loathed by most 
of his pupils - yes he probably can quote "Let them fear me so long 
as they obey me*" but so what?  We all of us want to be liked and 
loved. He may have lost the only woman he ever loved to a hated 
rival.  He was abused - Harry was abused.  The only difference 
to "inner child Snape" is that there was never anyone to treat him 
specially - but there's Harry getting away with just about 
everything - feted, adored etc.  Somewhere in there, there's a 
howling screaming child.  I don't hold out much hope for a great 
deal of mutual understanding yet.

Poor bloody Snape indeed.

June

*Tiberius Caesar - but spot on for Snape don't you think?




From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Sat Sep 20 14:26:00 2003
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 14:26:00 -0000
Subject: Book 6 prediction - Regulus Black
In-Reply-To: <bkhi9l+l0t6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkho1o+57hk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81184

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Hagrid" <aussie_lol at y...> 
wrote:
 
> 
> If he wasn't killed on LV orders, then:-
> ... Regulus would have been a year or two behind Sirius in 
Hogwarts, 
> and would have known his brother's friends and rivals ... that 
means 
> either Peter Pettigrew killed Regulus, or Severus Snape did.

There were other Death Eaters, who also knew Regulus. Bellatrix knew 
Sirius, she was his cousin, and she was at school together with the 
Marauders, as was her later husband and probably also her brother in 
law (At least according to Sirius in GOF, in the chapter Padfoot 
returns). Lucius is the husband of Regulus' cousin, that means, he 
very probably knew him, too. Not to mention, that every Death Eater 
met him during their meetings. Regulus was a Death Eater, after all 
(before he wanted to step out). That means, he probably was at their 
meetings.

Hickengruendler




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Sat Sep 20 15:15:25 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 15:15:25 -0000
Subject: Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die!
In-Reply-To: <bkfi3f+82vl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkhqud+tdhq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81185

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> wrote:
>>Kneasy:
> > Well, yes. Useful stuff, immortality - superficially at least. If 
> > he gets true immortality he can't lose. He can always wait 
> > everybody else out.
> 
> Sandy:
> But then he's dealing with a whole new set of "everybody else." And 
> Voldemort knows the value of knowing his enemies; 


Kneasy:
True. And that's partly  the point. His  quiet years lulled the WW into
a sense  of false security. Only DD made any effort to keep reminding
people  who didn't want to  be reminded. Wait a few years; will there
be a Dumbledore  equivalent to oppose effectively?


> Sandy:
> I seem to remember that JKR said in an interview that Dumbledore had 
> not worked on the Stone with Flamel in spite of having been his 
> alchemy partner. It's not clear that "those two" had the stone. Canon 
> says it was Flamel's; so Dumbledore had merely provided security. 
> Canon seems to express that Dumbledore is not 600+ years old: 

Kneasy:
Partnership usually  implies a sharing of any results or rewards the
partnership produces or any materiel that has been contributed to
the partnership. It's different to being a  helper, or advisor. So it
comes down to their interpretation of 'partners'. 
No, DD isn't 600 years old. Unless he does a Fawkes and is 'reborn'
into  a new  young body as opposed to 'not dying' like Flamel. 
Interesting philosophical point: is a re-born Fawkes the same Fawkes
that went up  in flames?    

> 
> Sandy:
> Where does canon say that Voldy wants to deny use of the stone to 
> Dumbledore? Voldy says in OoP that there's nothing worse than death, 
> while in PS/SS Dumbledore says proper thinking frames death as an 
> adventure and in OoP that Voldy's belief that there is nothing worse 
> than death is his "greatest weakness."

Kneasy:
It  doesn't. But  you can make a decent argument for him thinking so.
A seriously  evil stop-at-nothing type, looking for immortality. His
implacable enemy has the means to  immortality.  Wouldn't he fear that 
his enemy would use the Stone if it meant victory? Wouldn't  he do
exactly that if positions were reversed? After all, the effects of the 
Stone cannot be permanent, otherwise Flamel *cannot*  die. DD 
would not be doing something totally irrevocable.
To my mind, a thing worse than death is eternal life. What DD
considers it to be I have no idea. Do you?
> 
> Sandy:
> Does Dumbledore "scorn" the MoM post? Or does he leave it to the 
> political animals who are better suited to dealing with the endless 
> posturing and pronouncements constituents seem to expect? 


Kneasy:
Same thing, in my opinion. He doesn't think it is all that important
or influential otherwise he would take it. If it was a position of real
power, he could have built a nice little centre  of influence, weed out
the duds and be ready for The Return. Would anyone object to such
as McGonagall as Headmistress? Seems to be eminently suitable and
would have maintained DDs ethos with little effort. But then, of course,
would the books have been written?


> 
> Sandy:
> I don't think it's a matter of who uses the power "actively" 
> or "passively" (a couple of misnomers, IMO); it's a matter of 
> Voldemort having to trumpet his superiority himself, except in rare 
> instances; 

Kneasy:
Hmm. So the atmosphere of fear engendered in the WW  just at the 
mention of his name is not enough? Voldy is insecure in his evil?
Sorry, can't agree. Voldy might win. He can win - if we can believe
the prophecy. He knows this too. Otherwise why bother?
 

> While the Order of the Phoenix and other members of the Eternal Fans 
> of Albus Dumbledore Society (EFADS) are proud of their connection 
> with Dumbledore; excepting MoM employees who have to keep under the 
> radar until Voldemort is "outed," they are quick and fierce in their 
> expressions of loyalty. They generally show alacrity, even eagerness 
> to follow his instructions to the letter. Is that what you meant 
> by "actively" and "passively"?
>
Kneasy:
Not really.  A bit more general. DD doesn't really  want to interfere in
lives of people unless he absolutely has to. Voldemort  is a commited
interventionist, IMO. He likes giving orders, waving  his wand about.
It's the difference between King Log and King Frog, basically. Except
Log is being forced to act.  
 
> 
> Sandy:
> Dumbledore doesn't want to change human nature: he only wants it to 
> experience an object lesson (former teacher, remember?). If the 
> lesson is on a grand enough scale, the culture learns...aren't hate 
> crimes more severely punished in Germany nowadays than many other 
> places whose populations don't so viscerally recall the consequences?

Kneasy:
Punishment isn't the criteria; occurence is. Germany is no better
than the rest of Europe. Ask the Turkish community.
Maybe in fiction it will work.

> 
> Sandy:
> So you're trying to trade Pip's RW analogy for your RW + IF ("not 
> that he did") example? Why am I still inclined to find Pip's the more 
> convincing, I wonder?
>
Kneasy:
I'm not convinced Pip's anology is real world. A lot of people forget that
ole Adolph derived his support from the unemployed workers in the
late 20s and early 30s. He was *voted* in. His party called themselves 
National Socialists (that's what Nazi is an abbreviation of).The Junkers
thought he was a jumped up little nobody. There was nobody to 
oppose him. Uncomfortable, but true. Where's the analogy to  a coup 
d'etat backed by the so-called elite with everyone else against him that 
we have in the WW?
Explain please.

> 
> Sandy:
> When the Third Reich fell, the "cart carriers" still ate, slept, 
> worked; but those who had Jewish heritage, were of the intelligensia, 
> were gay, or had other targeted attributes they'd been hiding, were 
> able to do all those things without the miasma of fear they moved 
> through under that regime. Not only that, those who had become "cart 
> carriers" in order to duck the Reich's notice could come out of the 
> shadows.
>
Kneasy:
Sorry, can't get the point you're trying to make. Are you saying you 
can have a war without victims?
 

> Sandy:
> If Arthur Weasley is the post-Phoenix/transition government MoM (or 
> equivalent), followed by, perhaps, Lupin (aided by judicious 
> application of the Homorphus charm), who is followed by, say, 
> Hermione, I think there is a very good change of the paradigm shift 
> sticking without Dumbledore there to hold it in place. Although none 
> of those candidates now adhere perfectly to Dumbledore's egalitarian 
> philosophies, by the time the Phoenix's pyre is cold, they likely 
> will. Anyway, if Harry survives, having conquered Voldemort, what 
> exactly do you think the WW will deny *him* for the next, oh, hundred 
> years or so? Harry seems to me to pretty well embody that egalitarian 
> attitude and appreciation of influence as a double-edged sword. And 
> also has a pretty hefty command of "magical power," whose surface 
> hasn't even been scratched yet. A big enough "bang" (liked that, some 
> of you) can cause, not a permanent change, but a shake up of the old 
> order which *can* last long enough for a new paradigm to become the 
> new status quo.
>
Kneasy:
Oh, dear. Don't you think the rest of the WW should be allowed a say?
You seem to be following my lead on the uses and misuses of power.
A managed succession, no  intruders allowed. Not certain I approve.
Merit (which DD has) should be the criterium for leadership. Once  he
goes, the WW should pick some-one else, not hand it on like a crown.
 Showing my cynicism again, don't forget Churchill was thrown out
after all he did to help save the world. Will history repeat iitself?

 
> Sandy:
> I think there may come a melt-down scenario: learn to get along, or 
> magic dies. No canon for this, but there's room for it, since we know 
> so very little about the origins, hows, and whys of magic.


Kneasy:
Much bigger BANG if there's no choice. I rather fancy seeing Malfoy Snr
earning his living as a snotty butler. 







From jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 20 16:09:51 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 16:09:51 -0000
Subject: Shadow Waltz (a filk)
Message-ID: <bkhu4f+9lb4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81186

This is a filk of a song by the same name from the musical
"Forty-Second Street."

It is also the penultimate filk to be done in the filk musical "At 12
Grimmauld Place."  One more and I'll be done!


                       Shadow Waltz 

SCENE:  Forced to break her cover because of Mundungus Fletcher's
dereliction of duty, Arabella Figg explains to Harry that the old
crowd, the Order of the Phoenix, has been watching Harry's every
movement to protect him

ARABELLA FIGG:
Lying by the wall
We can see you sprawl.
Here and there and ev'rywhere,
Stuck to you like glue,
Though you had no clue.
There we were, 
Watching you.

>From the shadows, 
Safety we will bring to you.
We know Death Eaters'll take a swing at you.
Though I'm just a Squib, I know a thing or two
We will linger there,
Let the Foe beware..

In the summer
Let the Dursleys care for you,
While the Order watches ev'rywhere for you.
The old crowd takes its cue,
>From the shadows, we are ever guarding you.
>From the shadows, we are ever guarding you.
>From the shadows,
>From the shadows,
>From the shadows,

>From the shadows
The Dementors came for you..
They cursed Dudley when they tried to aim for you.
Even so, he tried to put the blame on you,
Your aunt was fouler;
She got a Howler.

In the summer,
There's an awful lot to do 
Some of us already fought for you.
And though you never knew,
>From the shadows, we will ever guard-
>From the shadows, we will ever guard-
>From the shadows, we are ever guarding you.

 
In the autumn,
We will all be leaving here,
Fear not, Harry.  Seeing is believing, here.
One and all, we'll be true,
>From the shadows, we are ever guarding you, hear?
>From the shadows, we are ever guarding you.

-Haggridd




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Sat Sep 20 16:37:40 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 16:37:40 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Philosophy (WAS:  MAGIC DISHWASHER: Spying Game Philosophy
In-Reply-To: <bkhm1q+896m@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkhvok+38gv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81187

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "elfundeb2" <elfundeb at c...> 
wrote:
> <<snipped large segment>>
> In fact, one of the reasons I hated chapter 37, The Lost Prophecy, 
> was because I didn't ? and still don't ? see Dumbledore's decision 
> not to tell Harry about the prophecy sooner as a mistake.  What 
> Dumbledore now sees as a *mistake* was to treat Harry as a human 
> being and not as a weapon.
> <snipped canon quote>
> I think Dumbledore overstates his error here; it is the lament of 
one 
> grieving the loss of Sirius.  The DEs were astonished to discover 
> that Harry did not know about the prophecy, because they cannot 
> conceive that Dumbledore would treat Harry as more than a weapon.  
> Were it not for his and Harry's grief, I don't think he would ever 
> assert that caring for Harry for himself was a mistake, because 
> that's the great divide that separates good from evil.  


Jen:

All I can say is: Amazing...In a few short paragraphs, you've 
explained something that's been bothering me since reading OOTP--how 
to reconcile the Dumbledore who believes "our choices make us who we 
are" with the Dumbledore in OOTP who appears to *orchestrate* Harry's 
life from the moment the prophecy was made. That seemed completely 
contradictory to me: How can Dumbledore buy into this prophecy, a 
form of predestination, when he clearly states in GOF, "it matters 
not what someone is born, but what they grow to be!" 
 
I've always believed so fully in Dumbledore's wisdom and goodness, 
that it never occurred to me he could be wrong when he tells Harry 
about the "mistake" he made! But Dumbledore's grief over Sirius, 
(combined with his inability to protect Harry in OOTP), is making DD 
second-guess ALL his choices re: Harry--talk about a person who 
carries immense loads....sounds like a Phoenix, almost...

Then I had another "aha!" moment reading your next quote:

Debbie:

> I've never been part of the MD camp, and don't get there after OOP, 
> notwithstanding Dumbledore's references to his plan.  See, I think 
> Dumbledore's plan was to keep Harry alive until he gained enough 
> understanding to choose for himself whether to accept the 
> responsibility of being the weapon. <snip>  

>But if a plan to improve the condition of humanity is not combined 
>with a love of those humans as individuals, then people are nothing 
>more than weapons.  Dumbledore won't make Harry his weapon; Harry 
>must choose that for himself.  To be honest, Harry seems to have 
>chosen to be the weapon even without Dumbledore's information.

Jen:

So, instead of raising Harry as the "weapon", Dumbledore has tried to 
protect Harry, given the many constraints of the situation. This idea 
also helps me understand on a deeper level some of the choices 
Dumbledore made early on. For example, we know Petunia's blood 
protects Harry physically, but why would DD sacrifice Harry's mental 
and emotional well-being by leaving him with the Dursley's? Before 
today, I thought, "well that's the best DD could do and the blood 
protection was more important. Harry turned out alright, didn't he?"  
That didn't satisfy me, though!

Now I see Dumbledore *was* protecting Harry psychologically as well. 
Dumbledore knows if Harry stays in the WW he will be "Famous before 
he can walk and talk! Famous for something he can't remember! Can't 
you see how much  better off he'll be, growing up away from all that 
until he's ready to take it?" (SS, p. 13).

"It" in this case does refer to fame, but given the knowledge 
Dumbledore has of the prophecy, "It" also refers to Harry being 
surrounded by the knowledge of why he was marked, asking questions 
before he's ready for the answers, and etc.  He would not be asking 
Dumbledore at 11, "why was Voldemort trying to kill *me*?, but rather 
at a much younger and more vulnerable age. He would know too much, 
too soon and THAT psychological scar could be great, indeed. So in 
choosing between two poor options, Dumbledore made what he felt was 
the best choice at the time. 


OK, enough of my musings...But thanks, Debbie, for your post. It was 
really beautifully written. You're my list-elf, too, so instead of 
worrying for two months about Dumbledore I could have just *asked* 
your opinion!.....I'll know next time :)  Jen




From ladypensieve at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 20 13:23:49 2003
From: ladypensieve at yahoo.com (Lady Pensieve)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 13:23:49 -0000
Subject: Snape's Worst Memory
In-Reply-To: <bkhct8+rugc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkhkd5+3t7k@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81188

 "sylviablundell2001" wrote:
> It is nowhere mentioned in canon, as far as I can remember, that 
Snape knew that Harry had any knowledge of what a pensieve was, so 
felt quite safe in leaving him alone with it.  When he returns and 
finds that, not only does Harry know exactly what it is, but is 
actually using it and thus witnessing the scene Snape most wants him 
not to witness, he is naturally livid. Is there any authority for 
believing that Snape does know that Harry knows about the Pensieve?
> Sylvia 


Hmmm - you bring up another point...There's nothing in the canon 
suggesting that Snape is aware of Harry's knowledge of a pensieve, 
BUT Dumbledore is the one who lent it to Snape to use while teaching 
Harry....and Dumbledore is very well aware that Harry knows what HIS 
pensieve looks like...Hmmm
Kathy






From summerdazeno1 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 20 14:15:13 2003
From: summerdazeno1 at yahoo.com (summerdazeno1)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 14:15:13 -0000
Subject: Snape's worst memory
In-Reply-To: <bkgbg7+ujid@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkhndh+c4sh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81189


Karen wrote:
<snip> if Snape *removed* this memory and put into the 
> pensieve, why was he so upset with Harry looking at it? Presumably, 
> by taking it out of his mind (literally?), it helped him to be more 
> objective and less angry with the son of James Potter, therefore 
> better able to teach him one on one. Okay, here's my question once 
> again. IF THE MEMORY WAS NOT IN HIS MIND, BUT IN THE PENSIEVE, WHY 
> WAS HE SO UPSET? Presumably, he wouldn't remember what he put in 
the 
> bowl, or at the very least, it would not make him that angry! I 
> realize it is difficult to figure out how a fictitious magical 
> object works, but the only reasonable explanation for him 
> withdrawing the memories is to *not* remember them. 
> 
> Maybe I'm slipping a cog, here, but I don't understand this whole 
> set up. I understood how it worked in Dumbledore's office, but he 
> said he used the pensieve to look at things more objectively. We 
can 
> only assume that Dumbledore gave Snape the pensieve to use to help 
> him be less prejudice working with Harry.
> 
> Karen

Me, Summer:
I don't believe the purpose of the pensieve was to make Snape less 
prejudice against Harry.  I believe its purpose was to keep Harry 
from accidentally discovering things that he didn't "need to know" 
(according to Dumbledore and the Order). It is entirely possible that 
Snape starting taking the MWPP memory out only after Harry 
accidentally uncovered some of his childhood memories. He then began 
removing the incident to the pensieve for self-protection. 

As far as Snape not remembering the incident while it was in the 
pensieve, I don't know.  I just assumed that it gave the owner a 
third person perspective of the memory, not that it erased it 
completely while in the pensieve.  But as you stated, how can we ever 
expect to completely  understand how a fictional, magical object 
works? ;)

However, I do understand why Sape was so angry.  Even if the pensieve 
did temporarily erase the memory from Snape's mind, he had to enter 
into the memory in order to pull Harry out.  Surely, being physically 
present in a memory would be much more vivid than merely remembering 
it in your head? 

Summer





From hebrideanblack at earthlink.net  Sat Sep 20 17:26:31 2003
From: hebrideanblack at earthlink.net (Wendy)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 17:26:31 -0000
Subject: McGonagall a Muggle? (Was: Did I Miss Something?)
In-Reply-To: <bkh96a+t94d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bki2k7+j1hr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81190

Pip!Squeak wrote:

> I've argued this before, but I think Professor McGonagall is 
muggle > born. That's why she wears muggle clothing in the holidays 
*and* > gets it right. In PS/SS she talks about 'their news', but 
obviously > does recognise that a voice floating out of the 
Dursley's window > might be from the TV/radio. [Chapter 1]


Now me (Wendy):

I've never heard this theory (must have missed it when you discussed 
it before <g>), and I'd like to know how you think it fits with a 
bit of canon that's been bothering me (from the first chapter of the 
first book). When Minerva meets Dumbledore at the Dursleys, during 
their conversation she says:

"'You'd think they'd be a bit more careful, but no -- even the 
Muggles have noticed something's going on. It was on their news.' 
She jerked her head back at the Dursleys' dark living-room 
window. 'I heard it. Flocks of owls...shooting stars...Well, they're
not completely stupid.'"

To me, this reads as distain for Muggles. Perhaps not mean-spirited, 
but it still doesn't seem a very Pro-Muggle attitude. However, what 
it reminds me of more than anything is Arthur (thus far the poster 
guy for Pro-Muggle <g>) and the way he talks about Muggles as if 
they are amusing children who once in a while manage to do something 
clever. No, he doesn't want to kill them off or exclude their 
children from the Wizarding World, but he also doesn't seem to think 
of them with respect, or as equals. We know that he has at least 
spoken to the Grangers, and I assume that he treats them fine, but I 
still don't think his overall attitude is one of acceptance.

I see this comment from McGonagall in much the same way. Whether or 
not she "likes" Muggles, she certainly doesn't respect their 
intelligence.

I see three possibilities here (there may be more, but these are the 
ones that occur to me).

First, this is just the general attitude in the Wizarding World - 
that Muggles are stupid, inferior beings. Well, I think this is the 
general attitude regardless of what else is going on with 
McGonagall. Dumbledore doesn't seem to feel this way about Muggles, 
but Pro-Muggle Arthur does, and McGonagall is not at all shy about 
calling them all stupid, so it's apparently a perfectly acceptable 
sentiment to express in the WW. Ugh.

This comment has also been used as evidence that McGonagall is 
really Ever So Evil. That she is anti-Muggle, and this is just one 
of the places she shows her true colours. Actually, now I'm not sure 
this really is good evidence for Evil!McGonagall (although I still 
think this theory has a chance, even after OoP, and I will probably 
post something about this soon). No, I don't think McGonagall's 
comment can be used as evidence of any particular hatred of Muggles 
that would align her with Voldemort. Instead, it just shows how much 
the WW in general is distainful of Muggles, and she's just 
expressing that here.

Finally (and getting back to your original point), what if 
McGonagall is herself Muggle-born? This comment would seem to argue 
against that (can you imagine Hermione making a comment like this?), 
but I don't think it's impossible. Perhaps Minerva was Muggle-born, 
but for whatever reason has decided to distance herself as much as 
possible from her roots. So, she speaks distainfully of Muggles as 
though to show that she is in no way connected to "them." Reminds me 
a bit of Olympe and her vehement denial of her half-giant parentage. 
Protesteth too much, and all that <g>.

So, to take this a bit further, if McGonagall is a Muggle-born witch 
who has tried to erase all connections to her origins, where does 
that put her in the greater scheme of things? One of the things that 
has always bugged me (and led me to speculate that she is evil), is 
that Dumbledore doesn't seem to trust her or confide in her as much 
as would seem appropriate, considering her position as Deputy 
Headmistress. And yet, he does trust her to guard Barty Crouch Jr at 
the end of GoF (and see how *that* turned out), and now we've found 
that she is a member of the Order. If she is indeed Muggle-born, 
that would give Dumbledore addtional incentive to trust her. Why on 
earth would she turn against Muggles if she was born one? BUT . . . 
if she really is in denial about being Muggle-born, and trying 
desperately to pretend that she wasn't, that might provide some 
incentive for her to join Voldemort. It also makes her even more 
psychologically twisted than I'd ever imagined she could be, but 
hey, that's okay with me. I like twisted, just fine. ;-)

:-)
Wendy





From naama_gat at hotmail.com  Sat Sep 20 17:36:27 2003
From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 17:36:27 -0000
Subject: Reaction to MAGIC DISHWASHER (TBAY INTRO)
In-Reply-To: <bkd8js+92un@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bki36r+3cao@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81191

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bluesqueak" <pipdowns at e...> 
wrote:
> 
> Pip!Squeak:
> There we have a clash of philosophies, because I do not believe in 
> Good and Evil as Yin and Yang. My philosophy is that evil cannot 
> create, only destroy. It is a parasite, a cancer, a destructive 
> force. It takes what good has created and tries to destroy or 
> corrupt it. If good sometimes seems to come out of evil, it is only 
> because good is so powerful that it can repair what evil has done.
> 
> Death is not necessarily evil; it can be a transformation. 
> 
> This is the canonical view of death, incidentally. Sir Nicholas 
> talks about lacking the courage to `go on'. [OOP Ch. 38, p. 759]. 
> Dumbledore talks about death as `the next great adventure' [PS/SS 
> Ch. 17 p.215] Luna is convinced that she'll meet her mother again 
> when she dies [OOP Ch. 38, pp.760-761]
> 
> Making someone choose is not evil. What is evil would be to force 
> them to choose a particular path. Voldemort is evil partly because 
> his philosophy does not allow for choice. Follow him or die. 
> 
> And yes, if the WW is irredeemably evil, it is better to sacrifice 
> it for the future. That is a decision that has been made before. 
You 
> may well be right that the new society won't be perfect (people 
> being irritatingly inclined to choose `those things which are worst 
> for them'). But a society set up to disapprove of evil, and which 
> believes in actively opposing evil is going to be a lot better for 
> people to live in. The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is 
> for good people to do nothing. [I apologise that I don't know who 
> originally said that]

I don't understand how the WW can be "irredeemably evil". You [Pip] 
described the racism and prejudice rife in the WW; this you see as 
the background, or rather, breeding ground for Voldemort(s). But if 
so, then any and every human society is irredeemably evil - since all 
societies have (varying levels) of ethincism, xenophobia, economic 
exploitation, despotism, oppression of women, oppression of 
minorities, ... sadly, the list is, in its way, infinite.  

Scientific racism did not originate in Germany. It was much more an 
English and American creation. Moreover, practically everybody in the 
Western world took for granted the division of humanity into a few 
major races, reflecting a ladder of evolutionary progress (white 
being, of course, the top rung). Anti-semitism was born of Medieval 
Christianity, and used extensively by secular and religious leaders 
in many countries during many centuries to deflect political unrest. 

You say that "if the WW is irredeemably evil, it is better to 
sacrifice it for the future." But the WW is no more irredeemably evil 
than the examples I gave above. Would it have been better for the 
entire social structure of Britain and the USA to have been 
destroyed - since it was riddled with so much evil? And the current  
Muggle world - does it have no potential for breeding Voldemort(s)? 
And if so, should it be also destroyed? 

The fact that WW is rife with racism does not put it on a par with 
Nazi Germany. It puts it on a par with human societies in general. I 
think that JKR means Voldemort to be seen as the logical outcome of 
the darker aspect of human *nature*, not a product of a certain time 
and culture. I would think a whole lot less of her if the books' 
message would be less universal than that. 


Naama




From erinellii at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 20 18:06:00 2003
From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 18:06:00 -0000
Subject: Harry & Lupin
In-Reply-To: <bkg097+cni5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bki4u8+2kef@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81192

 "greatlit2003"  wrote:
> I think that it was significant that Sirius's last gift to Harry 
was  a joint gift from him and Lupin <snip> Why 
> would JKR make them give the gift together to Harry? To me, it 
> symbolizes that Harry is moving from Sirius to Lupin. 
<snip>
Perhaps Harry will find a better 
> father figure in Lupin, one who is not burdened with insecurities 
> and depression like poor Sirius was. Lupin and Harry also have more 
> in common. <snip> 
> greatlit2003

  
  I find Lupin as a father figure pretty unlikely.  I believe one of 
the major themes of this book was Harry being divested of father 
figures.  James and Dumbledore both let him down, and Sirius is 
killed.  At some point, most adults outgrow their need for a father 
figure.  Harry has had to reach that point a little early, but I 
think that's where he'll stay- relying on himself, and becoming an 
adult, rather than relying on an adult and staying a mental child. 
 
Besides, Lupin has less insecurites and depression than Sirius?  I 
like the man, but gimme a break.  He's a *werewolf*.  He deals with 
them well, but he's always going to have insecurities and anxiety 
that, IMO, are worse than what Sirius had.  

As for why they gave the gift together, well, let me just say that 
between that and Lupin moving in with Sirius, JKR made a lot of 
Remus/Lupin fans very happy, even as they were crying over Sirius's 
demise.

Erin





From erinellii at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 20 18:28:38 2003
From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 18:28:38 -0000
Subject: Snape's worst memory
In-Reply-To: <bkghp5+4h04@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bki68m+6d23@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81193

 "phoenixmum"  wrote:
> Perhaps what enraged Snape is that Harry was prying into Snape's 
> memories; even if at that moment Snape could not remember exactly  
> what he put in the pensieve, Snape must remember that whatever he 
>put  there was something he didn't want Harry to access (either 
because  the iformation was dangerous for Harry to have, or 
humiliating  for  Snape). If people couldn't remember at least that 
they put memories  in the pensieve, than they wouldn't remember to 
get them back out.  (Just as a side note, maybe this would be useful 
for people who want to forget things.)


He might still have known what it was.  If he has looked at it any 
time after he put it in the Pensieve, then he would have them memory 
of looking at it-- much like the memory of watching a movie, rathar 
than actually having the stuff happen to him.  So potentially, all 
three memories could be the SAME memory- the original one and then 
two times Snape viewed it.  Gets confusing, doesn't it?

Though personally, I don't believe putting a memory in the pensieve 
makes you forget it- just makes it impossible for others to access 
and makes it more solid so you can study it.

Erin





From elizabeth1603 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 20 18:32:38 2003
From: elizabeth1603 at yahoo.com (elizabeth1603)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 18:32:38 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore in the Hog's Head
In-Reply-To: <bkhkgb+2k4o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bki6g6+j84q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81194

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "entropymail" 
<entropymail at y...> wrote:
> Don't know why I never noticed this before. Let me know if it's been
> mentioned. Dumbledore was the barman in the Hog's Head during that
> first DA meeting:
> 
>snip 
> :: Entropy ::

Or, maybe he was Dumbledore's brother, Aberforthe.

Elli




From june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk  Sat Sep 20 18:51:39 2003
From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 18:51:39 -0000
Subject: Occlumency/Legilimency as Metaphor
Message-ID: <bki7jr+3cae@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81195

A new idea on the Occlumency/Legilimency thing struck me the other 
night and I've been giving the matter some thought since then.  
Here's what I thunk.

This arose from a situation that will be common to any parents out 
there - the what is your teenager really doing thing.

Okay - here's a rather irritating personal digression but I promise 
the elves that it is relevant to topic.

Here chez nous - we have been getting most of the teenage nonsense - 
with the latest being "experimenting with smoking".  My daughter has 
recently taken up with a new best friend who smokes. So being a 
teenage crowd pleaser she has to try it as well.  Now I don't smoke -
 I did heavily until 7 years ago when I kicked the habit with much 
pain and misery.  So I have no desire to see my daughter become 
hooked on a total waste of time, money and a health disaster.  
Anyway, the latest episode ended with a promise that she would not 
do it again.  

On returning home from work (unexpectedly early) on Tuesday I find a 
bit of a give away - her bedroom window wide open.  This from a kid 
who will have the heating on in July if possible.  So being a sneaky 
mother I crept into the house and sneaked up to her room, knocked 
sharply on the door, walked in without waiting for a reply (I don't 
normally like to behave like the KGB but needs must...).  There on 
the windowsill is a cigarette lighter.*  The upshot was a 
conversation when I pointed out just how easy it was for a 
determined and fairly smart adult to read the average teenage mind.  
Did I feel like Snape?  Actually yes (eeeew!).  

Anyway I got to thinking about this later and found it, in 
retrospect, amusing.  I equally remember my mother being able to 
second guess me in an almost eerie way. 

OK here's the point.  Snape is a parental figure in these books 
whether we like it or not.  OK not a nice cuddly parental figure - 
but a rather scary and strict parental figure.  He's the dad or mum 
who always knows that you are up to something - often before you've 
even started it.  And guess what?  Like your mum or dad at their 
spookiest - he can read your mind.  

So is that an undertext for Occlumency and Legilimency - the scarily 
prescient parent figure who always knows when you've been up to 
something you shouldn't.  I would add to this that Harry goes to 
great efforts to conceal certain memories from him - especially the 
ones about Cho - which are just the kind of things a teenager would 
not want adults to know about either.  

Just a thought.

June

*  Oh and by the way the lighter belonged to a friend - and I 
couldn't smell cigarettes on her breath and short of torture could 
not obtain a confession - the saga therefore continues! 




From fc26det at aol.com  Sat Sep 20 18:56:44 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 18:56:44 -0000
Subject: Snape's Worst Memory
In-Reply-To: <bkhkd5+3t7k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bki7tc+qsuc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81196

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lady Pensieve" 
<ladypensieve at y...> wrote: 
> 
> Hmmm - you bring up another point...There's nothing in the canon 
> suggesting that Snape is aware of Harry's knowledge of a pensieve, 
> BUT Dumbledore is the one who lent it to Snape to use while 
teaching 
> Harry....and Dumbledore is very well aware that Harry knows what 
HIS 
> pensieve looks like...Hmmm
> Kathy


Where does it say in canon that Dumbledore lent Snape the pensieve?  
I always thought Snape may have had his own even though Harry 
*thought* it was Dumbledore's.
Susan




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 20 21:23:01 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 21:23:01 -0000
Subject: Snape's worst memory
In-Reply-To: <3F6C9F6C.31678.1636370@localhost>
Message-ID: <bkigfl+626i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81197

Shaun: <snip>
> In an objective sense, things much worse have happened to me - but 
> that doesn't make them my worst memory.
> 
> What makes a memory bad is complex - and I can easily believe being 
> humiliated in front of your peers as a teen is the worst memory 
> that Snape has. No matter what evil he has done, I can believe it.

This is brilliant, Shaun. In the debate about whether or not Snape's 
worst memory could or would be one of himself hanging in midair 
upside down and helpless before his nemeses with his shabby or grubby 
underwear showing in public, I don't think anyone else has addressed 
this. If our self-esteem is deeply damaged by a humiliating incident, 
regardless of any "logical" analysis of that incident, our subjective 
experience of it could very well make it historically that "worst" 
memory. (Especially if we happen to be someone who has a habit of not 
dealing with old baggage.) The one person none of us can ever escape 
is the *I* inside. (Always assuming one is not a conjoined twin, of 
course. <Sorry>.) And I think you were very brave to share that.

Sandy, whose pirate name is Mad Prudentilla Flint and is somewhat 
alarmed to have yet *another* aspect and also finds it hilarious 
being "Mad Prude" (according to some website which crunches answers 
to a questionnaire then spits out a pirate name--it's probably 
because I said honestly that my favorite color is orange, which makes 
my mouth water...shut up now...ok)




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 20 21:40:37 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 21:40:37 -0000
Subject: Snape's Worst Memory
In-Reply-To: <bki7tc+qsuc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkihgl+amr2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81198

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Potterfanme" <fc26det at a...> 
wrote:
> 
> Where does it say in canon that Dumbledore lent Snape the 
pensieve?  
> I always thought Snape may have had his own even though Harry 
> *thought* it was Dumbledore's.



It sounds like we need a new textbook from JKR dealing with magical 
devices-pensieves, wands, invisibility cloaks, brooms, the Marauder's 
Map, portkeys...  Oh Jo-I bet Comic Relief could use more help!  

Laura, always happy to support the causes (both HP and Comic Relief)




From silverdragon at ezweb.com.au  Sat Sep 20 05:12:29 2003
From: silverdragon at ezweb.com.au (silverdragon at ezweb.com.au)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 15:12:29 +1000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] reaction to MAGIC DISHWASHER
References: <1063995609.102832.32241.m14@yahoogroups.com> <001701c37ef3$36337300$bb516751@f3b7j4>
Message-ID: <000201c37fc0$c4646cb0$7a984cca@Monteith>

No: HPFGUIDX 81199

 Remnant >>Wouldn't Binns have mentioned a
> > procession of Dark Lord wannabes throughout the ages?
>

Ffred> IIRC, there are a number of mentions of individuals in Binns's
lectures who
> may be dark rebels, someone will doubtless correct me on the name but I
> think one of them was Edric the Intelligent or something similar.


And remember, Harry barely _listens_ in History of Magic classes, so perhaps
it was mentioned while he was sleeping/dozing/daydreaming. Hermione probably
would have mentioned it though, but its a thought.

Nox




From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz  Sat Sep 20 02:22:04 2003
From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 14:22:04 +1200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: James Potter = Voldemort
In-Reply-To: <bkfobs+2tb7@eGroups.com>
References: <bkeuhb+20b9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20030920140857.00aa8bd0@pop3.xtra.co.nz>

No: HPFGUIDX 81200


>Toni:
> > A friend of mine told me yesterday that Harry's Dad turns out to be
> > Voldemort himself.  Is that possible?

Amanda:
>God, I hope not.
>
>I don't think it's been discussed in detail, because (I believe)
>someone had speculated Harry/Voldemort kinship somehow, and JKR
>made "that's way too Star Wars" type comments. I am not sure of my
>source or my recollection, but I think that nobody's seriously
>pursued a real theory along these lines for this reason.
>
>Check the interviews on the Lexicon; or maybe someone with more
>mental cohesion or time can point your way.


I will have to go back and read the books in closer detail, there are
lots of pointers pointing in all directions. My first questions to answering
this.  My theories would depend on James Potter, was he pureblood.
However, having LV half blood makes it more difficult.

I also wonder if the same connection with LV/Harry is the same between
Grindeward (sorry spelling) and LV.

Tanya







From grannygoodwitch613 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 20 18:32:52 2003
From: grannygoodwitch613 at yahoo.com (Granny Goodwitch)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 11:32:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: The DD Brothers and The Dementors
Message-ID: <20030920183252.74958.qmail@web20714.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81202

20September2003

Hello Dears,

I'm new to the group, so please forgive me if this subject has been discussed.  But, have been re-reading the series and some things are really jumping out at me now.  It would be nice to hear your reactions.

We all know how Albus DD dislikes the Dementors.  In OOP, he's clearly against their presence at Hogwarts.  At the end of GoF, Albus DD states that the Dememtors would be natural allies of the Dark Lord.  How he knows, we don't really know, but at his rebirth (again in GF) Voldmort states that the Dementors are his natual allies.

Albus DD, earlier in GF, tells Hagrid about his brother, Aberforth his prosecution and subsequent articles in the Daily Prophet because of an inappropiate charm on goats.  He doesn't seem the least embarassed, even somewhat proud that his brother still held his head up high--although it's suspected that Aberforth can't read.  None the less, Albus still uses him as an examplary for Hagrid.

Now what I'm wondering in all this is what's Aberforth REALLY up to?  In OOP, Harry thinks he smells goats when in Hogs Head, where Aberforth works.  So we are led to suspect that something's still going on with goats and charms--why else would a bar smell like goats?  We know that Albus doesn't have a blind faith in the Ministry, so are some of you, like me, beginning to suspect that the DD brothers are working on a plan to find another way to combat the evil forces-ie Dememtors, Death Eaters (Why are the called Death Eaters anyway?  And has it occured to anyone that goats have a reputation for eating anything--could this be a connection?) and of course, Voldemort himself.

If anyone out there has more hints from canon, or some TBAY, let's hear it!

"Granny"









From nyrae22 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 20 20:02:46 2003
From: nyrae22 at yahoo.com (nyrae22)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 20:02:46 -0000
Subject: Tom Riddle
Message-ID: <bkibp6+st0b@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81203

I am a new member so I am sure that this may have been brought up 
before but it has been driving me crazy to see what everyone else 
thinks. Lord Voldemort is Tom Riddle, and Tom Riddle has a muggle for 
a father which means he is not pure blood. How is it that he is the 
heir of Slytherin in CoS? Also, don't Voldemort's supporters want to 
purify by getting rid of all muggle borns? How can someone who is 
muggle born lead that revolt? Does everyone know that Voldemort is 
Tom Riddle and that he is muggle born?

Thanks
Kelley





From delphislash at yahoo.ca  Sat Sep 20 20:09:21 2003
From: delphislash at yahoo.ca (delphislash)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 20:09:21 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore in the Hog's Head
In-Reply-To: <bki6g6+j84q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkic5h+jcqk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81204

I'm of the camp that the barman in the Hog's Head is, in fact, 
Aberforth Dumbledore - isn't there mention of the place smelling of 
goats.  And JKR also mentions that the barman looks at Harry's scar - 
something that by Book 5 is an odd thing to mention, unless the 
barman does in fact know to be on the lookout for Harry.

Just my 2 knuts,
-Delphi





From flesch at 012.net.il  Sat Sep 20 20:49:17 2003
From: flesch at 012.net.il (gamer5255)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 20:49:17 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Philosophy (WAS:  MAGIC DISHWASHER: Spying Game Philosophy
In-Reply-To: <bkhvok+38gv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkiegd+5r06@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81205

<Uber-snip here>
Jen:
> How can Dumbledore buy into this prophecy, a form of 
> predestination, when he clearly states in GOF, "it matters 
> not what someone is born, but what they grow to be!" 


The wording of the prophecy doesn't actually dictate fate. It says 
Harry has the *ability* to vanquish Voldemort, not that he'll do it
('The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord will be born as 
the seventh month dies'). He can, but he's not predestined to. So I 
see no contradiction, but maybe a tactical thought in Dumbledore's 
actions - that because Harry by no means is guaranteed to actually 
kill Voldemort, Dumbledore tried to prevent him from doing so before 
he could. If, at 11, Harry knew he could kill Voldemort, he might've 
run off half-cocked to do so. So maybe Dumbledore's holding back the 
secret has more to do with Harry's self-restraint developement than 
any sentimentality. It's a thought, no?

Potter-gamer






From kkearney at students.miami.edu  Sat Sep 20 22:14:01 2003
From: kkearney at students.miami.edu (corinthum)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 22:14:01 -0000
Subject: Did I Miss Something? (McGonagall)
In-Reply-To: <bkhm7t+3hdd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkijf9+hnfg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81206


> Pip wrote:
> >  she may 
> > have been in her final year at Hogwarts when the previous attacks 
> > happened. If so, she remembers that someone died - she didn't get 
> > the 'accident' version that Diary!Riddle talks about.

And Golly responded:
 
> She couldn't have been there.  She's only been there for 16 years as 
> per OOTP, I believe.

She's been a teacher for 16 years.  But she was also a studwent once,
and based on her age at least part of her time at Hogwarts may have
coincided with Riddle.

-Corinth




From eiffelangel at hotmail.com  Sat Sep 20 18:19:03 2003
From: eiffelangel at hotmail.com (eiffelangel)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 18:19:03 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore as an Animagus (was Re: Dumbledore & Harry's security)
In-Reply-To: <bjsbt0+tai3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bki5mn+dnnf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81207

> Eiffel Angel wrote:
<snip>
> > I can only conclude that Dumbledore 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?

Ffi wrote:
> Great idea - only thing that occurs to me is that Hermione has 
looked up the registered animagi and didn't mention Dumbledore - he 
could be an unofficial one like Rita Skeeter and james, Lupin, sirisu 
and Pettigrew of course...would dumbledore risk that?  Probably...
*snippage* >>>


Yes, that thought occured to me, too. However, as was the case 
when they were trying to find Flamel, they were looking too 
recently. "... [A]nd I went and looked Professor McGonagall up on 
the register, and there have only been seven Animagi this 
century, and Pettigrew's name wasn't on the list--" (POA, pg. 
351). The key words in that quote are *this century*. Dumbledore 
is well over a hundred and twenty years old, I'd say. MWPP all 
became Animagi within the first eighteen years of their life 
(seeing as they were all still at Hogwarts), and I don't doubt that 
DD probably could have achieved this feat even faster than 
them. Even so, I doubt Hermione would have casually 
mentioned Dumbledore's name, seeing as they were extremely 
busy with Sirius Black's explanations in the Shrieking Shack at 
that time. She also probably would not have been surprised to 
see such a powerful wizard's name on the list.

Eiffel Angel *emmy*





From kkearney at students.miami.edu  Sat Sep 20 22:24:32 2003
From: kkearney at students.miami.edu (corinthum)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 22:24:32 -0000
Subject: Tom Riddle
In-Reply-To: <bkibp6+st0b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkik30+902j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81208

Kelley asked:

> Lord Voldemort is Tom Riddle, and Tom Riddle has a muggle for 
> a father which means he is not pure blood. How is it that he is the 
> heir of Slytherin in CoS? 

He can trace his lineage to Slytherin through his mother's side.

> Also, don't Voldemort's supporters want to 
> purify by getting rid of all muggle borns? How can someone who is 
> muggle born lead that revolt?

Riddle needed a scapegoat for the many problems he (and the wizarding
world in general) have faced, and based on his own experiences with
the Muggle world (Muggle father abandoned left his mother, leading to
her death, and abondoned him,he was raised in an orphange that he
apparently hated, etc.) it's not too surprising that he chose Muggles
as the target on which to focus his hate.

The collision of the Muggle and Wizarding worlds, in Riddles own life,
resulted in only pain.  He has transferred this experience to life in
general.

My opinions, of course.

>Does everyone know that Voldemort is 
> Tom Riddle and that he is muggle born?
 
No.  Dumbledore states in CoS that very few people know Voldemort is
the same person as Tom Riddle.  

Also, Bellatrix makes it quite clear during her battle with Harry that
she believes Riddle to be pureblood.  Why would Voldemort alienate all
these followers who are so willing to do his bidding by revealing a
silly little secret like that?

-Corinth




From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Sat Sep 20 22:30:26 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 22:30:26 -0000
Subject: Did I Miss Something? (McGonagall)
In-Reply-To: <bkhm7t+3hdd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkike2+853q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81209


> Pip wrote:
> >  she [McGonagall]may 
> > have been in her final year at Hogwarts when the previous 
> > attacks happened.

<Snip>
> Golly:
> She couldn't have been there.  She's only been there for 16 years 
> as per OOTP, I believe.
> 
Pip!Squeak replies:

McGonagall has been teaching at Hogwarts for '39 years this 
December' [OOP, Ch. 15 p.287]. Before that, she probably went to the 
school as a student; while there's no canon evidence *where* she 
went to school, the oft repeated statement that Hogwarts is the only 
wizarding school for Britain and Ireland makes it likely she was at 
school at Hogwarts.

If she's 70 in GoF, she'd be 68 in CoS, and the first Riddle opening 
of the Chamber of Secrets would have taken place when she was 18, 
and doing her NEWTS.

Incidentally, the female teacher who's been at Hogwarts for 16 years 
is Trelawney. ;-)

Pip!Squeak




From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz  Sat Sep 20 02:07:41 2003
From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 14:07:41 +1200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Phoenix Must Die
In-Reply-To: <bkg7j8+uge0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20030920135121.00aa7400@pop3.xtra.co.nz>

No: HPFGUIDX 81210

Derannimer wrote:
<snip>
> If I might add a point that could fit in here -- and I know it's 
> just an interview, but still -- you know, JKR has said that 
> Christians should be able to guess where the series is going. If 
> the Wizarding World must "lose its life to save it," that is a 
> kind of thematic resurrection, isn't it? The Christian theme of 
> resurrection; and the Phoenix; and the redemption, and subsequent 
> revival, of the WW, all tie rather neatly together thematically, 
> don't they? (If we do end up with some variant on 
> OutlivesHisDeath!Harry, how might that fit in there? Do people 
> have any ideas?)


Hello all

Wow, did she really say that, very interesting.  I have not been on 
this list long but have picked up from other lists a theory that has 
LV and Harry fall through the veil together, that is after Harry lures 
him there.  The suggested outcome being that through sacrifice, Harry 
was able to re emerge.

But sticking to Christian themes, the little I know.  Resurrection, 
well wonder how that will fit into it if true.  Possibly could have 
them all surface for the war, and they way things are going, the extra 
numbers might be needed unless there is a way to prevent anymore factions 
going to LV.  But sticking to this theme.  Ensuring this situation never 
rises again, well, I'm still thinking hard as to how that could be made 
to come about.  Not sure the Christian (bible) outcome of annihilation is 
really workable here.

Still if it is written this way, the next two books will probably have fast 
forward action to tidy all the ends. 

Tanya





From redwoman06 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 20 13:28:15 2003
From: redwoman06 at yahoo.com (redwoman06)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 13:28:15 -0000
Subject: Did I Miss Something?
In-Reply-To: <bkh96a+t94d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkhklf+sfen@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81211


Susan wrote:
> > I am reading COS (my new UK edition) and something doesn't make 
sense to me.  <Snip>  When Harry is in the hospital ward having his 
bones regrown [Ch. 10]and they bring Colin Creevey in, McGonagall 
gets Madam Pomfrey.  When Pomfrey asks what happened, Dumbledore says 
that Minerva found him on the stairs.  A few lines down, McGonagall 
says that she shudders to think...if Albus hadn't been on the way 
downstairs for hot chocolate, who knows what might have....
> > 
> > Ok what did I miss?  If McGonagall found him, what does that 
have to do with Albus getting hot chocolate? <Snip> >>>


Pip!Squeak:
> It may be as simple as Professor McGonagall thinking that whatever 
> had just petrified Colin was going to come back and finish Colin 
> off. <snip>
> However, it might tie in with Minerva McGonagall being a perfectly 
> normal Scottish muggle name when Professor McGonagall was born, 
> and the fact that she wears a muggle coat and dress in OOP.
<snip> 
> So, she *may* have said 'if Albus hadn't been on his way down, the 
> muggle born teacher who'd found him might have been the next victim.
> 
> And she might have been found dead. >>>

That's a great theory but I doesn't explain why Dumbledore said that 
McGonagall found him and then a second later McGonagall saying that 
Dumbledore was downstairs with her?
  Why were they together? It is a bit odd, Hogwarts is a big school, 
and the likelihood of two people meeting up in the same stairs, in 
the middle of the night, with a petrified boy is not very great.
   Were they together? Also, is McGonagall the only one that calls 
Dumbledore by his first name? 

redwoman06




From katiecannon2000 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 20 23:02:04 2003
From: katiecannon2000 at yahoo.com (katiecannon2000)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 23:02:04 -0000
Subject: SS/PS "third brother" - never mind!
In-Reply-To: <biqlhq+go9s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkim9c+6sej@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81212

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "goodnight_moon5" 
<lmbolland at e...> wrote:
> One reason to study sentence diagramming!!!
> LOL - it was the twin part which caught us, but clearly after 
study, 
> the twin Fred goes through, and the third brother is George.
> 
> Sorry!! Not a flint, just muddled reading.
> 
> Lauri

Lauri:
Please elaborate a little on this--where are you getting this and 
what conclusions are you drawing?

kc--searching for a little guidance in the confusing WW




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 20 23:18:55 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 23:18:55 -0000
Subject: Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die!
In-Reply-To: <bkhqud+tdhq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkin8v+uhvb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81213

Kneasy:
> His [Voldemort's] quiet years lulled the WW into a sense of false 
> security. Only DD made any effort to keep reminding people who 
> didn't want to be reminded. Wait a few years; will there be a 
> Dumbledore equivalent to oppose effectively?

Sandy:
Then why *isn't* Voldemort just sitting back and waiting for victory 
through attrition of any who oppose him? Hold on, I'm completely 
losing track of who is where in this argument...

> Kneasy:
> Partnership usually implies a sharing of any results or rewards the
> partnership produces or any materiel that has been contributed to
> the partnership. It's different to being a helper, or advisor. So it
> comes down to their interpretation of 'partners'. 

Sandy:
I agree. And it had occurred to me. But, again, does a Dumbledore who 
is taking the elixir go gray in fifty years? And I will look for a 
source for where JKR said that Dumbledore had not helped create or 
used the Stone.

Kneasy:
> No, DD isn't 600 years old. Unless he does a Fawkes and is 'reborn'
> into a new young body as opposed to 'not dying' like Flamel. 
> Interesting philosophical point: is a re-born Fawkes the same Fawkes
> that went up in flames?    

Sandy:
So we have a scenario where Flamel was already into elixir/borrowed 
time before Dumbledore became his partner; interesting.

"The same Fawkes" question is similar to the Star Trek question: is 
the person who leaves the transporter pad "there" the same person who 
arrives on another "here"? Except in Fawke's case, he's a hatchling 
again; albeit one who seems to mature pretty fast.

Then Sandy:
> Where does canon say that Voldy wants to deny use of the stone to 
> Dumbledore?

Kneasy:
> It doesn't. But you can make a decent argument for him thinking so.
> A seriously evil stop-at-nothing type, looking for immortality. His
> implacable enemy has the means to immortality.  Wouldn't he fear 
> that his enemy would use the Stone if it meant victory? Wouldn't  
> he do exactly that if positions were reversed?

Sandy:
Voldemort has a pretty good idea that "Wouldn't he do exactly that if 
positions were reversed?" is not a very useful exercise in predicting 
Dumbledore's behavior. In OoP, Dumbledore says, "...I acted exactly 
as Voldemort expects we fools who love to act." Again, I go back to 
Bella's, "The Dark Lord always knows," when she is talking about 
Harry's showing up to rescue Sirius. Voldemort manipulates people by 
understanding them, not by expecting them to behave as he would. So, 
whether he expects Dumbledore to use the Stone/elixir depends not on 
what he knows he, Voldemort, would do, but on what he expects 
Dumbledore thinks or feels about immortality; from all we've seen, 
Dumbledore pities and/or despises Voldemort's grasping after it. Does 
Voldemort know that in CoS? That, to me, has to be the crux of that 
question.

Kneasy:
> To my mind, a thing worse than death is eternal life. What DD
> considers it to be I have no idea. Do you?

Sandy:
Maybe. Dumbledore speaks of Nicolas (someone using the elixir for at 
least temporary immortality) with familiarity but no hint of 
condemnation. He seems to say that he has talked Flamel out of a need 
to produce more and convinced him that the Stone's existence is a 
danger that is greater than Mr. and Mrs. Flamel's continued presence 
on the planet can offset. Flamel agrees to this. Everything points to 
Albus' alchemy partner being a "good guy." I don't think Dumbledore 
thinks eternal life is "a fate worse than death" but I think he may 
think that an overweening terror of death is. What's that line about 
a thousand deaths? Doesn't it say something about a "brave man?" 
What's that quality Gryffindors have? (We've already seen a few of 
Voldemort's thousand deaths, come to think of it.) Further, I can see 
mortality as quite a spanner in the works of Slytherin's overweening 
ambition: a limited time in which to accomplish those ambitions.

Kneasy:
> Same thing, in my opinion. He doesn't think it is all that important
> or influential otherwise he would take it. If it was a position of 
> real power, he could have built a nice little centre of influence, 
> weed out the duds and be ready for The Return. Would anyone object 
> to such as McGonagall as Headmistress? Seems to be eminently 
> suitable and would have maintained DDs ethos with little effort. 

Why is it the same thing? I do not dismiss or despise the paths other 
people take, even if there is some similarity in our goals. I think 
any contempt Dumbledore has for Fudge is personal, not aimed at his 
office. Anyway, if Dumbledore is planning to give the WW "enough rope 
to hang" itself (which fits new MD IMO), he'd avoid the MoM position.

I have to go now, but wanted to post what I had. I will continue 
later. (This is long enough for now already for one post anyway.)

Sandy, who is getting ready to go out in the RW where there are 
*audible* and *visible* (and huggable <g>) HP fans (local monthly SF 
group {DASFA} meeting, yippee!)




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sat Sep 20 23:20:34 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 23:20:34 -0000
Subject: Tom Riddle
In-Reply-To: <bkibp6+st0b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkinc2+vl3c@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81214

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nyrae22" <nyrae22 at y...> wrote:
> I am a new member so I am sure that this may have been brought up 
> before but it has been driving me crazy to see what everyone else 
> thinks. Lord Voldemort is Tom Riddle, and Tom Riddle has a muggle 
for 
> a father which means he is not pure blood. How is it that he is the 
> heir of Slytherin in CoS? Also, don't Voldemort's supporters want 
to 
> purify by getting rid of all muggle borns? How can someone who is 
> muggle born lead that revolt? 



Geoff:
Riddle is not a muggle. He is a half-blood - his mother was a witch.



> Does everyone know that Voldemort is 
> Tom Riddle and that he is muggle born?


Geoff:
Dumbledore - "Very few people knew that Lord Voldemort was once 
called Tom Riddle. I taught him myself, fifty years ago at Hogwarts. 
He disappeared after leaving the school...... travelled far and 
wide.... sank so deeply into the Dark Arts, consorted with the very 
worst of our kind, underwent so many dangerous, magical 
transformations, that when he resurfaced as Lord Voldemort, he was 
barely recognisable. Hardly anyone connected Lord Voldemort with the 
clever, handsome boy who was once Head Boy here."
(COS UK edition p.242)





From fc26det at aol.com  Sat Sep 20 23:24:07 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 23:24:07 -0000
Subject: Snape's Worst Memory
In-Reply-To: <bkihgl+amr2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkinin+e6vm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81215

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Potterfanme" <fc26det at a...> 
> wrote:
> > 
> > Where does it say in canon that Dumbledore lent Snape the 
> pensieve?  
> > I always thought Snape may have had his own even though Harry 
> > *thought* it was Dumbledore's.
> 
> 
>Laura replied: 
> It sounds like we need a new textbook from JKR dealing with magical 
> devices-pensieves, wands, invisibility cloaks, brooms, the 
Marauder's 
> Map, portkeys...  Oh Jo-I bet Comic Relief could use more help!  
> 
> Laura, always happy to support the causes (both HP and Comic Relief)


I'm sorry?  I didn't think this was a stupid or funny question.  Just 
wondered so I could read it as I obviously missed it.  I thought that 
was one of the purposes of this group.
Susan







From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com  Sun Sep 21 00:19:24 2003
From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 00:19:24 -0000
Subject: S.P.T. (filk)
Message-ID: <bkiqqc+tge6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81216

S.P.T. (OOP, Chap 34-35)

To the tune of Do Re Mi, from Rodgers and Hammerstein's The Sound of 
Music

Dedicated to Maria

THE SCENE: The Department of Mysteries. Row 97. The Six find no trace 
of SIRIUS, but do find a dusty sphere with the cryptic inscription 
S.P.T. to A.P.W.B.D.

NEVILLE
We came in the very front entrance
So very like Maxwell Smart

LUNA
With the thestrals we reached the Ministry
 
GINNY
On this floor, we lurk through the Mysteries

ALL
Ministry's
Mysteries

RON
Upon this sphere I happen to see
S.P.T. 

ALL
S.P.T.

S.P.T. what could it all

?
 
HARRY (spoken)
Let's see if we can't figure this all out
.

(music)
S - Oh, yes, an SOS
P - The place of which I've dreamed
T - To which we six all came
A - But absent Black now seems
P - This puzzle is unclear
W - What, where and why?
B -  Ron spies a glass ball sphere
That's engraved with "D" Dark Lord's name & mine
..

(HERMIONE) & THE OTHER FOUR
(S)- Oh, yes, an SOS
(P) - The place of which you've dreamed
(T)- To which we six all came
(A) - But absent Black now seems
(P) - This puzzle is unclear
(W) - Was, when and were?
(B) -  Ron spies a glass ball sphere
That's engraved with "D" Dark Lord's



(Suddenly a legion of DEATH EATERS appears, led by LUCIUS MALFOY)

LUCIUS:
S - Oh dear, you're SOL
P - Just as the Dark Lord planned

DOLOHOV & ROOKWOOD
T - trapped here with our cruel gang
A - Direct from Azkaban

BELLATRIX:
P - The widdle Potter wad 
W ? Won't feel well

CHORUS OF DEATH EATERS
B ? If he finds out we're bad
You must bid "D" sphere farewell! 
Now give the sphere to us right now!
Right now!

LUCIUS (spoken):  
Now children, simply hand over the prophecy and no one need get 
hurt.  We'll just let you skip off home. 

(BELLATRIX moves as if to grab for it)

(to BELLATRIX) No! No! If you let it smash. WAIT UNTIL WE'VE GOT THE 
PROPHECY!

HARRY (music) 
What's this `bout a prophecy? 

BELLATRIX (spoken):
You jest, Harry Potter.  

HARRY (music) 
Voldemort wants it badly?  

BELLATRIX: (music)
You dare speak his name to me?

HARRY 
Right down to the silent "T!"
 
LUCIUS (to HARRY, incredulously delighted)
Now I've put it all together

(music)
Dumbledore chose not to share
How you got that scar you bear! 
 
BELLATRIX (spoken):
So he doesn't know anything...

HERMIONE (aside, spoken):
So they put them in spheres, 
One sphere for ev'ry prophecy:

LUCIUS: 
Do not make a sudden move  
Till the sphere has been removed!
 
HARRY (aside, to DA)
When I make a sudden cry  
Smash each shelf that stands nearby.

(THE DA AND the DEs rev up for Battle)

HERMIONE
S - A cry of Stupefy

HARRY
P - Protego, protect me!

DOLOHOV
T - Tarantallegra!

BELLATRIX
A - Accio Prophecy!

HARRY
P - Petrificus, work fast! (spoken) NOW!

(The DA fire their wands at the shelves, creating an avalanche of 
falling glass)

NEVILLE
W ? What's on the floor?

THE SIX
B - Reducto made a blast
So let's now run for "D" doors
.

(THE DA runs for it, inadvertently splitting into two groups)

HARRY, HERMIONE & NEVILLE (looking for the others, they are attacked 
by a DE in the Time Room)
They must have gone the wrong way

(They Stupefy the Death Eater, causing him some chronological havoc)

Death Eating  is child's play!

BABY-HEADED DEATH-EATER (babbling acronyms)
DADA DADA MOM MOM
MOM DADA DADA MOM
DADA DADA MOM MOM
MOM DADA DADA MOM

.

(HERMIONE is rendered unconscious. BELLATRIX begins torturing 
NEVILLE.)

BELLATRIX:
When your friend gets Crucio'd 
That sphere you will soon unload 

(HARRY is about to hand over the sphere when six Members of the 
Order, including Dumbledore, arrive, and begin subduing the Death 
Eaters )

SIRIUS & SHACKLEBOLT
S - We're here the day to save
P - the New Phoenix Order  

TONKS & LUPIN
T - It's Tonks and Lupin too

DUMBLEDORE AND MOODY
A - Albus and Alastor 

ALL OOP (except SIRIUS)
P ? Let's Eaters pulverize 
W - You know with what

(All the DEs are neutralized, save only BELLATRIX, who duels with 
SIRIUS)

B ? Black makes them realize
That "D" case has now been shut. 
And we'll now see Black beat
..

BELLATRIX:
See how the Animagus dies!

(BELLATRIX blasts SIRIUS through the veil)

HARRY (screaming)
No!

(BELLATRIX laughs triumphantly. BLACK-out)

   -	CMC (if you have to die, die to something that sounds 
cheerful)

HARRY POTTER FILKS
http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm 





From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 21 01:04:47 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 01:04:47 -0000
Subject: Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die!
In-Reply-To: <bkin8v+uhvb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkitff+seje@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81217

<a bunch of snips>
 Kneasy:
 He [DD]doesn't think it [Fudge's job] is all that important or 
influential otherwise he would take it. If it was a position of real 
power, he could have built a nice little centre of influence, weed 
out the duds and be ready for The Return. Would anyone object to such 
as McGonagall as Headmistress? Seems to be eminently suitable and 
would have maintained DDs ethos with little effort. 
> 
Sandy:
I think any contempt Dumbledore has for Fudge is personal, not aimed 
at his  office. Anyway, if Dumbledore is planning to give the 
WW "enough rope to hang" itself (which fits new MD IMO), he'd avoid 
the MoM position.

Laura:

Fudge deserves plenty of contempt on a personal level regardless of 
DD's opinion of the Ministry.  *rolls eyes*

When we come into the Potterverse in PS/SS, things have been quiet 
for 11 years, and no one knows where LV is, what kind of condition 
he's in or when he's likely to reappear on the scene.  I very much 
like Pip's theory that DD is at Hogwarts to mold his students in his 
own image.  Given that there's only one school of wizardry in the UK 
and there are no institutions of higher learning, Hogwarts has to be 
a very important and influential place.  If you needed any further 
proof, Lucius sat on the Board of Governors,and he's not going to 
waste his time going to meetings if they don't add to his prestige 
and influence.

DD sits on the Wizengamot, as we know.  Moreover, there is clearly 
ongoing communication between Fudge and DD throughout the books, so 
DD can have his cake and eat it too.  He can wield power when he 
wants to, either directly or via Fudge or his other supporters, and 
oversee the moral/ethical training of upcoming generations of witches 
and wizards at the same time.  This way he can avoid stupid 
bureaucracy, skip the ceremonial ribbon-cuttings and just do what he 
wants to do.  He's a lot less constrained at Hogwarts than he would 
be at the Ministry.

I would suggest that DD doesn't necessarily have contempt for the 
office of Minister, but he doesn't find much to respect in the way 
Fudge is doing the job.  As always with a leadership position, it is 
what the holder makes it.

 




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 21 01:38:12 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 01:38:12 -0000
Subject: DD as spiritual leader? (was:Canon for BADD ANGST) 
In-Reply-To: <bkgd7c+1vpu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkive4+7u47@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81218

<snips>
> Sandy:
> Just who is Dumbledore? And what religion are most wizards? It's 
> pretty obvious they're not pagans; I'm pagan, and they're not...I 
> think. So who is the supreme spiritual authority in the WW? Fudge? 
> No, it's Dumbledore. He knows more about everything than anybody. I 
> have to conclude that if this is the only hope--if the cataclysm, 
the 
> Phoenix pyre is what's left to weigh against NO hope--then yes, the 
> end justifies the means. (And if someone not God has to make the 
> decision, then is that person even more damned than Voldemort? Even 
> if he does it out of love? Dumbledore saves the world by destroying 
> it and is stuck for eternity in Azkaban-beyond-the-veil. (Bangy 
> enough for you bangers?))
> 
>snip> 
 I think the reason we all (me, too) don't want to go with 
manipulating, lying, megalomaniac Dumbledore is that we want, we 
*need* him to be "better" than that. We need him to save the world 
and retain his nobility even if he loses his life. Even if he has to 
sacrifice Harry, or let Harry sacrifice himself. Even without a God 
in the WW, we want to believe that Dumbledore would leave the flood, 
the purge, to Him. <snip>

Laura:

Wow, Sandy.  The admin elves may have to start a theology subgroup!
*smiles*

JKR has carefully avoided any reference to spirituality, spiritual 
practice or organized religion of any brand, at least in my reading 
of the HP books.  Christmas and Easter are entirely secular 
holidays.  There is no moment of prayer, no chapel, no holy book.  So 
I think it's assuming too much to suggest that DD is the spiritual 
head of the WW.  What we know about him is that he is deeply and 
widely respected, that he has fought dark lords and dark magic all 
his life (okay, at least since 1945) and that he believes that non-
magical creatures and magical non-humans deserve as much respect as 
wizards and witches.  But there's no evidence that DD has any 
interest in, or control of, ritual spiritual practices in the WW, if 
any exist, or that the WW looks to him for guidance on all moral 
issues.  So I don't accept your suggestion that DD is the spiritual 
leader of the WW.

If it's DD who saves the world, then the scope of the books, it seems 
to me, is a lot smaller than if there is a group fighting LV.  Sure, 
there's already the Order, but what I mean is that they have to be 
doing the fighting of their own free will, and not because DD has 
insight that no one else can reach.  If the books are ultimately 
about LV vs DD, with Harry as a weapon, or LV vs. God with DD as a 
weapon, then they become a lot less interesting to me.  The struggle 
to create a moral, just world is one that each of us has to wage on a 
daily basis.  We can't leave it to our leaders (religious, political 
or otherwise) to bring about a better world, even if they're people 
of extraordinary moral power and clarity.  We *all* have to do it.  

In the theology to which I belong (Judaism), God has stopped 
intervening directly in human events.  This happened during the time 
of the Torah (the 5 books of Moses, which Christians and others refer 
to as the old testament), but according to our tradition, once those 
events were over, we were on our own.  God wanted us to grow up and 
take responsibility for the taks God had set before us-to perfect the 
world. 

Now I know JKR isn't Jewish, but I think she's showing us a world in 
which humans are ultimately responsible for the state of their 
world.  If they mess it up, they have to fix it-or it doesn't get 
fixed.  The age of floods is over.  The fate of the WW lies in the 
hands of each witch and wizard, and that's what Pip's arguing.  DD 
wants to force the WW to see that the choice, and the power, is 
theirs.  






From kkearney at students.miami.edu  Sun Sep 21 01:42:31 2003
From: kkearney at students.miami.edu (corinthum)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 01:42:31 -0000
Subject: Snape's Worst Memory
In-Reply-To: <bkinin+e6vm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkivm7+4n4s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81219

Susan wrote:
 
> > > Where does it say in canon that Dumbledore lent Snape the 
> > pensieve?  
> > > I always thought Snape may have had his own even though Harry 
> > > *thought* it was Dumbledore's.

And Laura replied:
> > It sounds like we need a new textbook from JKR dealing with magical 
> > devices-pensieves, wands, invisibility cloaks, brooms, the 
> Marauder's 
> > Map, portkeys...  Oh Jo-I bet Comic Relief could use more help!  

Susan again:

> I'm sorry?  I didn't think this was a stupid or funny question.  Just 
> wondered so I could read it as I obviously missed it.  I thought that 
> was one of the purposes of this group.

No, it wasn't funny or stupid at all.  Laura was referring to the
"textbooks" which JKR wrote (proceeds of which went to Comic Relief)
that gave theorizers plenty of extra canon on magical creatures and
Quidditch.  We could really use another book giving extra details on
magic devices.

As to the original question, the quote states "Harry recognized it at
once- Dumbledore's Pensieve." (OoP US p. 529)  You're right, this
could be Harry's mistake, but I think it's about as straightforward as
Rowling can be.  I think it actually belongs to Dubledore.  However,
the number of Penseives in existance throughout the Wizarding World
remains a subject of debate (I personally believe they are extremely
rare; possibly Dumbledore's is the only one).

-Corinth  




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 21 01:54:45 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 01:54:45 -0000
Subject: Snape's Worst Memory
In-Reply-To: <bkinin+e6vm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkj0d5+jr03@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81220

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Potterfanme" <fc26det at a...> 
wrote:
> > > 
> > > Where does it say in canon that Dumbledore lent Snape the 
> > pensieve?  
> > > I always thought Snape may have had his own even though Harry 
> > > *thought* it was Dumbledore's.
> > 
> > 
> >Laura replied: 
> > It sounds like we need a new textbook from JKR dealing with 
magical devices> 
> 
> I'm sorry?  I didn't think this was a stupid or funny question.  
Just 
> wondered so I could read it as I obviously missed it.  I thought 
that 
> was one of the purposes of this group.
> Susan

Laura:

Oh dear, Susan, I'm sorry-I think you misread my reply.  Your 
question was neither stupid nor funny-it was perfectly reasonable.  
There have been lots and lots of questions about how various magical 
devices work, so I though it would be fun if JKR were to write 
another textbook (the first 2 were "Quidditch Through the Ages" 
and "Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, and JKR donated all the 
profits to a British charity called Comic Relief).  

Please accept my sincere apologies. 




From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Sun Sep 21 05:44:54 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 05:44:54 -0000
Subject: Tom Riddle
In-Reply-To: <bkik30+902j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkjdsm+k9as@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81221

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "corinthum" <kkearney at s...> 
wrote:
[ About Voldemort the Half Blood leading an anti "mudblood" 
campaign ]

> it's not too surprising that he chose Muggles
> as the target on which to focus his hate.

Actually the campaign is specifically against "mudbloods" (i.e. 
wizards who have no magical parents), not so much against "half 
bloods" (like Harry or Voldemort himself) or muggles (who are not 
worthy of notice other than as playthings in their view).

> >Does everyone know that Voldemort is 
> > Tom Riddle and that he is muggle born?
>  
> No.  Dumbledore states in CoS that very few people know Voldemort 
is
> the same person as Tom Riddle.  
> 
> Also, Bellatrix makes it quite clear during her battle with Harry 
that
> she believes Riddle to be pureblood.  Why would Voldemort alienate 
all
> these followers who are so willing to do his bidding by revealing a
> silly little secret like that?

Nah, of course Voldemort's DE's know his real name and real 
heritage. He told them all about it in great detail in GoF after his 
resurection.

His followers follow him due to his being the biggest bully on the 
block and conveniently ignore the less savory aspects (from their 
perspective) of his heritage. I imagine they also hope to learn the 
secret of immortality from him.

Salit





From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Sun Sep 21 06:02:46 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 06:02:46 -0000
Subject: Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die!
In-Reply-To: <bkitff+seje@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkjeu6+igm7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81222

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
> <a bunch of snips>
> Fudge deserves plenty of contempt on a personal level regardless 
of 
> DD's opinion of the Ministry.  *rolls eyes*

Fudge is a small man wearing shoes much too big for him, and too 
petty to realize that.

> I very much 
> like Pip's theory that DD is at Hogwarts to mold his students in 
his 
> own image.  Given that there's only one school of wizardry in the 
UK 
> and there are no institutions of higher learning, Hogwarts has to 
be 
> a very important and influential place.

Yes, but I also think that Dumbledore had no desire to rule or deal 
with politics. Also I believe that he wants to be there now to look 
after Harry. While Harry attends Hogwarts, Dumbledore will be there.

> If you needed any further 
> proof, Lucius sat on the Board of Governors,
[deleted]
> Moreover, there is clearly 
> ongoing communication between Fudge and DD throughout the books,

Actually not really. Fudge seems to me the kind of person unable to 
make an independent decision. He starts out doing what Dumbledore 
tells him but then drifts. Already in CoS we see him moving away 
from Dumbledore. I thought it very revealing that when he goes to 
arrest Hagrid in CoS, Malfoy Senior arrives some minutes later and 
says "already here Fudge? good! good!". I think their relationship 
started then and proceeded so that by OoP Fudge is completely 
manipulated by Malfoy, but that it started long before that. I would 
not be surprised to find that in PoA Fudge sent the dementors to 
Hogwarts at Malfoy's behest and that Malfoy conveyed to the 
dementors that they should kill Harry given the chance. After all 
they have tried to do that at least three times (on the train to 
school, during the first Quidditch match and again when Sirius was 
captured).

Salit


> I would suggest that DD doesn't necessarily have contempt for the 
> office of Minister, but he doesn't find much to respect in the way 
> Fudge is doing the job.  As always with a leadership position, it 
is 
> what the holder makes it.

Exactly but I can't see DD willing to continue to live with such an 
incompetent leader during times of crisis. I was surprised that by 
the end of OoP he was not actively working to replace Fudge. Perhaps 
he is waiting for the WW to do that for him, after all the 
California governor is being recalled for misdeeds far more minor 
than Fudge's.

Salit





From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Sep 21 06:48:21 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 06:48:21 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Philosophy (WAS:  MAGIC DISHWASHER: Spying Game Philosophy
In-Reply-To: <bkhvok+38gv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkjhjl+u5es@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81223

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" <stevejjen at e...> wrote:

Jen Reese wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/81187  :

<< how to reconcile the Dumbledore who believes "our choices make us
who we are" with the Dumbledore in OOTP who appears to *orchestrate*
Harry's life from the moment the prophecy was made. That seemed
completely contradictory to me: How can Dumbledore buy into this
prophecy, a form of predestination, when he clearly states in GOF, 
"it matters not what someone is born, but what they grow to be!" >>

The Dumbledore quote (from CoS) did not say that our choices *make* 
us who we are, it said that our choices *show* who we truly are. 
That statement, "show", can go along with either free will or
predestination. (There was a *gorgeous* post explaining that, which I
will quote below.) 

So Dumbledore can talk about choices and still believe in
predestination and prophecies, believe that Harry is predestined to
grow to be the hero who overthrows Voldemort, and do everything he 
can to help that destiny come about -- he can tell himself that his
actions may be part of the predestiny revealed by the prophecy. 

As an aside, I sometimes wonder why people who believe in some form 
of fate or predestination ever bother to struggle so hard: I like to
think that if I believed that the future was already plotted out, 
then I would just goof off and have fun, and whenever anyone got on 
my case about goofing off, I would just tell them that me goofing off 
was obviously destined or else I wouldn't be doing it.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/23598
From:  "Aberforth's Goat" <Aberforths_Goat at Y...> 
Date:  Sat Aug 4, 2001  12:47 pm
Subject:  Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: Calvinism

<< Not so fast! The CoS passage actually has some of the most
"Calvinistic" passages in the canon. In fact, it was that passage 
that got me thinking about this. Let's pull it out for exegesis:
 
*  "Exactly," said Dumbledore, beaming once more. "Which
*  makes you very different from Tom Riddle. It is our choices,
*  Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities."
*  Harry sat motionless in his chair, stunned. "If you want proof,
*  Harry, that you belong in Gryffindor, I suggest you look more
*  closely at this." [....]
*
*  "Only a true Gryffindor could have pulled that out of the hat,
*  Harry."
 
So: Harry's choices *reveal* something--they peel the layers off the
onion--they show us the person he actually is. His true identity, his
soul, his platonic essence. And that person is, fundamentally, a
Gryffindor. He may not even have known it, but there's a white hat in
his soul and when it comes to a crisis, he'll wear it. >>




From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk  Sun Sep 21 06:54:30 2003
From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 06:54:30 -0000
Subject: The missing 15 years? What did DD do in the 60's?
Message-ID: <bkjhv6+2fkh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81224

Hi list, and pardon me if this has come up before,

I think there's an empty space in Dumbledore's CV and would be
interested to hear if someone else has thought about it.

We know that Prof McGonagall has taught Transfiguration for "39 years
this Christmas" which makes her starting year sometime in the fifties
(HPL says 1956). I also think it's not too much of a stretch to assume
that she took over the job after Dumbledore quit.

But the next time we hear about AD at Hogwarts, it's when he becomes
Headmaster. I take Lupin's words in the Shrieking Shack to mean that
AD      
was quite new at the job when Messrs. Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot and
Prongs began their first year in the seventies.

It seems that AD was out of the picture for about fifteen years. But
what did he do during the time? Was he doing research with Nicolas
Flamel? Following Tom Riddle's doings disguised as a white bumblebee?
Playing ten-pin bowling? 

Alshain




From featheringstonehaugh at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 21 06:58:47 2003
From: featheringstonehaugh at yahoo.com (A Featheringstonehaugh)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 23:58:47 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Snape's Other Worst Memory
In-Reply-To: <1063995609.102832.32241.m14@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030921065847.42325.qmail@web60203.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81225

Clio:  YES!  I absolutely agree with your theory that Snape removed the memory of his abuse by James in order to keep it from Harry.  He knew that eventually Harry would be able to break into his thoughts and wanted to prevent Harry from seeing that past event  - either because he wanted to prevent Harry from witnessing his father's behavior or perhaps he merely wanted to protect his own dignity.  We should also consider the possibility that Snape didn't realize that Harry would know about a pensive, so he may have felt safe in using it as he did.  After all, had he (Harry) not "snooped" in DD's office, he probably wouldn't know about pensives, as we've not had any indication that they've been introduced in any of the classes.
 
AF


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk  Sun Sep 21 07:32:36 2003
From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 07:32:36 -0000
Subject: The DD Brothers and The Dementors
In-Reply-To: <20030920183252.74958.qmail@web20714.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bkjk6k+fjmf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81226

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Granny Goodwitch
<grannygoodwitch613 at y...> wrote:

> Now what I'm wondering in all this is what's Aberforth REALLY up to?
 In OOP, Harry thinks he smells goats when in Hogs Head, where
Aberforth works.  So we are led to suspect that something's still
going on with goats and charms--why else would a bar smell like goats?
 We know that Albus doesn't have a blind faith in the Ministry, so are
some of you, like me, beginning to suspect that the DD brothers are
working on a plan to find another way to combat the evil forces-ie
Dememtors, Death Eaters (Why are the called Death Eaters anyway?  And
has it occured to anyone that goats have a reputation for eating
anything--could this be a connection?) and of course, Voldemort himself.
> 
We don't KNOW for sure that the landlord at the Hog's Head is
Aberforth, only that he has a crooked nose, grey hair and looks
vaguely familiar to Harry. (that said, I believe it's Aberforth
myself, and that Albus and he are working on something together, but I
haven't a clue about what. Maybe he's Dumbledore's secret agent in the
more unsavoury parts of the WW and the whole goat scandal was part of
his cover.)

Personally I believe that the task to somehow neutralise the Dementors
is going to Remus Lupin and that it's going to be fairly important
fairly soon. Perhaps one of the main themes of the sixth book.  

My own pet theory about the Death Eaters is that the word is a pun on
'necromancer'. Others have compared them to vultures (search the yahoo
site for Death Eaters and you'll find the discussion)

Alshain, fairly new myself    




From featheringstonehaugh at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 21 07:48:15 2003
From: featheringstonehaugh at yahoo.com (A Featheringstonehaugh)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 00:48:15 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: James Potter = Voldemort 
In-Reply-To: <1064024720.6613.49765.m6@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030921074815.26971.qmail@web60207.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81227


Not only would James = Voldemort be too Star Wars, I think it'd be awfully amateurish. 

Personally, I've long harbored the feeling that Snape is Harry's father. Yes, yes, I know...the physical resemblence between Harry and James, but Snape has black hair too, is thin and who knows, may clean up remarkably well?...Anyway,  Snape and Lily were in love... unbeknownst to all but a very few, but known to DD... (Lily exhibits  a bit of missionary zeal toward the loner Snape and her sympathy takes on a new dimension)... Snape's pureblood family (part of the Tom Riddle family tree?) are against it, ...Harry is conceived around the time Snape leaves the Death Eaters, a betrayal by Snape that enrages Voldemort... The Plan:... to protect Lily and their child, Snape enlists the help of the one person NO ONE would expect to help him - James (who still cares for Lily anyway, so it's a pretty good deal for him) ....Snape goes to ground, James and Lily marry and soon (less than 9 months later) Harry arrives as a Potter and as such, has nothing to fear from Voldemort....but Voldemort
 learns of the deception and goes after Harry both to punish Snape and to dispose of this infant rival to his power....Lily's own family know nothing of this, and so forever blame James for "compromising" their daughter/sister and hold him responsible for her death .... Snape is anguished at the loss of Lily but is determined to keep track of his son, whom he cannot acknowledge... so he goes to Hogwarts to teach, knowing that someday they'll be reunited there.... While he appreciates the ultimate sacrifice made by James, it rankles that someone he so dispised is revered by Harry and that his (Snape's) personal sacrifices and sorrows must remain hidden....His alleged hatred of Harry is a carefully crafted charade that must be mainatined in order to allow him to protect his son.  The End.

Thank you. You may now applaud.

AF

 

 


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From aldhelm at earthlink.net  Sun Sep 21 00:34:42 2003
From: aldhelm at earthlink.net (carin_in_oh)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 00:34:42 -0000
Subject: Snape's Worst Memory
In-Reply-To: <bkinin+e6vm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkirn2+tssc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81228

Laura wrote:
> > It sounds like we need a new textbook from JKR dealing with magical 
> > devices-pensieves, wands, invisibility cloaks, brooms, the 
> Marauder's 
> > Map, portkeys...  Oh Jo-I bet Comic Relief could use more help!  
> > 
> > Laura, always happy to support the causes (both HP and Comic Relief)

And Susan responded: 
> 
> I'm sorry?  I didn't think this was a stupid or funny question.  Just 
> wondered so I could read it as I obviously missed it.  I thought that 
> was one of the purposes of this group.
> Susan

And Carin replies:

I think Laura was referring to the books JKR does to support the UK charity "Comic 
Relief", and not demeaning Susan's post, right?

Back to the Pensieve: I, too, was puzzled when I first read the scene in Snape's 
office in OotP, because I assumed it's the kind of thing of which Snape would have 
his own and it seemed odd that Harry assumed it was Dumbledore's. I don't think 
we have canon to contradict Harry's assumption, do we? If Snape had to borrow one 
from Dumbledore, it must be _really rare_ (to quote Ron on invisibility cloaks). I 
would think a pensieve that's full of memories of two Order members would be a 
very high-security object and I'd be worried about worse people than Harry sticking 
their noses into it. There's definitely something not quite as it appears about 
Dumbledore letting it out of his office.

Carin





From warzog1 at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 21 02:19:36 2003
From: warzog1 at yahoo.com (warzog1)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 02:19:36 -0000
Subject: Time, the reverse spell, James and Lily, Voldemort, wierd...
Message-ID: <bkj1ro+rj8k@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81229

I've had a strange concern about the end of Book 4.
During the "Reverse Spell," when Harry & Voldemort's wands were 
forced to fight.
As the "Shadows" of Voldemort's victims came out of his wand, in 
reverse order, I caught, what I thought was a strange event.
James Potter's "Shadow" came out BEFORE Lily's did.
In ALL of the books, it's been stated that, according to Harry's 
dreams, James yelled for Lily to grab Harry and run, while he 
attacked, presumably, Voldemort.
If James had attacked, and presumably been killed, BEFORE Voldemort 
went on to kill Lily, and try to kill Harry, then why did 
James' "Shadow" come out BEFORE Lily's?
It should've come out AFTER hers, as they were coming out in reverse 
order.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In Book 5, Bellatrix states that to use an Unforgivable Curse, you've 
got to MEAN them, you need to really want to cause pain, to Enjoy it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In Book 5, it states that Lucius Malfoy is 41.
And that Bellatrix, and Molly & Arthur Weasley are a few years older 
than Sirus, James, Lily, Lupin, etc.
And with Harry being 15, figure his parents, and the rest would be in 
their mid-thirties to VERY-early 40's.
And yet, it states that Lucius is Voldemort's most trusted, and 
highest ranking Death Eater.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
BUT...
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In Book 2, Tom Riddle, aka Voldemort, was 16 years old, 50 years ago.
By Book 5, he'd be 69 years old.
So, even given that, as Dumbledore states in Book 5, Voldemort 
studied the Dark Arts, and slowly built his army into thousands, WHY 
aren't ANY of Voldemort's followers in their 60's, or 70's?
Surely, as a member of Slytherin house, he'd have made plenty of 
friends, and acquaintances, who shared is views.
And Surely, his most trusted Death Eaters would be comprised of 
witches and scorcerors in their 60's and 70's.
Especially if he had the THOUSANDs of followers it states in Book 5.
After all, Dumbledore's Order of the Phoenix has ALL age groups, old 
& young.
(And they were being slaughtered, or converted, by Voldemort & his 
Death Eaters!)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In Book 4, Voldemort stated that he could've used Wormtail's body to 
come back, but that it would be hard to get around in a body of 
someone that was known to be dead.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm kinda wondering if maybe James was a previous rebirth of 
Voldemort?
It would explain why his followers were closer to his age.
It would explain why Voldemort's spell didn't work, "He didn't Really 
Mean it," against his own son.
It would explain why the spell "Backfired" against Voldemort, like 
a "Reverse Spell."
It would explain why his "Shadow" came out of Voldemort's wand BEFORE 
Lily's.
-------------------------------------------------------------------





From ladypensieve at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 21 03:19:53 2003
From: ladypensieve at yahoo.com (Lady Pensieve)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 03:19:53 -0000
Subject: Snape's Worst Memory
In-Reply-To: <bki7tc+qsuc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkj5cp+a1fg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81230


>>>--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Potterfanme" 
<fc26det at a...> wrote:Where does it say in canon that Dumbledore lent 
Snape the pensieve? I always thought Snape may have had his own even 
though Harry *thought* it was Dumbledore's.> Susan
___________________

It's in the Occlumency chapter...page 529 in the American Hard Copy

"It was a shadowy room lined with shelves bearing hundreds of glass 
jars in which floated slimy bits of animals and plants, suspended in 
variously colored potions.  In a corner stood the cupboard full of 
ingredients that Snape had once accused Harry ? not without reason ? 
of robbing.  Harry's attention was drawn toward the desk, however, 
where a shallow stone basin engraved with runes and symbols lay in a 
pool of candlelight.  Harry recognized it at once ? Dumbledore's 
Pensieve. Wondering what on earth it was doing here, he jumped when 
Snape's cold voice came out of the corner."

Kathy

____________________





From lauren58 at snet.net  Sun Sep 21 03:49:43 2003
From: lauren58 at snet.net (laureng58)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 03:49:43 -0000
Subject: OOTP: metamorphs, polyjuice & Sirius
Message-ID: <bkj74n+p88k@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81231

I'm a new poster. I'm sorry if this has been brought up before, but 
I did try to search the various postings and couldn't find this 
particular topic. I hope someone has some thoughts about this:

I am currently reading for the third time (the 2nd time out loud to 
my son) and a question has been forming about the ways that wizards 
have of changing their appearances. In the chapter entitled "The 
Advance Guard," Harry witnesses Tonks changing her appearance at 
will and, upon her informing him that she is a Metamorphmagus, he 
asks if it is a skill that can be learned.  

"'Well, you'll have to learn the hard way, I'm afraid,' said 
Tonks. 'Metamorphmagi are really rare, they're born, not made. Most 
wizards need to use a wand or potions to change their appearance...'"

--page 52, US edition.

We already know about Polyjuice Potion. We have witnessed, 
in "Goblet of Fire," how Crouch, Jr. polyjuiced into Moody at his 
present age, with all scars, etc. I assume that this was because the 
hair taken from Moody was taken from him currently. If Junior had a 
ten-year old hair sample, would he transform into Moody as he was 
ten years ago?

That also made me think about Metamorphmagi and Polyjuice. Does 
Tonks have a "real" appearance?  I assume so, because she usually 
looks somewhat similar each time Harry sees her (heart-shaped face, 
short hair, etc.) So, if you pulled out one of Tonks' hairs and 
added it to polyjuice potion, would the drinker turn into Tonks as 
she normally looked, or as she appeared at the moment the hair was 
pulled? For example, if Tonks gave herself the big nose and the pink 
hair, and then pulled a hair sample and added to polyjuice potion, 
would the drinker turn into her replica with pink hair and big nose?

If the answer is "yes," it occurs to me that there was an easy way 
for Sirius to leave 12 Grimmauld Place on occasion: simply have 
Tonks change her appearance to something that wouldn't attract 
attention, pull several hair or fingernail samples, have Snape or 
someone concoct polyjuice potion, and let Sirius get out for an hour 
at a time. Given that the Order includes a renown ex-auror (Moody) 
and two people--Shacklebolt and Tonks--presently employed as aurors, 
I would think that this type of thing would have occurred to one of 
them.

Of course, I could be wrong in my thinking; nothing that JKR has 
said about either metamorphmagi or polyjuice potion would preclude 
her telling us later that this couldn't be done.  But, if I'm right, 
it could suggest that members of the Order either don't "think 
outside the box," don't think that Sirius can be of any real use if 
he is allowed out of 12 Grimmauld Place, or don't entirely trust him.

Anyway, I do think that, if I *am* right in my suspicions about how 
metamorpmagi and poyjuce potion be used together, it would be kind 
of cool.

Lauren





From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Sun Sep 21 10:39:05 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 10:39:05 -0000
Subject: Reaction to MAGIC DISHWASHER (TBAY INTRO)
In-Reply-To: <bki36r+3cao@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkjv49+aech@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81232

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "naamagatus" <naama_gat at h...> wrote:
> snip
> I don't understand how the WW can be "irredeemably evil". You [Pip] 
> described the racism and prejudice rife in the WW; this you see as 
> the background, or rather, breeding ground for Voldemort(s). But if 
> so, then any and every human society is irredeemably evil - 
> snip
> Scientific racism did not originate in Germany. It was much more an 
> English and American creation. Moreover, practically everybody in the 
> Western world took for granted ....Anti-semitism was born of Medieval 
> Christianity, and used extensively by secular and religious leaders 
> in many countries during many centuries to deflect political unrest. 
> snip
> You say that "if the WW is irredeemably evil, it is better to 
> sacrifice it for the future." But the WW is no more irredeemably evil 
> than the examples I gave above. 
> snip
> The fact that WW is rife with racism does not put it on a par with 
> Nazi Germany. It puts it on a par with human societies in general. I 
> think that JKR means Voldemort to be seen as the logical outcome of 
> the darker aspect of human *nature*, not a product of a certain time 
> and culture. I would think a whole lot less of her if the books' 
> message would be less universal than that. 
> 
Good  post; thank you.
Mind you, I  would say that, since it accords with much of my own
prejudices.

This idea that evil = a particular ideology is lazy  thinking.
To  be successful, any would be Supremo, including Voldemort, needs
a suitable social/political climate that has pre-existing vulnerabilities 
that can be exploited. These need to be severe enough for polarisation
to  be evident or easily provoked. Does this apply to the WW?

Pip makes much of racism in the WW. Just  how  widespread is it?
I think we are lead to believe that Slytherin-like attitudes are the 
fount of all that is wrong-thinking in the WW. OK, by extrapolation that 
gives us about 25% or less of the population. Is this enough to damn a 
society? What is the attitude of the press? Do they use weasle-words - 
(while we deplore his methods....) or are they anti? Anti, it seems to me.

IMO it seems that Naama is right. JKR is holding up a mirror to *our*
society, not to the past. Go down the pub, you'll hear  Slytherins 
a-plenty; and they're not all drinking  gin and tonic. We have a
corrupt  political system, Fudges everywhere; we have criminals
that avoid punishment by  doing deals; we have Ministries that
would prefer to dictate than consult; we have 'institutionalised' racism.
How do we differ from the WW? Unsettling thoughts.

The only thing we don't have is Voldemort. 

He is the warning, the bogeyman out there in the darkness, a threat
that could become a reality. To re-quote Burke (lovely man!) "It is 
necessary only for the good to do nothing for evil to triumph."
I'm fascinated to find out how JKR will  resolve her universe and
its problems. I'll be disappointed if it's something  trite and facile,
but HP is not a social engineering exam essay, written for the approval
of the right thinking, so I have hopes. I'll throw in another quote that
might be apposite, William Blake this time, "He who would do  good to
another, must do it in minute  particulars. General good is the plea of
the scoundrel, hypocrite and flatterer."

Though I'd prefer a  big BANG, myself.

Kneasy



 





From sylviablundell at aol.com  Sun Sep 21 11:37:42 2003
From: sylviablundell at aol.com (sylviablundell2001)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 11:37:42 -0000
Subject: Does Snape know?
Message-ID: <bkk2i6+8n6a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81233

Can anyone point me to anywhere in canon where it says that Snape 
knew that Harry would recognise a pensieve and its functions? I ask 
this because, if he did know and still left Harry alone with it, this 
will completely alter my take on Snape's subsequent reaction on 
returning to find Harry messing with his most intimate 
memories.Incidentally, I think it is Snape's own Pensieve. If it is 
DD's and he lent it to Snape knowing Harry would recognise it, that 
opens a whole new can of worms.
Sylvia (who is not fond of worms) 




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sun Sep 21 12:39:59 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 12:39:59 -0000
Subject: Time, the reverse spell, James and Lily, Voldemort, wierd...
In-Reply-To: <bkj1ro+rj8k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkk66v+nrmv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81234

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "warzog1" <warzog1 at y...> wrote:
> I've had a strange concern about the end of Book 4.
> During the "Reverse Spell," when Harry & Voldemort's wands were 
> forced to fight.
> As the "Shadows" of Voldemort's victims came out of his wand, in 
> reverse order, I caught, what I thought was a strange event.
> James Potter's "Shadow" came out BEFORE Lily's did.
> In ALL of the books, it's been stated that, according to Harry's 
> dreams, James yelled for Lily to grab Harry and run, while he 
> attacked, presumably, Voldemort.
> If James had attacked, and presumably been killed, BEFORE Voldemort 
> went on to kill Lily, and try to kill Harry, then why did 
> James' "Shadow" come out BEFORE Lily's?
> It should've come out AFTER hers, as they were coming out in 
reverse 
> order.
> 

Geoff:
This has been covered on a number of occasions in past postings. I 
believe JKR has acknowledged that it was a Flint. It has been 
adjusted in lated editions. My UK edition certainly has Lily emerging 
first followed by James -

"The smoky shadow of a young woman with long hair fell to the ground 
as Bertha had done, straightened up and looked at him... and Harry, 
his arms shaking madly now, looked back into the ghostly face of his 
mother.
'Your father's coming...' she said quietly. 'He wants to see you... 
it will be all right... hold on'"




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Sun Sep 21 12:47:52 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 12:47:52 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Philosophy (WAS:  MAGIC DISHWASHER: Spying Game Philosophy
In-Reply-To: <bkjhjl+u5es@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkk6lo+4bnj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81235

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" 
<catlady at w...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" <stevejjen at e...> 
wrote:
> 
>> The Dumbledore quote (from CoS) did not say that our choices 
*make* 
> us who we are, it said that our choices *show* who we truly are. 
> That statement, "show", can go along with either free will or
> predestination. (There was a *gorgeous* post explaining that, which 
I
> will quote below.) <snipped most, see below>
> 

Jen:

The qoute I used was *definitely* from GOF (p. 708 US version), not 
COS.  Dumbledore is talking to Fudge about his bias toward pure blood 
in "Parting of the Ways" and DD says: "You fail to recognize that it 
matters not what someone is born, but what they grow to be!"  That's 
why I used that perticular quote in regards to the prophecy, because 
it's not Harry's blood in this case, but he was born with "the power 
to vanquish the Dark Lord".  DD's quote tells me that even in Harry's 
case, he (DD) believes who Harry grows to be is the most important 
thing--that choice piece again!

I really liked you post and the one from Aberforth's goat and they 
will help me sysnthesize my thoughts on DD. "gamer" also pointed out 
to me that the prophecy wasn't really predestination since Harry has 
the "power to vanquish" not that fate dictates it...Jen







From maneelyfh at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 21 13:16:01 2003
From: maneelyfh at yahoo.com (maneelyfh)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 13:16:01 -0000
Subject: Tom Riddle
In-Reply-To: <bkjdsm+k9as@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkk8ah+b70g@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81236

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "slgazit" <slgazit at s...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "corinthum" <kkearney at s...> 
> wrote:
> [ About Voldemort the Half Blood leading an anti "mudblood" 
> campaign ]
> 
> > it's not too surprising that he chose Muggles
> > as the target on which to focus his hate.
> 
> Actually the campaign is specifically against "mudbloods" (i.e. 
> wizards who have no magical parents), not so much against "half 
> bloods" (like Harry or Voldemort himself) or muggles (who are not 
> worthy of notice other than as playthings in their view).
> 
> > >Does everyone know that Voldemort is 
> > > Tom Riddle and that he is muggle born?
> >  
> > No.  Dumbledore states in CoS that very few people know Voldemort 
> is
> > the same person as Tom Riddle.  
> > 
> > Also, Bellatrix makes it quite clear during her battle with Harry 
> that
> > she believes Riddle to be pureblood.  Why would Voldemort 
alienate 
> all
> > these followers who are so willing to do his bidding by revealing 
a
> > silly little secret like that?
> 
> Nah, of course Voldemort's DE's know his real name and real 
> heritage. He told them all about it in great detail in GoF after 
his 
> resurection.
> 
> His followers follow him due to his being the biggest bully on the 
> block and conveniently ignore the less savory aspects (from their 
> perspective) of his heritage. I imagine they also hope to learn the 
> secret of immortality from him.
> 
> Salit

You may want to check p. 646 of GOF.  He tells Harry about his muggle-
born father etc., before the DE's come to the graveyard.

Also, this may be LV's downfall...the DEs finding out that he is 
halfblood. Somehow Harry convinces the DEs of LV's true parentage.
Fran




From fc26det at aol.com  Sun Sep 21 13:41:15 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 13:41:15 -0000
Subject: Snape's Worst Memory
In-Reply-To: <bkj0d5+jr03@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkk9pr+ser4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81237

> > I'm sorry?  I didn't think this was a stupid or funny question.  
> Just 
> > wondered so I could read it as I obviously missed it.  I thought 
> that 
> > was one of the purposes of this group.
> > Susan
> 

> Laura:
> 
> Oh dear, Susan, I'm sorry-I think you misread my reply.  Your 
> question was neither stupid nor funny-it was perfectly reasonable.  
> There have been lots and lots of questions about how various 
magical 
> devices work, so I though it would be fun if JKR were to write 
> another textbook (the first 2 were "Quidditch Through the Ages" 
> and "Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, and JKR donated all 
the 
> profits to a British charity called Comic Relief).  
> 
> Please accept my sincere apologies.


Oh my gosh!  I totally missed the boat on this one!  I am so sorry 
for reading your reply the wrong way.  I guess I was so concentrated 
on the question that it didn't register what you were actually saying.
No appology needed Laura, I am the one who read it wrong. 

Susan (blushing to the tips of her toes)




From urghiggi at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 21 13:54:11 2003
From: urghiggi at yahoo.com (urghiggi)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 13:54:11 -0000
Subject: The Phoenix Must Die
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20030920135121.00aa7400@pop3.xtra.co.nz>
Message-ID: <bkkai3+cggt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81238



> Derannimer wrote:
> <snip>
> > If I might add a point that could fit in here -- and I know it's 
> > just an interview, but still -- you know, JKR has said that 
> > Christians should be able to guess where the series is going. If 
> > the Wizarding World must "lose its life to save it," that is a 
> > kind of thematic resurrection, isn't it? The Christian theme of 
> > resurrection; and the Phoenix; and the redemption, and subsequent 
> > revival, of the WW, all tie rather neatly together thematically, 
> > don't they? (If we do end up with some variant on 
> > OutlivesHisDeath!Harry, how might that fit in there? Do people 
> > have any ideas?)
> 
Tanya replied:
> Wow, did she really say that, very interesting.  I have not been on 
> this list long but have picked up from other lists a theory that has 
> LV and Harry fall through the veil together, that is after Harry lures 
> him there.  The suggested outcome being that through sacrifice, Harry 
> was able to re emerge.
> 
Urghiggi says:
What I THINK she said was something along the lines of "I don't want to talk 
too much about my religious beliefs because then it would be too easy for 
people to figure out where the books are going." She did not mention 
Christianity per se, either in re her own beliefs or people's ability to see where 
she's going.

I have read this interview -- I think it was with a Canadian media provider -- 
but I'll be danged if I can find it now. A search on Quick Quotes using terms 
like "religion," "god," and "figure out" do not turn it up. Anybody have a link?

Urghiggi, Chgo




From fc26det at aol.com  Sun Sep 21 14:01:39 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 14:01:39 -0000
Subject: Snape's Worst Memory
In-Reply-To: <bkirn2+tssc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkkb03+skj1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81239

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "carin_in_oh" <aldhelm at e...> 
wrote:
> I think Laura was referring to the books JKR does to support the UK 
charity "Comic 
> Relief", and not demeaning Susan's post, right?

Susan:  Yep, I totally read it wrong....sorry again, Laura....

Carin: 
> Back to the Pensieve: I, too, was puzzled when I first read the 
scene in Snape's 
> office in OotP, because I assumed it's the kind of thing of which 
Snape would have 
> his own and it seemed odd that Harry assumed it was Dumbledore's. I 
don't think 
> we have canon to contradict Harry's assumption, do we? If Snape had 
to borrow one 
> from Dumbledore, it must be _really rare_ (to quote Ron on 
invisibility cloaks). I 
> would think a pensieve that's full of memories of two Order members 
would be a 
> very high-security object and I'd be worried about worse people 
than Harry sticking 
> their noses into it. There's definitely something not quite as it 
appears about 
> Dumbledore letting it out of his office.
> 
> Carin

Susan:

You know though, there are so many pieces of canon that are 
interpreted in many different ways, I am curious as to why this one 
is taken so strongly at face value.  I also think that they are very 
rare but I can see why Snape *would* need his own *if* he uses it 
when he is spying for the Order.  I think this will be one of those 
things that will niggle the back of my mind through the end if JKR 
doesn't clear up how many pensieves there are out there.

Susan--who wonders what would happen if there are two pensieves and 
DD and Snape accidentally put the wrong memories back into their 
brains....








From fc26det at aol.com  Sun Sep 21 14:15:26 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 14:15:26 -0000
Subject: James Potter = Voldemort
In-Reply-To: <20030921074815.26971.qmail@web60207.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bkkbpu+4g4o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81240

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, A Featheringstonehaugh 
<featheringstonehaugh at y...> wrote:
> 
> Not only would James = Voldemort be too Star Wars, I think it'd be 
awfully amateurish. 
> 
> Personally, I've long harbored the feeling that Snape is Harry's 
father. Yes, yes, I know...the physical resemblence between Harry and 
James, but Snape has black hair too, is thin and who knows, may clean 
up remarkably well?...Anyway,  Snape and Lily were in love... 
unbeknownst to all but a very few, but known to DD... (Lily exhibits  
a bit of missionary zeal toward the loner Snape and her sympathy 
takes on a new dimension)... Snape's pureblood family (part of the 
Tom Riddle family tree?) are against it, ...Harry is conceived around 
the time Snape leaves the Death Eaters, a betrayal by Snape that 
enrages Voldemort... The Plan:... to protect Lily and their child, 
Snape enlists the help of the one person NO ONE would expect to help 
him - James (who still cares for Lily anyway, so it's a pretty good 
deal for him) ....Snape goes to ground, James and Lily marry and soon 
(less than 9 months later) Harry arrives as a Potter and as such, has 
nothing to fear from Voldemort....but Voldemort
>  learns of the deception and goes after Harry both to punish Snape 
and to dispose of this infant rival to his power....Lily's own family 
know nothing of this, and so forever blame James for "compromising" 
their daughter/sister and hold him responsible for her death .... 
Snape is anguished at the loss of Lily but is determined to keep 
track of his son, whom he cannot acknowledge... so he goes to 
Hogwarts to teach, knowing that someday they'll be reunited there.... 
While he appreciates the ultimate sacrifice made by James, it rankles 
that someone he so dispised is revered by Harry and that his 
(Snape's) personal sacrifices and sorrows must remain hidden....His 
alleged hatred of Harry is a carefully crafted charade that must be 
mainatined in order to allow him to protect his son.  The End.
> 
> Thank you. You may now applaud.
> 
> AF 


Susan:

Could Snape and James be brothers?  That would explain how Harry 
could look so much like James.  It would also explain Snapes hatred 
of Harry....I would imagine it would irritate someone like Snape to 
have his son look like a brother who treated him so badly.






From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sun Sep 21 14:39:20 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 14:39:20 -0000
Subject: Tom Riddle
In-Reply-To: <bkk8ah+b70g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkkd6o+ch6e@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81241

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "maneelyfh" <maneelyfh at y...> 
wrote:

<snipped>

Fran: 
> You may want to check p. 646 of GOF.  He tells Harry about his 
muggle-
> born father etc., before the DE's come to the graveyard.
> 
> Also, this may be LV's downfall...the DEs finding out that he is 
> halfblood. Somehow Harry convinces the DEs of LV's true parentage.

Geoff:
He also told Harry (as Tom Riddle) in COS (p.231 UK edition) just 
after he plays anagrams with TOM MARVOLO RIDDLE.......




From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com  Sun Sep 21 15:02:09 2003
From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 21 Sep 2003 15:02:09 -0000
Subject: Reminder - Weekly Chat 
Message-ID: <1064156529.27.96604.m19@yahoogroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81242


We would like to remind you of this upcoming event.

Weekly Chat 

Date: Sunday, September 21, 2003 
Time: 11:00AM - 7:00PM CDT (GMT-05:00) 

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 maneelyfh at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 21 15:40:12 2003
From: maneelyfh at yahoo.com (maneelyfh)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 15:40:12 -0000
Subject: Tom Riddle
In-Reply-To: <bkkd6o+ch6e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkkgos+3r9k@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81243

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" 
<gbannister10 at a...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "maneelyfh" <maneelyfh at y...> 
> wrote:
> 
> <snipped>
> 
> Fran: 
> > You may want to check p. 646 of GOF.  He tells Harry about his 
> muggle-
> > born father etc., before the DE's come to the graveyard.
> > 
> > Also, this may be LV's downfall...the DEs finding out that he is 
> > halfblood. Somehow Harry convinces the DEs of LV's true parentage.
> 
> Geoff:
> He also told Harry (as Tom Riddle) in COS (p.231 UK edition) just 
> after he plays anagrams with TOM MARVOLO RIDDLE.......

Me again:
But the point is the DE's do not know, they were not in graveyard at 
the time LV again ( I left out the COS instance because the instance 
in question was the graveyard scene in GOF, told Harry he is half-
blood.  Also Bella was still in Azkaban at the time!  
I have always been curious what the reaction of the DE's would be or 
possibly will be if/when they find out that LV is indeed a halfblood.
Poor Bella!
Fran




From susannahlm at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 21 16:50:23 2003
From: susannahlm at yahoo.com (derannimer)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 16:50:23 -0000
Subject: Source for that quote (WAS: Re: The Phoenix Must Die)
Message-ID: <bkkksf+stab@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81244

Urghiggi wrote:

> What I THINK she said was something along the lines of "I don't want to talk 
> too much about my religious beliefs because then it would be too easy for 
> people to figure out where the books are going." She did not mention 
> Christianity per se, either in re her own beliefs or people's ability to see
> where she's going.

See the quote below. (And JKR's said multiple times, actually, that she is a Christian, 
and she's a member of the Church of Scotland.)
 
> I have read this interview -- I think it was with a Canadian media provider -- 
> but I'll be danged if I can find it now. A search on Quick Quotes using terms 
> like "religion," "god," and "figure out" do not turn it up. Anybody have a link?

No, I don't have a link.

You're right -- the interview *was* given to a Canadian newspaper: the Vancouver 
Sun. An HP friend of mine contacted Professor Terry Mattingly, and he supplied the 
full text of the interview, along with the byline. However, he wasn't able to provide 
the date that the article appeared, and it doesn't appear to be available at the 
Vancouver Sun's website. If anyone likes, I can send them the full text of the interview 
off-list -- that's not illegal, is it? -- but here's the relevant passage.

> Is she a Christian?

> ``Yes, I am,'' she says. ``Which seems to offend the religious right  far worse than 
> if I said I thought there was no God. Every time I've been  asked if I believe in God, 
> I've said yes, because I do, but no one ever really has gone any more deeply into it 
> than that, and I have to say that does suit me, because if I talk too freely about that 
> I think the intelligent reader, whether 10 or 60, will be able to guess what's coming 
> in the books.''




Derannimer




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Sun Sep 21 18:37:11 2003
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 18:37:11 -0000
Subject: TBAY: Re Spying Game Philosophy
Message-ID: <bkkr4n+40jc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81245

(This post refers to Pip!Squeak's post 81010)

TBAY portions in ### for those who like to skip

# # # # #
Pippin stared bewilderedly at the juicy hamburger lying on the 
plate in front of her.  She seemed to be in the Safe House, where 
there was quite a party going on. Oddly, she couldn't remember 
how she 'd got there and she had no idea what she'd been 
doing. The hamburger was very good, though. Taking another 
bite, Pippin listened as  Pip!squeak, whose screen name was 
so confusingly similar to her own,  paused in the middle of a  
long speech to make a bracketed remark. 

"[ See OOP Chapter 27- Dumbledore's direct lie is on page 545 
]" 

At that point, some of the hamburger must have gone down the 
wrong way, because Pippin was suddenly seized by a violent 
coughing fit.

"May I offer you a cough drop?" Pip!Squeak asked, looking rather 
annoyed.

Pippin could not reply. She was finding it very hard, as well as 
somewhat painful, to hold back. When you are a vampire, it is not 
such a good idea to bite your lips.

"Excuse me, did I say something funny?" Pip!Squeak demanded. 

"Well--" said Pippin, getting a hold of herself at last. "It's just
that   the MDDT has completely overlooked the c-" 

Pippin spluttered again. "S-sorry," she went on,  "completely 
overlooked the canon for Agent!Sirius manipulating events in 
Gryffindor Tower!"

Grey, Melody and Pip! all goggled. They could not have been 
more surprised if Pippin had torn the  LIE* (Lupin Is EverSoEvil) 
badge from her cape and announced that she was henceforth 
toeing the PARTY LINE. (Principled Altruistic Righteous Teacher 
Yummy Lupin Is Not Evil )

"What do you mean?" they all asked at once. 


"I mean," said Pippin, "that everything that Dumbledore told 
Fudge on page 545 is either true or can be canon supported.  
Look, I'll show you.

# # # # # #
 Here's a list of everything that Dumbledore 
says on page 545 (Raincoast). And he means every word
 My comments are in brackets.

"Well the game is up."
[True]

 "Would you like a written confession from me, Cornelius, or will 
a statement before these witnesses suffice?"  
[A question. A very important one. From now on, Dumbledore is 
not engaged in casual conversation but regards himself as 
giving a statement. Fudge is now examining a hostile witness, 
and should be on his guard.  ]

"Dumbledore's army, Cornelius. Not Potter's Army. 
*Dumbledore's Army*." 

[True. That's exactly  what the parchment says.]

Fudge asks, "You?"

"That's right." 
[True. He is the Dumbledore referred to on the parchment]

Fudge asks, "You organised this?"

Dumbledore says, "I did."  

[Canon supported. The idea of forming a group to train students 
in magical combat is planted in Hermione's brain by Agent!Sirius  
on page 272.  On pages 329-331 we learn that the students 
were tailed to the Hogs Head and their conversations monitored 
by Agent!Mundungus who reported to Agent!Sirius and 
Agent!Molly.  Agent!Sirius greenlights the mission  (despite 
Agent!Molly's dissenting vote).  Agent!Sirius  says he will "think 
on" a safer place to meet.  Agent!Dobby (Dumbledore's 
employee) shows up on page 342 and recommends the Room 
of Requirement. A room which, as Harry says on 344, 
Dumbledore knows about and previously mentioned to Harry.  
Hermione drops *all* her reservations about a plan 
recommended by Sirius and Dobby once she learns this.  Harry  
may think that Dumbledore is lying, but I doubt Hermione would 
agree. <g>]

Fudge asks "You recruited these students for -- for your army?"

"Tonight was supposed to be the first meeting," said 
Dumbledore nodding. "Merely to see whether they would be 
interested in joining me."

[ Unlike Marietta, Dumbledore has not been asked to testify in 
sign language, so while the nod is canon it may not be 
considered as part of his statement. We must instruct the jury to 
ignore it. Maybe the old man was just tired <g>. Dumbledore 
does not agree that he recruited the students for his army. 
Instead he goes off on a tangent.

What Dumbledore does say is canon supported. Remember 
that there are *two* alleged illegal organizations being 
discussed, both of which, confusingly, are called "Dumbledore's 
Army."  One, which Umbridge discovered through Marietta, is the 
study group "whose aim was to learn curses and spells which 
the Ministry has decided are inappropriate for school age. " Let's 
call that DA1, which has been meeting in the RoR for months. 
This is the group that Dolores set out to catch.

The DA2, the seditious group which Fudge suspects of working 
against  *him*, exists mostly in Fudge's imagination, (and as 
The Order of the Phoenix, but that is not a student group.) 
Dumbledore does confess that there was "supposed" to be a 
meeting of the DA2. And this, I submit, is true.

DA1 had one legal meeting and subsequently met many times 
in violation of educational decree number twentyfour, but at no   
meeting until that night did Dumbledore or his agents attempt to 
recruit it into a conspiracy against Fudge. 

But that night was different.

*Somebody* told Dobby that the House Elves must not warn the 
students that they were about to be caught (p. 535). This is very 
strange. House Elves do not customarily interfere in Hogwarts 
discipline.  Even Dobby does not. Dobby attacked  his former 
master to keep Harry from harm, and yet he did nothing to protect 
Harry from Umbridge. Why would  anyone think it necessary to 
order the House Elves not to intervene? 

 But Agent!Dobby, who is an employee and not a slave bound by 
House Elf magic, disobeys *somebody's* orders, as 
Dumbledore knows he can.   If those orders were given by 
Dumbledore or at his instigation,   then Dumbledore's statement 
is true. There was indeed supposed to be a first meeting 
between one of his agents and the DA1, merely to see if they 
would be interested in joining him...in Dumbledore's office, that 
is,  where they would probably have been expelled. <g> ]

 "I see now that it was a mistake to invite Miss Edgecombe, of 
course."

 [True. Once again, Dumbledore uses the  passive  construction 
to avoid alleging agency.]

Fudge yells, "Then you have been plotting against me!"

"That's right" 
[ Canon supported, see above. Nor does this make a liar out of 
Dumbledore in GoF. He gives Cornelius fair warning that they 
will not be on the same side if Fudge does not work against 
Voldemort. ]

Note:  Spymaster!Dumbledore's life would be so much *easier* 
if he had lied.Once he was sure that Voldemort knew about the 
mindlink, he could have told Harry, "Beware of the Department of 
Mysteries.   There's a prophecy there that Voldemort needs-- to 
find out how to destroy you." Dumbledore wouldn't have been 
revealing any information that Voldemort didn't think he already 
had, and Harry would have been warned. 

# # # # # #

Pippin  piled a few more hamburgers onto her plate and nibbled 
absently on them as Pip!Squeak had a lot more to say. The plate 
was empty of all but the discarded buns when Pip!squeak finally 
finished, with a flourish and a quote from Robert Frost.

"Oh Pip!," Pippin chuckled. "You've done it again. That's not 
Dumbledore you're talking about. It's Ever So Evil Lupin! All this 
time I've been trying to figure out  a  better motivation for him,
and  you've finally come up with something that makes sense.

# # # # # #

In regard to Dumbledore's supposed philosophy I find it very 
easy to believe that somebody might resort to abetting terrorism 
in order to manufacture consent for their political agenda.  

And maybe someone thinks that when system comes down,  
there'll be a fire-breathing chicken in every pot, there'll be no 
need to hate and fear dark creatures any more, and we'll all live 
happily ever after. <g> 

Right.  I just have a hard time imagining Dumbledore, whose 
mistakes are the mistakes of an old man, buying that particular 
load of dubious cauldrons.  Perhaps Lupin believed it once. He 
was young, after all. The naive and the passionate are easy prey. 
Those who seek their heart's desire seldom see things as they 
are.

Young Lupin  did not care if innocent people were scared half to 
death by a werewolf, as long as he and his friends were safe.  
Well, he did care, sort of. But not enough.

 And does older Lupin  care if numbers of faceless and 
nameless people and creatures were slaughtered, as long as in 
the here and now his friends are safe, and in the future there will 
be a brighter day? Or maybe he thinks that  you can sup with the 
devil that's Voldemort, as long as  you bring a long spoon.

 But no spoon is long enough. Peter took James. Now Sirius is 
gone. Harry is threatened. Lupin may have his doubts now. But 
it's far, far too late. And as for the future he dreamed of...

"There are dangers involved of which you can have no idea, any 
of you," Lupin says. What does he know that even Sirius does 
not? 

Is the glowing silvery orb that Lupin fears the prophecy? Or is it 
another prophecy? Maybe JKR was thinking of  this one:

"You who wish for the day of the Lord, why should you want the 
day of the Lord? It shall be darkness, not light! As if a man 
should run from a lion and be attacked by a bear. Or if he got 
indoors, should lean his hand on the wall and be bitten by a 
snake! Surely the day of the Lord shall be not light, but darkness, 
blackest night without a glimmer. " -- Amos 5:18-20

"And none will come after" ?

IMO,  Dumbledore is wise enough or humble enough to know  
he can't get purge the WW of evil by some cataclysmic act.   Even 
if racism could be abolished, won't  other hatreds and 
grievances be born of the fire?  The new system will surely 
contain flaws of its own.  And sooner or later, Voldemort, or 
someone like him , will discover those flaws and exploit them.   
There'll always have to be someone  ready to fight evil. Constant, 
never-ending vigilance!  But it's hardly bleak. Nobody has to fight 
forever. Ghosts aside, sooner or later everyone goes to the next 
great adventure, after all.  

So what *is* Dumbledore trying to do? He and Harry didn't 
entirely destroy the fountain.  Look at what happens to the 
figures.  The hegemonic witch and wizard --shattered. The 
Centaur -- disarmed, yet it takes a protective role. The goblin and 
the house elf--  hand in hand with the chastened and humbled 
leadership of the MOM.

 Dumbledore doesn't think the Ministry's dream of magical 
brotherhood is worthless... he'd just like to see  more 
brotherhood and less dreaming, thank you very much.

The wizarding world will never be perfect. The greedy will still be 
deceived by their desires, whether they be Wizards who long for 
power or Elves who long for subservience. Slytherins will be 
Slytherins and  Hufflepuffs will  be undervalued. Blood will still be 
thicker than water. People will always be more ready to help their 
friends and kindred than they are to help strangers. But 
competing interests can work together peacefully, as the 
founders once did. For a while, there will be peace. And good 
men, with a sigh of relief, may do nothing. **

# # # # # #

 Pippin fed her uneaten buns to the rabbit and threaded her way 
through the crowd to the kitchen of the Safe House, where 
everyone was gathered to admire the shiny new MAGIC 
DISHWASHER. 

Greywolf was proudly wiping non existent fingermarks off the 
immaculate stainless steel surface bristling with all manner of 
can(n)on. 

"Scuse me," said Pippin politely. displaying her juicestained 
dish.  "Where should I put this?" 

# # # # # #

Pippin

*See the Ever-So-Evil Lupin post

 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/39362

 for how he might have done it. But disregard everything I said 
about why. <g> Oh, and the bit about not knowing Pettigrew was 
alive has been revised. Evil!Lupin found out that Peter was alive 
when the picture appeared in the Prophet, same as Sirius. But 
Lupin thought Pettigrew had died at Sirius's hands when 
Scabbers was thought to have been eaten.

** Anybody who would like to quote the  philosopher Edmund 
Burke in refutation of this is advised to consult this web page
http://www.tartarus.org/~martin/essays/burkequote.html
where they will find the quote in its proper form <veg>





From bard7696 at aol.com  Sun Sep 21 18:37:37 2003
From: bard7696 at aol.com (darrin_burnett)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 18:37:37 -0000
Subject: Why Ron Loves Hermione
Message-ID: <bkkr5h+9bu8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81246

Why has Ron fallen in love with Hermione? It is pretty obvious to me 
that he has, though he covers it up in typical teenage boy fashion.

I believe it is the same reason James fell in love with Lily and why 
Snape might have fallen in love with Lily and why Arthur fell for 
Molly and why Hagrid fell for Madame Maxime.

I know of what I speak. I am a single man who has fallen deeply and 
passionately in love in my life.

Ron is a good kid, and I believe he'll grow to be a good man. But he 
is always second best in his own mind, to his brothers, to Harry, 
even to Draco, who is richer than he. Such things matter to Ron.

With Hermione, he is a better man. He wants to be braver. He wants to 
be kinder. He wants to be smarter. He wants to be better.

James was a bully. No way around it. But bullies often have 
inadequacies they are compensating for. I firmly believe James was 
not the same man when he died that he was in that Penseive scene.

And I credit Lily. James wanted to be a better man.

If you believe in Snape loving Lily, perhaps that is why he turned 
against V-Mort.

Arthur needs Molly. Hagrid needs Olympe. Both are flawed, decent men. 
But they dream of being better for the love of their ladies.

When you fall in love, deeply, powerfully in love, you feel all your 
flaws are on display and magnified. You live in fear that you will be 
found out, but you can't help but be honest because you know she will 
instinctively scent dishonestly.

So you pray that she loves you for what you are, and more 
importantly, what she knows you can be. 

And then she does, and you realize that a miracle has happened and 
you don't quite understand why.

That is magic more powerful than any spell.

Darrin
-- Heard any good band names lately?





From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sun Sep 21 20:36:36 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 20:36:36 -0000
Subject: Source for that quote (WAS: Re: The Phoenix Must Die)
In-Reply-To: <bkkksf+stab@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkl24k+57ip@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81247

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "derannimer" <susannahlm at y...> 
wrote:
> Urghiggi wrote:
> 
> > What I THINK she said was something along the lines of "I don't 
want to talk 
> > too much about my religious beliefs because then it would be too 
easy for 
> > people to figure out where the books are going." She did not 
mention 
> > Christianity per se, either in re her own beliefs or people's 
ability to see
> > where she's going.
> 
> See the quote below. (And JKR's said multiple times, actually, that 
she is a Christian, 
> and she's a member of the Church of Scotland.)
>  
> > I have read this interview -- I think it was with a Canadian 
media provider -- 
> > but I'll be danged if I can find it now. A search on Quick Quotes 
using terms 
> > like "religion," "god," and "figure out" do not turn it up. 
Anybody have a link?
> 
> No, I don't have a link.
> 
> You're right -- the interview *was* given to a Canadian newspaper: 
the Vancouver 
> Sun. An HP friend of mine contacted Professor Terry Mattingly, and 
he supplied the 
> full text of the interview, along with the byline. However, he 
wasn't able to provide 
> the date that the article appeared, and it doesn't appear to be 
available at the 
> Vancouver Sun's website. 

Geoff:
Interestingly, I put "religious right" into the group archive search 
and got message 78024 as one of them; this quotes the same data as 
you but gives the Ottawa Sun as source - maybe this is why you 
couldn't track it on the Vancouver Sun site.....




From Ali at zymurgy.org  Sun Sep 21 20:50:34 2003
From: Ali at zymurgy.org (Ali)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 20:50:34 -0000
Subject: Life expectancy in the Potterverse and associated problems
Message-ID: <bkl2uq+6h9s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81248

JKR has told us that wizards have longer life expectancy than 
Muggles: http://www.the-leaky-
cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/2001/0301-comicrelief-staff.htm

This surely gives legitimacy to some of the Pure Blood aversion to 
marrying Muggles, although not for the reasons given. Quite simply, 
if an average wizard lives to 150 (wars, terrorism and general WW 
living notwithstanding), and Muggles live to 75, then that would 
surely lead to many broken hearted Wizards when they're yet to reach 
middle age. It also means that whilst they are still young, by their 
standards, their partners are nearing the end of their lives. As 
different age groups tend to have different outlooks on life and be 
at different stages of the reproductive cycle, this could impose 
huge strains both physically and psychologically on partnerships.

Does a Muggle-born Witch or Wizard have a longer life span merely 
because they are magical, or do they too die earlier? If this is the 
case, what would the life expectancy of a Half blood like Harry be ? 
assuming that they die of old age?

Given that a squib has some magical attributes, do they have a life 
expectancy as long as the average wizard, or lacking in magical 
blood, do they live and die like Muggles? Filch seems to have a long 
history and look to the good old days, so perhaps this is indicative 
of squibs having wizard-like life expectancies?

Perhaps, wizards have a longer life expectancy only because they 
indulge in some kind of potion-taking which has an effect similar to 
the Philosopher's Stone? JKR has told us that wizarding life 
expectancy is longer. She has told us Dumbledore's, McGonagall's and 
Snape's. But from that, we are still left to extrapolate what the 
life expectancy actually is.

I still find it curious that Lucius Malfoy has so much power at the 
age of *only* 41 if many wizards to reach 150. The WW strikes me as 
very traditional, and thus unlikely to look too kindly to *young* 
upstarts like Malfoy, even if they have impeccable Pure-Blood 
credentials. 

Why is McGonagall lucky to have survived the stunners in OoP "at her 
age" (p. 644 OoP UK edition) if she is only half way through her 
life? Surely, she would have been lucky to survive. End of story? If 
a 40 year old in Muggle Britain survived an horrendous accident, 
they would be said to be fortunate, not because of their age, but 
because of the accident. Is this an inconsistency? 

Dumbledore isn't the only very old wizard as Professor Marchbanks 
tested him in his NEWTS, indicating that she is at least a few years 
his senior (p. 627 OoP UK edition).

I suspect that the issue of Life expectancy is yet another potential 
inconsistency in the Potterverse, and one about which there has been 
curiously little discussion.

Ali




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sun Sep 21 20:53:18 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 20:53:18 -0000
Subject: DD as spiritual leader? (was:Canon for BADD ANGST)
In-Reply-To: <bkive4+7u47@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkl33u+liil@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81249

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
> <snips>
> > Sandy:
> > Just who is Dumbledore? And what religion are most wizards? It's 
> > pretty obvious they're not pagans; I'm pagan, and they're not...I 
> > think. So who is the supreme spiritual authority in the WW? 
Fudge? 
> > No, it's Dumbledore. He knows more about everything than anybody. 
I 
> > have to conclude that if this is the only hope--if the cataclysm, 
> the 
> > Phoenix pyre is what's left to weigh against NO hope--then yes, 
the 
> > end justifies the means. (And if someone not God has to make the 
> > decision, then is that person even more damned than Voldemort? 
Even 
> > if he does it out of love? Dumbledore saves the world by 
destroying 
> > it and is stuck for eternity in Azkaban-beyond-the-veil. (Bangy 
> > enough for you bangers?))
> > 
> >snip> 
>  I think the reason we all (me, too) don't want to go with 
> manipulating, lying, megalomaniac Dumbledore is that we want, we 
> *need* him to be "better" than that. We need him to save the world 
> and retain his nobility even if he loses his life. Even if he has 
to 
> sacrifice Harry, or let Harry sacrifice himself. Even without a God 
> in the WW, we want to believe that Dumbledore would leave the 
flood, 
> the purge, to Him. <snip>
> 
> Laura:
> 
> Wow, Sandy.  The admin elves may have to start a theology subgroup!
> *smiles*
> 
> JKR has carefully avoided any reference to spirituality, spiritual 
> practice or organized religion of any brand, at least in my reading 
> of the HP books.  Christmas and Easter are entirely secular 
> holidays.  There is no moment of prayer, no chapel, no holy book.  
So 
> I think it's assuming too much to suggest that DD is the spiritual 
> head of the WW.  What we know about him is that he is deeply and 
> widely respected, that he has fought dark lords and dark magic all 
> his life (okay, at least since 1945) and that he believes that non-
> magical creatures and magical non-humans deserve as much respect as 
> wizards and witches.  But there's no evidence that DD has any 
> interest in, or control of, ritual spiritual practices in the WW, 
if 
> any exist, or that the WW looks to him for guidance on all moral 
> issues.  

<snipped>

Geoff:
Bear in mind that other writers who were Christians - I am thinking 
of JRR Tolkien and CS Lewis - do not have an overt Christian faith 
shown in their books, yet where they are coming from is visible if 
you look carefully. JRRT sets his in a culture in the distant past - 
way pre-Christian - but the underlying themes are there to be 
recognised. It is probably a little more overt in "The Silmarillion" 
where there is talk of Eru (The One) and the creation of the world 
and the fall from grace of Morgoth. CS Lewis again speaks of 
the "Great Emperor over Sea" and the story of Aslan is very much an 
allegory of Christ's coming to earth as God taking on human form.

There are many quotes from the books which echo Christian teaching - 
I shan't bore you by listing them now; it has been done frequently 
and which I often use working with young people in my own BAptist 
background.

I have said in previous posts that I see Harry as a representative of 
everyman on his journey - not a Christ-like figure but one seeking 
the true God. In relation to the Dumbledore/Harry relationship, I am 
reminded of some of the teacher/student pairings which existed with 
the disciples in the early church and are mentioned in the New 
Testament. In particular Paul/Timothy and Peter/Mark come to mind. 
Mark, in his gospel, is certainly believed to be using Peter's 
memories and experiences to write his version.







From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sun Sep 21 21:01:21 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 21:01:21 -0000
Subject: Fawkes and the basilisk
In-Reply-To: <bkl33u+liil@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkl3j1+eme3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81250

I have been reading bits of COS through again in the last couple of 
days and also watching a few scenes in the DVD when an odd thought 
came to me. Perhaps this has been tackled in the dim past, but I 
would be interested to hear other people's views.

How did Fawkes manage to attack the basilisk and blind it without 
looking at the creature's eyes and getting killed as a result?





From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Sep 21 21:14:08 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 21:14:08 -0000
Subject: Fawkes and the basilisk
In-Reply-To: <bkl3j1+eme3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkl4b0+iiil@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81251

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister"
<gbannister10 at a...> wrote:
 
> How did Fawkes manage to attack the basilisk and blind it without 
> looking at the creature's eyes and getting killed as a result?

Closed his eyes and navigated by sound? FB doesn't say that phoenices
have sonar like bats, but it doesn't say they don't.




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sun Sep 21 21:47:02 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 21:47:02 -0000
Subject: Fawkes and the basilisk
In-Reply-To: <bkl4b0+iiil@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkl68m+se8p@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81252

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" 
<catlady at w...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister"
> <gbannister10 at a...> wrote:
>  
> > How did Fawkes manage to attack the basilisk and blind it without 
> > looking at the creature's eyes and getting killed as a result?
> 

Catlady:
> Closed his eyes and navigated by sound? FB doesn't say that 
phoenices
> have sonar like bats, but it doesn't say they don't.

Geoff:
That thought had crossed my mind but to use sonar to navigate in on 
the basilisk's eyes would not be feasible, I think. Bats use sound to 
avoid obstacles of any variety; I don't think it could be used to 
locate a specific target.




From catlady at wicca.net  Sun Sep 21 21:56:50 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 21:56:50 -0000
Subject: Life expectancy in the Potterverse and associated problems
In-Reply-To: <bkl2uq+6h9s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkl6r2+9o62@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81253

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ali" <Ali at z...> wrote:

<< I suspect that the issue of Life expectancy is yet another
potential inconsistency in the Potterverse >>

Yes. Perhaps it is because age is a number, and numbers seem to be
where the most Flints and Inconsistencies arise. Even tho' she *told*
us about wizards living longer than Muggles, the people in the story
*seem* to age like Muggles (except that Bill and Charlie appear a bit
younger than they must be if there really is that long gap between
Charlie and Percy).

And a couple of previous posts, whose authors and numbers I do not
recall, said that all the Famous Witches and Wizards cards, 
supposedly approved by Rowling, giving the birth year and death year
of the person depicted, add up to perfectly normal Muggle life-spans.
Someone said that the longest -lived wizard on those cards lived to 
be 103. Of course, they also said that those cards say that Bertie
Botts invented his beans in the 20th century, so Dumbledore could not
have encountered a vomit flavored one in his youth, unless that is a
clue to Ron having been cast back in time and becoming Dumbledore.

<< Does a Muggle-born Witch or Wizard have a longer life span merely 
because they are magical, or do they too die earlier? >>

I have no canon but I feel certain that the longer lifespan is either
the result of the magic inside, so being Muggle-born would make no
difference, or the result of magical medical treatment being so
superior to Muggle medical treatment, in which case, not only would
being Muggle-born make no difference, but also a Muggle with access 
to magical medical treatment (such as spouse of a witch/wizard) would
be almost as long-lived. In my fanfic, it's the magic inside that 
does the trick, and my characters out-live serial Muggle spouses.
 
<< This surely gives legitimacy to some of the Pure Blood aversion to 
marrying Muggles (snip)  different age groups tend to have different
outlooks on life and be at different stages of the reproductive 
cycle, this could impose huge strains both physically and
psychologically on partnerships. >>

Judging from the RL popularity of Muggle older men marrying Muggle
younger women, the life-span difference would not cause problems with
a witch marries a Muggle man. That's Seamus's parents, and Riddle's 
IF they were married. Are there any canon examples of a wizard
marrying a Muggle woman?

> I still find it curious that Lucius Malfoy has so much power at the 
> age of *only* 41 if many wizards to reach 150. The WW strikes me as 
> very traditional, and thus unlikely to look too kindly to *young* 
> upstarts like Malfoy, even if they have impeccable Pure-Blood 
> credentials. 

I have no canon, but I think Lucius murdered his father (as many
generations back as necessary) to become the Head of the family. 
Being the hereditary head of the family, no matter how young, he is
not an upstart.




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 21 22:16:07 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 22:16:07 -0000
Subject: DD as spiritual leader? (was:Canon for BADD ANGST)
In-Reply-To: <bkl33u+liil@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkl7v7+6ltf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81254

Laura:
> > I think it's assuming too much to suggest that DD is the 
spiritual head of the WW...there's no evidence that DD has any 
> > interest in, or control of, ritual spiritual practices in the WW, 
> if  any exist, or that the WW looks to him for guidance on all 
moral issues.  
> 
> <snipped>
> 
> Geoff:
> Bear in mind that other writers who were Christians - I am thinking 
> of JRR Tolkien and CS Lewis - do not have an overt Christian faith 
> shown in their books, yet where they are coming from is visible if 
> you look carefully. <snip> I have said in previous posts that I see 
Harry as a representative of 
> everyman on his journey - not a Christ-like figure but one seeking 
> the true God. In relation to the Dumbledore/Harry relationship, I 
am 
> reminded of some of the teacher/student pairings which existed with 
> the disciples in the early church and are mentioned in the New 
> Testament. In particular Paul/Timothy and Peter/Mark come to mind. 
> Mark, in his gospel, is certainly believed to be using Peter's 
> memories and experiences to write his version.

Laura again:

But the writer's philoophical stance may not be overtly reflected in 
every action in the book.  Sure, if you read Lewis or Tolkien, their 
beliefs are clear, and for all I know it's the same with JKR (not 
being well versed in Christian theology, I'm happy to defer to those 
with more expertise).  But do you think that DD is supposed to be 
divine?  Or something more than a mere human?  

What I was trying to get at is that JKR seems to be very consciously 
avoiding any overt spiritual framework in the Potterverse.  When 
Sandy suggested that DD is the spiritual leader of the WW, the 
question I had is, how do we know?  What do people do or say to 
indicate that he has that kind of position?  Power he certainly has, 
but I don't see it as the sort of power a spiritual leader would 
have. There doesn't seem to be any kind of coherent ethical system in 
the WW-or am I missing it?  I'm not talking about what we can infer, 
because that's debatable.  I'm talking about any reference to an 
accepted code of moral thought and behavior-that's what seems to be 
missing.  Just because DD may be the most evolved ethicist in the WW 
doesn't mean that he's a "spiritual leader" per se.  




From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Sun Sep 21 22:16:18 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 22:16:18 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Philosophy (WAS:  MAGIC DISHWASHER: Spying Game Philosophy
In-Reply-To: <bkjhjl+u5es@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkl7vi+59tb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81255

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince 
Winston)" <catlady at w...> wrote:
> As an aside, I sometimes wonder why people who believe in some 
form 
> of fate or predestination ever bother to struggle so hard: I like 
to
> think that if I believed that the future was already plotted out, 
> then I would just goof off and have fun, and whenever anyone got 
on 
> my case about goofing off, I would just tell them that me goofing 
off 
> was obviously destined or else I wouldn't be doing it.

I can't answer the general question but wrt Harry Potter, the 
prophecy does not say that he will defeat Voldemort, only that he is 
the (only?) one with the power to do so. So Harry's and Dumbledore's 
struggle is to keep Harry alive long enough to acquire the skills 
needed for the eventual faceoff. There is nothing in there that 
contradicts the issue of choices. Also the prophecy never said that 
the person with the power to defeat Voldemort is evil or good. I 
think Dumbledore's other goal is to nurture Harry so that he stays 
the good person he is and does not turn to the dark side.

Salit





From paulag5777 at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 21 15:34:22 2003
From: paulag5777 at yahoo.com (Paula Gaon)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 08:34:22 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: The DD Brothers and The Dementors
Message-ID: <20030921153422.81154.qmail@web40019.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81256

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Alshain wrote:

My own pet theory about the Death Eaters is that the word is a pun on
'necromancer'. Others have compared them to vultures (search the yahoo
site for Death Eaters and you'll find the discussion)

---Paula---

This makes a lot of sense, Alshain.  Will have to look on the site. The Death Eaters do behave very much like vultures,  circling around waiting to attack.  I'm reminded of the incident ( Book 1, if I'm not mistaken) where Harry witnesses the hooded figure drinking the unicorn's blood.

---Alshain---

Personally I believe that the task to somehow neutralise the Dementors
is going to Remus Lupin and that it's going to be fairly important
fairly soon. Perhaps one of the main themes of the sixth book. 

---Paula---

Why do you think this?  What hints do you find in canon?  Would really be interested to know.

 

Paula







From president0084 at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 21 21:47:10 2003
From: president0084 at yahoo.com (president0084)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 21:47:10 -0000
Subject: Life expectancy in the Potterverse and associated problems
In-Reply-To: <bkl2uq+6h9s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkl68u+a2j6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81257



 
<< Perhaps, wizards have a longer life expectancy only because they 
 indulge in some kind of potion-taking which has an effect similar to 
 the Philosopher's Stone?>>
 
Snip from Ali

Yeah! I think you have answered your own question. The fact that 
Wizards live much longer is that they have better medical system than 
Muggles


People in England live longer than people in Africa is because 
England have hospitals, Doctors Drugs (legal type) iF I remember 
correctly it something around 10,000 people to one doctur in one of 
the Nations of Africa (Congo I think). 

So A Muggle could live to 150 (which is possible) if they had acess 
to Potion and Magic.

Do you think it's right for the WW to keep medical break throughs to 
themselves? I for one don't, brings back the whole lack of respect in 
the WW for muggles.

Someone should really remind them that they WENT into Hiding from the 
Muggle world.

Thanks for reading my 2 cent
Jim





From Robert at shavian.fsnet.co.uk  Sun Sep 21 22:43:02 2003
From: Robert at shavian.fsnet.co.uk (Robert Shaw)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 23:43:02 +0100
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Fawkes and the basilisk
References: <bkl68m+se8p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3d4b01c38091$c9055910$308d87d9@robertft56e9wi>

No: HPFGUIDX 81258

Geoff:
> >
> > > How did Fawkes manage to attack the basilisk and blind it without
> > > looking at the creature's eyes and getting killed as a result?
> >
>
> Catlady:
> > Closed his eyes and navigated by sound?

> Geoff:
> That thought had crossed my mind but to use sonar to navigate in on
> the basilisk's eyes would not be feasible, I think. Bats use sound to
> avoid obstacles of any variety; I don't think it could be used to
> locate a specific target.
>
Bats also use their sonar to catch nocturnal insects, even when
the insects dodge.

However bats need their strange faces to make the sonar work.
Fawkes doesn't have a bat's face.

He might have magical superhearing, but that doesn't really fit
well with the rest of the phoenix.

More likely, I suspect, phoenixes don't die easily. That makes
sense, given their other powers. Fawkes could be immune to
petrification, and most other lethal magics. If he is killed then
setting the corpse on fire may well bring him back to life.

--
Robert





From paulag5777 at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 21 10:18:19 2003
From: paulag5777 at yahoo.com (Paula Gaon)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 03:18:19 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: The DD Brothers and The Dementors
Message-ID: <20030921101819.18273.qmail@web40015.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81259

21/9/03

On 20/9/03

 Granny Goodwitch wrote:

"Now what I'm wondering in all this is what's Aberforth REALLY up to? In OOP, Harry thinks he smells goats when in Hogs Head, where Aberforth works. So we are led to suspect that something's still going on with goats and charms--why else would a bar smell like goats? We know that Albus doesn't have a blind faith in the Ministry, so are some of you, like me, beginning to suspect that the DD brothers are working on a plan to find another way to combat the evil forces-ie Dememtors, Death Eaters (Why are the called Death Eaters anyway? And has it occured to anyone that goats have a reputation for eating anything! --could this be a connection?) and of course, Voldemort himself."

 "corinthum" wrote:

"Riddle (that is, Voldemort) needed a scapegoat for the many problems he (and the wizarding
world in general) have faced..."

 "alshainofthenorth" :

"It seems that AD was out of the picture for about fifteen years. But
what did he do during the time?"

Now me (Paula):

These are all some very interesting observations.  I've begun to wonder where this name Death Eaters came from.  Don't find any explanation in canon.  But when you think about it, The Dark Lord and his followers have a real main agenda, immortality at any cost, and they are willing to do anything to achieve this goal.  Just look at the disgusting things the Dark Lord has done, the rebirthing potion/party for one, to gain immortality.  Also, we know that most, if not all, of his followers are from Slytherin.  To this day, the Slytherins show nothing but disgust for living creatures.  Just look at their attitude and behavior in Hagrid's classes.  (eg: Draco's plot in P/A to destroy Buckbeak, the Hippogriph )  We even discover that McNair, the executor, is a Voldemort follower by his presence at the rebirthing in G/F.  We know that LV's supportors are also big supportors of the Dementors.  And, every description of the Dementors is nothing but death--cold, decay, sucking out the soul. 
 All very ironical, right?

AD being out of the picture is a new discovery for me and sheds a new light on the subject.  Makes one wonder what he was up to.  Battling Riddle/Voldemort's need for a scapegoat doing "research" on charms on goats would seem to be real poetic justice!

Paula




          "...Weeping may endure for a night, but joy comes in the morning."


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From Notyourpoet at breakbeat.com  Sun Sep 21 21:38:12 2003
From: Notyourpoet at breakbeat.com (troublenbass)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 21:38:12 -0000
Subject: Death Eaters
Message-ID: <bkl5o4+cpme@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81260

Hello all. I am barely a grownup, but a college student whose mother is also a 
part of this board. However, I do believe that I can add to the discussion.

I have a question - and I am not sure if it has been tackled in previous posts.

In GoF, Voldemort counts his Deatheaters:
"And here we have six missing Death Eaters...three dead in my service. One, 
too cowardly to return...he will pay. One, who I believe has left me forever...he 
will be killed, of course. And one, who remains my most faithful servant, and 
who has already reentered my service."
p.651

Well, I know Crouch is the last one mentioned. Snape is either too cowardly or 
has left forever - thus, who is the third?
And who were the three that died?

Also, who is Sirius's brother...and where is he mentioned?







From tuck668 at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 21 23:04:36 2003
From: tuck668 at yahoo.com (tuck668)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 23:04:36 -0000
Subject: Fawkes and the basilisk
In-Reply-To: <3d4b01c38091$c9055910$308d87d9@robertft56e9wi>
Message-ID: <bklaq4+l7j7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81261


<snip>
> More likely, I suspect, phoenixes don't die easily. That makes
> sense, given their other powers. Fawkes could be immune to
> petrification, and most other lethal magics. If he is killed then
> setting the corpse on fire may well bring him back to life.
> 
> --
> Robert

Can a phoenix die?

-Anna




From fc26det at aol.com  Sun Sep 21 23:11:50 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 23:11:50 -0000
Subject: Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <bkl5o4+cpme@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bklb7n+59a5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81262

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "troublenbass" 
<Notyourpoet at b...> wrote:
> Hello all. I am barely a grownup, but a college student whose 
mother is also a 
> part of this board. However, I do believe that I can add to the 
discussion.
> 
> I have a question - and I am not sure if it has been tackled in 
previous posts.
> 
> In GoF, Voldemort counts his Deatheaters:
> "And here we have six missing Death Eaters...three dead in my 
service. One, 
> too cowardly to return...he will pay. One, who I believe has left 
me forever...he 
> will be killed, of course. And one, who remains my most faithful 
servant, and 
> who has already reentered my service."
> p.651
> 
> Well, I know Crouch is the last one mentioned. Snape is either too 
cowardly or 
> has left forever - thus, who is the third?
> And who were the three that died?
> 
> Also, who is Sirius's brother...and where is he mentioned?

Susan:
I can only answer two of your questions,  Karkaroff is the one who 
fled the TWT when the dark mark burned.  Sirius's brother was killed 
by LV or one of his death eaters.




From fc26det at aol.com  Sun Sep 21 23:23:38 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 23:23:38 -0000
Subject: Fawkes and the basilisk
In-Reply-To: <bklaq4+l7j7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bklbtq+9pb8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81263

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tuck668" <tuck668 at y...> wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> > More likely, I suspect, phoenixes don't die easily. That makes
> > sense, given their other powers. Fawkes could be immune to
> > petrification, and most other lethal magics. If he is killed then
> > setting the corpse on fire may well bring him back to life.
> > 
> > --
> > Robert


 
> Can a phoenix die?
> 
> -Anna


Susan:

I wondered if the phoenix being a bird was like a rooster whose sound 
is fatal to a basilisk?  I say *like* because Fawkes was singing the 
moment he entered the chamber and that is not what killed the 
basilisk.  I think maybe it mesmerized him?
 




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sun Sep 21 23:49:43 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 23:49:43 -0000
Subject: DD as spiritual leader? (was:Canon for BADD ANGST)
In-Reply-To: <bkl7v7+6ltf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bklden+la3k@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81264

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
> Laura:
> > > I think it's assuming too much to suggest that DD is the 
> spiritual head of the WW...there's no evidence that DD has any 
> > > interest in, or control of, ritual spiritual practices in the 
WW, 
> > if  any exist, or that the WW looks to him for guidance on all 
> moral issues.  
> > 
> > <snipped>
> > 
> > Geoff:
> > Bear in mind that other writers who were Christians - I am 
thinking 
> > of JRR Tolkien and CS Lewis - do not have an overt Christian 
faith 
> > shown in their books, yet where they are coming from is visible 
if 
> > you look carefully. <snip> I have said in previous posts that I 
see 
> Harry as a representative of 
> > everyman on his journey - not a Christ-like figure but one 
seeking 
> > the true God. In relation to the Dumbledore/Harry relationship, I 
> am 
> > reminded of some of the teacher/student pairings which existed 
with 
> > the disciples in the early church and are mentioned in the New 
> > Testament. In particular Paul/Timothy and Peter/Mark come to 
mind. 
> > Mark, in his gospel, is certainly believed to be using Peter's 
> > memories and experiences to write his version.
> 
> Laura again:
> 
> But the writer's philoophical stance may not be overtly reflected 
in 
> every action in the book.  Sure, if you read Lewis or Tolkien, 
their 
> beliefs are clear, and for all I know it's the same with JKR (not 
> being well versed in Christian theology, I'm happy to defer to 
those 
> with more expertise).  But do you think that DD is supposed to be 
> divine?  Or something more than a mere human?  



Geoff:
You missed my point. I said that I saw Dumbledore/Harry in an 
analagous position to pairing in the NT between the disciples where a 
younger one was being mentored by an older one.


Laura:
> What I was trying to get at is that JKR seems to be very 
consciously 
> avoiding any overt spiritual framework in the Potterverse.  



Geoff:
Also a point I made re Tolkien/Lewis. Lewis veers towards being overt 
but Tolkien's agenda is there for those who look for it but can 
otherwise be overlooked.


Laura:
> When Sandy suggested that DD is the spiritual leader of the WW, the 
> question I had is, how do we know?  What do people do or say to 
> indicate that he has that kind of position?  Power he certainly 
has, 
> but I don't see it as the sort of power a spiritual leader would 
> have. There doesn't seem to be any kind of coherent ethical system 
in 
> the WW-or am I missing it?  
> I'm not talking about what we can infer, 
> because that's debatable.  I'm talking about any reference to an 
> accepted code of moral thought and behavior-that's what seems to be 
> missing.  


Geoff:
How about the difference between Dark Magic and "Light" magic for 
want of a better term)? It would seem that the behaviour of "moral" 
people in the Wizarding World is to avoid the path of Dark Magic. 
Look at the sharp intakes of breath which occur when Voldemort's name 
is mentioned.... In Christian terms, this is the avoidance of sinful 
behaviour, ie behaviour which flouts the two great commandments. I do 
not find this an easy path to tread, even after 40 years as a 
Christian but it is one which I seek to follow. It doesn't 
necessarily make me a spiritual leader though.




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sun Sep 21 23:59:17 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 23:59:17 -0000
Subject: Fawkes and the basilisk
In-Reply-To: <bklbtq+9pb8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkle0l+ujlj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81265

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Potterfanme" <fc26det at a...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tuck668" <tuck668 at y...> 
wrote:
> > 
> > <snip>
> > > More likely, I suspect, phoenixes don't die easily. That makes
> > > sense, given their other powers. Fawkes could be immune to
> > > petrification, and most other lethal magics. If he is killed 
then
> > > setting the corpse on fire may well bring him back to life.
> > > 
> > > --
> > > Robert
> 
> 
>  
> > Can a phoenix die?
> > 
> > -Anna
> 

Geoff:
Since normally when a phoenix comes to the end of its life span, it 
spontaneously combusts and is reborn from the ashes. However, what 
happens if a phoenix is killed in an accident or something of tht 
nature? This made me think of Tolkien's elves who are immortal and do 
not suffer diseases; it is only if they are killed in, say, battle 
that they lose their immortality.


 
> Susan:
> 
> I wondered if the phoenix being a bird was like a rooster whose 
sound 
> is fatal to a basilisk?  I say *like* because Fawkes was singing 
the 
> moment he entered the chamber and that is not what killed the 
> basilisk.  I think maybe it mesmerized him?

Yes but would a mesmerised basilisk close its eyes? Also, quoting 
from canon:

"As Harry trembled, ready to to close his eyes if it turned, he saw 
what had distracted the snake. Fawkes was soaring around its head and 
the Basilisk was snapping furiously at him with fangs long and thin 
as sabres." (COS UK edition pp.234-5). 

Doesn't sound very mesmerised.

This is becoming an intriguing discussion.




From andie at knownet.net  Mon Sep 22 00:31:41 2003
From: andie at knownet.net (grindieloe)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 00:31:41 -0000
Subject: The Phoenix 
In-Reply-To: <bkkai3+cggt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bklftd+4lnh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81266

I was looking around the HP-Lexicon today and came across the theory 
regarding Fawkes possibly belonging to Godric Gryffindor before 
becoming the faithful pet of Albus Dumbledore.  

While I hate to think that Dumbledore will not make it through to the 
end of the series, I do realize that he is getting older each year.  
Therefore, I think it a valid possibility that Fawkes may someday 
become the loyal pet of Harry Potter, especially if the theory 
regarding Fawkes' original "owner" being Godric Gryffindor is true. 
After all, the theory of Harry being a direct descendent of 
Gryffindor has neither been proved or disproved up to OoP.  I still 
believe strongly that Harry will end up being a direct heir.

I also believe that Harry will one day inherit the beautiful, 
heartwarming, and faithful companion whose feather resides in his 
wand... [and whose feather also once resided in the wand of the 
defeated wizard, formerly known as He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named, Lord 
Voldemort.] :)

Andrea




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 22 01:04:45 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 01:04:45 -0000
Subject: DD as spiritual leader? (was:Canon for BADD ANGST)
In-Reply-To: <bklden+la3k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bklhrd+na8s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81267

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" 
<gbannister10 at a...> wrote:
 In relation to the Dumbledore/Harry relationship, I  am 
> > > reminded of some of the teacher/student pairings which existed 
> with the disciples in the early church and are mentioned in the New 
> > > Testament. <snip> > 

Laura:
> > 
 <snip>But do you think that DD is supposed to be divine?  Or 
something more than a mere human?  
> 
> 
> 
> Geoff:
> You missed my point. I said that I saw Dumbledore/Harry in an 
> analagous position to pairing in the NT between the disciples where 
a younger one was being mentored by an older one.

Laura responds:

Oh, now I see.  Thank you for the clarification.  I don't know a heck 
of a lot about Christianity-it's hard enough figuring out what the 
house I belong to believes.  :-)
> 
> 
> Laura:
> > What I was trying to get at is that JKR seems to be very 
> consciously 
> > avoiding any overt spiritual framework in the Potterverse.  
> 
> 
> 
> Geoff:
> Also a point I made re Tolkien/Lewis. Lewis veers towards being 
overt 
> but Tolkien's agenda is there for those who look for it but can 
> otherwise be overlooked.
> 
Laura responds:

By overt spiritual framework, I didn't mean an identifiable set of 
beliefs so much as identifiable spiritual practices.  There aren't 
any set times for prayer or contemplation, no holidays celebrating 
the creation of the WW or that kind of thing, no formal ethical 
training with reference to a code or set of beliefs that is accepted 
throughout the WW.  Even Halloween is just another albeit lavish and 
fun) feast!

> Laura:

 There doesn't seem to be any kind of coherent ethical system 
> in the WW-or am I missing it?  
<snip
> 
> Geoff:
> How about the difference between Dark Magic and "Light" magic for 
> want of a better term)? It would seem that the behaviour of "moral" 
> people in the Wizarding World is to avoid the path of Dark Magic. 
> Look at the sharp intakes of breath which occur when Voldemort's 
name 
> is mentioned.... In Christian terms, this is the avoidance of 
sinful 
> behaviour, ie behaviour which flouts the two great commandments. I 
do 
> not find this an easy path to tread, even after 40 years as a 
> Christian but it is one which I seek to follow. It doesn't 
> necessarily make me a spiritual leader though.

Laura responds:

Well, maybe, but the lines seem pretty vague and don't seem to carry 
a whole lot of weight with them.  Good people use dark magic (the 
aurors, for instance, during LV's first campaign), people who are 
morally weak use dark magic any time they can convince themselves 
they need to (Fudge, Umbridge).  Sometimes neutral magic is used to 
inflict harm (Snape and James hexing each other for 7 years at 
school).  We have had a lot of discussion about such things as 
legilimency and the pensieve, but no one in the books ever refers to 
an existing moral code that explains when and how these powers are 
properly used.  

Two great commandments?  You get off easy-we have 613 (really!)  
*smiles but feels inadequate*

Thanks for explaining your views, Geoff, and please forgive my 
ignorance.  




From ktd7 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 22 01:07:20 2003
From: ktd7 at yahoo.com (Karen)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 01:07:20 -0000
Subject: Snape's worst memory
In-Reply-To: <bkhndh+c4sh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkli08+71ut@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81268

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "summerdazeno1" 
<summerdazeno1 at y...> wrote:
> 
> However, I do understand why Sape was so angry.  Even if the 
pensieve 
> did temporarily erase the memory from Snape's mind, he had to 
enter 
> into the memory in order to pull Harry out.  Surely, being 
physically 
> present in a memory would be much more vivid than merely 
remembering 
> it in your head? 


That makes sense, that Snape would have seen the memory as he pulled 
Harry out of the pensieve. I still wonder about Snape removing the 
memories to keep Harry from seeing them. It seems to me that there 
was no reason to suspect Harry would see then. Snape didn't know 
that Harry would use a Protego charm that would reverse his 
Legilimens and allow Harry to see into Snape's mind. That was a 
surprise to both of them. Since Dumbledore also mentioned taking out 
memories when his thoughts were getting crowded, it seemed to me 
more natural that Snape would remove the memories that would hinder 
him working with Harry. He has obviously been prejudiced against 
Harry from day one, for no real discernable reason except that he 
hated Harry's father. Removing the painful memories would make it 
easier for him to stay objective while teaching Harry in the one-on-
one sessions. In my mind, that would be a more obvious reason for 
removing the memories than expecting Harry to see them in his head, 
which Harry did only by accident. 


Karen




From oppen at mycns.net  Mon Sep 22 01:14:56 2003
From: oppen at mycns.net (Eric Oppen)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 20:14:56 -0500
Subject: Phoenixes---can they die?  (OoP spoiler)
Message-ID: <008001c380a6$f043af80$7f4a0043@hppav>

No: HPFGUIDX 81269

If you'll recall, at one point in OotP, Fawkes took the full blast of an
_Avada Kedavra_ spell...and it didn't kill him.




From fc26det at aol.com  Mon Sep 22 01:34:58 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 01:34:58 -0000
Subject: Fawkes and the basilisk
In-Reply-To: <bkle0l+ujlj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkljk2+sp6s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81270

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" 
<gbannister10 at a...> wrote:
 
Geoff wrote: 
> Yes but would a mesmerised basilisk close its eyes? Also, quoting 
> from canon:
> 
> "As Harry trembled, ready to to close his eyes if it turned, he saw 
> what had distracted the snake. Fawkes was soaring around its head 
and 
> the Basilisk was snapping furiously at him with fangs long and thin 
> as sabres." (COS UK edition pp.234-5). 
> 
> Doesn't sound very mesmerised.
> 
> This is becoming an intriguing discussion.

Susan:

Point taken!  I do think tho that the Phoenix Song had some sort of 
effect other than to calm Harry. (IIRC it bolstered his courage)  It 
does say in FB that when short of food a basilisk will eat birds but 
it does not make a reference as to whether they are affected by its 
gaze.




From eowynn_24 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 22 02:01:09 2003
From: eowynn_24 at yahoo.com (eowynn_24)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 19:01:09 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <bklb7n+59a5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030922020109.6598.qmail@web60201.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81271



Potterfanme <fc26det at aol.com> wrote:
--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "troublenbass" 
<Notyourpoet at b...> wrote:
> <snip> 
> I have a question - and I am not sure if it has been tackled in 
previous posts.
> 
> In GoF, Voldemort counts his Deatheaters:
> "And here we have six missing Death Eaters...three dead in my 
service. One, 
> too cowardly to return...he will pay. One, who I believe has left 
me forever...he 
> will be killed, of course. And one, who remains my most faithful 
servant, and 
> who has already reentered my service."
> p.651
> 
> Well, I know Crouch is the last one mentioned. Snape is either too 
cowardly or 
> has left forever - thus, who is the third?
> And who were the three that died?
> 
> Also, who is Sirius's brother...and where is he mentioned?

Susan:
I can only answer two of your questions,  Karkaroff is the one who 
fled the TWT when the dark mark burned.  Sirius's brother was killed 
by LV or one of his death eaters.

Eowynn:

Since your last question has been answered (canon pg 112 OOP US edition.)  I Will try and answer the other ones. I agree that Crouch Jr. was the most loyal servant and that he had returned to LV service, however I do not believe that Snape is one of the other two. Do we know for a fact that he wasn't there? I can't find any canon to say he was at the tournament, only that he was there after, and not until they reached Crouchs' office. There is plenty of time for him to get back, and explain to DD what happened and where he had been. So this is my theory, feel free to disagree. I believe that you have two options for the two missing DE, one is Karkaroff, and the other is Lupin. Which one is which I haven't quite figured out yet, mostly due to personal feelings. I hope that it is Lupin who has left him forever, but am afraid he is the one who was too cowardly to show up. ( second doubts now that Sirius is back and he as heard how strong Harry is. Possibly hoping for the second chance
 that Snape got.)Which leaves Karkaroff as the one who will die, probably by the hand of a DE, he wasn't important enough to be killed by LV. Any how those are my thoughts on the three missing DE; Lupin, Crouch Jr, and Karkaroff.

Eowynn






---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From kkearney at students.miami.edu  Mon Sep 22 03:01:08 2003
From: kkearney at students.miami.edu (corinthum)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 03:01:08 -0000
Subject: Fawkes and the basilisk
In-Reply-To: <bkle0l+ujlj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bklolk+2u3o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81272

Anna asked:
 
> > > Can a phoenix die?

Geoff replied:

> Since normally when a phoenix comes to the end of its life span, it 
> spontaneously combusts and is reborn from the ashes. However, what 
> happens if a phoenix is killed in an accident or something of tht 
> nature? This made me think of Tolkien's elves who are immortal and do 
> not suffer diseases; it is only if they are killed in, say, battle 
> that they lose their immortality.

We've seen Fawkes die twice, once of natural causes (CoS), and once
from Avada Kedavra (OoP).  Both times he burst into flame and was
immediately reborn in the ashes.  So it seems to me that phoenixes are
mortal, in that they can die or be killed in the same way that any
other creature can, but immortal in that they are reborn immediately
regardless of the cause of death.

Back to the original question, the stare of a basilisk is deadly, but
what about a sidelong glance?  If Fawkes was to sneak up on the
basilisk from behind and injure one eye before the basilisk could
properly "stare" at him, I think he would be safe.

-Corinth

P.S. Tolkien's elves could die non-violently, for example, Arwen 




From jdr0918 at hotmail.com  Mon Sep 22 03:19:04 2003
From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 03:19:04 -0000
Subject: Why Ron Loves Hermione
In-Reply-To: <bkkr5h+9bu8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bklpn8+v1ei@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81273

<<<In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "darrin_burnett" wrote: Why has 
Ron fallen in love with Hermione? It is pretty obvious to me that he 
has, though he covers it up in typical teenage boy fashion...I know 
of what I speak. I am a single man who has fallen deeply and 
passionately in love in my life...Ron is a good kid, and I believe 
he'll grow to be a good man. But he is always second best in his own 
mind, to his brothers, to Harry, even to Draco, who is richer than 
he. Such things matter to Ron.>>>

The Sergeant Majorette says

First of all: Awwwwww! We always *knew* you were a sweetie, ya big 
lug!

Ron's love is obvious to everybody except himself, which I guess *is* 
pretty typical. I think one of the reasons Ron has fallen in love 
with Hermione is that he was raised to be a *good kid* and to value 
things other than surface beauty (oh, the veela thing--he's got 
hormones, so?). He's lucky to have available to him a girl from 
outside his world who doesn't know she's supposed to fall for one of 
Ron's fabulous older brothers, or his famous friend who, to her, is 
no less goofy, or his wealthy adversary, who's a rodent.

Also, Ron is exactly the kind of uncomplicated but not unintelligent 
guy-type guy that girls too smart for their own good often find 
irresistable.

The problem I have with canon Ron is that we know by the emphasis on 
his chess prowess that he's not stupid, but I'm still waiting for his 
big epiphany. God, I hope JKR doesn't plan to kill him off!

--JDR




From urghiggi at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 22 03:40:44 2003
From: urghiggi at yahoo.com (urghiggi)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 03:40:44 -0000
Subject: Source for that quote (WAS: Re: The Phoenix Must Die)
In-Reply-To: <bkkksf+stab@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bklqvs+cij6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81274

urghiggi wrote:
> 
> > What I THINK she said was something along the lines of "I don't want to 
talk 
> > too much about my religious beliefs because then it would be too easy for 
> > people to figure out where the books are going." She did not mention 
> > Christianity per se, either in re her own beliefs or people's ability to see
> > where she's going.

Derannimer replied:

> See the quote below. (And JKR's said multiple times, actually, that she is a Christian, 
> and she's a member of the Church of Scotland.)
>  snip. then quote from the JKR interview being discussed:

>> > Is she a Christian?
> > ``Yes, I am,'' she says. ``Which seems to offend the religious right  far 
worse than 
> > if I said I thought there was no God. Every time I've been  asked if I believe 
in God, 
> > I've said yes, because I do, but no one ever really has gone any more 
deeply into it 
> > than that, and I have to say that does suit me, because if I talk too freely 
about that 
> > I think the intelligent reader, whether 10 or 60, will be able to guess what's 
coming 
> > in the books.''
> 
Thanks for the quote and also to Geoff for the additional info he posted later 
about the interview -- Ottawa was sticking in my mind too, but darned if I can 
find a current link to the thing. Anyway I appreciate seeing the wording of the 
quote again, and thanks, Derannimer, for tracking it down. I'd never dispute 
that JKR's a Christian -- in fact I previously posted here chunks of a different 
JKR interview discussing that very same thing. I was only wanting to re-
examine the particular quote above -- where it says merely that if she talked 
more about her beliefs beyond saying she believed in God, then the 
"intelligent reader" (not just Christian ones) would find it too easy to predict 
her M.O. I didn't mean by my reply that she failed to acknowledge her 
Christianity -- only that in this particular quote she was talking about simply 
"believing in God" as having a strong bearing on the reader's ability to figure 
out the plot. Sorry I didn't word that more clearly in my post .... I don't really 
think we have a disagreement here, other than clarifying that she seemed to 
be saying that she didn't think it would only be Christians who might have a 
good shot at figuring out where she was going if she was more forthcoming 
about her theology.

I find all of this ironic in light of some off-list correspondence I recently had 
with another HPfGU member (not a Christian) who said something along the 
lines of  being able to "see a church by daylight" (when reading the books) 
even if many of JKR's fellow Christians can't .... 

Re pip!squeak's comments about what WAS it in CoS that came nigh to 
"giving it all away," I've always harbored the suspicion that perhaps it was the 
bold climax of the thing, which is the only section of books 1-5 that I'd be 
comfortable really labeling as allegory (and Christian allegory at that). John 
Granger's "Hidden Key to Harry Potter" offers a convincingly argued 
allegorical interp of this passage. (Briefly involving HP as everyman, LV as 
satan, the basilisk as sins threatening to overwhelm everyman, Fawkes as 
Christ helping everyman overcome his sins and saving him from a certain 
death, and HP rising with Fawkes as everyman rises with Christ.... that's a 
bare-bones outline, but you get the idea.) In light of JKR's preferred strategy of 
avoiding overt religious references in the work -- perhaps she herself thought 
in retrospect that this passage came perilously close to blowing her cover??? 

Of course the "secret of CoS"  could just be some obscure twist involving 
Moaning Myrtle or deathday rituals or Colin Creevy's camera or Gilderoy's 
charming smile -- who knows? Time (and books 6 & 7!) alone will tell....

Urghiggi, Chgo




From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Mon Sep 22 04:35:56 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 04:35:56 -0000
Subject: Tom Riddle
In-Reply-To: <bkkgos+3r9k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bklu7c+k24l@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81275

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "maneelyfh" <maneelyfh at y...> 
wrote:
> > Fran: 
> > > You may want to check p. 646 of GOF.  He tells Harry about his 
> > muggle-
> > > born father etc., before the DE's come to the graveyard.

The DE's were at the graveyard. They know why they are all there - 
Voldemort tells them "My father's bone, naturally, meant that he 
would have to come here, where he was burried" (GoF, Am.Ed. pp 656).
This is a "muggle" vilage and a "muggle" graveyard. They have to 
know this means his father was a muggle. We know that Malfoy Senior 
at least knew that Voldemort was Tom Riddle for a long time (since 
he was the one who owned the diary in CoS). The diary was purchased 
in a muggle shop (as Harry notices in CoS). Why would a pure blood 
wizard ever need to buy anything from muggles?

Bellatrix never argues with Harry about the truthfullness of his 
statement in OoP. She knows it to be true. That does not seem to 
make her any less devoted to Voldemort.

The campaign is first and foremost against mudbloods, not half 
bloods. It's possible that those would be dealt with later if they 
win, but I doubt it. There is the other issue of royalty. Voldemort 
may be half blood but he is also the last descendant of Slytherin. I 
think that in the eyes of the dark wizards, that fact more than 
compensates for the lack of proper heritage on his father's side.

> I have always been curious what the reaction of the DE's would be 
or 
> possibly will be if/when they find out that LV is indeed a 
halfblood.

It would make no difference to them. They already know it. Just 
think of the Nazis who worshipped Hitler, even though he was not 
pure Arian, and in fact had some Jewish blood in him. The important 
point about blind racism of that type is that reason has no part in 
it. Trying to get bigoted people to change their way by pointing out 
an error of reasoning in their way of thinking is bound to fail. 
They have set their mind and will simply ignore anything that does 
not fit nicely into their world view.

Salit





From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Mon Sep 22 04:44:30 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 04:44:30 -0000
Subject: Does Snape know?
In-Reply-To: <bkk2i6+8n6a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bklune+d7tl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81276

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sylviablundell2001" 
<sylviablundell at a...> wrote:
> Incidentally, I think it is Snape's own Pensieve. If it is 
> DD's and he lent it to Snape knowing Harry would recognise it, 
that 
> opens a whole new can of worms.

I am sure it's Dumbledore's. This is repeated in at least two or 
three places in the story.

As for the first question. I don't believe that Snape meant for 
Harry to look into his memories. I think that was why he put them in 
the pensieve in the first place!

Salit
(who would feel more sorry for Snape if Harry had also been given 
the luxury of removing especially embarassing memories from his mind 
for the duration of the Occlumency lessons. As it is, I feel like 
Snape merely had the tables turned on him, so to speak).





From harryp_56 at hotmail.com  Sat Sep 20 23:05:15 2003
From: harryp_56 at hotmail.com (zack87421)
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 23:05:15 -0000
Subject: Is Dumbledore Voldemort's Grandfather?
Message-ID: <bkimfb+dol3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81277

This post is referring to a section on the Harry Potter Lexicon about 
Dumbledore being related to the Riddle Family. The name of Tom Riddle 
jr.'s grandfather on his mother's side (the magical side) was Marvolo 
(sp?).  The author made the hypothesis that Dumbledore might be 
Voldemort's grandfather. The writer of the piece said that their 
theory might be right if Dumbledore's middle name was stated. 
Dumbledore's middle name had been mentioned in The Order of the 
Phoenix. On page 139 in the chapter entitled "The Hearing", 
Dumbledore is a witness to Harry Potter's trial. For the record, his 
full name was stated, "Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore". 
Could someone contact the Lexicon and tell them the error of their 
ways? 

zack87421 




From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz  Sun Sep 21 23:03:54 2003
From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 11:03:54 +1200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: James Potter = Voldemort
In-Reply-To: <20030921074815.26971.qmail@web60207.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <1064024720.6613.49765.m6@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20030922110317.00ab8cd0@pop3.xtra.co.nz>

No: HPFGUIDX 81278

AF wrote:

>Not only would James = Voldemort be too Star Wars, I think it'd be awfully 
>amateurish.
>
>Personally, I've long harbored the feeling that Snape is Harry's father.


Now that would be a great twist.  What impressions in the books did you 
come by that?  Be fun if it was really written into the books.  I'll go 
back later and read up about character traits, namely James.  But thinking 
about it, Harry has yet to show the teenage traits of James, so he might 
take more after his mother in character leaving it harder to say.

However, until Harry softens his attitude to Snape, I can just imagine his 
reaction to this news...........................

Tanya





From Batchevra at aol.com  Sun Sep 21 23:41:10 2003
From: Batchevra at aol.com (Batchevra at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 19:41:10 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's Other Worst Memory
Message-ID: <145.195b772c.2c9f9116@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81279

 
AF (featheringstonehaugh at yahoo.com) writes:

> <snip> We should also consider the possibility that Snape didn't realize that Harry would know about a pensive, so he may have felt safe in using it as he did.  After all, had he (Harry) not "snooped" in DD's office, he probably wouldn't know about pensives, as we've not had any indication that 
> they've been introduced in any of the classes. >>>

Harry would have figured out how to work the Pensieve even had he not gone 
into Dumbledore's the previous year. Snape kept on putting his memories into the Pensieve while Harry was in the room. Made me think that he was hoping that 
Harry would go in.

Batchevra





From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz  Sun Sep 21 23:55:18 2003
From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 11:55:18 +1200
Subject: The DD Brothers and The Dementors
In-Reply-To: <20030921153422.81154.qmail@web40019.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20030922115223.00a97200@pop3.xtra.co.nz>

No: HPFGUIDX 81280

Paula wrote:
>Personally I believe that the task to somehow neutralise the Dementors
>is going to Remus Lupin and that it's going to be fairly important
>fairly soon. Perhaps one of the main themes of the sixth book.


I agree, something has to be done about the Dementors.  But as to who, I am 
not sure, have not got any clues from the books.  Again, must re read 
them.  But this would go a long way to curbing LV's influence which is 
helpful.  I mean if one faction is neutralised, then there is less leverage 
for him to grab a hold.

Tanya





From ladypensieve at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 21 23:56:20 2003
From: ladypensieve at yahoo.com (Lady Pensieve)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 23:56:20 -0000
Subject: Fawkes and the basilisk
In-Reply-To: <bklbtq+9pb8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkldr4+7lud@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81281

Robert:
> > > More likely, I suspect, phoenixes don't die easily. That makes
> > > sense, given their other powers. Fawkes could be immune to
> > > petrification, and most other lethal magics. If he is killed 
> > > then setting the corpse on fire may well bring him back to life.
 
Anna:
> > Can a phoenix die?

Susan:
> I wondered if the phoenix being a bird was like a rooster whose 
sound is fatal to a basilisk?  I say *like* because Fawkes was singing 
the moment he entered the chamber and that is not what killed the 
basilisk.  I think maybe it mesmerized him? >>>

What if Fawkes was attacking from above and not in direct eye 
contact?  

Kathy




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 22 06:25:07 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 06:25:07 -0000
Subject: Hyperbolic Chapter Titles; Was Re: Snape's worst memory
In-Reply-To: <bkfhsv+skum@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkm4k3+65dg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81282

feetmadeofclay" wrote:
> But I can't take Rowling's titles for her chapters as hyperbole. 
> Otherwise I would never be able to believe anything she tells us 
> when she's speaking as the author. 
> 
> Are we going to give the authorial voice, this same treatment over 
> the whole series?

Aren't we already? We have ESE!Lupin fans and Hero!Malfoy theories. 
We even have ESE!Dumbledore, for Pete's sake. Why aren't chapter 
titles grist for the mill if characterizations are? We have some 
people, me included, who are even suspicious of *interview* 
information where JKR in the flesh opens her mouth and speaks into 
the ears of thousands. Although I don't think the chapter titles are 
precisely hyperbole, however I would not put it past her to mislead 
us with a chapter title as much as anything else. How about a Weasley 
chapter called The Red Hairings? ;-)

Didn't we (well, I did) spend four books hating Snape, only to find 
in the fifth one that he had a hard childhood and was the victim of 
bullies, 3/4th of whom are people we've been rooting for? Petunia 
turned out to be someone we need to approve of in at least a 
rudimentary way for doing a distasteful (to her) but important (to us)
duty. Dudley almost gets demented and even that is written in such a 
way that we are not disappointed when Harry saves him. (Are we?) 
Ron's pet rat of the first two books turns out in the third book to 
be a former and future Voldemort flunky. The dangerous criminal 
everyone is so terrified will catch and murder Harry in that same 
book turns out to be Harry's most ardent protector. Hem hem. Yes, I 
think we *are* going to give the authorial voice the same treatment 
over the entire series; besides, what else have we obsessed fans got 
to do for the next couple of years? Is nothing sacred? With this many 
people looting it for valuable artifacts, no. I'm ready to turn each 
book and the whole series upside down and look for the spell to turn 
my enemies' ears into kumquats.

Sandy




From asperia_aspen at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 22 00:32:41 2003
From: asperia_aspen at yahoo.com (Asperia Aspen)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 17:32:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: James Potter = Voldemort
Message-ID: <20030922003241.57357.qmail@web60107.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81283

AF <featheringstonehaugh at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Personally, I've long harbored the feeling that
> Snape is Harry's father. [snip theory]


Well...I think this would make a fine piece of fic. It
certainly must have taken some thought. And in
canonical terms it all works for me except for this
part:

> James and Lily marry and soon (less than 9 months
> later) Harry arrives as a Potter and as such, has
> nothing to fear from Voldemort....

Are you *sure* about that? If you're right, Snape, in
getting James to marry Lily, has just in effect turned
 his own son over to a couple who have, together or
apart, defied LV at least twice. (I've always been
unclear about whether the three-times-defiance of
James/Lily towards Voldemort includes Lily's sacrifice
of herself for her son or not.) Snape, as an
ex-Death-Eater, is in an excellent position to know
how badly LV reacts to opposition. If Snape as Harry's
biodad wishes Harry to escape persecution by
Voldemort, his strategy for achieving that goal seems
pretty flawed: I'm not at all sure Harry would come in
for less Voldemorian ire as a Potter than as a Snape.
If getting Harry off the hook with LV is *all* that
Snape wishes to accomplish marrying his old girlfriend
off to his old archenemy, then...all I gotta say is
that Snape'd better be careful of his
Machiavellian-plotter bona fides. Because they're in
danger. 

(A *real* insidious manipulator would've swapped Harry
for Neville...after getting DD drunk on butterbeer and
thereby siphoning out of his the details of the
Trelawey prophecy...so maybe Harry is *actually* a
Longbottom!!! Hee hee!!!)

;-) 

Sincerely,
Asperia Aspen






From warzog1 at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 21 15:56:57 2003
From: warzog1 at yahoo.com (warzog1)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 15:56:57 -0000
Subject: Time, the reverse spell, James and Lily, Voldemort, wierd...
In-Reply-To: <bkk66v+nrmv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkkho9+rvb2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81284

warzog1:
> As the "Shadows" of Voldemort's victims came out of his wand, in 
> reverse order, I caught, what I thought was a strange event.
> James Potter's "Shadow" came out BEFORE Lily's did.

Geoff:
> This has been covered on a number of occasions in past postings. I 
believe JKR has acknowledged that it was a Flint. It has been 
adjusted in lated editions. My UK edition certainly has Lily emerging 
first followed by James. >>> 

I have a 3rd printing of the British Deluxe Version.
(The dark blue one, with the pic of Harry doing the 1st task.)
How "Late" was it revised?

warzog1




From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au  Mon Sep 22 06:40:26 2003
From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 06:40:26 -0000
Subject: Fawkes and the basilisk
In-Reply-To: <bklolk+2u3o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkm5gq+ag3i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81285

--- "corinthum" <kkearney> wrote:
> Back to the question, the stare of a basilisk is deadly, but
> what about a sidelong glance?  If Fawkes was to sneak up on the
> basilisk from behind and injure one eye before the basilisk could
> properly "stare" at him, I think he would be safe.> > -Corinth

The Poor Basalisk would die of starvation if it's prey suddenly 
became stone before it had the chance to eat it. 

Maybe instead of the qualities of Fawkes, we should be looking at the 
characteristics of the basalisk. 

A Basalisk will:
a) turn to stone any creature that looks it INDIRECTLY in the eye.
b) kill any creature that looks directly, except for weasles (Greek 
mythology). That is how Moaning Myrtle died, but she wasn't eaten. So 
it seems when it kills for food, it may close its eyes and use it's 
keen sence of smell.
c) use its poisonous fangs. Other serpents use this method to hunt 
food

While moving through around Hogwarts, Harry heard it say, "I smell 
blood." and Riddle called for the Basalisk to smell out Harry. 

So maybe the Basalisk didn't even try to look at Fawkes. It felt 
confident in its own lair.

aussie




From chitrasahai at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 22 06:53:49 2003
From: chitrasahai at yahoo.com (hermys_quill)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 06:53:49 -0000
Subject: FanFiction
Message-ID: <bkm69t+ii5b@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81286

Can somebody give me link of their favourite Harry/Draco fiction 
stories?
Thanks
hermys_quill 




From greatraven at hotmail.com  Mon Sep 22 07:26:16 2003
From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 07:26:16 -0000
Subject: Snape's worst memory
In-Reply-To: <bkli08+71ut@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkm86o+rrro@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81287

-
> 
> it seemed to me 
> more natural that Snape would remove the memories that would hinder 
> him working with Harry. He has obviously been prejudiced against 
> Harry from day one, for no real discernable reason except that he 
> hated Harry's father. Removing the painful memories would make it 
> easier for him to stay objective while teaching Harry in the one-on-
> one sessions. In my mind, that would be a more obvious reason for 
> removing the memories than expecting Harry to see them in his head, 
> which Harry did only by accident. 
> 
> 
> Karen

This is an interesting thought that never occurred to me, but I did 
wonder why, if he was so crash-hot at Occlumency - perhaps good
enough 
even to hide his thoughts from LV - he felt the need to use the 
Pensieve at all, just to keep out embarrassing memories. Another 
thought: if the Pensieve was *that* handy for making you "forget" 
things, wouldn't it be simple enough for a spy to just use it before 
heading for LV's presence? :-) Somehow, I suspect it's not that 
simple. Sue B




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 22 07:32:15 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 07:32:15 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore in the Hog's Head
In-Reply-To: <bkhkgb+2k4o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkm8hv+3udd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81288

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "entropymail" <entropymail at y...>
wrote:
> Don't know why I never noticed this before. Let me know if it's been
> mentioned. Dumbledore was the barman in the Hog's Head during that
> first DA meeting:
> 
> ...edited...
> 
> So, Dumbledore's keeping a closer eye on Harry than I thought!
> 
> :: Entropy ::


bboy_mn:

Pardon the attitude but how does a man with long hair and a beard
disguise himself? ...with long hair and a beard? I think not.

How could a whole room full of students not recognise their headmaster?

Now if Dumbledore was trying to trick them, he would have vanished his
beard and changed his hair color, THEN no one would have recognised
him. It makes no sense for DUmbledore to disguise himself in a way
that looks just like himself.

On the other hand, there is something fishy going on here, the comment
that the barman looks oddly familar couldn't be there by accident;
it's certainly not 'filler' for the scene. So it must mean something.

The conclusion that most people have reached is that the barman looked
oddly familiar because he bore a family resemblance to his brother;
Albus Dumbledore. That would make him Aberforth Dumbledore.

This reminds me of one other similar comment. Harry says the Tom
Riddle's name seems oddly familar. That little comment hasn't been
resolved yet either; at least not in the book.

OR...

...these could just be little things that JKR throws in to make us cazy.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn




From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au  Mon Sep 22 07:53:34 2003
From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 07:53:34 -0000
Subject: Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <20030922020109.6598.qmail@web60201.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bkm9pu+ahff@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81289

> > In GoF, Voldemort counts his Deatheaters:
> > "And here we have six missing Death Eaters...three dead in my 
> > service. One, too cowardly to return...he willpay. One, who I 
> >  believe has left me forever...he will be killed, of course. 
> > And one, who remains my most faithful servant, and 
> > who has already reentered my service."
> > p.651
> > 

See http://www.hp-lexicon.org/death_eaters.html 
three dead :
- Rosier (GoF 27 + 30)
- Wilkes (GoF 27)
- Regulus Black (OotP 6)

Cowardly or Left Forever
- Snape **
- Karakoff 
Faithful Servant
- Barty Couch Jr

** Voldemort had already seen Snape while possessing Quirrel, but 
never revealed himself to the Potions Prof. Why should he if LV 
wasn't sure where Snape stood? Snape had to have brought some very 
valuable information to LV on his return or he wouldn't be alive now. 
That is one reason why I think Snape has stayed loyal to LV by 
keeping close to LV's main enemy, Dumbledore. He has convinced LV and 
the DE that he has always been loyal.

aussie




From ffionmiles at hotmail.com  Mon Sep 22 07:54:17 2003
From: ffionmiles at hotmail.com (ffimiles)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 07:54:17 -0000
Subject: Why Ron Loves Hermione
In-Reply-To: <bklpn8+v1ei@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkm9r9+ha2t@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81290


> Ron's love is obvious to everybody except himself, which I guess 
*is* 
> pretty typical. I think one of the reasons Ron has fallen in love 
> with Hermione is that he was raised to be a *good kid* and to value 
> things other than surface beauty (oh, the veela thing--he's got 
> hormones, so?). He's lucky to have available to him a girl from 
> outside his world who doesn't know she's supposed to fall for one 
of 
> Ron's fabulous older brothers, or his famous friend who, to her, is 
> no less goofy, or his wealthy adversary, who's a rodent.
> 
> Also, Ron is exactly the kind of uncomplicated but not 
unintelligent 
> guy-type guy that girls too smart for their own good often find 
> irresistable.
> 
> The problem I have with canon Ron is that we know by the emphasis 
on 
> his chess prowess that he's not stupid, but I'm still waiting for 
his 
> big epiphany. God, I hope JKR doesn't plan to kill him off!
> 
> --JDR

Ron's definately going to have a big 'moment' which'll be pivotal for 
the good side - Hermione's already had so many in helping Harry get 
throught asks/time-turning/figure out the basalisk - sof ar Ron's 
greatest moment came in the chess game in PS - he's got to have 
another moment - even if it is to redeem himself from some weakness 
he shows, which might get Harry and others into trouble - but he'll 
come good - and don't even mention him being killed off...

I also think Hermione's got to see him as brave - someone's said in 
earlier posts that that's a big thing for her in men - she thought 
Lockhart was brave (even though it was just a teenage/teacher crush 
thing),b ecause he'd supposedly done all he said he'd done in the 
books - she says Krum's brave when watching to the Wronsky Feint in 
the World Cup, and obviously she thinks Harry's brave...but has Ron 
reached that status for her yet?  She clearly likes him, but maybe 
there's too much of an element of 'oh, bless...he really should think 
more of himself and he can be such a 'boy'...'

But he'll have his big moment.

Ffi






From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 22 07:54:38 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 07:54:38 -0000
Subject: Fawkes and the basilisk
In-Reply-To: <bkl68m+se8p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkm9ru+vb6d@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81291

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister"
<gbannister10 at a...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" 
> <catlady at w...> wrote:
> > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister"
> > <gbannister10 at a...> wrote:
> >  
> > > How did Fawkes manage to attack the basilisk and blind it without 
> > > looking at the creature's eyes and getting killed as a result?
> > 
> 
> Catlady:
> > Closed his eyes and navigated by sound? FB doesn't say that 
> >phoenices have sonar like bats, but it doesn't say they don't.
> 
> Geoff:
> That thought had crossed my mind but to use sonar to navigate in on 
> the basilisk's eyes would not be feasible, I think. Bats use sound 
> to avoid obstacles of any variety; I don't think it could be used to
> locate a specific target.

bboy_mn:

Of course bats can locate specific targets by sonar, how else would
they be able to catch all those insects at night?

So, bats can located very small objects easily, but the real question
is can they detect texture? Can they detect small bumps on a much
larger solid object? Answer: I don't know.

We've had several discussion about what has to happen to be killed by
a Basilisk's gaze, but never with any clear answers. Can you look at a
Basilisk's eyes and not get hurt if the Basilisk doesn't see you? Or
if the Basilisk sees your eyes, but you don't see it, do you die? Or
does it have to be eye-to-eye contact? Or does the Basilisk have to
look with murderous intent? Answer: I don't know.

While there are other possible speculation, I think that Fawkes flew
up on the Basilisk's blind side and was able to see the eyes, but the
Phoenix and the Basilisk did not have eye-to-eye contact. Or being an
immensely magical creature, the Phoenix might be immune. Or....

Just a thought.

bboy_mn




From june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk  Mon Sep 22 07:55:09 2003
From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 07:55:09 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore in the Hog's Head
In-Reply-To: <bkm8hv+3udd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkm9st+961u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81292

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "entropymail" 
<entropymail at y...>
> wrote:
> > Don't know why I never noticed this before. Let me know if it's 
been
> > mentioned. Dumbledore was the barman in the Hog's Head during that
> > first DA meeting:
> > 
> >> bboy_mn:
> 
> Pardon the attitude but how does a man with long hair and a beard
> disguise himself? ...with long hair and a beard? I think not.
> 
> How could a whole room full of students not recognise their 
headmaster?
> 
> Now if Dumbledore was trying to trick them, he would have vanished 
his
> beard and changed his hair color, THEN no one would have recognised
> him. It makes no sense for DUmbledore to disguise himself in a way
> that looks just like himself.
> 
> On the other hand, there is something fishy going on here, the 
comment
> that the barman looks oddly familar couldn't be there by accident;
> it's certainly not 'filler' for the scene. So it must mean 
something.
> 
> 
Or - are you aware just how poor teaching salaries are in the UK?  
Perhaps it is Dumbledore and he is forced to moonlight in order to 
make ends meet.  The bar job is a bit of realism intruding into the 
magic again.  That's why he disguises his appearance - he is 
embarassed.  Well you'd be wouldn't you.  Trying to appear all 
knowing, all wise when you have an overdraft the size of the national 
debt of a South American state and you have to moonlight to pay it 
off.

June




From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au  Mon Sep 22 08:09:26 2003
From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 08:09:26 -0000
Subject: FILK - Quidditch "Who's on First" (thanks to Abbott/Costello)
Message-ID: <bkmanm+k3u1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81293

Quidditch - Hoo's on Left Pitch

Draco: We are getting into Quidditch soon. It may be good for you to 
know about the best team around. The Montrose Magpies. 
Crabb: OK. What makes them so good?
Draco: They confuse the other team with their nicknames.
Crabb: OK. I have to know the Quidditch players' names. Do you know 
the players' names?
Draco: Oh sure.
Crabb: So you go ahead and tell me some of their names.
Draco: Well, I'll tell you. You know sometimes they give Quidditch 
players peculiar names.
Crabb: You mean funny names.
Draco: Yeah, Nicknames, pet names, 
Crabb: Like Buffy!
Draco: Buffy, huh? Never heard that one. Now let's see. We have three 
chasers - Hoo's on Left Pitch, Watt's on Center Pitch, Eye Dunno's on 
Right Pitch.
Crabb: That's what I want to find out.
Draco: I said Hoo's on Left, Watt's on Center, Eye Dunno's on Right -
Crabb: Do you know their names?
Draco: Certainly!
Crabb: Well then who's on Left?
Draco: Yes!
Crabb: I mean the fellow's name!
Draco: Hoo!
Crabb: The guy on Left!
Draco: Hoo!
Crabb: The Left chaser!
Draco: Hoo!
Crabb: The guy playing Left!
Draco: Hoo is on Left!
Crabb: Now what are you asking me for?
Draco: I'm telling you Hoo is on Left.
Crabb: Well, I'm asking YOU who's on Left!
Draco: That's the man's name.
Crabb: That's who's name?
Draco: Yes.
Crabb: Well go ahead and tell me.
Draco: Hoo.
Crabb: The guy on Left.
Draco: Hoo!
Crabb: The Left chaser.
Draco: Hoo is on Left!
Crabb: Have you got a contract with the Left chaser?
Draco: Absolutely.
Crabb: Who signs the contract?
Draco: Well, naturally!
Crabb: When you pay off the Left chaser every month, who gets the 
money?
Draco: Every Galleon. Why not? The man's entitled to it.
Crabb: Who is?
Draco: Yes. Sometimes his wife comes down and collects it.
Crabb: Who's wife?
Draco: Yes.
Crabb: All I'm trying to find out is what's the guy's name on Left 
Pitch.
Draco: Oh, no - wait a minute, don't switch them around. Watt is on 
Center Pitch.
Crabb: I'm not asking you who's on Center.
Draco: Hoo is on Left.
Crabb: I don't know.
Draco: He's on Right - now we're not talking about him.
Crabb: Now, how did I get on Right Pitch?
Draco: You mentioned his name!
Crabb: If I mentioned the Right chaser's name, who did I say is 
playing Right?
Draco: No - Hoo's playing Left.
Crabb: Never mind Left - I want to know what's the guy's name on 
Right.
Draco: No - Watt's on Center.
Crabb: I'm not asking you who's on Center.
Draco: Hoo's on Left.
Crabb: I don't know.
Draco: He's on Right Pitch.
Crabb: Aaah! Would you please stay on Right Pitch and don't go off it?
Draco: What was it you wanted?
Crabb: Now who's playing Right Pitch?
Draco: Now why do you insist on putting Hoo on Right Pitch?
Crabb: Why? Who am I putting over there?
Draco: Yes. But we don't want him there.
Crabb: What's the guy's name on Right Pitch?
Draco: Watt belongs on Center.
Crabb: I'm not asking you who's on Center.
Draco: Hoo's on Left.
Crabb: I don't know.
Draco & Crabb: RIGHT PITCH!
Crabb: Do you have Beaters?
Draco: Oh yes! Upper and lower Beaters.
Crabb: Give me the lower beater's name?
Draco: Why.
Crabb: I don't know, I just thought I'd ask you.
Draco: Well, I just thought I'd tell you.
Crabb: Alright, then tell me who's playing lower beater.
Draco: Hoo is playing Lef-
Crabb: STAY AWAY FROM THE CHASERS! I want to know what's the lower 
beater's name.
Draco: Watt's on Center.
Crabb: I'm not asking you who's on Center.
Draco: Hoo's on Left.
Crabb: I don't know.
Draco & Crabb: RIGHT PITCH!
Crabb: The lower beater's name?
Draco: Why.
Crabb: Because!
Draco: Oh, he's upper beater.
Crabb: Look, do you have a seeker on this team?
Draco: Now wouldn't this be a fine team without a seeker.
Crabb: The seeker's name.
Draco: Tomorrow.
Crabb: You don't want to tell me today?
Draco: I'm telling you now.
Crabb: Then go ahead.
Draco: Tomorrow.
Crabb: What time?
Draco: What time what?
Crabb: What time tomorrow are you going to tell me who is the seeker?
Draco: Now listen. Hoo is not the seeker. Hoo is on Lef-
Crabb: I'll break something if you say Who's on Left. I want to know 
what's the seeker's name.
Draco: Watt's on Center.
Crabb: I don't know.
Draco & Crabb: RIGHT PITCH!
Crabb: Do you have a keeper?
Draco: Oh, absolutely.
Crabb: The keeper's name.
Draco: Today.
Crabb: Today. And Tomorrow's seeking.
Draco: Now you've got it.
Crabb: All we've got is a couple of days on the team.
Draco: Well, I can't help that.
Crabb: Well, I'm a keeper too.
Draco: I know that.
Crabb: Now suppose I'm keeping, and their heavy chaser gets up.
Draco: Yes.
Crabb: He throws the quaffle. I catch the quaffle since I'm a good 
keeper, and I want to throw it to the chaser out at Left Pitch. So I 
pick up the quaffle and throw it to who?
Draco: Now that's the first thing you've said right.
Crabb: I don't even know what I'm talking about!
Draco: Well that's all you have to do.
Crabb: Is to throw the quaffle to Left Pitch.
Draco: Yes.
Crabb: Now who's got it?
Draco: Naturally!
Crabb: If I throw the quaffle to Left Pitch, somebody has to catch 
it. Now who caught it?
Draco: Naturally!
Crabb: Who caught it?
Draco: Naturally.
Crabb: Who?
Draco: Naturally!
Crabb: Naturally.
Draco: Yes.
Crabb: So I pick up the quaffle and I throw it to Naturally.
Draco: NO, NO, NO! You throw the quaffle to Left Pitch and Hoo gets 
it?
Crabb: Naturally.
Draco: That's right. There we go.
Crabb: So I pick up the quaffle and I throw it to Naturally.
Draco: You don't!
Crabb: I throw it to who?
Draco: Naturally.
Crabb: THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING!
Draco: You're not saying it the right way.
Crabb: I said I throw the quaffle to Naturally.
Draco: You don't - you throw the quaffle to Hoo.
Crabb: Naturally!
Draco: Well, say that!
Crabb: THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING! I throw the quaffle to who?
Draco: Naturally.
Crabb: Now say that to me.
Draco: You throw the quaffle to Hoo.
Crabb: Naturally.
Draco: That's it.
Crabb: SAME AS YOU!! I throw the quaffle to Left Pitch and who gets 
it?
Draco: Naturally!
Crabb: Who has it?
Draco: Naturally!
Crabb: HE BETTER HAVE IT! I throw the quaffle to Left Pitch. Whoever 
it is grabs the quaffle, so the other team moves away from Center 
Pitch. Who picks up the quaffle and throws it to What, What throws it 
to I Don't Know, I Don't Know throws it through the hoop - goal.
Draco: Yes.
Crabb: Their Beater gets up - it's a Bludger to Because. Why? I don't 
know. He's on Right Pitch and I don't care!
Draco: What was that?
Crabb: I said I don't care!
Draco: Oh, Eye Duncare is our Coach.

************************
have fun - aussie




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 22 08:12:37 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 08:12:37 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore in the Hog's Head
In-Reply-To: <bkm9st+961u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkmatl+e6dc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81294

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "junediamanti"
<june.diamanti at b...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "entropymail" 
> <entropymail at y...>
> > wrote:
> > > Don't know why I never noticed this before. Let me know if it's
> > > been mentioned. Dumbledore was the barman in the Hog's Head ...
> > > 
> > >> bboy_mn:
> > 
> > Pardon the attitude but how does a man with long hair and a beard
> > disguise himself? ...with long hair and a beard? I think not.
> > 
> > How could a whole room full of students not recognise their 
> > headmaster?
> > 

> June: 
> Or - are you aware just how poor teaching salaries are in the UK?  
> Perhaps it is Dumbledore ... is  ...moonlight ....  That's why he 
> disguises his appearance - he is embarassed. 
> 
> June

bboy_mn:

Again I ask, why would Dumbledore disguise himself in a way that is
almost a perfect description of himself. I cut the description out,
but it is quoted in the original post, and it describes Dumbledore
very closely. True, to some, that could lead to the conclude that it
is Dumbledore, but I have to believe Dumbledore is cleaver enough to
disguise himself better than that. And if he wasn't disguise then why
didn't the student recognise him?

Also, I believe that the headmaster of a school makes a little more
than the average teacher, especially the headmaster of a private
school. Privite by USA definision, meaning the school is run by a
private organization and not by the government. Hogwarts is ruled by a
board of governors, and not by the government. Although, as we saw,
they are unable to avoid arbitrary decrees and laws passed by the
government.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn






From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Mon Sep 22 09:52:55 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 09:52:55 -0000
Subject: Source for that quote (WAS: Re: The Phoenix Must Die)
In-Reply-To: <bklqvs+cij6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkmgpn+m66j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81296

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "urghiggi" <urghiggi at y...> wrote:
 In light of JKR's preferred strategy of 
> avoiding overt religious references in the work -- perhaps she herself thought 
> in retrospect that this passage came perilously close to blowing her cover??? 
> 

Just to stir the pot a bit, (heh, heh, heh), it's well worth 
remembering that "Christian' covers a multitude of different
interpretations and variations. 

If (and I  emphasise 'if'), JKR belongs to the Church of Scotland,
expect dire punshment for 'sin'. The Wee Frees take no prisoners.


Kneasy




From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk  Mon Sep 22 09:57:58 2003
From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 09:57:58 -0000
Subject: The DD Brothers and The Dementors
In-Reply-To: <20030921153422.81154.qmail@web40019.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bkmh36+bg0h@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81297

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Paula Gaon <paulag5777 at y...> wrote:

> ---Alshain---
> 
> Personally I believe that the task to somehow neutralise the Dementors
> is going to Remus Lupin and that it's going to be fairly important
> fairly soon. Perhaps one of the main themes of the sixth book. 
> 
> ---Paula---
> 
> Why do you think this?  What hints do you find in canon?  Would
really be interested to know.
>  
> Paula

Hello, Paula,
I don't really have hard canon evidence for much of this theory.
Mainly it's just intuition and logic.

In the third book, Lupin and dementors are introduced on the Hogwarts
Express, almost simultaneously which I don't think is a coincidence,
and it seems like everything that happens to Harry on the Express is
important later on.

PS: Ron, Dumbledore (on a collector's card that also mentions Nicolas
Flamel), Neville, Hermione, Draco.
CoS: Hmmm, they weren't actually on the school train, so I'll skip this.
PoA: Lupin and the Dementors
GoF: Durmstrang, BEauxbatons and the Triwizard Tournament
OoP: Luna Lovegood, the Quibbler, Sirius's cover blown, a stray
comment from Ron about making people write lines in detention (and I
don't think it's a coincidence that everyone in the compartment ends
up in the rescue mission to the MoM)

While Lupin isn't exactly comfortable around Dementors he can function
around them, though many qualified wizards have trouble with the
Patronus charm, he seems to be able to perform it well enough to drive
away a Dementor, and he teaches it to Harry (and Harry passes on the
knowledge to the DA group -- I think this is a fairly important clue.)
As well (this is just a hunch again) it seems like Lupin knows more
about them in PoA than he wants to let on. 
He's a Member of the Order and currently unemployed, which means he
has time to research a way of getting the Dementors out of the way. He
has the kind of personality that seems to go well with Research and
Development, too.

(And -- this is going to sound terrifying -- in Rowling's crusade to
deprive Harry of father figures, Lupin finding a way to take out the
Dementors and then succumbing to The Kiss would be rather a neat piece
of irony.)

Now that the Dementors have joined Voldemort we can assume that they
won't stop short of the Kiss, which is a terrible weapon. If there
ever is a large-scale battle, Voldemort can send in his Dementors to
feed first and then wipe up the rest with just a handful of his
minions. (Yes, Harry has once driven off a hundred Dementors, but he
can't be on all places at once.) Even the terror they inspire are a
weapon in itself, who wouldn't do anything to save his soul?  

If The Good Guys manage to neutralise the Dementors, Voldemort will
suffer a great blow, and the sooner the better I say. He's horrible
enough without that kind of allies. And the world would be a better
one without the Dementoids.

Anyway that's my story and I'm sticking to it, as Steve says.
Alshain 




From xmezumiiru at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 22 11:19:32 2003
From: xmezumiiru at yahoo.com (An'nai Jiriki)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 04:19:32 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Does Snape know?
In-Reply-To: <bklune+d7tl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030922111932.2471.qmail@web12207.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81298


--- slgazit <slgazit at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com,
> "sylviablundell2001" 
> <sylviablundell at a...> wrote:
> > Incidentally, I think it is Snape's own Pensieve.
> If it is 
> > DD's and he lent it to Snape knowing Harry would
> recognise it, 
> that 
> > opens a whole new can of worms.
> 
> I am sure it's Dumbledore's. This is repeated in at
> least two or 
> three places in the story.
> 
Snip

It is quite possible pensives are mass manufatured and
DDs and Snape's just look the same. It's in Harry's
perspective that the pensive is DDs, not an objective
comment. The repeat might just be to throw the reader
off. DD might have never told Snape Harry knew what it
was and would not bother it, or Snape might have
assumed Harry knew not to look in it because he knew
what it was curiosity or no.

I think it would be Snape's as he would need one for
spying (I am assuming he still is) and DD would have
one of his own just because he needs one for all his
thoughts.

The only other wizarding family Harry has had contact
with is the Weasleys. I beleive they conserved the
money to purchase a pensive to use for their children,
hence, Harry only ever saw DDs and Snapes.

Chris

=====
"You irritate me. Kill me now." ~Javert, Les Miserables

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From fc26det at aol.com  Mon Sep 22 11:24:00 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 11:24:00 -0000
Subject: Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <bkm9pu+ahff@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkmm4g+2es0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81299

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Hagrid" <aussie_lol at y...> 
wrote:
> > > In GoF, Voldemort counts his Deatheaters:
> > > "And here we have six missing Death Eaters...three dead in my 
> > > service. One, too cowardly to return...he willpay. One, who I 
> > >  believe has left me forever...he will be killed, of course. 
> > > And one, who remains my most faithful servant, and 
> > > who has already reentered my service."
> > > p.651
> > > 
> 
> See http://www.hp-lexicon.org/death_eaters.html 
> three dead :
> - Rosier (GoF 27 + 30)
> - Wilkes (GoF 27)
> - Regulus Black (OotP 6)
> 
> Cowardly or Left Forever
> - Snape **
> - Karakoff 

Aussie,
Do you think Regulus is one of the dead?  I just figured that since 
LV killed or had him killed that he didn't count as one that he would 
mention in a mournful way.  I figured he would think of him as just 
so much waste.  Just curious...
Susan
> Faithful Servant
> - Barty Couch Jr
> 
> ** Voldemort had already seen Snape while possessing Quirrel, but 
> never revealed himself to the Potions Prof. Why should he if LV 
> wasn't sure where Snape stood? Snape had to have brought some very 
> valuable information to LV on his return or he wouldn't be alive 
now. 
> That is one reason why I think Snape has stayed loyal to LV by 
> keeping close to LV's main enemy, Dumbledore. He has convinced LV 
and 
> the DE that he has always been loyal.
> 
> aussie




From talisman22457 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 22 11:32:24 2003
From: talisman22457 at yahoo.com (Talisman)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 11:32:24 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore in the Hog's Head
In-Reply-To: <bkmatl+e6dc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkmmk8+fg5u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81300

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "junediamanti"
> <june.diamanti at b...> wrote:
> > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> 
wrote:
> > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "entropymail" 
> > <entropymail at y...>
> > > wrote: Don't know why I never noticed this before. Dumbledore 
was the barman in the Hog's Head ...> 
> > > >> bboy_mn: Pardon the attitude but how does a man with long 
hair and a beard disguise himself? ...with long hair and a beard? I 
think not.
> > > 
Talisman, checking out the House Elves's pork chop recipes, suggests:

Of course you *can* see DD in the Hog's Head, just not behind the 
bar. He is the Hog(wart)s Head. All severed and bloody and seeping 
into that nice white cloth.

Talisman, reminding you that the BBQ in on (maybe, after Fudge is 
creamed in Book 6, could we talk the heliopaths into doing a little 
rotisserie work--eh?)








From entropymail at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 22 11:54:08 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 11:54:08 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore in the Hog's Head
In-Reply-To: <bkm9st+961u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkmnt0+qvl1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81301

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "junediamanti" 
> Or - are you aware just how poor teaching salaries are in the UK?  
> Perhaps it is Dumbledore and he is forced to moonlight in order to 
> make ends meet.  The bar job is a bit of realism intruding into the 
> magic again.  That's why he disguises his appearance - he is 
> embarassed.  Well you'd be wouldn't you.  Trying to appear all 
> knowing, all wise when you have an overdraft the size of the national 
> debt of a South American state and you have to moonlight to pay it 
> off.
> 
> June

Hee hee! Very funny; hadn't thought of that possibility! Wonder if
Harry will wander into the Home Depot in Book 6, only to find Snapie
selling lighting fixtures and paint supplies!

:: Entropy ::




From elfundeb at comcast.net  Mon Sep 22 12:03:41 2003
From: elfundeb at comcast.net (elfundeb2)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 12:03:41 -0000
Subject: ADMIN:  It's All About the Books
Message-ID: <bkmoet+jtf7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81302

Crack!  And lo, a list elf appears, decked out in a maroon pillowcase 
and tottering under a pile of books, which spill out onto the floor.  
 
"It's all about the books," she squeaks, gingerly picking up well-
worn copies of five OOP, GoF, PoA, CoS, PS/SS and two schoolbooks.  
 
This list, that is.  It's about the *Harry Potter* books.
 
When you post only to compliment someone on a great post it's not 
about the books.  It's about the poster.  Posters love compliments, 
but please send them offlist.  (Just click on the truncated email 
address when you view the post in webview.)
 
Likewise, everyone is welcome to splash in Theory Bay, or to quaff a 
few at the Royal George, but please bring your canon with you. 
 
And when the topic of conversation drifts to Diana Wynne Jones, or 
Dickens, or other literature, well, yes, it is about books, but make 
sure the post connects those books to HP, or it's not about *the* 
books.  If a thread is drifting OT, please apparate to our sister 
list, HPFGU-OTChatter -- at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-
OTChatter/ -- where many lively literature discussions take place.
 
****
Clutching her canon, the list elf disapparates as quickly as she 
arrived.
 
Debbie Elf
for the List Admin Team




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 22 12:55:51 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 12:55:51 -0000
Subject: Source for that quote (WAS: Re: The Phoenix Must Die)
In-Reply-To: <bkmgpn+m66j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkmrgn+6h27@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81303

> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "urghiggi" <urghiggi at y...> 
wrote:
>  In light of JKR's preferred strategy of 
> > avoiding overt religious references in the work -- perhaps she 
herself thought 
> > in retrospect that this passage came perilously close to blowing 
her cover??? 
> > 
> Kneasy:
> Just to stir the pot a bit, (heh, heh, heh), it's well worth 
> remembering that "Christian' covers a multitude of different
> interpretations and variations. 
> 
> If (and I  emphasise 'if'), JKR belongs to the Church of Scotland,
> expect dire punshment for 'sin'. The Wee Frees take no prisoners.
> 
> 
Laura:

Okay, I'm not Christian, but I thought all of the different 
denominations agreed on the redemption thing, i.e., that humanity can 
be redeemed.  (I'm a bit fuzzy on the mechanics of this, I admit.)  
If something has changed, could you all put out a press release or 
something?  :-) That seems to be where JKR is going, according to Pip 
and others, right?  It may take an apocalypse but it will happen.

Laura, who should probably be spending her time this week getting 
ready for Rosh Hashanah...




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Mon Sep 22 13:16:17 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 13:16:17 -0000
Subject: Fawkes and the basilisk
In-Reply-To: <bkm9ru+vb6d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkmsn1+vlmg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81304

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
>

> > Geoff:
> > That thought had crossed my mind but to use sonar to navigate in 
on 
> > the basilisk's eyes would not be feasible, I think. Bats use 
sound 
> > to avoid obstacles of any variety; I don't think it could be used 
to
> > locate a specific target.
> 
> bboy_mn:
> 
> Of course bats can locate specific targets by sonar, how else would
> they be able to catch all those insects at night?
> 
> So, bats can located very small objects easily, but the real 
question
> is can they detect texture? Can they detect small bumps on a much
> larger solid object? Answer: I don't know.
> 

Geoff:
Sorry, I didn't make myself very clear.... That is what I meant. The 
basilisk's eye is in its face whereas an insect for example is 
a "whole". I was trying to work out if the sonar (or whatever) would 
allow them to find the eye in the face - your comment about texture 
is probably what I was after.....




From kkearney at students.miami.edu  Mon Sep 22 14:01:18 2003
From: kkearney at students.miami.edu (corinthum)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 14:01:18 -0000
Subject: Fawkes and the basilisk
In-Reply-To: <bkm5gq+ag3i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkmvbe+ig03@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81306

I wrote:
> > Back to the question, the stare of a basilisk is deadly, but
> > what about a sidelong glance?  If Fawkes was to sneak up on the
> > basilisk from behind and injure one eye before the basilisk could
> > properly "stare" at him, I think he would be safe.> > -Corinth

And Aussie replied:

> The Poor Basalisk would die of starvation if it's prey suddenly 
> became stone before it had the chance to eat it. 
> 
> Maybe instead of the qualities of Fawkes, we should be looking at 
the 
> characteristics of the basalisk. 
> 
> A Basalisk will:
> a) turn to stone any creature that looks it INDIRECTLY in the eye.
> b) kill any creature that looks directly, except for weasles (Greek 
> mythology). That is how Moaning Myrtle died, but she wasn't eaten. 

Part a) is 100% assumption on your part; there is no evidence that a 
Potterverse basilisk can turn anything to stone (in other mythology 
yes, but not here).  Unless you're referring to petrification, which 
I consider to be a different concept.  Petrification in CoS seemed to 
require a full stare that was somehow weakened (reflection by water 
or mirror, refraction by a camera lense, distortion through Nick) 
rather than a partial glance.  So by canon, a sideways glance might 
be neither lethal nor petrifying.

-Corinth 




From grannygoodwitch613 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 22 11:33:54 2003
From: grannygoodwitch613 at yahoo.com (Granny Goodwitch)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 04:33:54 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Why Ron Loves Hermione
Message-ID: <20030922113354.62196.qmail@web20705.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81307


22September03

JDR wrote:  "...Also, Ron is exactly the kind of uncomplicated but not unintelligent
guy-type guy that girls too smart for their own good often find
irresistable."

Granny asks:   What exactly do you mean by the phrase, "girls too smart for their own good"?  Granted, Dear that Hermione is indeed overt about her intelligence, but I fail to see where her intelligence is not to her own good.  Why on earth in this day and age must a woman still "cover up" her smarts?

JDR wrote:   "The problem I have with canon Ron is that we know by the emphasis on
his chess prowess that he's not stupid, but I'm still waiting for his
big epiphany. God, I hope JKR doesn't plan to kill him off!"

Granny responds:   I agree totally here with you.  But I see  the matter in a totally  different light.  Ron's intelligence and ability to think on his feet are clear all throughout canon.  However, he's a "sleeper" due to his birth order (#6 if you count the twins separately) ;  always overshadowed, but still quite capable. However, he's learned an untold amount from the examples of his older brothers.  None the less, he would only know how to function as a sleeper.  Therefore, I'm of the opinion that Ron and Hermione would form a real symbionic pair.  She'd probably be attracted to Ron because of his ability to get things done without a lot of  noise and fanfare.  As one who always feels she has to prove herself as a Muggle-born in the WW, Hermione would naturally appreciate Ron's serene capability.  Ron, on the other hand has no experience in the limelight.  So Hermione would naturally fill in this gap.  I'm with you 100%, please G-d, JKR will not kill him off.  In my opinion,
 they're a match made in Heaven, and Ron will indeed will make his mark--hopefully with Hermione at his side.

"Granny"



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From paulag5777 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 22 11:39:30 2003
From: paulag5777 at yahoo.com (Paula Gaon)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 04:39:30 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: TheDDBrothers and the Dementors
Message-ID: <20030922113930.56127.qmail@web40005.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81308


22/9/03

Tanya Swaine  wrote:


"Paula wrote:  Personally I believe that the task to somehow neutralise the Dementors
is going to Remus Lupin and that it's going to be fairly important
fairly soon. Perhaps one of the main themes of the sixth book."

Paula:  For the record, please note that I didn't write the above, rather was responding to another post.  However, would still like to know if anyone can find any hints in cannon that Lupin will be the one to somewhat neutralise the Dememtors.

Paula



 



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From dfran at sbcglobal.net  Mon Sep 22 07:24:10 2003
From: dfran at sbcglobal.net (deedeee88)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 07:24:10 -0000
Subject: Phoenixes---can they die?  (OoP spoiler)
In-Reply-To: <008001c380a6$f043af80$7f4a0043@hppav>
Message-ID: <bkm82q+emev@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81309

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Eric Oppen" <oppen at m...> wrote:
> If you'll recall, at one point in OotP, Fawkes took the full blast 
of an
> _Avada Kedavra_ spell...and it didn't kill him.

No, the Phoenix cannot die...


in the hebrew/christian world....even in the muslim world...

no, the phoenixx cannoot die....


the  phoenix is all of our "guilty pleasures"......

whether it be for a happy ending or a sad ending....


unless DD or HP  thought/wished/hoped fawekes would die...it would 
not happen...







From Berkana_01 at hotmail.com  Mon Sep 22 10:03:26 2003
From: Berkana_01 at hotmail.com (Joanna Barra)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 10:03:26 +0000
Subject: The Phoenix & the wand
Message-ID: <BAY7-F77Rn8P5o7P6um0000d4f4@hotmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81310

Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 00:31:41 -0000
>    From: "grindieloe" <andie at knownet.net>

While I hate to think that Dumbledore will not make it through to the
>end of the series, I do realize that he is getting older each year.
>Therefore, I think it a valid possibility that Fawkes may someday
>become the loyal pet of Harry Potter, especially if the theory
>regarding Fawkes' original "owner" being Godric Gryffindor is true.
>After all, the theory of Harry being a direct descendent of
>Gryffindor has neither been proved or disproved up to OoP.  I still
>believe strongly that Harry will end up being a direct heir.
>
>I also believe that Harry will one day inherit the beautiful,
>heartwarming, and faithful companion whose feather resides in his
>wand... [and whose feather also once resided in the wand of the
>defeated wizard, formerly known as He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named, Lord
>Voldemort.] :)
>
>Andrea

........................................
Joanna says

That is a fantastic theory and it also makes you wonder why Fawkes has taken 
to Harry so much and will do anything for him, even attack a basilisk. We 
all believe it was because Harry was loyal to Dumbledore, but it might be a 
lot more than that, it might actually be, because Harry will be his future 
owner.
And as for Voldemort, what will happen to his wand if and when he dies? His 
wand and Harry's wand are connected, because of Fawkes. So will the wand 
just cease to exist after he dies, or will Harry inherit the wand? Or will 
he use his wand to destroy it's brother?

ML


Joanna
x

_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail messages direct to your mobile phone http://www.msn.co.uk/msnmobile





From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz  Mon Sep 22 10:05:21 2003
From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 22:05:21 +1200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <bkm9pu+ahff@eGroups.com>
References: <20030922020109.6598.qmail@web60201.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20030922220252.00ab51a0@pop3.xtra.co.nz>

No: HPFGUIDX 81311

At 07:53 22/09/2003 +0000, you wrote:
>Snape had to have brought some very
>valuable information to LV on his return or he wouldn't be alive now.
>That is one reason why I think Snape has stayed loyal to LV by
>keeping close to LV's main enemy, Dumbledore. He has convinced LV and
>the DE that he has always been loyal.
>
>aussie

Yes, I can see how that would be true.  To be safe when in the group, he 
has to
give them something.  Maybe just information that Dumbledore has authorised
him to 'spill', I'm not sure.  But guess it will all come out soon.

Tanya





From grannygoodwitch613 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 22 12:52:33 2003
From: grannygoodwitch613 at yahoo.com (Granny Goodwitch)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 05:52:33 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Time, the reverse spell, James and Lily, Voldemort, weird
Message-ID: <20030922125233.12643.qmail@web20704.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81312


22September03 


On 21September "warzog1"  wrote:   I'm kinda wondering if maybe James was a previous rebirth of 
Voldemort? It would explain why his followers were closer to his age.  It would explain why Voldemort's spell didn't work, "He didn't Really   Mean it," against his own son.  It would explain why the spell "Backfired" against Voldemort, like  a "Reverse Spell".

Granny responds:   James being a previous rebirth of Voldemort is quite a heavy thought.  But remember, LV took some of Harry's blood(G/F) to concoct his rebirth potion.  So, that would mean that he's indirectly taken his own blood.  My goodness, this really boggles the mind.  Makes one wonder, what does LV really intend to do, what's his ultimate goal if Harry is in reality his own "flesh and blood", so to speak.?

"Granny"


 



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From paulag5777 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 22 12:57:49 2003
From: paulag5777 at yahoo.com (Paula Gaon)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 05:57:49 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: The DDBrothers and the Dementors
Message-ID: <20030922125749.77101.qmail@web40010.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81313


22/9/03

 

Alshain wrote:   "...   While Lupin isn't exactly comfortable around Dementors he can function around them, though many qualified wizards have trouble with the Patronus charm, he seems to be able to perform it well enough to driveaway a Dementor, and he teaches it to Harry (and Harry passes on the knowledge to the DA group -- I think this is a fairly important clue.) As well (this is just a hunch again) it seems like Lupin knows moreabout them in PoA than he wants! to let on. He's a Member of the Order and currently unemployed, which means he has time to research a way of getting the Dementors out of the way. He has the kind of personality that seems to go well with Research and Development, too. ..."

Paula:  Hello Alshain, this is a really good point.  I had failed to consider Lupin's ability to function around the Dementors.  When one considers it, a guy who suffers from the curse of being a vampire wouldn't have much to fear, would he?  In addition, Lupin's teaching Harry the Petronus charm and Harry passing the knowledge on is so much in keeping with the spirit of co-operation that characterises the Good Guys in the series.  But, the stigma and trauma of being a vampire would force Lupin into a life of relative solitude, ie Research and Development.  However, he could still use this forced solitude to help a good cause, getting those nasty Dementors under control.  I love it!

Paula





---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca  Mon Sep 22 13:54:21 2003
From: feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca (feetmadeofclay)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 13:54:21 -0000
Subject: Snape's OTHER Worst Memory (FINALLY)
In-Reply-To: <bkffgq+m9rq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkmuud+mht4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81314

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sydney" <sydpad at y...> wrote:
> 
> Snape is so screamingly obviously from an abusive household, 
though...

Golly: I think this is what is what we are meant to think - or maybe 
it is setting the stage for future events.

The way I see it, that memory has a two fold purpose. 

1. It links Harry and Snape with similar pasts.  The difference being 
that Harry has and will choose to be a good person.  Snape has not.  
All about choice...  

Not sure if I like this message.  It is a mite harder for abused 
children to get a handle on their issues than just to decide to be 
nice.  Often they don't want to behave like their parents - they are 
patterned to.  
  
2.  It tells us something about James, making him less an idol and 
Snape more sympathetic.  I can't say I was surprised but it was very 
well drawn.  

> 3--.  It's Snape's worst memory not because it's the worst incident 
of
> bullying, but the worst incident involving Lily.  Just from my own
> personal recollections, memories that really make me wince aren't of
> the dreadful things that happened to me, but of the events where I
> really wish I'd acted differently.  


I have to say this is the BEST theory I have heard so far.  Very 
plausible and fits with the title.  

Golly  







From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 22 15:37:48 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 15:37:48 -0000
Subject: Veiled Dementors; Was Re: The DD Brothers and The Dementors
In-Reply-To: <bkmh36+bg0h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkn50c+8usr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81315

Alshain wrote:

> (And -- this is going to sound terrifying -- in Rowling's crusade to
> deprive Harry of father figures, Lupin finding a way to take out the
> Dementors and then succumbing to The Kiss would be rather a neat 
> piece of irony.)

"...rather a neat piece of irony." Ah, I am heartsick at the notion; 
have you no heart? ;-)

There has been some wondering and theorizing around what happens to 
people who have had their souls sucked out by dementors; do they 
become dementors themselves, etc. (Gak! What if *that's* what 
actually happened to the Longbottoms...and the Droobles is a clue 
about that...who knows what a soul looks like as it is removed 
<shudder> from someone...perhaps it looks like a bubble gum bubble.)

Maybe what happens to the leftover soulless shell is the wrong 
question. What happens to the *soul* a dementor sucks out of its 
victim? Does it just cease to exist? Is it *eaten*? Do dementors 
*eat* souls as Death *Eaters* (natural allies, them) etc? Or is each 
dementor a soul prison?

If Harry was hearing voices behind the veil, wasn't it soul voices? 
Luna certainly seemed to think so. If that's where the dead go, where 
souls go--then those who have been soul sucked by dementors 
are "missing in action" beyond the veil; no afterlife for that 
person. No "next great adventure," organized mind or not.

Let's round up all the dementors and push *them* through the veil; 
see if any of the souls they sucked are freed, shall we?

Sandy, thinking, yeah, Rescue Mission!




From feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca  Mon Sep 22 13:43:06 2003
From: feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca (feetmadeofclay)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 13:43:06 -0000
Subject: Hyperbolic Chapter Titles; Was Re: Snape's worst memory
In-Reply-To: <bkm4k3+65dg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkmu9a+aqdg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81316


feetmadeofclay" wrote:
> > But I can't take Rowling's titles for her chapters as hyperbole. 
> > Otherwise I would never be able to believe anything she tells us 
> > when she's speaking as the author. 

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> > Are we going to give the authorial voice, this same treatment 
over 
> > the whole series?
> 
> SANDY: Aren't we already? We have ESE!Lupin fans and Hero!Malfoy 
theories. 
> We even have ESE!Dumbledore, for Pete's sake. Why aren't chapter 
> titles grist for the mill if characterizations are? 

Golly: It is not different. When Rowling says something point blank 
about a character, like hair colour, I believe it.  Same is true 
about any point blank given information. 

> 
> Sandy: Didn't we (well, I did) spend four books hating Snape, only 
to find 
> in the fifth one that he had a hard childhood and was the victim of 
> bullies, 3/4th of whom are people we've been rooting for? 

Golly: You hate Snape less? I don't. He's still a 36 year old man 
who picked on an 11 year old because he had a grudge with said kid's 
father. 

He's still the same man who picks on Neville - what reason is that. 
We knew from the first that Snape had a reason (other than Harry 
himself) to hate Harry. We only wondered what it was. I can't say I 
was surprised by the Pensive revelation. I figured that it was 
pretty much a popular kid vs. the loser after POA. It had that 
flavour in POA. Realistically James was not likely to be an angel if 
Sirius was his friend. Harry wouldn't have been friends with a kid 
like Sirius - a boy who would think such a prank was an acceptable 
thing to do. Nor was it likely that Snape's dislike of Harry and 
James likely to be founded on nothing. 

Snape was a jerk and STILL IS. Nothing has changed. He's just now 
more sympathetic to some. But really he was that before. Many 
people loved Snape and figured he was a better person than Harry saw, 
given hints and evidence Rowling provided us with - like Snape saving 
Harry's life and DD trusting him. 


> SANDY: Petunia 
> turned out to be someone we need to approve of in at least a 
> rudimentary way for doing a distasteful (to her) but important (to 
us)
> duty. 

GOLLY: Well this is exactly what I always figured it was. I have a 
feeling there is a magical element to this sense of duty as well. 
Just as we are told saving someone's life produces a magical bond 
between the two. Details to be worked out later.

It doesn't make her any less nasty. No matter what she saw her duty 
as, she still treated Harry horribly. I doubt that was necessary. 
Most ordinary people, when they take in orphaned relatives are kind 
to them. 

> SANDY: Dudley almost gets demented and even that is written in such 
a 
> way that we are not disappointed when Harry saves him. (Are we?) 

GOLLY: Dudley's a jerk who beats up ten year old boys. What's new? 
We know Dementors can effect muggles and that muggles are not 
protected from magic. 

> SANDY Ron's pet rat of the first two books turns out in the third 
book to 
> be a former and future Voldemort flunky. The dangerous criminal 
> everyone is so terrified will catch and murder Harry in that same 
> book turns out to be Harry's most ardent protector. 

GOLLY: This is the most stock mystery plot, that there is. 

Sure I didn't expect Scabbers was an animageous, but this is hardly a 
denial that he was also Scabbers. Everything in this revelation is 
consistend with what we were told earlier. 


>SANDY: Yes, I 
> think we *are* going to give the authorial voice the same treatment 
> over the entire series; besides, what else have we obsessed fans 
got 
> to do for the next couple of years? Is nothing sacred? 

GOLLY: Nothing to do with being sacred. Merely with being somewhat 
logical about reading the text. I have no problem with wild 
theories. They are fun. 

But what is the likelihood that Hermione is really secretly in love 
with Draco and that together they will help the Dark Lord kill 
Harry? Probably would make a great fanfic.

Fun to speculate. But surely when someone objects to such a theory, 
they do so with good merit. 

The Authorial voice is always right - even when it doesn't give you 
the whole picture. The facts it gives you are true. Scabbers was a 
rat - undistinguished and long lived. Spells wouldn't work on it 
apparently. 

As I said before, if you are going to not believe it, everything has 
to be given equal treatment. Not just the desire for Snape to have 
worse memories than being panted. 


SANDY: With this many 
> people looting it for valuable artifacts, no. 

The key work is 'valuable'.

Golly






From urghiggi at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 22 15:50:51 2003
From: urghiggi at yahoo.com (urghiggi)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 15:50:51 -0000
Subject: Why Ron Loves Hermione
In-Reply-To: <bkm9r9+ha2t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkn5or+mqoq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81317

Ffi wrote;
> 
> Ron's definately going to have a big 'moment' which'll be pivotal for 
> the good side - Hermione's already had so many in helping Harry get 
> throught asks/time-turning/figure out the basalisk - sof ar Ron's 
> greatest moment came in the chess game in PS - he's got to have 
> another moment - even if it is to redeem himself from some weakness 
> he shows, which might get Harry and others into trouble - but he'll 
> come good - and don't even mention him being killed off...
> 


urghiggi replied:

I think one of these big moments comes in OoP when Percy's letter arrives, 
the trio read it together, and then Ron immediately dismisses his brother as 
"the world's biggest git" and angrily rips the letter into pieces. He has NO 
temptation to listen to any of the advice in this letter, regardless of what the 
cost might be for his future in the WizWorld. Utterly loyal, consequences be 
damned.

It is after this that Hermione looks at Ron "with an odd expression on her face" 
and then immediately offers to correct his and Harry's homework, which she 
heretofore had steadfastly refused to do. 

Urghiggi, Chgo




From oppen at mycns.net  Mon Sep 22 16:25:34 2003
From: oppen at mycns.net (Eric Oppen)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 11:25:34 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Death Eaters
References: <bkm9pu+ahff@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003401c38126$27530b40$6f570043@hppav>

No: HPFGUIDX 81318

Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Death Eaters


> > > In GoF, Voldemort counts his Deatheaters:
> > > "And here we have six missing Death Eaters...three dead in my
> > > service. One, too cowardly to return...he willpay. One, who I
> > >  believe has left me forever...he will be killed, of course.
> > > And one, who remains my most faithful servant, and
> > > who has already reentered my service."
> > > p.651
> > >
>
> See http://www.hp-lexicon.org/death_eaters.html
> three dead :
> - Rosier (GoF 27 + 30)
> - Wilkes (GoF 27)
> - Regulus Black (OotP 6)

I'm not sure that he'd count Regulus Black as "dead in my (Voldemort's)
service."  He was trying to get out and got killed for it, which I don't
think V'mort would consider an honorable death for the DE cause.  I don't
think he mentioned Regulus Black at all.  He may have been one of the gaps
that the Big V-man just didn't mention---without being actually physically
present at the graveyard and seeing, it's very hard to tell just what was
going on.  I think that the "six missing Death Eaters" was just the biggest
gap in the circle.

>
> Cowardly or Left Forever
> - Snape **
> - Karakoff
> Faithful Servant
> - Barty Couch Jr
>
> ** Voldemort had already seen Snape while possessing Quirrel, but
> never revealed himself to the Potions Prof. Why should he if LV
> wasn't sure where Snape stood? Snape had to have brought some very
> valuable information to LV on his return or he wouldn't be alive now.

He could also have pointed out, with perfect truth, that Quirrell had never
levelled with him about having V'mort in/on his head.  "How was I to know
you were there, my lord?  If I had known...but Quirrell never mentioned
being in your service, and I had no way of checking him to see!  _I_ thought
I was protecting the Stone until you could come to get it, or I could get it
for you!"  Snape was not there during the big confrontation between Harry
and Quirrell, after all.


> That is one reason why I think Snape has stayed loyal to LV by
> keeping close to LV's main enemy, Dumbledore. He has convinced LV and
> the DE that he has always been loyal.

Which may well be one reason, as has been pointed out, why he indulges Draco
Malfoy so much.  "Let the little twerp report back to Daddy that I pet him
and indulge him...Malfoy Senior will think I'm still on his side!"







From rmatovic at ssk.com  Mon Sep 22 17:07:59 2003
From: rmatovic at ssk.com (Rebecca M)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 17:07:59 -0000
Subject: Book 6 Predictions  -- goblins
In-Reply-To: <bja4ha+i3jp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkna9f+dqo4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81319

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "boyd_smythe" 
<boyd.t.smythe at f...> wrote:

.
> 
> So the question is, what will Lucius do?  [snip]

> 
> So...my vote is for him inciting a goblin revolt with the aid of a 
few 


I'm not sure about the Lucius point, but another canon argument for 
goblins playing a big role in book 6 (or 7) is that in GoF when 
Arthur is describing the different people from the ministry who go 
past the tent before the world cup, there is someone from Goblin 
relations -- all these passing mentions that seem just like quaint 
background on a first read tend to turn out to refer to something 
that is significant later on (e.g., two of the other people who pass 
by are unspeakables who work in the dept of mysteries)

Rebecca




From meltowne at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 22 17:18:38 2003
From: meltowne at yahoo.com (meltowne)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 17:18:38 -0000
Subject: Scabber is NOT a rat (was Hyperbolic Chapter Titles )
In-Reply-To: <bkmu9a+aqdg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bknate+9pkm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81320

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "feetmadeofclay" 
<feetmadeofclay at y...> wrote:

Golly: 

The Authorial voice is always right - even when it doesn't give you 
the whole picture. The facts it gives you are true. Scabbers was a 
rat - undistinguished and long lived. Spells wouldn't work on it 
apparently. 

Me:

Actually, no scabbers was NOT a rat, and that's the point.  When Ron 
tried to cast spells on scabbers, he was trying to turn a RAT into 
something yellow:

          "Sunshine, daisies, butter mellow,
          Turn this stupid fat rat yellow."

The spell failed, not because Ron was a lousy spellcaster, but 
because Scabbers wasn't really a rat!  He was a human in disguise.

We can't always take everything at face value.  The memory from the 
pensieve may be Snapes worst memory, it might not.  Harry clearly 
thinks it is, or why would it be there?  Perhaps we need to figure 
out why it was there - and there are plenty of possibilities.

Maybe Snape didn't want Harry to access it - because it was his worst 
fear, or for some other reason.

Maybe Snape didn't want it clouding his own perception when dealing 
with Harry during the lessons.  He only got truly nasty with Harry 
AFTER he dove in to get him.  At that point he saw what memory Harry 
was seeing, and it did cloud his perception.

Melinda




From phoenixfeder2002 at yahoo.de  Mon Sep 22 12:32:35 2003
From: phoenixfeder2002 at yahoo.de (=?iso-8859-1?q?Diana=20Fischer?=)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 14:32:35 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: Why Ron Loves Hermione
In-Reply-To: <bklpn8+v1ei@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030922123235.43428.qmail@web41508.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81321

Darrin wrote: 
> Why has Ron fallen in love with Hermione? It is pretty obvious 
to me that he has, though he covers it up in typical teenage boy 
fashion...>>>

The Sergeant Majorette says

> Ron's love is obvious to everybody except himself, which I guess *is* 
pretty typical. >>>


The better question would be did he fall for her or not? Its not in canon that Ron is in love. Thats what I know because he reacts only in this direction that the reader could think Ron is in love with Hermione but its not written that he really is. To this comes he react like that only if someone else is interest in Hermione that way but in all other instance he don't show any interess in Hermione more as a friend.

Diana Fischer




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Mon Sep 22 17:47:34 2003
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 17:47:34 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Philosophy (WAS:  MAGIC DISHWASHER: Spying Game Philosophy
In-Reply-To: <bkhm1q+896m@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkncjm+gh7e@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81322

Debbie wrote:

> In fact, one of the reasons I hated chapter 37, The Lost Prophecy, 
> was because I didn't ? and still don't ? see Dumbledore's decision 
> not to tell Harry about the prophecy sooner as a mistake.  What 
> Dumbledore now sees as a *mistake* was to treat Harry as a human 
> being and not as a weapon.

David:

I don't understand the argument here.  You seem to be saying that 
Dumbledore has a dilemma: either keep Harry in ignorance, and allow 
him the freedom to make his own choices, or tell him the truth and 
so manipulate him; to turn him into a weapon, as you put it.

This seems a false dilemma to me.  True, when Harry is very young, 
to burden him with too much knowledge might be to paralyse him, but 
as he gets older he should be able to bear the truth without losing 
his freedom - indeed knowing more makes him more free because his 
choices are better informed.

It seems to me therefore there is a crossover point - encountered by 
every parent - when it is better to let a growing child into a 
secret.  What Dumbledore is lamenting is that he delayed past that 
crossover point, as IMO he makes clear by recounting the details of 
the first four books and describing the ever weakening justification 
for remaining silent.

If, at the end of GOF, Dumbledore had told Harry aboutt the 
prophecy, how would that have reduced him?  If so, how, at the end 
of OOP, does Harry knowing about the prophecy *not* do so?

David




From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk  Mon Sep 22 18:06:17 2003
From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 18:06:17 -0000
Subject: Veiled Dementors; Was Re: The DD Brothers and The Dementors
In-Reply-To: <bkn50c+8usr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkndmp+j9ai@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81323

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...>
wrote:
>

> "...rather a neat piece of irony." Ah, I am heartsick at the notion; 
> have you no heart? ;-)

Al: Heart, in a gel who loved what JKR did to Snape and Sirius in OOP? 
Nah. :-) Forgot to add another neat piece of irony, BTW: in PoA, Lupin
was the one who told Harry about the Dementor's Kiss. (Allright, I'm
really a softy. Cried through the last three chapters.)

Sandy:
> There has been some wondering and theorizing around what happens to 
> people who have had their souls sucked out by dementors; do they 
> become dementors themselves, etc. 

Al: I don't think soul-sucked people become Dementors, in any case.
There was an interview with Rowling (Canadian Press, Ochtober 25,
2000) where she said Dementors don't breed but grow like fungi
wherever there's decay.

http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/2000/1000-canadianpress-moore.htm


Whatever a soul-sucked person is like, I think they're even worse off
then the Longbottoms. The Dementor's Kiss is definitely "cruel and
unusual punishment" and as such ought to be banned by the
International Confederation of Wizards.    

Sandy:
> If Harry was hearing voices behind the veil, wasn't it soul voices? 
> Luna certainly seemed to think so. If that's where the dead go, where 
> souls go--then those who have been soul sucked by dementors 
> are "missing in action" beyond the veil; no afterlife for that 
> person. No "next great adventure," organized mind or not.
> 
Al: IIK! (though I think you have a good point here) 
That'd be the worst thing in a Soulless!Remus scenario (if you happen
to be a Remus/Sirius-shipper like yours truly.) First mutual suspicion
during the first war, then twelve years spent apart, three years with
Sirius on the run, then Sirius dies and Remus's soul is taken away
from him. The poor lads don't even get to spend the afterlife together.
 
Alshain, off to find some fluffy, alternate-universe fanfic where
everybody lives happily ever after




From jsmgleaner at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 22 18:08:57 2003
From: jsmgleaner at yahoo.com (Hayes)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 11:08:57 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: DEs: What's my motivation? (long)
Message-ID: <20030922180857.86140.qmail@web14805.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81324

In what little of my spare time I've been trying to
think through a question that came up much earlier on
the board (see how little spare time I have!), but I
am unable to find the original post now (thanks,
yahoomort).  That is, I want to know what motivates
the Death Eaters to become Death Eaters.  I've laid
out some ideas of what we do know, but I keep running
up against a fundamental absence that is very
suggestive: we don't really know much about the dark
arts beyond what Fake!Moody told us in GoF.

My list is meant to be suggestive, even sporting, but
not thorough (take aim or fill in as you please):  

1. No matter what political side you are on in real
life, you usually assure yourself (or work to clarify
to yourself) that you are on the right one, but you
can never know for absolute sure, a job usually left
to the writing of history <dodges mugs thrown at her
from people who are always perfectly sure they are
always choosing the good side always>.  In other
words, I'm fairly sure that we all think we're on the
right side.  If they were more than fictional
constructions, the Death Eaters would think they were
on the right side too; however, the narrative language
is so, well, unyieldingly "those are the evil cads,
look at them!!" that it's hard to see what their
justification or motivation is.  I will concede that
this probably has something to do with the fact that
these are children's books.

2.  The Death Eaters practice the "dark" arts; theirs
is the "dark" side; their name itself is "death"
eaters.  In case you missed it, they are the baddies;
they're on the bad side.  And it's way too postmodern
for JKR to put in a bit about the DEs trying to
"reclaim" and "appropriate" the terms of evil. 

3.  They're the equivalent of racists.  Really bad
racists.  As in KKK racists (the hoods! the hoods! 
why always the comparison to Nazis?).  But racism is
not some simple formulation ("they just *hate*
different people"; "they're just ignorant"); no,
unfortunately it's also a complex and historically
contingent response to socio-political developments
like economics and immigration.  Plus, there is a big
difference between garden-variety racism (upheld, as
it is, by institutional racism) and becoming a KKK
member.  So there is a definite difference between
believing in blood purity and becoming a Death Eater
in the books, as Sirius explains to Harry when
describing how people supported Voldemort's ideas but
thought he was "too killy" (crass summarizing; I don't
have my books near me). 

Okay, so thus far we know they're bad.  They're bad
because they're bad and do bad things and think bad
things. I fear I'm in the land of tautology, so I will
move on.

4.  The language LV's followers use puts them on the
same -- or worse -- level than house elves (the
closest to slaves we have in the series).  They call
him "master," he abuses them and makes them do all of
his dirty work.  Seems an odd thing for wizards, who
do have some power independent of a leader, to do. 
Voldemort seems to have more than one agenda going on
-- two, we know of now: kill Harry; become the most
powerful wizard ever -- and we already know that he
doesn't have qualms about killing and torturing his
own followers (Regulus Black, Avery).  Hmmm . . .
that's a bit of a gamble, that is.  In other words,
you would have to believe in the ideology, have a
personal/economic/historical stake in that ideology,
be pretty pissed off personally, and want to be pushed
around.  All right.

5.  If being able to use an unforgivable -- or at
least the Crucio curse -- means having really to mean
it, as Bellatrix tells Harry, that suggests a sort of
sadistic component to the dark arts, in that it is
necessary to the "dark" arts that one wants to harm
another for harm's sake and not for justice or even
revenge <that is, if we trust Bellatrix; she could be
lying for all we really know about the Dark Arts>. 
But MacNair comes to mind: Death Eater, magical
creature executioner, Death Eater.  This matches #4
above, where the masochism of the Death Eaters as
Voldy's "slaves" appears.  

6.  So, what we have is a suggestion that there must
be an S/M component of, for lack of a better term (and
thank you to a friend for supplying it because it
didn't occur to me), "Death Eater Culture."    

7.  I still don't have any complex and foundational
motivation for why Death Eaters' go bad, and their
embracing of the various terms of "evil" (instead of
saying they're on the side of goodness and light). 
But I am interested in the fact that JKR seems to
sidestep that whole question of motivation by filling
in the oscillating turns of sadism and masochism
inherent in DE/Voldemort relationships where the
motivation should be. We can't get a glimpse of the
complexity of the choice to become a Death Eater right
now because too many of the DE characters we know
(with the notable exception of the story of Regulus
Black) fall into slightly sadistic or masochistic
characterizations.

So there may be no complex motivation at all within
the narrative.  But my guess is, and here I go on to
wild speculation, that Harry will dabble in the DA.  I
think he/we need to know more about these durn dark
arts that are so darkly attractive to so many dark
characters.

--Hayes, who is shocked! shocked! you actually read
this far.



=====
"Do I contradict myself?/ Very well then . . . . I contradict myself."-- Walt Whitman

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From hpfanmatt at gmx.net  Mon Sep 22 19:17:17 2003
From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 19:17:17 -0000
Subject: McGonagall a Muggle? (Was: Did I Miss Something?)
In-Reply-To: <bki2k7+j1hr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bknhrt+dp28@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81325

--- Responding to Pip's theory that McGonagall
is Muggle-born, Wendy wrote: 
 
> I've never heard this theory ... and I'd like 
> to know how you think it fits with a bit of 
> canon that's been bothering me (from the first 
> chapter of the first book). When Minerva meets 
> Dumbledore at the Dursleys, during their 
> conversation she says:
> 
> "'You'd think they'd be a bit more careful, 
> but no -- even the Muggles have noticed 
> something's going on. It was on their news.' 
> She jerked her head back at the Dursleys' dark 
> living-room window. 'I heard it. Flocks of 
> owls...shooting stars...Well, they're not 
> completely stupid.'"

Along the same lines, in the same conversation,
McGonagall strongly objects to DD's placing 
Harry with the Dursleys on the ground (and I 
paraphrase only slightly) that "you couldn't 
find a bunch of Muggles more unlike *us*."

Wendy goes on to suggest three possible ways of
resolving McGonagall's apparent disdain toward
non-magic folk with a background in which she
is Muggle-born.

A fourth, and simpler, possibility (if you'll pardon an explanation
that implies fallibility on the part of the creator <gr>) is that
Rowling might have made the decision to write McGonagall as a
Muggle-born teacher only after book one.  This is a small enough
backstory detail that it is easy to imagine it not having crossed
JKR's mind until, perhaps, she was dealing with the political tensions
over the issue in CS.  If so, she might have then viewed the
conversation in PS/SS as a minor enough inconsistency to simply
ignore, or she might have mentally resolved it along one of the lines
of reasoning that Wendy suggests.




From featheringstonehaugh at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 22 20:04:32 2003
From: featheringstonehaugh at yahoo.com (A Featheringstonehaugh)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 13:04:32 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: James Potter =Voldemort
In-Reply-To: <1064211879.3546.62973.m5@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030922200432.85385.qmail@web60201.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81326



Message: 22
   Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 11:03:54 +1200
   From: Tanya Swaine <swaine.t at xtra.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Re: James Potter = Voldemort

AF wrote:
>Personally, I've long harbored the feeling that Snape is Harry's 
father.

Tanya wrote: 
>Now that would be a great twist.  What impressions in the books did you 
>come by that?  

Primarily because I really, really like Snape and would love it if both he and Harry found security and family. Ahhh!  Besides, I thought there had to be a bigger reason than an old schoolboy grudge against James to cause an adult and a professional to be so "hostile" toward an 11 year old kid whom he'd never met. (The quotes are because I believe the hostility is an act. ) From Day 1, Snape had his eye on Harry - why?  Curiosity about an old aquaintance's son would hardly be so overpowering and even if he'd been "in love" with Lily, if it had been limited to the teen years and unrequited, I can't see it being so intense that he'd turn it into hatred for a child.  (I'm not saying relationships that begin in the teen years can't endure but those that DO last, do so because they grow over the years, not because someone "loved" for a short time in adolescence. )  Then of course, there's the straight, black hair, thin build, something about the noses ( although I can't remember what) the
 lack of any info about Potter relatives or any apparent involvement  with Harry (what ... all the Potters died between the Hogwarts years when Sirius camped out with the Potters and when Harry was a year old? Possible, of course, but curious.). And finally, the vague little tidbit from the first pensive encounter, where the "I saw him kissing..." remark was introduced.  That had no bearing on anything else we've read so far, and I can't see JKR bothering to write it in if it wasn't going to be important. My vote for Snape kissing Lily has been cast.

As for Harry's response if Papa Severus comes to pass...oh dear.  Unless of course, by the time the truth is revealed, their relationship has evolved into one of more understanding and respect.  Harry is growing up, after all and he'll doubless outgrow some of his stubbonness and irrational attitudes about many things.  

AF



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From kkearney at students.miami.edu  Mon Sep 22 20:05:10 2003
From: kkearney at students.miami.edu (corinthum)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 20:05:10 -0000
Subject: Fawkes and the basilisk
In-Reply-To: <bkmsn1+vlmg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bknklm+gd15@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81327

Geoff:

> > > That thought had crossed my mind but to use sonar to navigate 
in 
> on 
> > > the basilisk's eyes would not be feasible, I think. Bats use 
> sound 
> > > to avoid obstacles of any variety; I don't think it could be 
used 
> to
> > > locate a specific target.

Steve:

> > Of course bats can locate specific targets by sonar, how else 
would
> > they be able to catch all those insects at night?
> > 
> > So, bats can located very small objects easily, but the real 
> question
> > is can they detect texture? 

Geoff:

> Sorry, I didn't make myself very clear.... That is what I meant. 
The 
> basilisk's eye is in its face whereas an insect for example is 
> a "whole". I was trying to work out if the sonar (or whatever) 
would 
> allow them to find the eye in the face - your comment about texture 
> is probably what I was after.....

This may be getting a bit off topic, but a few comments on the nature 
of sonar.  Yes, sonar can determine texture by analyzing the amount 
of scattering an object produces.  The smooth surface of an eye would 
produce significanty less scatter than the rougher skin, making it a 
relatively easy target to locate via sonar.

That said, animals that use sonar/hearing to locate objects have 
adapted physiologically for this.  Phoenix song, as it is described, 
is much to diffuse and prolonged to be used as sonar.  Also, Harry 
does not note any of the features needed to receive the signal (some 
sort of ear-like feature, as with owls).  Add to that the fact that 
very few, if any, birds have eyelids.  So no, I don't think Fawkes 
was able to shut his eyes and maneuver by ear.

-Corinth




From hpfanmatt at gmx.net  Mon Sep 22 20:22:09 2003
From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 20:22:09 -0000
Subject: Time, the reverse spell, James and Lily, Voldemort, wierd...
In-Reply-To: <bkj1ro+rj8k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bknllh+4g0k@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81328

Warzog1 asks why none of Voldemort's followers
are nearer his age, with the oldest we know of
being Bellatrix (unknown, but a bit older than 
MWPP cohort) and Lucius (early 40s in OP).
(I have reproduced warzog1's exact language
below.)

A few points in response:

1. We are told (by DD, I believe, and please
pardon the lack of citation as I do not have
the books in front of me) that LV disappeared
for quite a while after school, immersing 
himself in an (apparently solitary) study of
the dark arts and his pursuit of immortality.
He then came back around 1970, unrecognizable
to most as the former Tom Riddle, and began
to recruit followers.  (In the first chapter
of PS/SS, set in 1981, DD says that witches
and wizards have had "precious little to
celebrate" for the last 12 years, implying
that LV's campaign began around 1969 or '70.)

2. Because he did not identify himself as Tom, 
it seems unlikely he would have been recruiting 
among old school friends.  Indeed, identifying 
himself as a "half-blood" would have been in 
tension with the ideology he was espousing at 
this point.  (I say "at this point" because
we do not know just how well-formed his
political views were when he was in school,
although there are of course the indications
of hostility toward Muggle-borns from his
statements as Diary Tom in C/S, and from the 
fact that he apparently used the monster to 
terrorize Muggle-borns.)

3. In any event, it appears that much of 
Voldemort's success in recruiting in the
1970s period was among young people --
see, for instance, Sirius' reference to a 
gang of Slytherins, including the Lestranges,
who "almost all" became Death Eaters.  
Similarly with Barty Crouch, who was 
apparently recruited as a teenager.  It
would make some sense that a persuasive 
leader with radical views and brutal methods
would have an easier time recruiting among
the young, the inexperienced, the impression-
able.  This fits in with Sirius' story about 
his brother Regulus becoming a follower and 
realizing too late the consequences of his
decision.  It also fits in with the anologies
that others have made on this list between the
Death Eaters and terrorist (or quasi-terrorist)
groups, which typically find their most rabid
adherents among the young.  A similar analogy
might be made to cults.

4. Those recruits who were young adults (say 
15-22) during the 1970s, when LV was actively
recruiting, would be 31 to 48 in the 1995-96 
period when the events of OP take place.

5. It is clearly the case that older members
of the WW supported Voldemort in other ways
than becoming Death Eaters (there is the strong
implication in OP, for instance, that Sirius'
parents helped fund LV).  And there is at least
one character whom we see as a Death Eater who
is portrayed as older, namely Macnair. 



--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "warzog1" <warzog1 at y...> wrote:
> In Book 5, it states that Lucius Malfoy is 41.
> And that Bellatrix, and Molly & Arthur Weasley are a few years older 
> than Sirus, James, Lily, Lupin, etc.
> And with Harry being 15, figure his parents, and the rest would be in 
> their mid-thirties to VERY-early 40's.
> And yet, it states that Lucius is Voldemort's most trusted, and 
> highest ranking Death Eater.
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> BUT...
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> In Book 2, Tom Riddle, aka Voldemort, was 16 years old, 50 years ago.
> By Book 5, he'd be 69 years old.
> So, even given that, as Dumbledore states in Book 5, Voldemort 
> studied the Dark Arts, and slowly built his army into thousands, WHY 
> aren't ANY of Voldemort's followers in their 60's, or 70's?
> Surely, as a member of Slytherin house, he'd have made plenty of 
> friends, and acquaintances, who shared is views.
> And Surely, his most trusted Death Eaters would be comprised of 
> witches and scorcerors in their 60's and 70's.
> Especially if he had the THOUSANDs of followers it states in Book 5.
> After all, Dumbledore's Order of the Phoenix has ALL age groups, old 
> & young.
> (And they were being slaughtered, or converted, by Voldemort & his 
> Death Eaters!)





From featheringstonehaugh at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 22 20:42:11 2003
From: featheringstonehaugh at yahoo.com (A Featheringstonehaugh)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 13:42:11 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: James = Voldemort
In-Reply-To: <1064225759.4360.21375.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030922204211.17168.qmail@web60205.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81329

 
Asperia wrote:
>Are you *sure* about that? If you're right, Snape, in
>getting James to marry Lily, has just in effect turned
>his own son over to a couple who have, together or
>apart, defied LV at least twice. (I've always been
>unclear about whether the three-times-defiance of
>James/Lily towards Voldemort includes Lily's sacrifice
>Oof herself for her son or not.) 

Oh.  Roadblock.  I'd forgotten about the three defiances. OK then.  As I'm very into this scenario, let me offer an amendment.

Snape has realized the error of his Death Eater ways and has disappeared for awhile - and at an especially inopportune time for the little mother-to-be.  (Maybe he didn't even know about the baby at that point.)  Lily turns to James to "give her baby a name" (this wasn't 2003 after all!) and he agrees, either out of love for Lily or, perversly, to inflict the ultimate insult on Snape.  When he learns of the marriage and later the child, Snape can't confront them out of fear for their safety/Lily's reputation, and so goes to Dumbledore for help in securing protection for them.  OR... How about this?  It was Lily's plan - carried out against advice of counsel Snape, family etc.; a desperate but not well thought out act to protect her child.

Or maybe I've read 'way too much Harry Potter and need to get a life. ;-)

AF

 




---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From susannahlm at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 22 21:00:45 2003
From: susannahlm at yahoo.com (derannimer)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 21:00:45 -0000
Subject: Source for that quote
Message-ID: <bknntt+ag80@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81330

Laura wrote:

> Okay, I'm not Christian, but I thought all of the different 
> denominations agreed on the redemption thing, i.e., that humanity can 
> be redeemed. (I'm a bit fuzzy on the mechanics of this, I admit.) 
> If something has changed, could you all put out a press release or 
> something? :-)

Man, if *that's* changed, we had jolly well better!

Yeah, AFAIK, the "redemption thing" is pretty fairly central and unanimously agreed 
upon, within the Church. Not only that, but, as your message shows, it is also one of 
the things that people who *aren't* Christians tend to know about Christianity. So, 
yeah -- regardless of her denomination, it's a good bet that whatever JKR's referring 
to has something to do with the redemptive concept, given that she seems to think it 
would be easy for people to figure things out. The redemptive concept *would* be 
easy to figure out. (Although obviously not specifically. As witness this conversation.) 
There are obviously other possibilities -- but I suspect that there is some sort of 
redemptive scenario in the works here.

> That seems to be where JKR is going, according to Pip 
> and others, right? It may take an apocalypse but it will happen.

Yeah -- and the idea, I think -- *not* a theologian, so I want to be careful here -- 
isn't just of regeneration, but of regeneration through sacrifice, and especially self-
sacrifice. "Those who want to save their life will lose it, and those who lose their life. . 
. will gain life everlasting." It's the Phoenix idea, almost -- "rising on stepping-stones 
of its dead self to higher things." You can't have immortality without dying first -- at 
least metaphorically speaking. (Wonder how this ties in, if at all, with Nearly Headless 
Nick's refusal to go on, and subsequent entrapment as a ghost?)

Down deeper and deeper -- and then up again.

Or, in other words, I think that for the story to qualify as having a Christian sort of 
redemptive theme, there may *have* to be an apocalypse.
 



Derannimer, Episcopalian/Presbyterian/Anglican. It's complicated.




From Koinonia2 at hotmail.com  Mon Sep 22 21:19:35 2003
From: Koinonia2 at hotmail.com (koinonia02)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 21:19:35 -0000
Subject: James Potter =Voldemort
In-Reply-To: <20030922200432.85385.qmail@web60201.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bknp17+55h1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81331

<featheringstonehaugh at y...>message 81326
And finally, the vague little tidbit from the first pensive 
encounter, where the "I saw him kissing..." remark was introduced.  
That had no bearing on anything else we've read so far, and I can't 
see JKR bothering to write it in if it wasn't going to be important. 
My vote for Snape kissing Lily has been cast.


"K":

I will agree that this 'kissing' scene will turn out to be 
important. But the person being kissed in this scene is Florence, 
not Lily.

GoF/Ch 30/pg 598/US
Frowning slightly, he prodded the thoughts within the basin with the 
tip of his wand. Instantly, a figure rose out of it, a plump, 
scowling girl of about sixteen, who began to revolve slowly, with 
her feet still in the basin. She took no notice whatsoever of Harry 
or Professor Dumbledore. When she spoke, her voice echoed as Snape's 
had done, as though it were coming from the depths of the stone 
basin. "He put a hex on me, Professor Dumbledore, and I was only 
teasing him, sir, I only said I'd seen him kissing Florence behind 
the greenhouses last Thursday..."

Also, I believe Harry is indeed the son of James and Lily Potter. I 
just don't see how it can be any other way.

By the way, according to the site below, Florence means 'blooming 
flower, flourishing. There's just something about all those flower 
names! 

www.babynameworld.com/b.asp


"K"




From deemarie1a at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 22 22:06:05 2003
From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 22:06:05 -0000
Subject: Veiled Dementors; Was Re: The DD Brothers and The Dementors
In-Reply-To: <bkn50c+8usr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bknrod+har@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81332

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> There has been some wondering and theorizing around what happens to 
> people who have had their souls sucked out by dementors; do they 
> become dementors themselves, etc. (Gak! What if *that's* what 
> actually happened to the Longbottoms...and the Droobles is a clue 
> about that...who knows what a soul looks like as it is removed 
> <shudder> from someone...perhaps it looks like a bubble gum bubble.)
> 
> Maybe what happens to the leftover soulless shell is the wrong 
> question. What happens to the *soul* a dementor sucks out of its 
> victim? Does it just cease to exist? Is it *eaten*? Do dementors 
> *eat* souls as Death *Eaters* (natural allies, them) etc? Or is 
each 
> dementor a soul prison?
> 
> If Harry was hearing voices behind the veil, wasn't it soul voices? 
> Luna certainly seemed to think so. If that's where the dead go, 
where 
> souls go--then those who have been soul sucked by dementors 
> are "missing in action" beyond the veil; no afterlife for that 
> person. No "next great adventure," organized mind or not.
> 
> Let's round up all the dementors and push *them* through the veil; 
> see if any of the souls they sucked are freed, shall we?
> 
> Sandy, thinking, yeah, Rescue Mission!

This was my opinion about dementors from post number 79422, and I 
still stand by what I said then...

I got the impression that these souless people became dementors 
themselves. It would make sense. Dememtors feed off the emotions of 
others. Being souless themselves, they would want to retrieve that 
from others, feed off it to nourish their own lack of emotions now 
that they are incapable of feeling. That would also be the reason 
that they suck the souls of others. IMO, when the dementors first 
came into being, the "kiss" was an attempt to regain a soul. Over 
time, it had become the punishment that is appears to be. Though a 
dementor still has a brain, I don't think they have a vast 
intelligence. They can communicate, and take orders, but I think 
they react on an instinctive level. Thus their appearance at 
Quidditch match. So much raw emotion drew them to feed.

As to their physical appearance, isn't the expression "the eyes are 
the windows to the soul" of some significance. Since they no longer 
have a soul, wouldn't their eyes be useless? Losing 
their "humanity", their physical appearance deteriorates. They begin 
to decay. The description of the dementor's hand in PoA certainly 
reminded me of decaying flesh.

Well, that's just my opinion...

D




From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com  Mon Sep 22 23:43:41 2003
From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 23:43:41 -0000
Subject: Talk to Firenze (filk)
Message-ID: <bko1fd+4qu4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81333

Talk to Firenze (OOP, Chap 26-27)

To the tune of the Mister Ed theme (no disrespect to centaurs is 
intended)

Dedicated to the Sergeant Majorette

Hear a MIDI at

http://pages.prodigy.net/ehammer/funtoonz.html

THE SCENE: DUMBLEDORE introduces the new Divination Professor, as 
Umbridge looks askance.

DUMBLEDORE
A horse is a horse, of course, of course,
And no one would hire a horse of course
But he, of course, he ain't no horse, he's the famous Firenze.

Go ask him of stars or planet Mars 
He'll give you the wisdom of the centaurs. 
He oft conceited wizards jars.
Talk to Firenze!

FIRENZE
I'll burn the sages and mallowsweet, observe by flame and fume
And though of course I'm often wrong, the portents all indicate doom

I lived with my herd until the bird
They gave me, so I to your school transferred.
Dean has said things he'd better reword

Well, listen, Thomas!
I have not been bred! 

   -	CMC

HARRY POTTER FILKS
http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm





From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 00:05:21 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 00:05:21 -0000
Subject: Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die! My part II
In-Reply-To: <bkhqud+tdhq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bko2o1+s9h4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81334

<This is part two from where I had to stop Saturday afternoon>

Kneasy:
> Hmm. So the atmosphere of fear engendered in the WW  just at the 
> mention of his name is not enough? Voldy is insecure in his evil?
> Sorry, can't agree. Voldy might win. He can win - if we can believe
> the prophecy. He knows this too. Otherwise why bother?

Sandy realtime:
Contrast Voldemort's demeanor with Dumbledore's: every time we have 
seen Voldemort he is agitated, threatening, punishing; in other 
words, just chewing the scenery and *performing,* always with his 
audience in mind. He is always bent on how menacing he has to seem. 
He beats that "I'm the evilest sumb*tch on the block" drum like his 
newly reacquired heartbeat depends on it (which it does if he wants 
to keep it going). He isn't insecure in his *evil*--it's his power he 
has doubts about, and his ability to win. That doesn't mean he thinks 
he *won't* win--but the more I study him, the more I see that 
his "affect" is all about fear: Voldemort's afraid, very afraid, all 
the time. He is at win or die. And we all know he believes there is 
nothing worse than death. And the name thing: well, fear of a name 
only counts if people believe the thing itself still exists to be 
afraid of. (The use of "You-Know-Who" has devolved into nothing more 
than pop culture lingo. All that silly theatrical gasping 
over "Voldemort." It's like his name is one of Carlin's Seven-Words-
You-Can't-Say-On-Television. It's just an obscenity. Little children 
probably sneak out behind the pumpkin patch with Daddy's wand to hex 
things on the sly and whisper "Voldemort" to each other and giggle at 
their badness.)

Anyway: what *is* behind not saying VOLDEMORT? (Is this like 
Lovecraft's YOG SOTHOTH? To speak his name is to summon him and lay 
waste the universe?)

Then Sandy:
> > <snip me :ouch:> Fans of Albus Dumbledore <snip :ouch:>
> > generally show alacrity, even eagerness to follow his 
> > instructions to the letter. Is that what you meant by "actively" 
> > and "passively"?

Kneasy:
> Not really.  A bit more general. DD doesn't really want to 
> interfere in lives of people unless he absolutely has to. 
> Voldemort  is a commited interventionist, IMO. He likes giving 
> orders, waving  his wand about. It's the difference between King 
> Log and King Frog, basically. Except Log is being forced to act.  

Sandy realtime:
I'm thinking as an amateur psychologist here again. Voldemort "likes 
giving orders, waving his wand about." (What would Freud have said 
about *that*!) What does that say, that grasping and manipulating of 
power? What is behind it? Isn't the guy who holds the reins tightest 
and feels the need to wield the quirt the guy who's afraid of the 
horse?

Then Sandy:
> > If the lesson is on a grand enough scale, the culture learns 
<snip>
 
Kneasy:
> Punishment isn't the criteria; occurence is. Germany is no better
> than the rest of Europe. Ask the Turkish community.
> Maybe in fiction it will work.
 
Sandy realtime:
I don't know any Turks. ;-) But I take it you're saying that while 
neo-Nazism is verbotten, crimes against ethnic/national origin groups 
are still rampant? How very sad. I will have to go look for info on 
this.

Kneasy:
> <snip> Where's the analogy to a coup d'etat backed by the so-called 
> elite with everyone else against him that we have in the WW?
> Explain please.

Sandy realtime:
The old families feel they don't count anymore. They used to be 
lauded and feted just for their pure blood. Look at what happened: 
Lucius was forced to divest the Malfoy manor of precious antiques due 
to those nasty raids. And influence? He is forced to hand over chunks 
of the family fortune to work his will these days; why, it amounts to 
nothing less than blackmail. The WW has come to the sorry pass that 
pure blood just doesn't matter anymore. Look at poor Draco: he tries 
so hard and yet his teachers still favor the Muggle-borns and 
Mudbloods. Everyone knows Fudge has no real power. Look at how he has 
to try to manage things by frantically putting Ministry spin on 
everything in sight; every single story The Daily "Profit" prints is 
a clarion call for spineless jellyfish everywhere to float together. 
Voldemort is a man of the people, the real people, the pure-blood 
people, the only hope of those masses who feel the earth eroding 
under their feet as the new elite, who trumpet superiority though 
egalitarianism, gain more ground every day. The world is awash in 
filth (just ask Mrs. Black) and how is anyone to live, to breathe? 

Am I on my side of the argument *now*? I can turn it inside out again 
if you like ;-) Er, if you don't, I mean. Furthermore--I am *way* 
more familiar with Pip's example (at least the broad strokes like the 
name "Hitler" and the fact that there was, er, one of those big 
numbered wars) than I am with your moldy old Roman whosis. So there. 
<g>

There is actually another, very relevant Voldemort/Hitler 
correlation: he was chosen by those who would have him lead them 
because they thought he would give them what they wanted, what they 
thought they needed. What they ended up with was something very 
different from what they jumped on board for. (Eh, Regulus?)

Kneasy:
> Sorry, can't get the point you're trying to make. Are you saying 
you can have a war without victims?

Sandy realtime:
You said, essentially, that a change in regime didn't matter to the 
common people, that only the coinage would be different. I'm saying 
that sometimes a war is worth having even though there are victims. 
When,  after you have the war, some of the people who *were* victims 
under the regime you toppled *are* better off. Or did you not imply 
what I inferred? <bg>

Then Sandy:
> > If Arthur Weasley is the post-Phoenix/transition government MoM 
> > (or equivalent), followed by, perhaps, Lupin (aided by judicious 
> > application of the Homorphus charm), who is followed by, say 
<snip> 

Kneasy:
> Oh, dear. Don't you think the rest of the WW should be allowed a 
> say? You seem to be following my lead on the uses and misuses of 
> power. A managed succession, no  intruders allowed. Not certain I 
> approve. Merit (which DD has) should be the criterium for 
> leadership. <snip>

Sandy realtime:
Actually, *I* never suggested a managed succession at all. I 
suggested that Dumbledore would not be leaving the WW without 
candidates who *have* merit. You seemed to be envisioning a power 
vacuum and that's what I was addressing.

Kneasy:
<snip>
> I rather fancy seeing Malfoy Snr earning his living as a snotty 
> butler.

Sandy realtime:
I am on an HP board where all list members are HP characters; Mrs. 
Malfoy has been *very* affectionate with Mr. Malfoy lately; 
naughtily, I have had a "post-family fortune laid waste" racy movie 
acting career in mind for the Mr. and Mrs.

Sandy, who thinks she just got a <gulp> fan letter from a lurker: hi, 
lurker! Thank you for the kind words! (This 'net stuff can be sooo 
strange. I like it, I like it.)




From jferer at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 00:18:08 2003
From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 00:18:08 -0000
Subject: Why Ron Loves Hermione  - But is Mistaken
In-Reply-To: <bkkr5h+9bu8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bko3g0+nn8i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81335

Darrin:" Why has Ron fallen in love with Hermione? It is pretty
obvious to me  that he has, though he covers it up in typical teenage
boy fashion."

"Fallen in love" is too strong, IMO.  "Attracted to" works fine,
though.  Ron shows plenty of signs of the latter but not the former. 
We don't see signs of depth or emotional intimacy in Ron's behavior
towards Hermione, but there's no argument he likes her.

Ron is, as you say, Darrin, a good, decent, intelligent young man, but
Hermione is not for him or he for her.

RON'S HAPPINESS MATTERS TOO

What does Ron want in his mate?  As the Weasley son most like his
father, Ron's ideal isn't very unlike Molly.  He wants a loving,
supportive wife that he can come to and talk about his experiences
with, make love to, and raise their kids with.  A decent, honorable
life I'd love to have.  The life of constant adventure he's had as
Harry's best friend is against his natural inclination, although he's
handled it well.

Your comments on Ron's feelings of self-worth are on target, I
believe.  That, combined with what I think Ron naturally wants out of
life, says to me he doesn't want the 24/7 challenge that Hermione
would represent.

And that is exactly what Hermione is all about.  She came to Hogwarts
for purely intellectual challenges and found much more. Her mind has
grown (!), but so has her courage, heart, sense of purpose, physical
bravery and people sense.  She is, and ever will be, always looking to
test herself and the world around her.  No other character in JKR's
creation has grown as much as Hermione.

So I believe Hermione's expectations and Ron's are far apart.  Their
life trajectories would never have come together were it not for being
friends with Harry Potter.  I'm afraid that Ron will grow to feel
harried and weary, second place to all her many priorities, and
Hermione will become impatient with Ron's (to her) lack of ambition.

Granny: "Therefore, I'm of the opinion that Ron and Hermione would
form a real symbiotic pair.  She'd probably be attracted to Ron
because of his ability to get things done without a lot of noise and
fanfare.  As one who always feels she has to prove herself as a
Muggle-born in the WW, Hermione would naturally appreciate Ron's
serene capability.  Ron, on the other hand has no experience in the
limelight.  So Hermione would naturally fill in this gap.  I'm with
you 100%, please G-d, JKR will not kill him off.  In my opinion, 
they're a match made in Heaven, and Ron will indeed will make his
mark--hopefully with Hermione at his side."

How would the symbiosis of Ron and Hermione compare to that between
Harry and Hermione?  I say not well.  We see plenty of examples of Ron
and Hermione cooperating, working together surely, as good friends do;
but Harry and Hermione are the perfect yin and yang, the phenomenal
natural talent combined with the exemplar of hard work and
application.  Harry and Hermione's life trajectories are converging
closer and closer as they complete each other.

To Harry, Hermione is the voice of reason that tempers his
impulsiveness.  He's starting to think a little more like her, hearing
her voice in him.  She's more: the one who knows what he needs,
whether it's a purpose to reconnect him with his peers (leading the
DA) or to start him on the road to vindication in the wizarding world
(the Skeeter interview).  They gravitate to each other, think
together, seem very much in tune to each other.  Even when Harry is
just plain unlikable, Hermione is there, sensitive to and knowing
what's going on in Harry.

Hermione, unlike any other young woman he knows, is up to the job of
Harry Potter.  His fame does not intimidate her, and she knows how to
handle it, both bad and good.  She will love him but not indulge him,
challenging him back to health from all the damage he's going to take
(and he's going to take one hell of a lot before this is over).

THIS IS NOT "THE HERO GETS THE GIRL"

This never was HGTG.  The girls the heroes get are passive toys locked
in a tower, prizes waiting to be claimed.  Hermione is a heroine in
her own right (so is Ron); HGTG doesn't apply.  

It's not about Ron losing out to Harry again, either.  I don't think
Ron and Hermione would be happy in the long run.  Harry and Hermione
belong together, and Ron deserves a mate who wants the same things as
he does.

Jim Ferer







From jdr0918 at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 23 00:24:35 2003
From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 00:24:35 -0000
Subject: Why Ron Loves Hermione
In-Reply-To: <20030922113354.62196.qmail@web20705.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bko3s3+8tk3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81336

<<<In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Granny Goodwitch wrote:...What 
exactly do you mean by the phrase, "girls too smart for their own 
good"?  Granted, Dear that Hermione is indeed overt about her 
intelligence, but I fail to see where her intelligence is not to her 
own good.  Why on earth in this day and age must a woman still "cover 
up" her smarts?>>>

The Sergeant Majorette says (regretfully)

Because progress is not the same thing as evolution, and that's the 
way things still work. Men are psychologically delicate; a girl who 
shows her brain is going to have to waste a whole lot of time either 
mollifying men or rendering them unconscious if she is ever to get 
anything done. This is not just an uninformed opinion. I learned this 
though a whole lot of experience and I am a much happier old witch 
for the knowledge.

Also, Diana Fischer asked what the canon reference was for Ron's 
romantic interest in Hermione. The kicker is the last bit of ch 23, 
GoF:

**"Well, if you don't like it, you know what the solution is, don't 
you?" yelled Hermione;...her face was screwed up in anger.
"Oh yeah?" Ron yelled back. "What's that?"
"Next time there's a ball, ask me before someone else does, and not 
as a last resort!"
...Ron turned to look at Harry. "Well," he sputtered, looking 
thunderstruck, "well -- that just proves --completely missed the 
point --"
Harry didn't say anything. He liked being back on speaking terms with 
Ron too much to speak his mmind right now -- but he somehow thought 
that Hermione had gotten the point much better than Ron had.**

--JDR




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 00:30:07 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 00:30:07 -0000
Subject: Veiled Dementors; Was Re: The DD Brothers and The Dementors
In-Reply-To: <bknrod+har@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bko46f+81kd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81337

Donna wrote:
> This was my opinion about dementors from post number 79422...
> I got the impression that these souless people became dementors 
> themselves. <snip> IMO, when the dementors first came into being, 
> the "kiss" was an attempt to regain a soul. <snip> The description 
> of the dementor's hand in PoA certainly reminded me of decaying 
flesh.

Well, okay, but then Al said, in post #81323

Al:
> I don't think soul-sucked people become Dementors, in any case.
> There was an interview with Rowling (Canadian Press, October 25,
> 2000) where she said Dementors don't breed but grow like fungi
> wherever there's decay.

So I guess we're both wrong. JKR said so, sort of. Anyway, I *still* 
want to know--what *happens* to a soul sucked by a dementor? Is it 
<shudder> digested? Is there by-product? Or is it just *gone*?

Sandy, who thinks that "decay" comment supports Pip's new MD




From rredordead at aol.com  Tue Sep 23 00:32:50 2003
From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 00:32:50 -0000
Subject: James Potter =Voldemort
In-Reply-To: <20030922200432.85385.qmail@web60201.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bko4bi+oa8r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81338

AF wrote:
Personally, I've long harbored the feeling that Snape is Harry's 
father.

Now me:
It's a great thought, wish it could be true BUT: 
"Harry, I am your Father."  Spoke Professor Snape softly just isn't 
going to happen.  It just too, for want of a better expression, Star 
Wars and JKR is far more original than that.  

They definitely have a relationship but Father and son...nope.

Mandy





From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 23 00:39:13 2003
From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 00:39:13 -0000
Subject: Goodbye! (filk)
Message-ID: <bko4nh+jhcm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81339

Goodbye!

To the tune of the same name from Mel Brooks' The Producers

Dedicated to Florentine Maier

Sorry, no MIDI on line. This is sung at the end of the show, 
extremely fast.

THE SCENE: The Ministry of Magic.  MOM receives a singing telegram 
from the dementors of Azkaban, giving their two-weeks notice.

CHORUS OF DEMENTORS
It's been real and that whole bit
Sad to tell you, we up and quit
Grab our robes `n' glide for the door!
'Case you didn't notice, we now serve Voldemort! 
We don't want to threaten everyone harm,
But you're best to learn that Patronus Charm!
He-Who-Is-Not-Named says tell ya this:
Adios, au revoir, wiedersehen, ta-ta-ta
Goodbye...goodnight... kiss-kiss!!

    -	CMC (who also just gave two weeks notice)

HARRY POTTER FILKS 
http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm





From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 01:35:21 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 01:35:21 -0000
Subject: Why Ron Loves Hermione (I Think So Too but Don't Care Much)
In-Reply-To: <bko3s3+8tk3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bko80p+5ive@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81340

Granny Goodwitch wrote:
> ...What exactly do you mean by the phrase, "girls too smart for 
> their own good"?  Granted, Dear that Hermione is indeed overt about 
> her intelligence, but I fail to see where her intelligence is not 
> to her own good.  Why on earth in this day and age must a woman 
> still "cover up" her smarts?>>>

The Sergeant Majorette (regretfully) wrote:
> Because progress is not the same thing as evolution, and that's the 
> way things still work. Men are psychologically delicate; a girl who 
> shows her brain is going to have to waste a whole lot of time 
> either mollifying men or rendering them unconscious if she is ever 
> to get anything done. This is not just an uninformed opinion. I 
> learned this though a whole lot of experience and I am a much 
> happier old witch for the knowledge.

Me now: what matters, for the purpose of "shipping" HP characters, is 
whether the candidates for Hermione's affections fall into the 
category of men I think we can all agree exists to some degree or 
other who are intimidated (still) by women who are bright and not shy 
about it. What do we have to go on? There's Harry's reflection in 
PS/SS that he "could not believe anyone could be so interfering" and 
Ron's "She must've noticed she's got no friends." What else? Does 
either boy smirk at her abilities in CoS when she whips up the 
Polyjuice Potion? Hermione's in their bad graces in PoA, but again, 
that's because she's "interfering" (this time over the Firebolt she 
believes Sirius Black has sent Harry), not because she's smart. In 
GoF, Harry certainly doesn't disdain Hermione's help getting ready 
for upcoming tasks. As a matter of fact, if Harry was going to be 
intimidated by girls with abilities, well, look at Cho, a quite good 
Quidditch player. So he must think, "Well, it's okay if she's atletic 
so long as she isn't smarter than me." I don't see it. Ron? He does 
not seem the least embarrassed having Hermione help him with 
homework, and the only girl we're sure he's noticed is Fleur. Who 
knows?

(I am having a very odd echo-y feeling as if this whole argument has 
been posted already, and recently. But while I'm here...I have to 
say, being one of those kinda "girls" myself, I think both Granny and 
Sarge are right: while I have been happily cohabitating with one of 
the unthreatened examples of the male species for 18 years, I didn't 
find him until I looked outside the mainstream culture. (He *likes* 
it when I can make him wrong; mentally, we hone each other.) Any of 
you out there (in the 21st century!) still having that "they run when 
I'm smart" problem: go check out your local Science Fiction fandom, 
especially the literary side. Nerd hotties, unite!)

The Sergeant Majorette also wrote:

> Also, Diana Fischer asked what the canon reference was for Ron's 
> romantic interest in Hermione. The kicker is the last bit of ch 23, 
> GoF: <snip canon around Ron & Hermione's "if you don't like it ask
> me first next time" argument>

I gotta add: Ron bought Hermione >*perfume*< for Christmas in OoP.

(But I'm not a shipper. Even as I enjoy a lot of the group's 
shippers' virtual matchmaking, I find it very <ducking> silly: the 
U.S. divorce rate is over fifty percent, and here many people are so 
certain of their pairings and the wisdom behind them. Or is this just 
about predicting what *Jo* will do regarding couple-ing the 
youngsters as they grow up? Now *that* maybe I could get into...)
 ^--^

Sandy, waving at her public




From feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca  Mon Sep 22 18:49:27 2003
From: feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca (feetmadeofclay)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 18:49:27 -0000
Subject: Scabber is NOT a rat (was Hyperbolic Chapter Titles )
In-Reply-To: <bknate+9pkm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkng7n+v7k4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81341

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "meltowne" <meltowne at y...> 
wrote:

> Golly: 
> 
> The Authorial voice is always right - even when it doesn't give you 
> the whole picture. The facts it gives you are true. Scabbers was a 
> rat - undistinguished and long lived. Spells wouldn't work on it 
> apparently. 
> 
> Me:
> 
> Actually, no scabbers was NOT a rat, and that's the point.  


Golly: Actually an animagus is the animal it turns into enough to 
refer to it as a dog or a rat or a stag.  Scabbers WAS a rat who was 
also an animagus in his non human form.  The same way a person can 
be a doctor and a woman and dead all at the same time.   


>When Ron 
> tried to cast spells on scabbers, he was trying to turn a RAT into 
> something yellow:
> 
>           "Sunshine, daisies, butter mellow,
>           Turn this stupid fat rat yellow."
> 
> The spell failed, not because Ron was a lousy spellcaster, but 
> because Scabbers wasn't really a rat!  He was a human in disguise.

He was a human in transformed shape.  We have no idea why the spell 
didn't work.  We don't know if Ron flubbed it, if it wasn't a real 
spell or if it is because animagi cannot be changed colours.  You're 
doing exactly what you are saying I should not be doing.  You're 
jumping on the most reasonable explanation.  But at least here the 
text provides ambigiuty.  

The fact that the spell didn't work doesn't make him less of a rat 
and more of a human.  He has the body of the rat and a mind of a 
human.  Who is to say which he is more like?  Sirius said the 
Dementors could not sense animal emotions - thus imply when he was in 
dog form he was a dog.  

 The revelation is perfectly consistent with the previous authorial 
voice.   
 
> We can't always take everything at face value.

GOLLY:  What a person cannot be is dead and alive at the same time. 

Which is why when the author says 'worst'  I believe it.  You can't 
have a memory that is the worst and not the worst.  It either is or 
it isn't.


  The memory from the 
> pensieve may be Snapes worst memory, it might not.  

GOLLY: Why?  Why he put it in there we don't know.  All I know is 
that it is his worst memory.  

And yet again, I ask if you are going to give this treatment to the 
books, it has to go with EVERYTHING.  Every word is suspect.  Is 
Hermione a girl?

Golly





From raps29 at aol.com  Mon Sep 22 19:22:43 2003
From: raps29 at aol.com (raps029)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 19:22:43 -0000
Subject: Did Voldemort kill Petunia & Lily's parents?
In-Reply-To: <bk86fd+e0vl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkni63+47ro@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81342

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hickengruendler" 
<hickengruendler at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ghinghapuss" 
<rredordead at a...> 
> wrote:
>  
> > 
> > What do you all think?
> > 
>  
> I think Petunia's and Lily's parents are dead. Because Petunia is 
> Lily's last blood relative. If the Evans' were still alive, 
> Dumbledore could have given Baby Harry to them.
> 
> And I also think, it is likely, that Voldemort or the Death Eaters 
> killed them.  
> Hickengruendler

I've been developing a theory about Petunia's feelings toward Harry.  
I also think that Voldemort killed Harry's grandparents, possibly 
before Harry was born.  Petunia blamed Lily and WW for the death of 
her parents and kept herself from feeling the pain of loss by 
refusing to have anything to do them.  She channels all of her 
emotions into taking care of her husband and son and their home.

After taking Harry in as a baby, she knows that he is under a death 
threat and so acts mean to Harry to keep herself from caring about 
him. If she doesn't care about him, it won't hurt so much when he's 
killed by Voldemort.

That's one of the things I really liked about book 5, that our view 
of the Dursleys has changed away from that of traditional English 
children's literature.  In books 1-4 the Dursleys reminded me of the 
horrible families in Roald Dahl's books, but in book 5 I could start 
to see some motivation for Petunia's treatment of Harry.  I can't 
wait to find out more in the last two books.

Ruth P 
 





From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz  Mon Sep 22 20:51:08 2003
From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 08:51:08 +1200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: James Potter =Voldemort
In-Reply-To: <20030922200432.85385.qmail@web60201.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <1064211879.3546.62973.m5@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20030923083721.00a29da0@pop3.xtra.co.nz>

No: HPFGUIDX 81343

At 13:04 22/09/2003 -0700, AF wrote:
>Primarily because I really, really like Snape and would love it if both he 
>and Harry found security and family. Ahhh!  Besides, I thought there had 
>to be a bigger reason than an old schoolboy grudge against James to cause 
>an adult and a professional to be so "hostile" toward an 11 year old kid 
>whom he'd never met. (The quotes are because I believe the hostility is an 
>act. ) Then of course, there's the straight, black hair, thin build, 
>something about the noses ( although I can't remember what) the  lack of 
>any info about Potter relatives or any apparent involvement with Harry 
>(what ... all the Potters died between the Hogwarts years when Sirius 
>camped out with the Potters and when Harry was a year old? Possible, of 
>course, but curious.). And finally, the vague little tidbit from the first 
>pensive encounter, where the "I saw him kissing..." remark was introduced.
>


Commenting on the sections about.  Snape is growing fast on me, and I 
really hope your impressions are correct.  But yes, it is interesting that 
he has been tailing Harry since day 1.  However, I think it cannot be 
revealed until after the war, just imagine what Malfory's (spelling) would 
say for one.  But if it is true and revealed, I hope they get to talk face 
to face afterwards, talk I mean, not yell and scream, which Harry would do 
now if he found out.  No doubt Dumbledore would know however.  But for me, 
back to reading the first pensive section, I missed that, blush.

But I have wondered about the rest of his family.  Why there is only the 
Dursleys, and specifically they are on the mothers side, not Potters.  Some 
Potters must of survived, cousins whatever, surely James was not an only 
child.  Still book 5 says James and Lily started going out year 5 from 
memory, so wonder what happened between then and Harry's birth.

Tanya





From feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca  Mon Sep 22 21:16:18 2003
From: feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca (feetmadeofclay)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 21:16:18 -0000
Subject: Source for that quote
In-Reply-To: <bknntt+ag80@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bknor2+s9o4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81344

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "derannimer" <susannahlm at y...> 
wrote:

> yeah -- regardless of her denomination, it's a good bet that 
whatever JKR's referring 
> to has something to do with the redemptive concept, given that she 
seems to think it 
> would be easy for people to figure things out. The redemptive 
concept *would* be 
> easy to figure out. (Although obviously not specifically. As 
witness this conversation.) 
> There are obviously other possibilities -- but I suspect that there 
is some sort of 
> redemptive scenario in the works here.
> 
> Derannimer, Episcopalian/Presbyterian/Anglican. It's complicated.


Well yes those with knowledge of Christian texts and even Western 
literature will be familiar with its themes. It is a prevelant part 
of Western culture. But many are not Christian or culturally Western. 
Those raised outside the Christian influenced framework may not 
understand it at all.   

It isn't easy to figure out if you don't really know and understand 
the Christ story and/or Revelations.

Golly





From hannahwonder at aol.com  Tue Sep 23 00:03:52 2003
From: hannahwonder at aol.com (hannahwonder at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 20:03:52 EDT
Subject: Snape's Worst Memory (and the purpose thereof) (Was: Hyperbolic Chapter Titles...)
Message-ID: <78.47ab2869.2ca0e7e8@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81345

Golly:  
You hate Snape less? I don't.  He's still a 36 year old man who picked on an 11 year old because he had a grudge with said kid's father.  (snip) Snape was a jerk and STILL IS.  Nothing has changed. He's just now more sympathetic to some.  But really he was that before.

In a later post on the same topic: 
1. It links Harry and Snape with similar pasts.  The difference being that Harry has and will choose to be a good person.  Snape has not.  

All about choice...  

(snip)

2.  It tells us something about James, making him less an idol and Snape more sympathetic.  I can't say I was surprised but it was very well drawn.  



Hannah: 
I can't agree that Snape is a jerk, nor that he chose not to be a good 
person, and my reasoning behind that is exactly your number 2 reason for the purpose of the memory: changing the previous (and rather more narrow) perception of the character. I felt the memory was included because, yes, it drew 
similarities between Snape and Harry and made Harry sympathize with the younger Snape. This makes Snape and his relationship to Harry much more complex and, I think, much more interesting. 

My one fault with character development in the series is the one-demensional 
qualities of some of Harry's adversaries. IMHO, this includes Malfoy, 
Bellatrix, and particularly Professor Umbridge. To me they appear to just be /all 
bad/, in a way that's harder for me to believe humans are. Similarly, Dumbledore's being wholly good is less likely or relatable for readers, though since OOP we have seen him to be fallible.

This is what I think makes Snape such a great character: one can't target him 
as a good guy or a bad guy -- we (or, rather, Harry) don't know which he is 
yet, or if he ever can be classified as either. He does act rather like a jerk, 
as Golly said, to Harry and Neville and can be really horrible to them, but 
he is in the Order, Dumbledore does trust him, he did save Harry's life in 
PS/SS, /and/ he listens to Harry and checks on Sirius after Harry tries to tell 
him about the vision (He's got Padfoot in the place where it's hidden) in 
Umbridge's office.

I'm so glad for the penseive scene because it makes me interested in how 
Harry is eventually going to deal with how he feels toward Snape: how can he 
reconcile Snape's rudeness and his responding anger with the sympathy/guilt he 
feels for Snape being tormented as a child by Harry's father? How can a reader 
reconcile it? I, for one, cannot,  and that makes me all the more eager for book 
6. :)

Hannah




From lbean1 at gmu.edu  Tue Sep 23 01:11:43 2003
From: lbean1 at gmu.edu (lbean1 at gmu.edu)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 21:11:43 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: James = Voldemort
Message-ID: <57fe225845f4.5845f457fe22@gmu.edu>

No: HPFGUIDX 81346

This is my first time, so forgive me if I mess up...

I love snape, don't get me wrong, I think he's an amazingly complicated and intriguing character. 

But there have been SO many references to Harry Potter's unmistakable resemblance to his father James Potter that I don't see how they couldn't be father and son. Do any Snape as Harry's father theorists have an explanation for the identical hair and face? 

~badnewsbean~


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From navarro198 at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 23 05:25:21 2003
From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 05:25:21 -0000
Subject: Ron's big moment? (WAS: Why Ron Loves Hermione)
In-Reply-To: <bkm9r9+ha2t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkolg1+uek9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81347

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ffimiles" <ffionmiles at h...> 
wrote:
> 
> Ron's definately going to have a big 'moment' which'll be pivotal 
for 
> the good side - Hermione's already had so many in helping Harry 
get 
> throught asks/time-turning/figure out the basalisk - sof ar Ron's 
> greatest moment came in the chess game in PS - he's got to have 
> another moment - even if it is to redeem himself from some 
weakness 
> he shows, which might get Harry and others into trouble - but 
he'll 
> come good - and don't even mention him being killed off...

Two things struck me from the fight in the Ministry.  First, after 
Ron, Luna, and Ginny were separated from the others when running 
from the prophecy shelves, Ron was in a very strange state when they 
caught up with Harry again.  

(US Ch 35, p795) "'Harry,' said Ron, giggling weakly, lurching 
forward, seizing the front of Harry's robes and gazing at hinm with 
unfocusec eyes. 'There you are...Ha ha ha ... You look funny, 
Harry....You're all messed up....'

Ron's face was very white and something dark was trickling from the 
corner of his mouth.  Next moment his knees had given way, <snip>

'Harry, we saw Uranus up close!' said Ron, still giggling 
feebly.  'Get it, Harry? We was Uranus - ha ha ha - '"

Neither Ginny or Luna knew what had happened to Ron.  Then, a few 
pages later, Ron (still giggling) called one of the brains from the 
tank:

(US Ch35, p798) "For a moment it seemed suspended in midair, then it 
soared toward Ron, spinning as it came, and what looked like ribbons 
of moving images flew from it, unraveling like rolls of film - <snip>

The moment they made contact with his skin, the tentacles began 
wrapping themselves around Ron's arms like ropes. <snip> But the 
thin ribbons were spinning around Ron's chest now.  He tugged and 
tore at them as the brain was pulled tight against him like an 
octopus's body."

So Ron took a one-two punch during the fight. First was something to 
do with planets, then the brain.  In the infirmary at the end, Ron 
was apparently recovered from the brain - (Ch38, p847) "There were 
still deep welts on his forearms where the brain's tentacles had 
wrapped around him.  According to Madam Pomgrey, thoughts could 
leave deeper scarring than almost anything else, though since she 
had started applying copious amounts of Dr. Ubbly's Oblivious 
Unction, there seemed to be some improvement."  

Notice the qualifiers "according to" and "seemed to be."  And 
nothing was said about his episode of silliness.  This just screams 
*important clue* to me.  Thoughts on what they mean?

Ravenclaw Bookworm





From navarro198 at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 23 06:03:16 2003
From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 06:03:16 -0000
Subject: Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <20030922020109.6598.qmail@web60201.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bkonn4+4ej5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81348

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, eowynn_24 <eowynn_24 at y...> 
wrote:
Eowynn:
<snip> I agree that Crouch Jr. was the most loyal servant and that 
he had returned to LV service, however I do not believe that Snape 
is one of the other two. Do we know for a fact that he wasn't there? 
I can't find any canon to say he was at the tournament, only that he 
was there after, and not until they reached Crouchs' office. There 
is plenty of time for him to get back, and explain to DD what 
happened and where he had been. 

Bookworm:
So far I agree.  I think JKR wants us to assume she meant Karkaroff 
and Snape as the cowardly and missing DEs, but is heading in a 
different direction.  Snape know he would be called eventually 
because of the dark mark on his arm, and could have discussed it 
with DD previously.  Not that he know when the call would come, but 
contingency plans for when it did happen. And not all of the DEs 
spoke or were named, so Snape could have been there without Harry 
realizing it.

Eowynn:
So this is my theory, feel free to disagree. 

Bookworm:
But, of course...<g>

Eowynn:
I believe that you have two options for the two missing DE, one is 
Karkaroff, and the other is Lupin. Which one is which I haven't 
quite figured out yet, mostly due to personal feelings. I hope that 
it is Lupin who has left him forever, but am afraid he is the one 
who was too cowardly to show up. ( second doubts now that Sirius is 
back and he as heard how strong Harry is. Possibly hoping for the 
second chance that Snape got.)Which leaves Karkaroff as the one who 
will die, probably by the hand of a DE, he wasn't important enough 
to be killed by LV. Any how those are my thoughts on the three 
missing DE; Lupin, Crouch Jr, and Karkaroff.

Bookworm:
I think the third missing DE is Ludo Bagman, not Lupin.  Remember 
that Bagman was accused of being a DE, whined that he trusted his 
boss, Rookwood, and was basically let off because of his Quidditch 
fans in the Wizengamot.  Also, look at the language of LV's 
statement: "One, too cowardly to return...he will pay."  When last 
seen, Bagman was running from the goblins - now LV's allies - 
because he couldn't *pay* his gambling debts.

That would make Karkaroff the "One, who I believe has left me 
forever...he will be killed, of course."  Earlier in GoF, Harry saw 
Karkaroff show Snape how the mark on his arm was getting more 
noticeable.  Instead of interpreting this as Karkaroff 
being "cowardly" about LV's return, what if he was worried about 
LV's return because he had left LV's service and feared LV's 
vengeance.  It's a subtle difference, but I think he was afraid for 
his life, while Bagman was just plain afraid.

Ravenclaw Bookworm




From oppen at mycns.net  Tue Sep 23 06:13:59 2003
From: oppen at mycns.net (Eric Oppen)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 01:13:59 -0500
Subject: Muggle-Born McGonagall?
Message-ID: <01c901c38199$e17311a0$bb570043@hppav>

No: HPFGUIDX 81349

One thing to remember about Professor McGonagall is that when we meet her,
she's "a sprightly 75" according to Herself.  If she was muggle-born, she
joined the Wizard World 64 years or so before the start of PS/SS.  Plenty
enough time, I think, for her to pretty much drop her "muggle"
ways-of-thinking and identify completely with the Wizard World.

By the end of her life (may it be long) Hermione may well be very much
changed from the girl we now know, who's still heavily influenced by her
Muggle upbringing.




From eowynn_24 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 06:25:42 2003
From: eowynn_24 at yahoo.com (eowynn_24)
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 23:25:42 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <bkonn4+4ej5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030923062542.54645.qmail@web60210.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81350



scoutmom21113 <navarro198 at hotmail.com> wrote:
--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, eowynn_24 <eowynn_24 at y...> 
wrote:
Eowynn:
<snip> I agree that Crouch Jr. was the most loyal servant and that 
he had returned to LV service, however I do not believe that Snape 
is one of the other two. Do we know for a fact that he wasn't there? 
I can't find any canon to say he was at the tournament, only that he 
was there after, and not until they reached Crouchs' office. There 
is plenty of time for him to get back, and explain to DD what 
happened and where he had been. 

Bookworm:
So far I agree.  I think JKR wants us to assume she meant Karkaroff 
and Snape as the cowardly and missing DEs, but is heading in a 
different direction.  Snape know he would be called eventually 
because of the dark mark on his arm, and could have discussed it 
with DD previously.  Not that he know when the call would come, but 
contingency plans for when it did happen. And not all of the DEs 
spoke or were named, so Snape could have been there without Harry 
realizing it.

Eowynn:
So this is my theory, feel free to disagree. 

Bookworm:
But, of course...<g>

Eowynn:
<snip> Any how those are my thoughts on the three 
missing DE; Lupin, Crouch Jr, and Karkaroff.

Bookworm:
I think the third missing DE is Ludo Bagman, not Lupin.  Remember 
that Bagman was accused of being a DE, whined that he trusted his 
boss, Rookwood, and was basically let off because of his Quidditch 
fans in the Wizengamot.  Also, look at the language of LV's 
statement: "One, too cowardly to return...he will pay."  When last 
seen, Bagman was running from the goblins - now LV's allies - 
because he couldn't *pay* his gambling debts.

That would make Karkaroff the "One, who I believe has left me 
forever...he will be killed, of course."  Earlier in GoF, Harry saw 
Karkaroff show Snape how the mark on his arm was getting more 
noticeable.  Instead of interpreting this as Karkaroff 
being "cowardly" about LV's return, what if he was worried about 
LV's return because he had left LV's service and feared LV's 
vengeance.  It's a subtle difference, but I think he was afraid for 
his life, while Bagman was just plain afraid.

Ravenclaw Bookworm

Eowynn:

I never even thought of Bagman, now I have to re-read the whole graveyard scene. Maybe ESE Lupin was there (shakes head in sorrow, and I was so hoping that he would give up his DE ways and turn back to the good side.) Once again, no canon one way or the other,...(lost in thought) This changes the whole outlook of a lot of my other thoughts. Thank you so much for this other POV, I may be even more confused, but that scenario opens up a lot of other avenues that had at one time seemed to treacherous to venture on. Now I think, with a little planning, that I may just choose to venture those roads. Now I am so excited. When did we find out that the goblins had gone over to LV side? I thought that bill was working on getting them on DD side? Did I miss some really big part of the book?

Eowynn (holding out till the end for ESE Lupin, to change his ways.)  






---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 07:46:25 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 07:46:25 -0000
Subject: The Phoenix & the wand
In-Reply-To: <BAY7-F77Rn8P5o7P6um0000d4f4@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <bkotoh+65lp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81351

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Joanna Barra" <Berkana_01 at h...>
wrote:
> Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 00:31:41 -0000
> >    From: "grindieloe" <andie at k...>
> 
> > ... I think it a valid possibility that Fawkes may someday
> >become the loyal pet of Harry Potter, ...edited...
> >
> >Andrea
> 
> ........................................
> Joanna says
> 
> ... makes you wonder why Fawkes has taken to Harry so much .... We 
> all believe it was because Harry was loyal to Dumbledore, but it 
> might be ..., because Harry will be his future owner.


bboy_mn:

Well, I've been saying that Harry would inherit Fawkes for years.
Although, I confess that my theory is a little more complex. I believe
that you become Heir to Gryffindor, not by heredity, but by being
selected as the one worth of the title. By being the one who most
reflects the characteristics and traditions of a Gryffindor.

So who decides who is worthy? The one who has spent over a 1,000 years
as part of the Gryffindor legacy; Fawkes. 

You can not domesticate a Phoenix; they can't be tamed, trained, or
taught little tricks. They are not pets. But if a Phoenix likes you
and chooses to be loyal to you; it will be immensely loyal and
protective. So just as the wand chooses the wizard; the Phoenix also
chooses his wizard. 

JKR has said in interviews that Harry will get a new pet at some point
in the book. I suspect that when Dumbledore dies, Fawkes will choose
Harry as his new master and in doing so, make Harry the worthy Heir to
Gryffindor's 'throne'.

> And as for Voldemort, what will happen to his wand if and when he
> dies? His wand and Harry's wand are connected, because of Fawkes. So
> will the wand just cease to exist after he dies, or will Harry 
> inherit the wand? Or will he use his wand to destroy it's brother?
> 
> ML
> 
> 
> Joanna

bboy_mn:

What happens to Voldemort's wand when he dies; tricky question. What
happened to Grindlewald's wand when Dumbledore defeated him? What
happened to James and Lily's wands? For that matter what will happen
to Dumbledore's wand when he dies?

My guess is, assuming they are not buried with them, that either they
are returned to the next of kin as personal property, or in the case
of no next of kin, they are held in a Ministry evidence storage room. 

I can't prove that, so it's not much more than a guess.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn




From delwynmarch at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 08:26:53 2003
From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (Doriane)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 08:26:53 -0000
Subject: McGonagall a Muggle? (Was: Did I Miss Something?)
In-Reply-To: <bki2k7+j1hr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkp04d+gdem@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81352

> McGonagall : "'You'd think they'd be a bit more careful, but no -- 
> even the Muggles have noticed something's going on. It was on their 
> news.' She jerked her head back at the Dursleys' dark living-room 
> window. 'I heard it. Flocks of owls...shooting stars...Well, they're
> not completely stupid.'"
> 
> Wendy : Finally (and getting back to your original point), what if 
> McGonagall is herself Muggle-born? This comment would seem to argue 
> against that (can you imagine Hermione making a comment like 
> this?), 

Actually, yes. Remember what she said when she got her Prefect 
badge ? She said (paraphrase) that prefect was a concept her parents 
could understand. I remember I was shocked the first time I read it, 
especially by what it implied : that her parents couldn't understand 
the rest of her life. How so ?? Is it because she doesn't explain 
things to them, because they are not interested in knowing her 
wizarding life, or because she *thinks* they couldn't understand 
anyway ? Do you see how this last line of reasoning could lead, after 
a few decades of complete immersion in the WW, to the kind of 
comments McGonagall made about Muggles ? So I don't necessarily 
consider those comments as a proof that she's not Muggle-born.

Del





From silmariel at telefonica.net  Tue Sep 23 09:41:36 2003
From: silmariel at telefonica.net (Carolina)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 11:41:36 +0200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: James = Voldemort
In-Reply-To: <57fe225845f4.5845f457fe22@gmu.edu>
References: <57fe225845f4.5845f457fe22@gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <200309231141.36750.silmariel@telefonica.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 81353

badnewsbean:
> I love snape, don't get me wrong, I think he's an amazingly
> complicated and intriguing character.
>
> But there have been SO many references to Harry Potter's
> unmistakable resemblance to his father James Potter that I don't
> see how they couldn't be father and son. Do any Snape as Harry's
> father theorists have an explanation for the identical hair and
> face?

Danger. Common sense question. I'm not a Snape!Father!Harry 
theorist, but someone (don't remember who) pointed out in a post 
that Harry making his hair grow while still a child might mean he 
is a metamorphmagus. 

I consider this option more likable now that Tonk's has said 
metamorphmagi ability appears spontaneously, in childhood.

The original poster idea was that, as Harry wanted to look like 
James, he did. At the age his parents were wiped out, he can have 
memories of his father's looks. Not concious, but they suffice.

Speculating, I also find reasonable that Petunia talked to 
baby!Harry in early childhood, giving him more context. There is a 
common tendency in adults to understimate a childs' ability to 
absorb information, and I find rambling about her disgraces while 
babycaring Harry very in character for her, IMO.

silmariel










From deemarie1a at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 09:38:01 2003
From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 09:38:01 -0000
Subject: Veiled Dementors; Was Re: The DD Brothers and The Dementors
In-Reply-To: <bko46f+81kd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkp49p+r9qt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81354

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> Donna wrote:
> > This was my opinion about dementors from post number 79422...
> > I got the impression that these souless people became dementors 
> > themselves. <snip> IMO, when the dementors first came into being, 
> > the "kiss" was an attempt to regain a soul. <snip> The 
description 
> > of the dementor's hand in PoA certainly reminded me of decaying 
> flesh.
> 
> Well, okay, but then Al said, in post #81323
> 
> Al:
> > I don't think soul-sucked people become Dementors, in any case.
> > There was an interview with Rowling (Canadian Press, October 25,
> > 2000) where she said Dementors don't breed but grow like fungi
> > wherever there's decay.
> 
> So I guess we're both wrong. JKR said so, sort of. Anyway, I 
*still* 
> want to know--what *happens* to a soul sucked by a dementor? Is it 
> <shudder> digested? Is there by-product? Or is it just *gone*?
> 
> Sandy, who thinks that "decay" comment supports Pip's new MD

Ah, but Sandy, isn't it true, that if something is not used, decay 
begins to set in?  And since these people are not using their bodies 
for anything, wouldn't decay begin there?  When Harry sees the 
dementor's hand in PoA, he pretty much says the flesh looked 
desicated and decayed.  That's why I think that dementors are soul-
sucked people.  I don't have the canon in front of me, but it is 
either Lupin or Sirius who says that the soul-sucked begin to become 
like dementors.

D




From mkeller01 at alltel.net  Tue Sep 23 10:52:40 2003
From: mkeller01 at alltel.net (jksunflower2002)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 10:52:40 -0000
Subject: Ron's big moment? (WAS: Why Ron Loves Hermione)
In-Reply-To: <bkolg1+uek9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkp8lo+7mjj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81355



Ravenclaw Bookworm said:
> ><Snipped. Bigtime.>
> So Ron took a one-two punch during the fight. First was something 
to 
> do with planets, then the brain.  In the infirmary at the end, Ron 
> was apparently recovered from the brain - (Ch38, p847) "There were 
> still deep welts on his forearms where the brain's tentacles had 
> wrapped around him.  According to Madam Pomgrey, thoughts could 
> leave deeper scarring than almost anything else, though since she 
> had started applying copious amounts of Dr. Ubbly's Oblivious 
> Unction, there seemed to be some improvement."  


I'm sure this has probably been mentioned before, but....the welts  
are capable of leaving deep scarring.  They need to be removed with 
Dr. Ubbly's Oblivious Unction.....kind of like using the "Obliviate" 
curse to remove someone's painful thoughts (memories.) 


> Notice the qualifiers "according to" and "seemed to be."  And 
> nothing was said about his episode of silliness.  This just 
screams 
> *important clue* to me.  Thoughts on what they mean?
> 
> Ravenclaw Bookworm


So, is that implying that M. Pomfrey has actually used the Obliviate 
on someone before?  Is JKR trying to tell us that people who have 
experienced the Obliviate seem to be improved but actually are not?  
The entire morality of using the obliviate could come into play in a 
future book (perhaps having been used widely during the first war?) 

Toad (Who probably shouldn't have responded to this post without 
having her cup of coffee first--sorry.  My welts aren't running very 
deep this morning.)





From dcyasser at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 12:40:57 2003
From: dcyasser at yahoo.com (dcyasser)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 12:40:57 -0000
Subject: Ron's big moment? (WAS: Why Ron Loves Hermione)
In-Reply-To: <bkolg1+uek9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkpf0p+6kcq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81356

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "scoutmom21113" 
<navarro198 at h...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ffimiles" <ffionmiles at h...> 
> wrote:
> > 
> > Ron's definately going to have a big 'moment' which'll be 
pivotal 
> for 
> > the good side - Hermione's already had so many in helping Harry 
> get 
> > throught asks/time-turning/figure out the basalisk - sof ar 
Ron's 
> > greatest moment came in the chess game in PS - he's got to have 
> > another moment - even if it is to redeem himself from some 
> weakness 
> > he shows, which might get Harry and others into trouble - but 
> he'll 
> > come good - and don't even mention him being killed off...
> 
> Two things struck me from the fight in the Ministry.  First, after 
> Ron, Luna, and Ginny were separated from the others when running 
> from the prophecy shelves, Ron was in a very strange state when 
they 
> caught up with Harry again.  
> 
> (US Ch 35, p795) "'Harry,' said Ron, giggling weakly, lurching 
> forward, seizing the front of Harry's robes and gazing at hinm 
with 
> unfocusec eyes. 'There you are...Ha ha ha ... You look funny, 
> Harry....You're all messed up....'
> 
> Ron's face was very white and something dark was trickling from 
the 
> corner of his mouth.  Next moment his knees had given way, <snip>
> 
> 'Harry, we saw Uranus up close!' said Ron, still giggling 
> feebly.  'Get it, Harry? We was Uranus - ha ha ha - '"
> 
> Neither Ginny or Luna knew what had happened to Ron.  Then, a few 
> pages later, Ron (still giggling) called one of the brains from 
the 
> tank:
> 
> (US Ch35, p798) "For a moment it seemed suspended in midair, then 
it 
> soared toward Ron, spinning as it came, and what looked like 
ribbons 
> of moving images flew from it, unraveling like rolls of film - 
<snip>
> 
> The moment they made contact with his skin, the tentacles began 
> wrapping themselves around Ron's arms like ropes. <snip> But the 
> thin ribbons were spinning around Ron's chest now.  He tugged and 
> tore at them as the brain was pulled tight against him like an 
> octopus's body."
> 
> So Ron took a one-two punch during the fight. First was something 
to 
> do with planets, then the brain.  In the infirmary at the end, Ron 
> was apparently recovered from the brain - (Ch38, p847) "There were 
> still deep welts on his forearms where the brain's tentacles had 
> wrapped around him.  According to Madam Pomgrey, thoughts could 
> leave deeper scarring than almost anything else, though since she 
> had started applying copious amounts of Dr. Ubbly's Oblivious 
> Unction, there seemed to be some improvement."  
> 
> Notice the qualifiers "according to" and "seemed to be."  And 
> nothing was said about his episode of silliness.  This just 
screams 
> *important clue* to me.  Thoughts on what they mean?
> 
> Ravenclaw Bookworm




From dcyasser at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 12:47:56 2003
From: dcyasser at yahoo.com (dcyasser)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 12:47:56 -0000
Subject: Ron's big moment? 
In-Reply-To: <bkolg1+uek9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkpfds+n5q8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81357

Additionally, regarding Ron's Big Moment in upcoming books, I fully 
expect him to have one, a real think-on-your-feet, jump in 
physically, save the day (save Harry) moment.  And I don't think any 
of it will sink in for him until after it has happened, at which 
time he will be in shock at what a) the dangers they're all facing 
b)the true importance of his best pal c) what he just did and d) his 
own abilities. Talk about an epiphany!

Cheers
dc

   




From elfundeb at comcast.net  Tue Sep 23 12:14:06 2003
From: elfundeb at comcast.net (elfundeb)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 08:14:06 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Dumbledore's Philosophy (WAS:  MAGIC DISHWASHER: Spying Game Philosophy
References: <bkncjm+gh7e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <002101c381cc$3031fe00$9ddc5644@aoldsl.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 81358

I, Debbie wrote:

> I didn't - and still don't - see Dumbledore's decision 
> not to tell Harry about the prophecy sooner as a mistake.  What 
> Dumbledore now sees as a *mistake* was to treat Harry as a human 
> being and not as a weapon.

David responded:

I don't understand the argument here.  You seem to be saying that 
Dumbledore has a dilemma: either keep Harry in ignorance, and allow 
him the freedom to make his own choices, or tell him the truth and 
so manipulate him; to turn him into a weapon, as you put it.

This seems a false dilemma to me.  True, when Harry is very young, 
to burden him with too much knowledge might be to paralyse him, but 
as he gets older he should be able to bear the truth without losing 
his freedom - indeed knowing more makes him more free because his 
choices are better informed.


Debbie:

Harry already understands by the end of PS/SS that Voldemort is after him.  But it's one thing for a child to have the knowledge that he will be forced to defend himself, and it's another to know that the entire WW is depending on him to vanquish Voldemort.  Dumbledore was right to withhold that, I think, until Harry better understood his own will and knew the WW a bit better.  Dumbledore says he made a mistake by not telling him everything five years ago, and I simply don't agree with this.

David again:

It seems to me therefore there is a crossover point - encountered by 
every parent - when it is better to let a growing child into a 
secret.  [snip]  If, at the end of GOF, Dumbledore had told Harry aboutt the 
prophecy, how would that have reduced him?  If so, how, at the end 
of OOP, does Harry knowing about the prophecy *not* do so?

Debbie:

My issue here is that Dumbledore perceives his error to relate directly to the prophecy.  I believe Dumbledore did err in OOP, but it was a more general refusal to give information to Harry.  The time to level with Harry was, I think, not at the end of GoF but when he arrived at 12 Grimmauld Place, after he had an opportunity to process and gain some distance from Cedric's death and his encounter with Voldemort.  He arrived demanding to know what was going on and was told very little.  He wasn't told what Voldemort was doing to his mind, or that Voldemort might try to use the mind connection to lure him away, or why Dumbledore wouldn't give him the time of day, in my mind the worst of Dumbledore's errors.  Dumbledore admits these mistakes.  Correcting these mistakes does not require Harry to learn what the prophecy says, though arguably this would have been an appropriate time to tell him about it.  

In fact, knowing what the prophecy said might have caused Harry to do something foolhardy that would ensure Voldemort's victory; this is the same Oedipus dilemma that trapped Voldemort --trying to thwart the prophecy may itself have led to the prophecy's fulfillment adversely to himself. 

The very facts that Dumbledore recites to indicate that Harry was ready to know the prophecy, i.e., how he has risen to the occasion time and time again against challenges that should have been far beyond him, suggest that Harry was well on his way to fulfilling the prophecy without any knowledge of it or its contents.  Specific knowledge of the prophecy is just another burden that Harry must carry.

Debbie 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From entropymail at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 12:51:49 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 12:51:49 -0000
Subject: Scabber is NOT a rat (was Hyperbolic Chapter Titles )
In-Reply-To: <bkng7n+v7k4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkpfl5+jdt7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81359

> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "meltowne" <meltowne at y...> 
> wrote:

> >When Ron 
> > tried to cast spells on scabbers, he was trying to turn a RAT into 
> > something yellow:
> > 
> >           "Sunshine, daisies, butter mellow,
> >           Turn this stupid fat rat yellow."
> > 
> > The spell failed, not because Ron was a lousy spellcaster, but 
> > because Scabbers wasn't really a rat!  He was a human in disguise.

I don't think it had anything to do with whether Scabbers was an
actual rat or animagus rat. I've always thought that it becomes clear,
later on in the book, why the spell doesn't work: it comes from Fred
and George! And, as we come to know, the twins are always happy to
have a laugh at someone else's expense, especially if it's Ron. They
just wanted to make him look silly by "teaching" him a bogus spell. I
mean, with all of those foreign-sounding spells we've come to know so
well (imperius, crucio, accio...), that whole "sunshine, daisies,
butter mellow" thing sounds a bit ridiculous, doesn't it?

:: Entropy ::




From jeanico at securenet.net  Tue Sep 23 12:52:15 2003
From: jeanico at securenet.net (jeanico2000)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 12:52:15 -0000
Subject: Musings and a question
Message-ID: <bkpflv+cnsc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81360

I was having breakfast with my daughter early this morning and we 
started talking about OOTP. Neither of us could remember who taught 
Harry how to cast the "Protego" shield and I don't have the book 
handy right now. Could someone please remind me so that I can resume 
the debate with my daughter over supper?
Also, we were wondering why nobody tried to stop Harry from going 
after Bellatrix. Dumbledore ends up saving Harry and fighting 
Voldermort, but why did none of the order members go after him to 
help. (Or try to stop him with a well placed "Petrificus")Just 
wondering. Any thoughts?
Have a great day,
Nicole   




From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Tue Sep 23 13:25:23 2003
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:25:23 -0000
Subject: Musings and a question
In-Reply-To: <bkpflv+cnsc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkphk3+dql6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81361

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jeanico2000" <jeanico at s...> 
wrote:
 
> Also, we were wondering why nobody tried to stop Harry from going 
> after Bellatrix. Dumbledore ends up saving Harry and fighting 
> Voldermort, but why did none of the order members go after him to 
> help. (Or try to stop him with a well placed "Petrificus")Just 
> wondering. Any thoughts?
> Have a great day,
> Nicole

Kingsley and Tonks were both unconscious, and Moody tried to revive 
Tonks. That only leaves Lupin. He tried to stop him, but Harry ran 
anyway. Maybe he wanted to go after Harry, too, but Dumbledore told 
him that he would go, and that Lupin should look after Neville and 
the other DA members.

Hickengruendler





From navarro198 at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 23 13:25:53 2003
From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:25:53 -0000
Subject: Ron's big moment? (WAS: Why Ron Loves Hermione)
In-Reply-To: <bkp8lo+7mjj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkphl1+l52h@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81362

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jksunflower2002" 
<mkeller01 at a...> wrote:
> 
> 
> Ravenclaw Bookworm said:
> > ><Snipped. Bigtime.>
 (Ch38, p847) "There were 
> > still deep welts on his forearms where the brain's tentacles had 
> > wrapped around him.  According to Madam Pomgrey, thoughts could 
> > leave deeper scarring than almost anything else, though since 
she 
> > had started applying copious amounts of Dr. Ubbly's Oblivious 
> > Unction, there seemed to be some improvement."  
> > 
> > Notice the qualifiers "according to" and "seemed to be."  And 
> > nothing was said about his episode of silliness.  This just 
> screams 
> > *important clue* to me.  Thoughts on what they mean?
> > 

Toad said:
> So, is that implying that M. Pomfrey has actually used the 
Obliviate on someone before?  Is JKR trying to tell us that people 
who have experienced the Obliviate seem to be improved but actually 
are not?  The entire morality of using the obliviate could come into 
play in a future book (perhaps having been used widely during the 
first war?) 

Ravenclaw Bookworm:
What I was pointing out is that few things in JKR's writing are what 
they *seem* to be.  In this case, Ron *seems* to be recovering - but 
is he really?  Just how deep will this scarring go?  And was he 
treated for whatever happened to him when he got so silly?  
Considering his joke about Uranus, did the room have something to do 
with planets?  What unknown effect will manifest itself in the next 
book?  

Just a hunch - the joke he told about Uranus was the same one he 
used during a divination class (GoF, US Ch13, p201) - will he 
develop his talent for prophecy? 

I don't think there is a connection between Obliviate and the 
Oblivious Unction.  One is a spell, the other is an ointment 
(potion) that is applied to the skin. 

Ravenclaw Bookworm (who stayed up much too late last night and is 
now going in search of coffee)





From quigonginger at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 13:34:13 2003
From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:34:13 -0000
Subject: Musings and a question
In-Reply-To: <bkpflv+cnsc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkpi4l+mefd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81363

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jeanico2000" <jeanico at s...> 
wrote:
> I was having breakfast with my daughter early this morning and we 
> started talking about OOTP. Neither of us could remember who taught 
> Harry how to cast the "Protego" shield and I don't have the book 
> handy right now. Could someone please remind me so that I can 
resume 
> the debate with my daughter over supper?

Ginger here:
I'm kind of going out on a limb, but it seems that Protego , which is 
the Shield Charm used on pp 591-2 OoP, US edition is the same shield 
charm taught by Hermione in GoF pp 608-9 US hardcover.  Snape only 
says "a shield charm" in OoP, so there may be more than one, but 
that's where my knuts, yen, nickels and loonies are stacked right now.
Anyone care to correct?

> Also, we were wondering why nobody tried to stop Harry from going 
> after Bellatrix. Dumbledore ends up saving Harry and fighting 
> Voldermort, but why did none of the order members go after him to 
> help. (Or try to stop him with a well placed "Petrificus")Just 
> wondering. Any thoughts?

Ginger again: 
Just a guess, but when Harry left the room, Moody was trying to 
revive Tonks, Shacklebolt had finished dueling Bella, but we don't 
know what he did after that, and Remus yelled after Harry not to go.  
If KS and RL had followed Harry, they would have met up with Ron, who 
was still daffy, and Hermione, who was still out cold, and may have 
stopped to help them instead of chasing Harry.
Like I said, just a guess. 

> Have a great day,
> Nicole

You too!  Ginger, hoping everyone on the East Coast of the US is ok 
after the hurricane.




From dcyasser at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 13:35:44 2003
From: dcyasser at yahoo.com (dcyasser)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:35:44 -0000
Subject: Musings and a question
In-Reply-To: <bkpflv+cnsc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkpi7g+f6nn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81364

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jeanico2000" <jeanico at s...> 
wrote:
> I was having breakfast with my daughter early this morning and we 
> started talking about OOTP. Neither of us could remember who 
taught 
> Harry how to cast the "Protego" shield and I don't have the book 
> handy right now. Could someone please remind me so that I can 
resume 
> the debate with my daughter over supper?
> Also, we were wondering why nobody tried to stop Harry from going 
> after Bellatrix. Dumbledore ends up saving Harry and fighting 
> Voldermort, but why did none of the order members go after him to 
> help. (Or try to stop him with a well placed "Petrificus")Just 
> wondering. Any thoughts?
> Have a great day,
> Nicole

Nicole, 
I love discussing this with my daughter as well, and she asked the 
same thing, how it was that Harry heard voices shouting at him to 
come back, but no one stopped him.  Same questions as to why DD 
could easily round up all the other DE's but couldn't stop Bellatrix 
from escaping.  If this is one of those times when DD is letting 
Harry go (the way he subtly encouraged the pursuit of the Sorcerer's 
Stone) then it is rather rash. And why would he do it? Does DD 
think/know Bellatrix can't kill Harry? (due to prophecy), and does 
he then only interfere when he feels Voldemort arrive?  Or is it 
just JKR quickly getting Harry and Bellatrix out there without too 
much extra writing?  
Regarding the "protego" shield, it doesn't say how Harry learned it, 
so I assume he got it from the book Sirius and Lupin gave him.  It 
first mentions it when he teaches it to the DA.  "...when Harry 
taught them the Shield Charm, a means of deflecting minor jinxes 
back on  the attacker, only Hermione mastered the charm faster than 
Neville." (US hardcover p.553)
cheers
dc




From navarro198 at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 23 13:39:13 2003
From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:39:13 -0000
Subject: Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <20030923062542.54645.qmail@web60210.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bkpie1+97m7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81365

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, eowynn_24 <eowynn_24 at y...> 
wrote:
> 
When did we find out that the goblins had gone over to LV side? I 
thought that bill was working on getting them on DD side? Did I miss 
some really big part of the book?
> 
> Eowynn (holding out till the end for ESE Lupin, to change his 
ways.)  

Bookworm:
You got me.  I confused the goblins with the dementors.  Chalk it up 
to late night insanity.  The use of the word *pay* still applies, 
though.  However, I don't agree with ESE Lupin; I think Lupin is one 
of the really good guys and will be crushed if he turns out to be 
evil.

Raveclaw Bookworm




From dcyasser at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 13:43:46 2003
From: dcyasser at yahoo.com (dcyasser)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:43:46 -0000
Subject: Musings and a question
In-Reply-To: <bkpi4l+mefd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkpimi+a5in@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81366

> 
> Ginger here:
> I'm kind of going out on a limb, but it seems that Protego , which 
is 
> the Shield Charm used on pp 591-2 OoP, US edition is the same 
shield 
> charm taught by Hermione in GoF pp 608-9 US hardcover.  Snape only 
> says "a shield charm" in OoP, so there may be more than one, but 
> that's where my knuts, yen, nickels and loonies are stacked right 
now.
> Anyone care to correct?


Ooh, good one, Ginger, I didn't look back to GoF. Does it ever 
strike you as funny that Hermione helps Harry practice these and 
other charms in GoF but apparently, since he is teaching them to her 
in OoP, doesn't learn them herself? 

 -  dc, who is enjoying a dark, rainy morning purusing the 
Potterverse and who is lucky the hurricane didn't quite touch us 
altho they cancelled school anyway. 




From navarro198 at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 23 13:45:52 2003
From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:45:52 -0000
Subject: McGonagall a Muggle? (Was: Did I Miss Something?)
In-Reply-To: <bkp04d+gdem@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkpiqg+909k@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81367

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Doriane" <delwynmarch at y...> 
wrote:
Del said:
Actually, yes. Remember what she [Hermione] said when she got her 
Prefect badge ? She said (paraphrase) that prefect was a concept her 
parents could understand. I remember I was shocked the first time I 
read it, especially by what it implied : that her parents couldn't 
understand the rest of her life. How so ?? Is it because she doesn't 
explain things to them, because they are not interested in knowing 
her wizarding life, or because she *thinks* they couldn't understand 
anyway ? 

Bookworm:
Has anyone ever tried to explain a complicated scientific concept to 
someone who isn't good at science (or the reverse - heard an 
explanation from a scientist who can't speak non-science)?  
Hermione's parents are dentist (scientists).  I find it easy to 
imagine they have trouble understanding magical conecpts.  
Expecially if Hermione get wrapped up in the details and doesn't 
explain things well.

Ravenclaw Bookworm




From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au  Tue Sep 23 14:38:17 2003
From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 14:38:17 -0000
Subject: Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <bkmm4g+2es0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkplsp+7tha@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81368

--- "Potterfanme" <fc26det> wrote:
> --- "Hagrid" <aussie_lol> wrote:
> > See http://www.hp-lexicon.org/death_eaters.html 
> > three dead :
> > - Rosier (GoF 27 + 30)
> > - Wilkes (GoF 27)
> > - Regulus Black (OotP 6)
> > 
> > Cowardly or Left Forever
> > - Snape **
> > - Karakoff 
> > Faithful Servant
> > - Barty Couch Jr
> 
> Aussie,
> Do you think Regulus is one of the dead?  I just figured that since 
> LV killed or had him killed that he didn't count as one that he 
> would mention in a mournful way.  I figured he would think of him 
> as just so much waste.  Just curious...
> Susan

Susan, 
LV may not have ordered Regulus's death. 

This mention of that extra dead DE adds to my suspitions that Snape 
may have done a lot of underhanded things and remains faithful to the 
Dark Lord.

Sirius had no idea Severus was ever a DE. Therefore, Regulus would 
have also been suprised when he recognised Snape there. He was only a 
year or 2 behind Padfoot at Hogwarts, so knew about the friction 
between Sirius-Snape well. 

OF course, this arguement is also true if Wormtail was recognised.

- If LV included Regulus 
- If Regulus was killed without LV direction
- then there is much more to learn about that extra dead DE

> When did we find out that the goblins had gone over to LV side? I
> thought that bill was working on getting them on DD side? Did I 
> miss some really big part of the book?
> Eowynn 

The goblins do have a problem with the wizards loyal to MoM (OotP 4, 
5, 9). Hagrid said, "so yeh'd be mad ter try an' rob it (Gringotts), 
I'll tell yeh that. Never mess with goblins, Harry." Goblins are very 
sensitive when it comes to Galleons. 

The problem began when Ludo Bagman disappeared owing the goblins. The 
goblins suspected that he had MoM help to disappear.




From jane_starr at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 15:06:20 2003
From: jane_starr at yahoo.com (Jane Starr)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 08:06:20 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: McGonagall a Muggle? (Was: Did I Miss Something?)
In-Reply-To: <bkpiqg+909k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030923150620.83613.qmail@web13808.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81369

--- scoutmom21113 <navarro198 at hotmail.com> wrote:
<snip Doriane's post about Hermione's parents not
understanding...> 

> Bookworm:
> Has anyone ever tried to explain a complicated
> scientific concept to someone who isn't good at 
> science (or the reverse - heard an explanation from
> a scientist who can't speak non-science)? Hermione's

> parents are dentist scientists).  I find it easy to 
> imagine they have trouble understanding magical
> conecpts. Expecially if Hermione get wrapped up in 
> the details and doesn't explain things well.

JES:
Plus she is prevented from actual demonstrations which
might help make things clearer by the decree for the
restriction of underage wizardry. 


=====
JES
Canada

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



From EnsTren at aol.com  Tue Sep 23 15:20:36 2003
From: EnsTren at aol.com (EnsTren at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 11:20:36 -0400
Subject: Jewish Goblins? (was: Re: Death Eaters)
Message-ID: <02E73128.614147F2.00170183@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81370

Okay stupid subject heading but hear me out.  


In a message dated 9/23/2003 10:38:17 AM Eastern Daylight Time, aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au writes:

> The goblins do have a problem with the wizards loyal to MoM (OotP 4, 
> 5, 9). Hagrid said, "so yeh'd be mad ter try an' rob it (Gringotts), 
> I'll tell yeh that. Never mess with goblins, Harry." Goblins are very 
> sensitive when it comes to Galleons. 

Now this is what got me thinking, why would they be so sensitive when it comes to galleons?  why do they only work in the bank?


A long long time ago in a place across the sea
there were a people banned from owning land and certain buissnessry.

These were the Jews.  Thus they were forced into such 'dirty' proffessions as money lenders and lawyers and /bankers/.  All looked heavily down upon.  Shakesphear even did a play on it, which pointed out even then the jews were sometimes killed if money was owed.

There's my first point to the Goblins to draw parallels.

Second point, prior to World War two Jews were in control of the German goverment, one thing that let Hitler stir up anti seminisim.  Because of World War one Germany had to pay huuuuuge depts to france and several other countries.  /Money they didn't have./  So when Hitler got into power he started printing huge sums of money, it drove the vaule down, but the fines were phrased as "______ marks." not "Equivlent to _____ franks" or "Equivlent to ______ pounds of gold."

And a Mark is a Mark, even if it's worth less than a single lire.

Needless to say this made Hitler very popular.

However, Wizarding money is made out of real precious metals, which wouldn't change much in value, and you can't print them unless you find more.

So allow me to allign the Goblin rebellions with WWI and do you all see how my brain is working?

The Goblins were forced to work into the bank because it's a dirty proffession and they might just owe the MoM a lot of money because of their rebellions, hence why they are so sensitive about galleons, and upset that the MoM might have snatched it away.



Nemi, go ahead, shoot me down



From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 15:22:55 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 15:22:55 -0000
Subject: Veiled Dementors; Was Re: The DD Brothers and The Dementors
In-Reply-To: <bkp49p+r9qt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkpogf+4pmf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81371

Donna wrote:
> Ah, but Sandy, isn't it true, that if something is not used, decay 
> begins to set in?  And since these people are not using their 
> bodies for anything, wouldn't decay begin there?  When Harry sees 
> the dementor's hand in PoA, he pretty much says the flesh looked 
> desicated and decayed.  That's why I think that dementors are soul-
> sucked people.  I don't have the canon in front of me, but it is 
> either Lupin or Sirius who says that the soul-sucked begin to 
> become like dementors.

Canon gives us Lupin, PoA Ch. 12, U.S. pb ed. p. 247 [Harry has just 
asked if a dementor's kiss is fatal.]: "Oh, no," said Lupin. "Much 
worse than that. You can exist without your soul, you know, as long 
as your brain and heart are still working. But you'll have no sense 
of self anymore, no memory, no...anything. There's no chance at all 
of recovery. You'll just -- exist. As an empty shell. And your soul 
is gone forever...lost." (Guess that answers *my* question...or does 
it <g>). So, does Lupin mean you go on moving about without your 
soul, or does he mean that the soul-sucked are just stacked up like 
cordwood somewhere? (I don't believe they turn straightaway into 
dementors, if at all.)

JKR, according to Al, said, "Dementors don't breed but grow like 
fungi *wherever there is decay.* That would make decay the cause and 
dementors the effect, if you see what I mean; she wasn't saying that 
dementors are decayed, but that dementors show up, are "born" where 
decay already exists. And she said, paraphrasing: where decay exists 
(not within or from those who are decayed).
 
In PoA, Ch. 10, p. 187 of the U.S. trade pb ed., Remus Lupin says,
"Dementors are among the foulest creatures that walk this earth. They 
infest the darkest, filthiest places...<snip> If it can, the dementor 
will feed on you long enough to reduce you to something like itself...
soul-less and evil. You will be left with nothing but the worst 
experiences of your life."
 
Lupin was Harry's DADA teacher in PoA; it was his business to know 
dark creatures, and he said "...reduce you to '*something like* 
itself'." He didn't say "a dementor." He didn't say "*a* thing like 
itself." Nowhere, I think, are we finding substantive canon for soul-
sucked *equal* or *become* dementors. I know I am splitting hairs 
here, but IMO it's the best I or anyone else can do with what we've 
got on the subject.

Here is the URL for the Lexicon (thanks, Lexicon!) page which has 
information on and a list of canon references to dementors:
http://www.hp-lexicon.org/dementors.html

Sandy




From n_longbottom01 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 15:49:24 2003
From: n_longbottom01 at yahoo.com (n_longbottom01)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 15:49:24 -0000
Subject: The Phoenix & the Snowy Owl  (was The Phoenix & the Wand)
In-Reply-To: <bkotoh+65lp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkpq24+3r9v@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81372

> 
> bboy_mn:
> 
> Well, I've been saying that Harry would inherit Fawkes for years.
<snip>
> 
JKR has said in interviews that Harry will get a new pet at some point
in the book. I suspect that when Dumbledore dies, Fawkes will choose
Harry as his new master and in doing so, make Harry the worthy Heir to
Gryffindor's 'throne'.
> 

Now me, n_longbottom01:

If Harry is going to get a new pet at some point in the series, I 
think there is a good chance that it will be Fawkes.  I guess we are 
assuming Dumbledore is going to have to die for Harry to inherit the 
Phoenix?  Maybe Dumbledore could fake his own death, and Harry could 
inherit the Phoenix?  (Pardon my wishful thinking--I don't want to 
see any more of my favorite characters get killed off.)

Ok, maybe Dumbledore will have to die for Harry to get his new pet, 
but what about Hedwig?  Does something have to happen to Hedwig to 
make room for this new pet?  Could Hedwig's death the future death 
that is going to make JKR cry as she writes it?  Maybe Harry will 
just have two pets... but how would Hedwig feel when Harry chooses to 
send a message using Fawkes instead of her?  I see Fawkes as 
overshadowing Hedwig's role.

Maybe Buckbeak will be Harry's new pet instead?  Buckbeak needs 
someone now that Sirius is gone.  Buckbeak wouldn't usurp Hedwig's 
role... so I could see Harry owning both without too much conflict.

So... any theories as to Hedwig's fate in this new pet scenario?  
Extra credit will be awarded to those theories in which no beloved 
characters have to die.

--n_longbottom01  




From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au  Tue Sep 23 16:16:57 2003
From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 16:16:57 -0000
Subject: Snape@grave or not (was Re: Death Eaters)
In-Reply-To: <bkonn4+4ej5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkprlp+rt95@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81373

--- "scoutmom21113" <navarro198> wrote:
> --- eowynn_24 <eowynn_24> wrote:
> Eowynn:
> <snip> I agree that Crouch Jr. was the most loyal servant and that 
> he had returned to LV service, however I do not believe that Snape 
> is one of the other two.Do we know for a fact that he wasn't there? 
> I can't find any canon to say he was at the tournament, only that 
> he was there after, and not until they reached Crouchs' office. 
> There is plenty of time for him to get back, and explain to DD what 
> happened and where he had been. 
> 
> Bookworm:
> So far I agree.  I think JKR wants us to assume she meant Karkaroff 
> and Snape as the cowardly and missing DEs, but is heading in a 
> different direction.  ... And not all of the DEs 
> spoke or were named, so Snape could have been there without Harry 
> realizing it.

hmmm, I never expected Snape to be there, but did think his excuse 
for appearing later was acceptable enough for LV.

If, however, Snape was one of the wizards LV walked past, then Why 
didn't Voldemort talk to him?
- Snape was not as active as Malfoy, and Malfoy got chewed out.
- Snape received a Hogwarts posting around the time James Potter was 
alerted to hide ... suspitious to LV or what?
- He had the most inside information about DD than any of them.

I think it is either because:
- Snape was not there 
or
- LV already had enough good reports about Snape that he diddn't need 
to talk to him.

That report could have come from:
- Barty Couch Jr who was at Hogwarts as Moody (although Couch didn't 
see Snape show his DE activities. Any report from Moody would not 
show Snape is still a "sleeper spy" or not)
or
- Peter Pettigrew. 

I Propose that:
- Peter was recruited to the DE by Snape. 
- Snape may have guided Wormtail to LV in Albania 
- Pettigrew reported about Snape to LV and that's why LV didn't feel 
the need to single Snape out when he was chewing out the other DE.




From meltowne at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 16:18:52 2003
From: meltowne at yahoo.com (meltowne)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 16:18:52 -0000
Subject: Did Voldemort kill Petunia & Lily's parents?
In-Reply-To: <bkni63+47ro@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkprpc+kjjv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81374

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "raps029" <raps29 at a...> wrote:


Ruth:

> I've been developing a theory about Petunia's feelings toward 
Harry.  
> I also think that Voldemort killed Harry's grandparents, possibly 
> before Harry was born.  Petunia blamed Lily and WW for the death of 
> her parents and kept herself from feeling the pain of loss by 
> refusing to have anything to do them.  She channels all of her 
> emotions into taking care of her husband and son and their home.
> 
> After taking Harry in as a baby, she knows that he is under a death 
> threat and so acts mean to Harry to keep herself from caring about 
> him. If she doesn't care about him, it won't hurt so much when he's 
> killed by Voldemort.

I agree with this.  It also fits with them trying to keep Harry from 
being a wizard in the first place.  If he's not a wizards, then LV 
has no reason to kill him.  While Umbridge's dementors did attack 
Dudley, LV has made no attempts to harm Petunia or Dudley, so I don't 
think it's just the blood that matters to him.  If Harry was so 
importatnt as the last descendant of Godric Gryffindor, through his 
mother, then Petunia and Dudley would also be desendants - even if 
not a wizards himself, Dudley could have a wizard child, to continue 
the line.

Since Petunia is protecting Harry because she has a blood link, then 
we must assume that neither Petunia nor Lily was adopted, as some 
have suggested.  There's still something we're missing about the 
family - why were they so excited about Lily being a witch, and why 
did that make Petunia hate her?  In PS/SS she hadn't seen her sister 
in several years.




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 16:24:42 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 16:24:42 -0000
Subject: Ron's big moment? (WAS: Why Ron Loves Hermione)
In-Reply-To: <bkphl1+l52h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkps4a+esse@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81375

> Ravenclaw Bookworm:
> What I was pointing out is that few things in JKR's writing are 
> what they *seem* to be.  In this case, Ron *seems* to be 
> recovering - but is he really?  Just how deep will this scarring 
> go?  And was he treated for whatever happened to him when he got so 
> silly?  

I kept worrying about Ron and lasting effects from the battle at the 
MoM; but in Ch. 37 of the U.S. hb ed. of OoP, on p. 822, Dumbledore 
arrives from the MoM: "Well, Harry," said Dumbledore, finally turning 
away from the baby bird [Fawkes], "you will be pleased to hear that 
none of your fellow students are going to suffer lasting damage from 
the night's events." In spite of what I know: that Dumbledore may 
have been just trying to salvage something positive from the wreckage 
for Harry and he may not have told the entire truth, I cling to this 
whenever dread overwhelms my imagination (What will the goofifying 
spell or the attack of the flying brain(1) mean for Ron later?).

Nothing, however, says that there will be no lasting *effect*--is an 
episodically smarter Ron going to show up for last two books? Will 
he "know things?" (Right, that could mean he became a seer.) Or one 
with lapses like the one Dumbledore had start of term in GoF, when he 
started to tell an inappropriate joke right in the middle of 
explaining the upcoming TWT? (Oh, but wait--was that a lapse, or 
something we just don't undertand yet...<g>)

Another thing: was Dumbledore paying extra attention to Fawkes in 
order to give himself a few moments to prepare ("finally turning 
away") for the coming interview with Harry? It's also possible to 
comfort oneself with a creature companion with whom one has a 
profound bond. Too, he may have been reassuring and examining Fawkes 
as well as thanking him for the assist.

Sandy thinking (1)now *there's* a B movie title




From mkeller01 at alltel.net  Tue Sep 23 17:07:01 2003
From: mkeller01 at alltel.net (jksunflower2002)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 17:07:01 -0000
Subject: Ron's big moment? (WAS: Why Ron Loves Hermione)
In-Reply-To: <bkphl1+l52h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkpujl+upa2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81376

 > 
> Ravenclaw Bookworm:
>> 
> I don't think there is a connection between Obliviate and the 
> Oblivious Unction.  One is a spell, the other is an ointment 
> (potion) that is applied to the skin. 
> 
> Ravenclaw Bookworm (who stayed up much too late last night and is 
> now going in search of coffee)


Sorry, should have been clearer.  I was referring to the SYMBOLISM 
of the Oblivious ointment to the Obliviate spell.  

Toad




From missygallant2000 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 17:30:29 2003
From: missygallant2000 at yahoo.com (Missy)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 17:30:29 -0000
Subject: McGonagall a Muggle? (Was: Did I Miss Something?)
In-Reply-To: <bknhrt+dp28@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkpvvl+40ok@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81377

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Matt" <hpfanmatt at g...> wrote:
> --- Responding to Pip's theory that McGonagall
> is Muggle-born, Wendy wrote: 
>  
> > I've never heard this theory ... and I'd like 
> > to know how you think it fits with a bit of 
> > canon that's been bothering me (from the first 
> > chapter of the first book). When Minerva meets 
> > Dumbledore at the Dursleys, during their 
> > conversation she says:
> > 
> > "'You'd think they'd be a bit more careful, 
> > but no -- even the Muggles have noticed 
> > something's going on. It was on their news.' 
> > She jerked her head back at the Dursleys' dark 
> > living-room window. 'I heard it. Flocks of 
> > owls...shooting stars...Well, they're not 
> > completely stupid.'"
> 
> Along the same lines, in the same conversation,
> McGonagall strongly objects to DD's placing 
> Harry with the Dursleys on the ground (and I 
> paraphrase only slightly) that "you couldn't 
> find a bunch of Muggles more unlike *us*."
> 
I want to address these two comments in relation to Wendy's original 
post.  The first comment can be taken to mean that she is anti-
muggle, and that her remark is unkind.  However, there are several 
things that could be happening during this conversation.  DD could be 
giving her a look of disbelief about this being on the news.  
McGonagall's response is actually aimed at him.  However, since this 
is not specicially said to be the case in the canon, it can not be 
assumed.  The comment should also be taken in the full view of the 
magical world's context.  Muggles tend to brush off everything they 
see as strange with some sort of explaination.  Therefore, it is 
likely that the story about the owls, shooting stars, etc. if each 
was happening by itself would be given some sort of muggle like spin 
that wizards would see as stupid.  For example, a muggle upon 
noticing that all of the lights on Privet Drive went out would 
probably attribute it to a power failure.  Wizards would laugh, 
because they know it's the put-outter.  Normally, owls and shooting 
stars would probably recieve no news coverage, or would be followed 
by something other than "Very strange".  But this time the muggles 
could find no other explanation, and have to leave it at that.  
Therefore eliciting the "Well they're not completely stupid," 
comment.  Which also leads to the implication that with this one, the 
Muggles can not continue to bury their heads in the sand.


As for the Dursley's and her comment about how Muggle like they are, 
and how unlike Wizards they are, she is concerned for Harry.  Harry 
has the potential to be very powerful.  But this will not be fostered 
in this home.  She probably can see that.  She has seen Dudley-
diddums kicking his mother down the street.  And she does not want 
Harry to grow up in a household like this.
Missy




From missygallant2000 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 17:37:26 2003
From: missygallant2000 at yahoo.com (Missy)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 17:37:26 -0000
Subject: Did I Miss Something?
In-Reply-To: <bkh96a+t94d@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkq0cm+uohb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81378

> However, it might tie in with Minerva McGonagall being a perfectly 
> normal Scottish muggle name when Professor McGonagall was born, and 
> the fact that she wears a muggle coat and dress in OOP.
> 
> Looking at the coat and dress reference [OOP Ch. 6, p.109 UK 
> hardback], I note that while Harry thinks she looks odd in a muggle 
> dress and coat, he *doesn't* note that she's got the muggle costume 
> wrong.
> 
Now, you see, this didn't phase me at all.  I just assumed that she 
has a very special mission that she is doing for DD, and that she 
needs to be as thorough about it as possible.  So, she did her 
research, and didn't mess up the clothing.  She doesn't seem the type 
to do things halfway, or not take it seriously.

Remember that Mr Crouch Sr also got the clothing correct.  And he was 
definitely from a pureblood family.

Missy




From entropymail at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 18:17:25 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 18:17:25 -0000
Subject: Jewish Goblins? (was: Re: Death Eaters)
In-Reply-To: <02E73128.614147F2.00170183@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bkq2nl+6c89@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81379

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, EnsTren at a... wrote:
> Okay stupid subject heading but hear me out.  
> Second point, prior to World War two Jews were in control of the
German goverment, one thing that let Hitler stir up anti seminisim. 

Just wanted to mention that, yes, there is some similarity to the
struggles of WWI and WWII in the HP series. We've noticed lots of
references, not the least of which is Dumbledore's triumph in (I
believe) 1945.

But I also wanted to note something that strikes me every time JKR
mentions the Dark Mark.  The placement of the Mark on each Death Eater
(the forearm; God, I love it when Snape pulls back the sleeve of his
robe to reveal his Mark to Fudge in GoF!) is quite similar to the
numbered tattoos which were inflicted upon prisoners of the German
concentration camps. It's becoming rarer and rarer these days but,
growing up, I remember occasionally seeing these marks on the arms of
many of my parents' older neighbors.

Of course, the DE don't correlate with those in the concentration
camps. If anything, the DE would correlate more closely with the Nazis
and Hitler Youth.  But I still think it's an interesting bit of imagery.

:: Entropy ::




From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Tue Sep 23 19:22:34 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 19:22:34 -0000
Subject: Did I Miss Something?
In-Reply-To: <bkq0cm+uohb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkq6hq+3hpr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81380

Missy wrote:
> I just assumed that she 
> has a very special mission that she is doing for DD, and that she 
> needs to be as thorough about it as possible.  So, she did her 
> research, and didn't mess up the clothing.  She doesn't seem the 
type 
> to do things halfway, or not take it seriously.
> 
> Remember that Mr Crouch Sr also got the clothing correct.  And he 
was 
> definitely from a pureblood family.
> 
> Missy

As I recall, she also wore a tartan or plaid nightshirt in POA when 
Ron woke up with Sirius Black brandishing a knife above him. Either 
*way* in character for some mugglish mission, or wizards wear 
muggle-style nightshirts, or she's from Scotland or something.

She seems so comfortable in muggle clothes that she must have some 
muggle heritage, IMO.

But really, what does it matter? While she disparages the Dursleys 
(correctly) as being uber-muggles (in fact, they're even anti-WW), she 
is also more than decent to muggle-borns (Hermione) and purebloods, 
too (Neville). She seems, like DD, to care more about what's in a 
person's heart than their ancestry.

-Remnant




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Tue Sep 23 19:22:57 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 19:22:57 -0000
Subject: Spying Game Philosophy - The Phoenix must die! My part II
In-Reply-To: <bko2o1+s9h4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkq6ih+ium3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81381

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> wrote:
> <This is part two from where I had to stop Saturday afternoon>
> 
> 
> Sandy realtime:
> Contrast Voldemort's demeanor with Dumbledore's: every time we have 
> seen Voldemort he is agitated, threatening, punishing; in other 
> words, just chewing the scenery and *performing,* always with his 
> audience in mind. He is always bent on how menacing he has to seem. 
>snip>
>(The use of "You-Know-Who" has devolved into nothing more 
> than pop culture lingo. All that silly theatrical gasping 
> over "Voldemort." 
> 
> Anyway: what *is* behind not saying VOLDEMORT? (Is this like 
> Lovecraft's YOG SOTHOTH? To speak his name is to summon him and lay 
> waste the universe?)
>
Kneasy:
Of course! He's a shy retiring lad who's been told he must assert himself
more. No point in  being Ace!baddy unless  everybody knows  it. 
Actually, I'm a bit puzzled by the name avoidance myself. It doesn't
make a lot of sense to me. (Now if he was a bit more Lovecraftian, an
island rising from the sea, obscene nameless shapes twisted into another
dimension, slime and Voldy! Add the Necronomicon for luck....It would be
worthy of David Langford.) 

> 
> Sandy realtime:
> I'm thinking as an amateur psychologist here again. Voldemort "likes 
> giving orders, waving his wand about." (What would Freud have said 
> about *that*!) What does that say, that grasping and manipulating of 
> power? What is behind it? Isn't the guy who holds the reins tightest 
> and feels the need to wield the quirt the guy who's afraid of the 
> horse?
>
Kneasy:
Control yourself! 
Go and  lie down in a darkened room! 

>  
> Sandy realtime:
> I don't know any Turks. ;-) But I take it you're saying that while 
> neo-Nazism is verbotten, crimes against ethnic/national origin groups 
> are still rampant? How very sad. I will have to go look for info on 
> this.
> 
 Kneasy:
Despite the best intentions, monitoring child behaviour, etc, etc, prejudice
still  happens, in *every* society. Even in non-human species. Watch what
blackbirds do to an albino sport - it's not pretty. Certainly  among animals
any but minor differences are rarely tolerated; if they aren't killed outright 
they don't get a mate in the breeding season. The gene  line dies.
We look for differences; it is a way of identifying the group and non-group
members. It  is instinctive; what we have to do is kick  in the intellect and
realise it doesn't matter in most  cases. (Some physical  signs do, they are
indicators of inherited diseases. Not good  for our own gene survival) 

> Sandy realtime:
> The old families feel they don't count anymore. They used to be 
> lauded and feted just for their pure blood. Look at what happened: 
> Lucius was forced to divest the Malfoy manor of precious antiques due 
> to those nasty raids. And influence? He is forced to hand over chunks 
> of the family fortune to work his will these days; why, it amounts to 
> nothing less than blackmail. The WW has come to the sorry pass that 
> pure blood just doesn't matter anymore. Look at poor Draco: he tries 
> so hard and yet his teachers still favor the Muggle-borns and 
> Mudbloods. Everyone knows Fudge has no real power. Look at how he has 
> to try to manage things by frantically putting Ministry spin on 
> everything in sight; every single story The Daily "Profit" prints is 
> a clarion call for spineless jellyfish everywhere to float together. 
> Voldemort is a man of the people, the real people, the pure-blood 
> people, the only hope of those masses who feel the earth eroding 
> under their feet as the new elite, who trumpet superiority though 
> egalitarianism, gain more ground every day. The world is awash in 
> filth (just ask Mrs. Black) and how is anyone to live, to breathe? 
>
Kneasy;
Nurse! The screens!
Calm down, it'll be alright; just take deep breaths.
I  don't think things have changed all that much in the WW. It's much 
the same elsewhere; old families have the money and money talks. 
I'm also waiting for canon evidence that all old families are the same.
It implies much, but then I wonder, isn't DD old pureblood? Also the
Weasleys, the Diggorys? Moody? Just  how big is this 'elite' anyway?

 
> Am I on my side of the argument *now*? I can turn it inside out again 
> if you like ;-) Er, if you don't, I mean. Furthermore--I am *way* 
> more familiar with Pip's example (at least the broad strokes like the 
> name "Hitler" and the fact that there was, er, one of those big 
> numbered wars) than I am with your moldy old Roman whosis. So there. 
> <g>
> There is actually another, very relevant Voldemort/Hitler 
> correlation: he was chosen by those who would have him lead them 
> because they thought he would give them what they wanted, what they 
> thought they needed. What they ended up with was something very 
> different from what they jumped on board for. (Eh, Regulus?)

Kneasy:
Mouldy old Romans. (shudder). I forgive you, just. Maybe. Perhaps.
The thing about the Junkers was that they'd already got what they wanted;
land, influence, position, authority, money.  
It was the other way round, in the thirties Hitler wanted *them* as a sign
of approval and acceptance. To show he meant something. 
> 
> 
> Sandy realtime:
> You said, essentially, that a change in regime didn't matter to the 
> common people, that only the coinage would be different. I'm saying 
> that sometimes a war is worth having even though there are victims. 
> When,  after you have the war, some of the people who *were* victims 
> under the regime you toppled *are* better off. Or did you not imply 
> what I inferred? <bg>
>
Kneasy
Ah! Sorry I didn't pick it up. Yes. True. Now predict which ones it'll be.

> 
> Sandy realtime:
> Actually, *I* never suggested a managed succession at all. I 
> suggested that Dumbledore would not be leaving the WW without 
> candidates who *have* merit. You seemed to be envisioning a power 
> vacuum and that's what I was addressing.
> 
 Kneasy:
Very definitely. There usually is. Heroes get medals, not  Ministry posts.
Those who stayed at home polishing paperwork decide on how jobs 
are distributed, and they're not for troublemakers. (Thank you for
your application, Mr Potter, we appreciate what you did and all that,
but we feel the WW needs a chance to put all those unfortunate events
behind us. You, frankly would be a reminder. Next!)


> 
> Sandy realtime:
> I am on an HP board where all list members are HP characters; Mrs. 
> Malfoy has been *very* affectionate with Mr. Malfoy lately; 
> naughtily, I have had a "post-family fortune laid waste" racy movie 
> acting career in mind for the Mr. and Mrs.
>
Kneasy:
No, please, not Latex Lucius, the Master of the Magical Appliance! 






From thomasmwall at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 19:30:42 2003
From: thomasmwall at yahoo.com (Tom Wall)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 19:30:42 -0000
Subject: Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <bkpie1+97m7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkq712+vlds@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81382

Bookworm: 
<snip> I think JKR wants us to assume she meant Karkaroff 
and Snape as the cowardly and missing DEs, but is heading in a 
different direction.

Eowynn: 
Any how those are my thoughts on the three missing DE; Lupin, Crouch 
Jr, and Karkaroff.

Bookworm:
I think the third missing DE is Ludo Bagman, not Lupin. Remember 
that Bagman was accused of being a DE, whined that he trusted his 
boss, Rookwood, and was basically let off because of his Quidditch 
fans in the Wizengamot. Also, look at the language of LV's 
statement: "One, too cowardly to return...he will pay." When last 
seen, Bagman was running from the goblins - now LV's allies - 
because he couldn't *pay* his gambling debts.

Tom:
Heh-heh. I love this discussion, no matter how many times it comes up!
Let's throw a wrench into the works, eh?

First off, Bagman and Snape are at the Tournament and/or accounted 
for after the fact, as is McGonagall; since we know you can't 
apparate on the grounds, that pretty much solves that problem. Lupin? 
Well, I can't stomach it, but I concede that there's a convincing 
case.

So, let's speculate that Lupin is the coward and Barty Crouch, Jr. is 
the loyalist.

And what if Karkaroff *is* there? After all (as Snape tells us) he 
fled when he felt the mark burn. Sure, that just *reeks* of fear, 
doesn't it? 

But he's the headmaster of Durmstrang, which is a Very Valuable 
Position that I'd be excited about, if *I* were the Dark Lord. *And* 
he's been teaching all of his students the Dark Arts, which isn't 
exactly what you could feasibly call a renunciation of the old ways.

So, what if he fled right off the grounds and to the graveyard? There 
certainly is enough time between when Voldemort touched Pettigrew's 
mark and when the Death Eaters started apparating to allow for that. 
And *how* exciting would that be?

One spot left...

-Tom





From missygallant2000 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 19:54:29 2003
From: missygallant2000 at yahoo.com (Missy)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 19:54:29 -0000
Subject: Did I Miss Something?
In-Reply-To: <bkq6hq+3hpr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkq8dl+3nur@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81383

> As I recall, she also wore a tartan or plaid nightshirt in POA when 
> Ron woke up with Sirius Black brandishing a knife above him. Either 
> *way* in character for some mugglish mission, or wizards wear 
> muggle-style nightshirts, or she's from Scotland or something.
> 
I thought of that tartan also.  I believe that she's described a few 
times as wearing it.  But remember- she is Scottish.  And muggle or 
non-muggle the Scottish will win out, and plaid will be worn.  I've 
even read that it can cause a Scott physical pain to be able to wear 
plaid and not be able to.  ;-)

Seriously, even in the wizarding world certain nationality things 
seem to be prominant.  For instance, the Irish supporters wearing 
green.  So it wouldn't be surprising that with a last name of 
McGonagall she would wear a tartan.  (Since McGonagall is such a 
German sounding name- it should be leiderhosen?)

Missy




From lziner at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 20:34:55 2003
From: lziner at yahoo.com (lziner)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 20:34:55 -0000
Subject: tame werewolf ?
Message-ID: <bkqapf+95d8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81384

I was re-reading POA and had this thought.  If Lupin takes his 
wolfsbane and is attacked, how could he fight back?  He couldn't use 
a wand.  His mind would be that of a wizard but his body that of a 
wolf.  Not much of a match for a DE. It might be time for dear Remus 
to "go-off" the wolfsbane.  At least as a werewolf, he would be 
ferocious and stand at least a "biting" chance in a battle.

Lziner




From manawydan at ntlworld.com  Tue Sep 23 20:49:24 2003
From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 21:49:24 +0100
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Life expectancy in the Potterverse
References: <1064211879.3546.62973.m5@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <000d01c38214$42378f00$61516751@f3b7j4>

No: HPFGUIDX 81385

Jim wrote:
> Yeah! I think you have answered your own question. The fact that
> Wizards live much longer is that they have better medical system than
> Muggles

Possibly so, though even in our own world, medical care does seem to have
its limits, and there's a lot of evidence that increases in longevity in our
world have nothing at all to do with medical advances!

WW medical magic also seems to have limits - it can deal with a lot of the
more gross physical injuries, diseases, and the like, but (apart from the
Philosopher's Stone) it doesn't seem to have anything to treat old age.

I'd still go with the theory that WW longevity is genetic rather than due to
better health care, though there are some interesting social observations to
be made.

The first is that until physical maturity, wizen (can't remember who
originated that term, but thanks for doing so) seem to develop at the same
rate as muggles. WW people leave education at the same age, marry in their
early 20s, and are fully participant in the hurly-burly of life at that age
(WW people come of age at 17 - compare hobbits, who live on average to 100
but don't come of age until they are 33...).

So there appears to be a greater length of _adulthood_ rather than
childhood - with all sorts of implications for the length of one's working
life. Percy, going into the MoM, might well expect a career of 100 years
rather than 40 years (perhaps a good reason for his falling into line with
what's expected of him!)

But the WW is certainly not a gerontocracy. Dumbledore is on the elderly
side, but he is respected on the grounds of ability rather than age. Fudge
doesn't appear to have got the Minister's job on seniority - he was a
_junior_ minister not so long before - but because he was considered the
most appropriate person for the job.

> Do you think it's right for the WW to keep medical break throughs to
> themselves? I for one don't, brings back the whole lack of respect in
> the WW for muggles.
>
> Someone should really remind them that they WENT into Hiding from the
> Muggle world.

I think that the WW began to separate itself from the muggle world a long
time before the official concealment in the 17th century, perhaps many
centuries before. To re-engage would be a very tortuous and lengthy
process - I'm not sure whether it would even be feasible...

Cheers

Ffred

O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon
Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion
Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri




From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 21:26:32 2003
From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 21:26:32 -0000
Subject: Musings and a question
In-Reply-To: <bkpimi+a5in@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkqdq8+55ic@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81386

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dcyasser" <dcyasser at y...> 
wrote:
<snip>
> Does it ever strike you as funny that Hermione helps Harry 
> practice these and other charms in GoF but apparently, since 
> he is teaching them to her in OoP, doesn't learn them herself? 

Richard (that's me) replies:

First, as Hermione was in a group (the DA) that was learning spells 
together, even if she already knew these spells, she would still need 
to at least practice them with the rest of the DA.  Think "unit 
cohesion," and the need for expertise in a combat situation.

Second, knowing the spell is, from many points in canon, not the same 
as being able to use it -- effectively, reliably, or any number of 
other ways.  Think about the Patronus.  Harry knew the spell, 
including the verbal component, wand action and subject to be 
concentrated upon, well before he managed a good one, and even after 
that he was not totally reliable in creating one.  Hermione, while 
teaching Harry, would not necessarily have practiced what we may 
assume is a non-trivial spell enough to be any good at it.


Richard, who is neither surprised nor intrigued by this seeming 
inconsistency.





From gbannister10 at aol.com  Tue Sep 23 21:48:32 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 21:48:32 -0000
Subject: Did I Miss Something?
In-Reply-To: <bkq8dl+3nur@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkqf3g+s8o6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81387

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Missy" <missygallant2000 at y...> 
wrote:
> > As I recall, she also wore a tartan or plaid nightshirt in POA 
when 
> > Ron woke up with Sirius Black brandishing a knife above him. 
Either 
> > *way* in character for some mugglish mission, or wizards wear 
> > muggle-style nightshirts, or she's from Scotland or something.
> > 
> I thought of that tartan also.  I believe that she's described a 
few 
> times as wearing it.  But remember- she is Scottish.  And muggle or 
> non-muggle the Scottish will win out, and plaid will be worn.  I've 
> even read that it can cause a Scott physical pain to be able to 
wear 
> plaid and not be able to.  ;-)
> 
> Seriously, even in the wizarding world certain nationality things 
> seem to be prominant.  For instance, the Irish supporters wearing 
> green.  So it wouldn't be surprising that with a last name of 
> McGonagall she would wear a tartan.  (Since McGonagall is such a 
> German sounding name- it should be leiderhosen?)
> 
> Missy

Geoff:
Put the lederhosen back in the Kleiderschrank. I think Professor 
McGonagall is Scots through and through. It's a pairfectly guid Scuts 
name....

Have you not heard of the poet McGonagall in the 19th century who 
wrote the most excruciating poetry including the lament on the Tay 
Bridge railway disaster in 1879?




From lbiles at flash.net  Tue Sep 23 21:50:38 2003
From: lbiles at flash.net (leb2323)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 21:50:38 -0000
Subject: sword of gryffindor
Message-ID: <bkqf7e+1180r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81388

I was just rereading the series through again (for the umpteenth
time) when I developed a nagging question that I cannot seem to
answer for myself.  In GoF after Harry has the dream in divination
and heads off to DD's office he is left in there alone while DD, 
Fudge, and Moody leave to examine the grounds (ch 30 -- the
pensieve). There is something of an inventory in the narrative
listing all of the items that either have been or will be important
in the story -- Fawkes, the headmasters' portraits, the sorting hat, 
the sword of gryffindor, and the pensieve.  

The sword is displayed in a glass case.  My question is, was the
sword always on display in DD's office or did Harry summon it out of 
thin air when he literally pulled it out of the hat in CoS and now DD 
has it encased as an heirloom keepsake.  Since the hat and the sword 
both belonged to Godric then it could be plausible that it 
materialized from nowhere instead of being summoned from DD's office. 
 
Any theories on this one or at least a nudge to the blatantly obvious 
passage answering the question that is probably in the books
somewhere that I just overlooked?

leb




From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Tue Sep 23 22:00:01 2003
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:00:01 -0000
Subject: Did I Miss Something?
In-Reply-To: <bkq8dl+3nur@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkqfp1+pdo2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81389

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Missy" <missygallant2000 at y...> 
wrote:
>  (Since McGonagall is such a 
> German sounding name- it should be leiderhosen?)
> 
> Missy

As a german, I assure you, that McGonagall is definitely not a german 
name. I would be really surprised, if there is one single german, 
with that name. The prefix Mc or Mac is mostly a sign for a Scottish 
name. This also fits with the fact, that Harry dreamed, that she was 
playing the bagpipe. The bagpipe is a typical scottish instrument. Of 
course this was just in a dream, there it is questionable if this 
does really count as canon. Still it's very likely, that Minerva is 
scottish or has at least scottish ancestors.

Hickengruendler




From tammy at mauswerks.net  Tue Sep 23 22:03:10 2003
From: tammy at mauswerks.net (Tammy Rizzo)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 18:03:10 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Did I Miss Something?
In-Reply-To: <bkqf3g+s8o6@eGroups.com>
References: <bkq8dl+3nur@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F708ADE.18778.A9BBB8A@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 81390

On 23 Sep 2003 at 21:48, Geoff Bannister wrote:

> Geoff:
> Put the lederhosen back in the Kleiderschrank. I think Professor
> McGonagall is Scots through and through. It's a pairfectly guid Scuts
> name....
> 
> Have you not heard of the poet McGonagall in the 19th century who
> wrote the most excruciating poetry including the lament on the Tay
> Bridge railway disaster in 1879?

Woah, are we veering towards that slippery slope down which lies Vogon poetry?  ;-)

As for Minerva, I'd always just figured she was a proper Scottish witch.  I'm quite fond of her, 
actually.  I doubt she's evil (sorry, ESE!McGonagallers!) -- she seems much too soft to be 
ESE.  Of course, I'm still new at all this hyperanalyzing we tend to do here.  I was SO very 
proud of myself that, before I found this place, I had put things together and discovered that, of 
COURSE, Snape loved Lily, and that's why he hates James (HE got Lily, instead of Snape), 
and Harry (imagine looking at the face of the man you hate and seeing the eyes of the woman 
you love).  I thought it was SOOOO wonderful!  I'd discovered something deep and hidden!  
Then I find this place . . . so much for the ego-boost of coming up with an 'original theory'.  ;-D

***
Tammy
tammy at mauswerks.net





From shirley2allie at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 23 22:05:13 2003
From: shirley2allie at hotmail.com (Shirley)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:05:13 -0000
Subject: The Phoenix, the Snowy Owl & Buckbeak  (was The Phoenix & the Wand)
In-Reply-To: <bkpq24+3r9v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkqg2p+6147@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81391

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "n_longbottom01" 
<n_longbottom01 at y...> wrote:

> Maybe Buckbeak will be Harry's new pet instead?  Buckbeak needs 
> someone now that Sirius is gone.  Buckbeak wouldn't usurp Hedwig's 
> role... so I could see Harry owning both without too much conflict.
> 
> So... any theories as to Hedwig's fate in this new pet scenario?  
> Extra credit will be awarded to those theories in which no beloved 
> characters have to die.
> 
> --n_longbottom01

now Shirley:

Oh, how I wish I could come up with a scenario in which no beloved 
characters have to die!!  Unfortunately, I am here merely to point 
out that it seems it would be difficult for Buckbeak to be Harry's 
pet; at least openly....  IIRC, isn't he still 'on the lam', so to 
speak?  I mean, I'm not sure who in the MoM would want to pursue it 
(and Draco, with dad in Azkaban, is certainly in no position to do 
so), but Buckbeak was due to be executed a mere two years ago.

Having said that, what *will* happen to Buckbeak now, with Sirius 
gone?  He can't exactly wander back to be with Hagrid again, can he?

Shirley, not really seeing Buckbeak as a cute and cuddly (?) pet, but 
wanting him to find a good home in spite of being a vicious-looking 
beast




From tammy at mauswerks.net  Tue Sep 23 22:13:18 2003
From: tammy at mauswerks.net (Tammy Rizzo)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 18:13:18 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Did I Miss Something?
In-Reply-To: <bkqfp1+pdo2@eGroups.com>
References: <bkq8dl+3nur@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F708D3E.5819.AA50469@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 81392

On 23 Sep 2003 at 22:00, hickengruendler wrote:

> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Missy" <missygallant2000 at y...>
> wrote: > (Since McGonagall is such a > German sounding name- it should
> be leiderhosen?) > > Missy

I read this as faceteous or mildly sarcastic, as in, "Of course McGonagall's Scottish, with that 
name.  What else could she be, German?"  Of course, sarcasm and faceteousness and other 
wry poking just doesn't come through in print that easily.

Okay, to keep this on topic (waves to List Elves), how about a little pop-quiz, so to speak.  
What is your favorite scene involving a well-conveyed facial expression?  Any of the books, any 
scene, just tell us what text expression you were most able to picture in your mind from just 
words?

My favorite is Ron, blissfully re-playing in his mind the sight of Draco, the Amazing Bouncing 
WonderFerret.  ;->  I wish I had my books handy, so I could quote it.  I just love that bit.  :-D

***
Tammy
tammy at mauswerks.net





From greatraven at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 23 22:19:05 2003
From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:19:05 -0000
Subject: tame werewolf ?
In-Reply-To: <bkqapf+95d8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkqgsp+8lt3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81393

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lziner" <lziner at y...> wrote:
> I was re-reading POA and had this thought.  If Lupin takes his 
> wolfsbane and is attacked, how could he fight back?  He couldn't
use 
> a wand.  His mind would be that of a wizard but his body that of a 
> wolf.  Not much of a match for a DE. It might be time for dear
Remus 
> to "go-off" the wolfsbane.  At least as a werewolf, he would be 
> ferocious and stand at least a "biting" chance in a battle.
> 
> Lziner

Just a question here - to myself as well... Would the wolfsbane make 
him tame - and helpless as you suggest - or would it just enable him 
to *control* his murderous tendencies - and, of course, what he wants 
to do is just curl up in the office for the night, go to sleep and 
*get it over with*. Remember, he changes anyway - and when he changed 
without the stuff, in PoA, he ran amok. Sort of like a Vulcan in pon 
farr, hmm? :-) .So if all the wolfsbane did was enable self-control, 
surely he'd be able to attack the DE anyway. True, no wand - but he 
might be able to charge before his enemy used theirs.Sue B.




From greatraven at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 23 22:26:43 2003
From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:26:43 -0000
Subject: The Phoenix, the Snowy Owl & Buckbeak  (was The Phoenix & the Wand)
In-Reply-To: <bkqg2p+6147@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkqhb3+t1q5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81394

> 
> Oh, how I wish I could come up with a scenario in which no beloved 
> characters have to die!!  Unfortunately, I am here merely to point 
> out that it seems it would be difficult for Buckbeak to be Harry's 
> pet; at least openly....  IIRC, isn't he still 'on the lam', so to 
> speak?  I mean, I'm not sure who in the MoM would want to pursue it 
> (and Draco, with dad in Azkaban, is certainly in no position to do 
> so), but Buckbeak was due to be executed a mere two years ago.
> 
> Having said that, what *will* happen to Buckbeak now, with Sirius 
> gone?  He can't exactly wander back to be with Hagrid again, can he?
> 
> Shirley, not really seeing Buckbeak as a cute and cuddly (?) pet, 
but 
> wanting him to find a good home in spite of being a vicious-looking 
> beast

Maybe Lupin will look after him? Lupin may even stay at Grimmauld 
place now that the last heir is dead, to look after the order's HQ. 
The DE's who were involved in condemning Buckbeak are now in Azkaban 
and things have changed a LOT, with  the MoM having to admit LV is 
back. I suspect they will have more on their minds than executing a 
hippogriff that supposedly bit a boy whose father has been
discredited 
and jailed anyway. If that's the case, perhaps Hagrid *will* take him 
back, because that awful house is really not a good place to keep a 
winged animal. Sue B (who can't even bring herself to keep a caged 
budgie




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 22:39:26 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:39:26 -0000
Subject: Jewish Goblins? (was: Re: Death Eaters)
In-Reply-To: <02E73128.614147F2.00170183@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bkqi2u+mrlp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81395

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, EnsTren at a... wrote:
> 
> > The goblins do have a problem with the wizards loyal to MoM (OotP 
4, 
> > 5, 9). Hagrid said, "so yeh'd be mad ter try an' rob it 
(Gringotts), 
> > I'll tell yeh that. Never mess with goblins, Harry." Goblins are 
very 
> > sensitive when it comes to Galleons. 
> 
> Now this is what got me thinking, why would they be so sensitive 
when it comes to galleons?  why do they only work in the bank?
> 
> A long long time ago in a place across the sea
> there were a people banned from owning land and certain buissnessry.
> 
> These were the Jews.  <snip> 

> Second point, prior to World War two Jews were in control of the 
German goverment, one thing that let Hitler stir up anti seminisim.  
Because of World War one Germany had to pay huuuuuge depts to france 
and several other countries.  /Money they didn't have./  So when 
Hitler got into power he started printing huge sums of money, it 
drove the vaule down, but the fines were phrased as "______ marks." 
not "Equivlent to _____ franks" or "Equivlent to ______ pounds of 
gold."
> 
> And a Mark is a Mark, even if it's worth less than a single lire.
> 
> Needless to say this made Hitler very popular.
> 
> However, Wizarding money is made out of real precious metals, which 
wouldn't change much in value, and you can't print them unless you 
find more.
> 
> So allow me to allign the Goblin rebellions with WWI and do you all 
see how my brain is working?
> 
> The Goblins were forced to work into the bank because it's a dirty 
proffession and they might just owe the MoM a lot of money because of 
their rebellions, hence why they are so sensitive about galleons, and 
upset that the MoM might have snatched it away.
> 
Laura:

Well...do you really think JKR would indulge in such a hackneyed 
stereotype?  I know she's been accused of doing just that with the 
Irish and the Bulgarians but I don't see it.  I especially don't see 
that she would indulge in hurtful cartoon-like portrayals of the sort 
you suggest-I just think it's inconsistent with her ethos.

Which 2 Jews were in charge of the German government before WWII?  
I've done a lot of reading about this and I don't recall any such 
thing.  I know this is OT, though, so if you'd like to reply to me 
offlist, feel free.

There's no indication in the books that the WW regards money as 
dirty.  And the goblins may not be loved, but they're sure respected-
people trust them to safeguard their valuables.  Since there's only 
one bank, these goblins must be pretty reliable-it's not like you can 
take your business elsewhere, and we haven't heard any complaints.  
(There was that little matter of the break-in in PS/SS, but that's 
the exception that proves the rule.)

JKR describes the goblins, IIRC, as ugly and clever.  Do you really 
think she's trying to draw a parallel to Jews?  After all, I know 
plenty of Jews who are neither...in fact, I'm related to a bunch who 
would fail to meet the latter descriptive term.  :-)






From elfundeb at comcast.net  Tue Sep 23 22:54:57 2003
From: elfundeb at comcast.net (elfundeb2)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:54:57 -0000
Subject: Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <bkq712+vlds@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkqj01+42pt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81396


> Bookworm: 
> <snip> I think JKR wants us to assume she meant Karkaroff 
> and Snape as the cowardly and missing DEs, but is heading in a 
> different direction.
> 
> I think the third missing DE is Ludo Bagman, not Lupin. Remember 
> that Bagman was accused of being a DE, whined that he trusted his 
> boss, Rookwood, and was basically let off because of his Quidditch 
> fans in the Wizengamot. 
> 
> Tom Wall:

> Let's throw a wrench into the works, eh?
> 
> And what if Karkaroff *is* there? After all (as Snape tells us) he 
> fled when he felt the mark burn. Sure, that just *reeks* of fear, 
> doesn't it? 

I've taken out my own monkey wrench and will reprise a theory of mine 
from June of 2002 (I think).

Barty Crouch Jr. was Voldemort's faithful servant, but the DEs 
thought he was dead, so they must think it's someone else.  What 
former DE is at Hogwarts?  Why, Snape!  He must be the faithful 
servant.  Now that the dementor had Barty Jr. for dinner, who's going 
to tell the DEs who the faithful servant really was?  Voldemort 
doesn't seem the type to explain his failures to his henchmen.

So, now Snape has exactly the opening he needs to pay house calls on 
all those DEs (Malfoy, Nott, Crabbe, Goyle) whose children he's been 
pandering to as Head of Slytherin house these last four years and 
perform some Legilimency on them.  

As for the three actual dead (evil overlords never lie, so there must 
be one), they're Rosier, Wilkes and . . . Snape!  Barty was supposed 
to take care of him to complete the switch, and didn't have time.

Now, we have options for the one who has left forever and the 
coward.  There's Bagman and there's Karkaroff, but I agree with 
Bookworm that it's quite likely that JKR is leading us astray, and 
Tom's right that we could be surprised by Karkaroff.  They do wear 
those hoods, so maybe Rookwood wouldn't be able to identify him.

So if Karkaroff was there, perhaps Bagman was the coward.  That still 
leaves the one who has left forever.  How about ESE McGonagall?  Did 
anyone notice she wasn't in Moody's photograph of the old Order?  
Well, as long as it's anybody But Lupin.

Debbie
who can't remember if Voldemort referred to the one who has left 
forever as "he" 

 




From shirley2allie at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 23 23:08:17 2003
From: shirley2allie at hotmail.com (Shirley)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 23:08:17 -0000
Subject: Well-conveyed Facial Expressions (WAS Re: Did I Miss Something?)
In-Reply-To: <3F708D3E.5819.AA50469@localhost>
Message-ID: <bkqjp1+hu5c@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81397

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tammy Rizzo" <tammy at m...> 
wrote:
> 
> Okay, to keep this on topic (waves to List Elves), how about a 
little pop-quiz, so to speak.  
> What is your favorite scene involving a well-conveyed facial 
expression?  Any of the books, any 
> scene, just tell us what text expression you were most able to 
picture in your mind from just 
> words?
> 
> My favorite is Ron, blissfully re-playing in his mind the sight of 
Draco, the Amazing Bouncing 
> WonderFerret.  ;->  I wish I had my books handy, so I could quote 
it.  I just love that bit.  :-D
> 
> ***
> Tammy
> tammy at m...

Shirley:
I wish I had my books with me, too.  
I'd like to see Dumbledore's "gleam of triumph" that Harry thought he 
saw near the end of GoF;
Or Trelawney's facial expression when she has her 'real' prophecy in 
PoA;
Or Mrs. Black's drooling visage in her portrait.
....come to think of it, it's probably good I don't have my books 
with me or I'd try to look up some more!  ;-)

Shirley, who often finds herself with such a vivid 
picture/recollection of a scene that she could swear they've already 
made a movie of it. 




From fc26det at aol.com  Tue Sep 23 23:10:01 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 23:10:01 -0000
Subject: Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <bkplsp+7tha@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkqjs9+bkdj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81398

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Hagrid" <aussie_lol at y...> 
wrote:
> Susan, 
> LV may not have ordered Regulus's death. 
> 
> This mention of that extra dead DE adds to my suspitions that Snape 
> may have done a lot of underhanded things and remains faithful to 
the 
> Dark Lord.
> 
> Sirius had no idea Severus was ever a DE. Therefore, Regulus would 
> have also been suprised when he recognised Snape there. He was only 
a 
> year or 2 behind Padfoot at Hogwarts, so knew about the friction 
> between Sirius-Snape well. 
> 
> OF course, this arguement is also true if Wormtail was recognised.


Sirius said that Regulus realised what LV was up to and tried to get 
out and was killed for it.  I think with the immense power LV had at 
that time, he would have noticed if one of his DE's was getting cold 
feet. (Unless they were expert at Occlumency <hint> <hint>)  But what 
you are saying is that possibly Snape or Wormtail actually killed him 
but made it look like LV did it?  I am not sure I would agree with 
that.  Not sure why, it just doesn't seem to flow for me <grin>.
Susan




From shirley2allie at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 23 23:34:22 2003
From: shirley2allie at hotmail.com (Shirley)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 23:34:22 -0000
Subject: Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <bkqj01+42pt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkql9u+r4l3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81399

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "elfundeb2" <elfundeb at c...> 
wrote:
Debbie:
>semi-large snip>>
> So, now Snape has exactly the opening he needs to pay house calls 
on 
> all those DEs (Malfoy, Nott, Crabbe, Goyle) whose children he's 
been 
> pandering to as Head of Slytherin house these last four years and 
> perform some Legilimency on them. 

Shirley:  Wow!  What a brilliant thought!  I'm going to have to 
ponder on this thread, because I've never been able to get past what 
I considered the obvious (maybe *too* obvious) three.

Debbie:
> As for the three actual dead (evil overlords never lie, so there 
must 
> be one), they're Rosier, Wilkes and . . . Snape!  Barty was 
supposed 
> to take care of him to complete the switch, and didn't have time.

Shirley:  I'm confused; why would Barty need to kill *Snape* to 
complete the switch?  I thought the one Barty Jr. (you do mean Jr., 
don't you?) would need to kill to accomplish that would have been 
Moody, since he presumably wouldn't need him anymore once he got away.

<<snip>>
Debbie: 
> Debbie
> who can't remember if Voldemort referred to the one who has left 
> forever as "he"

Shirley, who must leave to pick up her 5th-grader, so will have to 
log on later tonight to get answers.....  




From fc26det at aol.com  Tue Sep 23 23:34:50 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 23:34:50 -0000
Subject: Well-conveyed Facial Expressions (WAS Re: Did I Miss Something?)
In-Reply-To: <bkqjp1+hu5c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkqlaq+g2ar@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81400


> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tammy Rizzo" <tammy at m...> 
> wrote:
>  
> Okay, to keep this on topic (waves to List Elves), how about a 
> little pop-quiz, so to speak.  
> What is your favorite scene involving a well-conveyed facial 
> expression?  Any of the books, any 
> scene, just tell us what text expression you were most able to 
> picture in your mind from just 
> words?
>  
> My favorite is Ron, blissfully re-playing in his mind the sight of 
 Draco, the Amazing Bouncing 
> WonderFerret.  ;->  I wish I had my books handy, so I could quote 
it.  I just love that bit.  :-D
> 
> ***
> Tammy
> tammy at m...

My favorites are when McGonagall is verbally battling with Umbridge.  
Also when she walks past Harry after putting Umbridge in her place 
and gives him a slight grin.
I know....evil!
Susan
 





From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Tue Sep 23 23:35:03 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 23:35:03 -0000
Subject: The Phoenix, the Snowy Owl & Buckbeak  (was The Phoenix & the Wand)
In-Reply-To: <bkqg2p+6147@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkqlb7+4r5n@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81401

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Shirley" <shirley2allie at h...> 
wrote:
> Having said that, what *will* happen to Buckbeak now, with Sirius 
> gone?  He can't exactly wander back to be with Hagrid again, can he?

I think he'll be exonerated and set free to join his herd. He was not 
intended as a pet - it was only because he had to be hidden. There is 
no reason to keep him tethered anymore.

I believe that Fawkes is the obvious candidate for Harry's next pet. 
But that will not happen till book 7: Clearly he can't bring him to 
the Dursleys during the summer so it will have to happen after he is 
done with them, and Dumbledore has to die first for the phoenix to 
change hands.

Salit






From fc26det at aol.com  Tue Sep 23 23:44:43 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 23:44:43 -0000
Subject: tame werewolf ?
In-Reply-To: <bkqgsp+8lt3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkqltb+44cd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81402

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sbursztynski" 
<greatraven at h...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lziner" <lziner at y...> wrote:
> > I was re-reading POA and had this thought.  If Lupin takes his 
> > wolfsbane and is attacked, how could he fight back?  He couldn't
> use 
> > a wand.  His mind would be that of a wizard but his body that of 
a 
> > wolf.  Not much of a match for a DE. It might be time for dear
> Remus 
> > to "go-off" the wolfsbane.  At least as a werewolf, he would be 
> > ferocious and stand at least a "biting" chance in a battle.
> > 
> > Lziner

SueB 
> Just a question here - to myself as well... Would the wolfsbane 
make 
> him tame - and helpless as you suggest - or would it just enable 
him 
> to *control* his murderous tendencies - and, of course, what he 
wants 
> to do is just curl up in the office for the night, go to sleep and 
> *get it over with*. Remember, he changes anyway - and when he 
changed 
> without the stuff, in PoA, he ran amok. Sort of like a Vulcan in 
pon 
> farr, hmm? :-) .So if all the wolfsbane did was enable self-
control, 
> surely he'd be able to attack the DE anyway. True, no wand - but he 
> might be able to charge before his enemy used theirs.Sue B.


The way I understood it was that the wolfsbane let him keep is human 
mind.  It did not take away his werewolf powers.
Susan




From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Tue Sep 23 23:47:34 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 23:47:34 -0000
Subject: Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <bkqj01+42pt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkqm2m+700v@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81403

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "elfundeb2" <elfundeb at c...> 
wrote:
> Barty Crouch Jr. was Voldemort's faithful servant, but the DEs 
> thought he was dead, so they must think it's someone else.  What 
> former DE is at Hogwarts?  Why, Snape!  He must be the faithful 
> servant.  Now that the dementor had Barty Jr. for dinner, who's 
going 
> to tell the DEs who the faithful servant really was?  Voldemort 
> doesn't seem the type to explain his failures to his henchmen.

There is one big gaping hole in this fascinating theory. One more 
person knows that Barty Crouch Jr. was killed (is he dead?) by the 
dementors - Fudge - who was completely controled by Lucius Malfoy. Do 
you think he did not tell Lucius about Crouch Jr.'s execution?

Salit





From constancevigilance at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 23:47:36 2003
From: constancevigilance at yahoo.com (Susan Miller)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 23:47:36 -0000
Subject: The Phoenix, the Snowy Owl & Buckbeak  (was The Phoenix & the Wand)
In-Reply-To: <bkqlb7+4r5n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkqm2o+qggt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81404

> "Shirley" wrote:
Having said that, what *will* happen to Buckbeak now, with Sirius 
gone?  He can't exactly wander back to be with Hagrid again, can he?

Then "slgazit" wrote:
I think he'll be exonerated and set free to join his herd. He was not 
intended as a pet - it was only because he had to be hidden. There is 
no reason to keep him tethered anymore.

Constance Vigilance (me):

Actually, there is a reason to keep him tethered. He was/is under his 
own death sentence. He can't be seen any more than Sirius could. If 
you release his tether, he is likely to look for Sirius or try to 
find Hagrid and find himself back under whoever-has-taken-over-from-
McNair's ax.

~ Constance Vigilance




From fc26det at aol.com  Tue Sep 23 23:53:48 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 23:53:48 -0000
Subject: Apparating
Message-ID: <bkqmed+u5jv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81405

I am curious why there is such a point made about not being able to 
apparate or disapparate on the Hogwarts grounds.  All anyone would 
have to do is pass through the front gates and apparate away.  The 
knight bus goes to the front gates and it basically apparates doesn't 
it?  After all, when you are riding on it you see where it is going 
but if you are waiting for it you don't see it until you hear the 
loud bang and there it is.  Granted it would take a little bit to get 
out the gates but from there you should be home free.  
Susan




From hpfanmatt at gmx.net  Wed Sep 24 00:01:22 2003
From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 00:01:22 -0000
Subject: Jewish Goblins?
In-Reply-To: <bkqi2u+mrlp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkqmsi+b82u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81406

--- EnsTren wrote:
> > Now this is what got me thinking, why would 
> > [the Goblins] be so sensitive when it comes 
> > to galleons?  why do they only work in the bank?
> > 
> > A long long time ago in a place across the sea
> > there were a people banned from owning land and 
> > certain buissnessry.
> > 
> > These were the Jews.  

<snip> 

> > So allow me to allign the Goblin rebellions 
> > with WWI and do you all see how my brain is 
> > working?
> > 
> > The Goblins were forced to work into the bank 
> > because it's a dirty proffession and they might 
> > just owe the MoM a lot of money because of 
> > their rebellions, hence why they are so 
> > sensitive about galleons . . . .

Laura replied:
 
> Well...do you really think JKR would indulge in 
> such a hackneyed stereotype?  I know she's been 
> accused of doing just that with the Irish and the 
> Bulgarians but I don't see it.  I especially don't 
> see that she would indulge in hurtful cartoon-like 
> portrayals of the sort you suggest-I just think 
> it's inconsistent with her ethos.

<snip>

> JKR describes the goblins, IIRC, as ugly and clever.  
> Do you really think she's trying to draw a parallel 
> to Jews?  After all, I know plenty of Jews who are 
> neither...in fact, I'm related to a bunch who 
> would fail to meet the latter descriptive term.  :-)

Although I suppose EnsTren could answer more reliably, I think that
you are misunderstanding his/her post.  The point, as I read it, is
not that the Goblins are supposed to *represent* Jews, but that the
*discrimination* against the Goblins is reminiscent of a certain brand
of anti-Semitism -- demonizing (goblinizing?) an entire group because
some members are successful in business or, particularly, in finance
("How now, Shylock, what news among the merchants"!).  In this sense,
EnsTren's point is similar to the prior thread discussing how various
brands of "otherness" in the books can be analogized to the otherness
felt by members of the gay/lesbian community (see post # 77983 and its
progeny).  Neither claim requires JKR to have intended any precise
symmetry, much less that she have "indulged in" a stereotype.  But,
given the prevalence of prejudice and discrimination as themes in the
books, it is rather difficult to believe that Rowling does not intend
us to draw *any* connection to prejudices in the real world.

It is perfectly clear, as you say, that Rowling disapproves of such
attitudes, in the RW and in the books.  It is perfectly reasonable to
predict that the injustice of such prejudice and discrimination will
continue to be a major theme in books 6 and 7.  And I do not think
that she will feel the need to tighten any of the metaphorical
connections EnsTren senses (there will be no goblin "Rosenblum" or
"Kravitz"), because Rowling knows she can trust her readers (yes, even
the young ones) to recognize enough of the allegory.  

-- Matt

P.S.: Laura definitely misread EnsTren in attributing to him/her a
claim that "2 Jews were in charge of the German government before
WWII."  What EnsTren said was that "prior to World War two Jews were
in control of the German goverment."  Notwithstanding the punctuation,
it is clear that the "two" was in reference to "World War II" and not
to "two Jews."






From lziner at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 00:11:51 2003
From: lziner at yahoo.com (lziner)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 00:11:51 -0000
Subject: Well-conveyed Facial Expressions (WAS Re: Did I Miss Something?)
In-Reply-To: <bkqlaq+g2ar@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkqng7+kkbo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81407

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Potterfanme" <fc26det at a...> 
wrote:
> 
> > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tammy Rizzo" <tammy at m...> 
> > wrote:
> >  
> > Okay, to keep this on topic (waves to List Elves), how about a 
> > little pop-quiz, so to speak.  
> > What is your favorite scene involving a well-conveyed facial 
> > expression?  Any of the books, any 
> > scene, just tell us what text expression you were most able to 
> > picture in your mind from just 
> > words?
> >  
> > My favorite is Ron, blissfully re-playing in his mind the sight 
of 
>  Draco, the Amazing Bouncing 
> > WonderFerret.  ;->  I wish I had my books handy, so I could quote 
> it.  I just love that bit.  :-D
> > 
> > ***
> > Tammy
> > tammy at m...
> 
> Two scenes come to mind. 1. The departure of Fred and George -
fabulous. 2. Harry thinking he saw/heard McGongall telling Peeves(out 
of the corner of her mouth) that the chandelier unscrews the other 
way :)
lz





From Koinonia2 at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 24 00:13:24 2003
From: Koinonia2 at hotmail.com (koinonia02)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 00:13:24 -0000
Subject: Life expectancy in the Potterverse and associated problems
In-Reply-To: <bkl2uq+6h9s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkqnj4+ajbh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81408

In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ali" <Ali at z...> Message   81248  
wrote:

> JKR has told us that wizards have longer life expectancy than 
> Muggles: http://www.the-leaky-
> cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/2001/0301-comicrelief-staff.htm
<snip> 
> Does a Muggle-born Witch or Wizard have a longer life span merely 
> because they are magical, or do they too die earlier? 



"K":
I've been reading through JKR's interviews and I remembered reading 
what she said about illness in the wizarding world. This interview 
basically deals with MS.

Bookshelf/December 2002

For her part, she will continue campaigning. Given her commitment to 
awareness-raising, she might be expected to try and write a 
character with the disease into one of her multimillion-selling 
Harry Potter novels. Well, it's not quite as simple as that. As 
Rowling explains: "One problem with the world of Hogwarts - or not, 
depending on how you look at it - is that, being wizards, they tend 
not to have to suffer what the rest of us do. I spent ages working 
out what magic could and couldn't do with regard to illness and 
decided that normal human ailments - such as MS - could be cured. 
~~~~~~~~~

Ali:
  
> I suspect that the issue of Life expectancy is yet another        
>potential inconsistency in the Potterverse, and one about which 
>there has been curiously little discussion.

I know this has been discussed over the years. Yes, some of the 
things you mentioned might be an inconsistency. I just don't dwell 
on those things too much.

You might also be interested in the following:

Barnes and Noble/March 1999

Hi, Ms. Rowling. How does a Muggle-born like Hermione develop 
magical abilities?

Nobody knows where magic comes from. It is like any other talent. 
Sometimes it seems to be inherited, but others are the only ones in 
their family who have the ability. 
~~~~~~
I guess the above is just too simple for some folks, but her answer 
is enough for me.

"K"





From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Wed Sep 24 00:20:53 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 00:20:53 -0000
Subject: The Phoenix, the Snowy Owl & Buckbeak  (was The Phoenix & the Wand)
In-Reply-To: <bkqm2o+qggt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkqo15+38g5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81409

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Susan Miller" 
<constancevigilance at y...> wrote:
> Actually, there is a reason to keep him tethered. He was/is under 
his 
> own death sentence. He can't be seen any more than Sirius could.

I said that he'll be exonerated first, i.e. will have his death 
sentence either overturned or commuted. Remember that it was given 
when the Committee for the control of Magical Creatures was under 
Malfoy's control. I would think that an appeal now would have an 
excellent chance.

Salit





From andie at knownet.net  Wed Sep 24 00:25:17 2003
From: andie at knownet.net (grindieloe)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 00:25:17 -0000
Subject: Apparating
In-Reply-To: <bkqmed+u5jv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkqo9d+4brm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81410

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Potterfanme" <fc26det at a...> 
wrote:
> I am curious why there is such a point made about not being able to 
> apparate or disapparate on the Hogwarts grounds.  



I think not being able to apparate or disapparate on Hogwarts grounds 
keeps being mentioned in order to show the vast power of certain 
wizards or creatures - ex. Dumbledore, Dobby, Fawkes.  There has to 
be some extraordinary powers there if they can perform a feat that is 
supposedly impossible. 

Also, there might be something more to it that we have yet to 
discover but will show up in future books.    

grindieloe




From lziner at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 00:26:26 2003
From: lziner at yahoo.com (lziner)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 00:26:26 -0000
Subject: (was tame werewolf ?): now  werewolf powers?
In-Reply-To: <bkqltb+44cd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkqobi+icnn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81411

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Potterfanme" <fc26det at a...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sbursztynski" 
> <greatraven at h...> wrote:
> > > <snip> So if all the wolfsbane did was enable self-
> control, 
> > surely he'd be able to attack the DE anyway. True, no wand - but 
he 
> > might be able to charge before his enemy used theirs.Sue B.
> 
> 
> The way I understood it was that the wolfsbane let him keep is 
human 
> mind.  It did not take away his werewolf powers.
> Susan

Your post leads me to a question.  What powers would he have as a 
werewolf.  Do they have any magical powers except biting people?  
Does anyone know? 

lz - still thinking it would be difficult for wolf Lupin to 
effectively battle a DE.I say chuck the potion Remus.




From jdr0918 at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 24 01:19:41 2003
From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 01:19:41 -0000
Subject: Jewish Goblins? (was: Re: Death Eaters)
In-Reply-To: <bkqi2u+mrlp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkqrfd+8mjb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81412

<<<In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" wrote:...I especially 
don't see that she would indulge in hurtful cartoon-like 
portrayals...And the goblins may not be loved, but they're sure 
respected-people trust them to safeguard their valuables...>>>

The Sergeant Majorette says

I think the goblins of Gringott's are a little joke reference to the 
gnomes of Zurich, which is the common nickname for the Swiss banks 
where people used to hide their money.

--JDR




From phoenixfeder2002 at yahoo.de  Tue Sep 23 10:05:05 2003
From: phoenixfeder2002 at yahoo.de (phoenixwriter)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 10:05:05 -0000
Subject: Crouch jr.?! Why did he train Harry?
Message-ID: <bkp5sh+hahc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81413

Hi, thats probably my first post because there isn't much left what 
keeps me wondering. But this one does.
In GoF "Moody" did perform the imperious curse at Harry. Not only 
one he did so long till Harry could fight it off. The most 
interesting part is what "Moody" said: "They'll have trouble 
controlling you" thats after the first time as he want that Harry 
jumps on the desk. Now I wonder "Moody" do prepair Harry so that he 
is able to controll his doing. But why? 
I mean its kinda strange for a DE to do if he want please his master 
and a Potter who isn't able to controlled is for sure not a thing 
what makes Voldi happy, or? This could even lead that Harry can 
escape from Voldemort. 

Thats really what keeps me thinking. It can mean "Moody" has his own 
thing with Harry and wanted himself kill him...

 





From diversity33 at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 23 12:25:02 2003
From: diversity33 at hotmail.com (Kath Lane)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:25:02 +0100
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why Ron Loves Hermione
Message-ID: <BAY1-F99poCRFCdaXF50000c754@hotmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81414

>From: Diana Fischer <phoenixfeder2002 at yahoo.de>
>Reply-To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com
>To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why Ron Loves Hermione
>Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 14:32:35 +0200 (CEST)
>The better question would be did he fall for her or not? Its not in canon 
>that Ron is in love. Thats what I know because he reacts only in this 
>direction that the reader could think Ron is in love with Hermione but its 
>not written that he really is. To this comes he react like that only if 
>someone else is interest in Hermione that way but in all other instance he 
>don't show any interess in Hermione more as a friend.
>
>Diana Fischer
>

It is left interestingly ambiguous in the books -- he does also
try and control Ginny's love life, so it may be a pattern he has
with female friends as well (one can see Ginny getting extremely
annoyed about this as she gets older). The perfume as a present is
rather a strong indicator though that it is tending to a romance.

_________________________________________________________________
On the move? Get Hotmail on your mobile phone http://www.msn.co.uk/msnmobile





From jakejensen at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 24 01:31:58 2003
From: jakejensen at hotmail.com (jakedjensen)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 01:31:58 -0000
Subject: Apparating
In-Reply-To: <bkqmed+u5jv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkqs6e+viqs@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81415

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Potterfanme" <fc26det at a...> 
> I am curious why there is such a point made about not being able to 
> apparate or disapparate on the Hogwarts grounds.  

I think there are a couple of reasons:

1) Plot.  You can't app/disapp on in/out of Hogwarts because it would 
make for a bunch of lame plotlines.  Imagine, baddies would be able 
to just aparate into Harry's bedroom and put the hurt on him.  Good 
guys wouldn't have to go to all that secrecy to get in.  It would 
streamline the plot and take away a lot of the actual obstacles our 
heros/baddies must overcome.

2) Battle.  I predict that in one of the final two books there will 
be a massive battle on Hogwarts grounds.  Once again, not being able 
to app/disapp will make the battle more interesting.  More of a seige 
the castle sort of thing.

Just my two cents,

Jake
(who hasn't posted in awhile because he's busy working on the PhD) 




From paulag5777 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 12:57:46 2003
From: paulag5777 at yahoo.com (Paula Gaon)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 05:57:46 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: De's What's my motivation?
Message-ID: <20030923125746.90177.qmail@web40002.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81416


23/9/03

On 22/9/03 Hayes wrote: "... I want to know what motivates
the Death Eaters to become Death Eaters. I've laid
out some ideas of what we do know, but I keep running
up against a fundamental absence..."

Paula:  I've wondered this same thing from the very beginning.  The only answer that I've ever been able to come up with is what the Sorting Hat tells us in Book 1.  In paraphrase (don't have the book here), Slytherins are willing to do whatever it takes to achieve their goals, and as far as we can see, the DE are largely (if not all) Slytherins.  Now if we look at history, these types of characters (Nazis and KKK members as Hayes mentioned later in the post) share this same trait, along with a tremendous pride and conviction of their cause.  So, with all that, in all of history, have we ever known what makes these types so sure of themselves that they are willing to go to such extemes?

Paula




---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca  Tue Sep 23 13:10:34 2003
From: feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca (feetmadeofclay)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:10:34 -0000
Subject: Snape's Worst Memory (and the purpose thereof) (Was: Hyperbolic Chapter Titles...)
In-Reply-To: <78.47ab2869.2ca0e7e8@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bkpgoa+48o7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81417

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, hannahwonder at a... wrote:
=]
> This is what I think makes Snape such a great character: one can't 
target him 
> as a good guy or a bad guy -- we (or, rather, Harry) don't know 
which he is 
> yet, or if he ever can be classified as either. He does act rather 
like a jerk, 
> as Golly said, to Harry and Neville and can be really horrible to 
them, but 
> he is in the Order, Dumbledore does trust him, he did save Harry's 
life in 

Which is why he's a jerk who happens to think that letting a deranged 
evil war-mongering lunatic take over the British (and perhaps 
foreign) wizarding world is not the best idea.  

Dumbeldore trusts him.  Which makes him trustworthy.  He's still a 
jerk.  He's just a jerk on the side of right.  

He's cruel not only to Harry (Ok so he's irrational about Harry..  
could be isolated personality quirk but it isn't.) He's also mean to 
Neville.  He mocks the boy in class in front of other students.  What 
did Neville do to him?  Why beat up on poor Neville who tries really 
hard and obviously struggles to do his best.  Neville is terrified of 
the man for good reason.  

I certainly wouldn't want Snape as my teacher.  But just because he's 
a jerk doesn't make him spawn of the devil or a racist.  He's just an 
ordinary nasty person.  Lots of ordinary people are not evil war 
mongering neo nazis without actually being nice people.  

I like him a lot.  He's a great character.  I even sympathize with 
the man.  I imagine teaching is not something he was destined to do.  
It probably doesn't bring out his best side. I still think he's a 
jerk.  But my is he funny. 

Golly






From nanstey at iastate.edu  Tue Sep 23 13:12:23 2003
From: nanstey at iastate.edu (nanstey2001)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:12:23 -0000
Subject: Musings and a question
In-Reply-To: <bkpflv+cnsc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkpgrn+fgk3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81418

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jeanico2000" <jeanico at s...> wrote:
> I was having breakfast with my daughter early this morning and we 
> started talking about OOTP. Neither of us could remember who taught 
> Harry how to cast the "Protego" shield and I don't have the book 
> handy right now. Could someone please remind me so that I can resume 
> the debate with my daughter over supper?
> Also, we were wondering why nobody tried to stop Harry from going 
> after Bellatrix. Dumbledore ends up saving Harry and fighting 
> Voldermort, but why did none of the order members go after him to 
> help. (Or try to stop him with a well placed "Petrificus")Just 
> wondering. Any thoughts?
> Have a great day,
> Nicole

Hermione helped him learn the Shield Charm "Protego" in GoF when
Harry, Ron, and Hermione were practicing for the third task.  As for
the big battle with Bellatrix, Harry broke away from Lupin, and the
OOTP members, unfortunately, weren't doing so hot.  Only DD's
appearance turned the tide (I particularly like that one of the DE
practically scrambled to try to escape him.)  Between the confusion of
the battle, the maze that is the Department of Mysteries, and the
speed that both Harry and Bellatix were moving, even DD was lucky to
have found them in time.  That and that Lupin was still pretty
shell-shocked from the loss of his last best friend...


- nanstey





From jessrynn at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 16:27:40 2003
From: jessrynn at yahoo.com (jessrynn)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 16:27:40 -0000
Subject: McGonagall a Muggle? (Was: Did I Miss Something?)
In-Reply-To: <bkp04d+gdem@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkps9s+ukrl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81419

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Doriane" <delwynmarch at y...> 
wrote:

> Is it because she doesn't explain 
> things to them, because they are not interested in knowing her 
> wizarding life, or because she *thinks* they couldn't understand 
> anyway ? Do you see how this last line of reasoning could lead, 
after 
> a few decades of complete immersion in the WW, to the kind of 
> comments McGonagall made about Muggles ? So I don't necessarily 
> consider those comments as a proof that she's not Muggle-born.

It has always seemed to me that Hermione has as close of a 
relationship with her parents that someone in her situation can have. 
I see her explaining things about her life to them. Somethings, 
however, you just have to see to understand. Quidditch, for example, 
from the discription we get in the books, I was still confused and 
couldn't quite imagine the game. Seeing it visually on the screen 
helped me a lot. She is also prohibited from using magic in front of 
them so demonstration cannot help them understand.

I took the statement that you mentioned as meaning there was finally 
something she didn't have to explain indepth for her parents to 
understand. She could just say, "Mum, Dad, I made Prefect," and they 
could reply, "That's great."

Jessryn





From jakejensen at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 24 01:58:40 2003
From: jakejensen at hotmail.com (jakedjensen)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 01:58:40 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Spies
Message-ID: <bkqtog+9bge@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81420

We know DD has a long history of using spy networks (POA-conversation 
at the Three Broomsticks). Here are a few of his techniques:

1) He likes to have an actual wizard at the site (e.g., A Weasley in 
OOTP, Mundungus in OOTP, himself in SS/PS, Figg for the whole series, 
etc.)
2) He likes to have his "on the spot wizard" invisible (e.g., 
Mundungus in OOTP) using an invis. cloak.

Why is this important?  
1) One thing that has always bothered me is that DD knew about the 
attack on the Potters right away.  He knew about it so fast that he 
dispatched Hagrid to get Harry ASAP.  Not only did he know about the 
attack, but he also knew how the attack was carried out.  How did he 
know this?  How did he know how LP protected HP?  How did he know any 
of it?
2) DD had an invisibility cloak that James "left with him."  Why did 
James leave it with him?  Why would James give DD (a much more 
powerful wizard, who, by his own admission does not need an 
invisibility cloak to be invisible, an invisibility cloak)?

Answer:
DD had a spy at the Potters that fateful night.  I don't know who.

Jake




From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au  Wed Sep 24 05:10:44 2003
From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 05:10:44 -0000
Subject: Apparating
In-Reply-To: <bkqs6e+viqs@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkr90k+6398@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81421

--- "jakedjensen" <jakejensen> wrote:
> --- "Potterfanme" <fc26det> 
> > I am curious why there is such a point made about not being able 
> > to apparate or disapparate on the Hogwarts grounds.  
> 
> I think there are a couple of reasons:
> 
> 1) Plot.  ... lame plotlines.  Imagine, baddies would be able 
> to just aparate into Harry's bedroom ...
> 
> 2) Battle.  I predict that in one of the final two books there will 
> be a massive battle on Hogwarts grounds.  Once again, not being 
> able to app/disapp will make the battle more interesting.  More of 
> a seige the castle sort of thing.
> > > Jake
> (who hasn't posted in awhile because he's busy working on the PhD)

A massive Battle? Woo Hoo!
I took the yahoo ID of Norbertsmummy because of a propsed "Flying 
Armada" as a final showdown with LV. What do we have that flies?

- Buckbeak, the Hippogriff
- Norbert, (Hagrid's pet dragon being trained by Charlie Weasley)
- Thestrells, (Neville rode that better than any broom)
- Firebolts, Nimbuses and other brooms
- Flying Carpets (outlawed in UK, but there are family sized ones)
- Arthur Weasley's car
- Sirius Black's missing motorcycle
- Beauxbaton's giant horses (12, winged, the size of elephants)

I am sure JKR would have fun with all those ... lol




From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Wed Sep 24 06:56:13 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 06:56:13 -0000
Subject: Crouch jr.?! Why did he train Harry?
In-Reply-To: <bkp5sh+hahc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkrf6d+9qfq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81422

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "phoenixwriter" 
<phoenixfeder2002 at y...> wrote:
> Hi, thats probably my first post because there isn't much left what 
> keeps me wondering. But this one does.

Welcome!

> In GoF "Moody" did perform the imperious curse at Harry. Not only 
> one he did so long till Harry could fight it off. The most 
> interesting part is what "Moody" said: "They'll have trouble 
> controlling you" thats after the first time as he want that Harry 
> jumps on the desk. Now I wonder "Moody" do prepair Harry so that he 
> is able to controll his doing. But why?

As I understand from his confession at the end (both willingly to 
Harry and later under the Veritaserum), he was following closely the 
lesson plan that the real Moody devised. Recall that Dumbledore got 
Moody to teach that year because he wanted an auror keeping an eye on 
Karkaroff and that Moody and Dumbledore are very close friends. 
During the year Moody was kept in his trunk, weakened and under the 
Imperius curse both for the polyjuice potion but also to ensure that 
Crouch Jr. acts as close as possible to the real Moody by questioning 
him at length. In addition, Crouch's goal was to gain Harry's trust 
so that he could guide him through the tournament without arousing 
suspicion. Teaching him to overcome the Imperius curse was a fairly 
good way of doing it.

I also have a feeling that Crouch Jr. actually enjoyed his role as a 
teacher. He certainly did a good job at it. After spending 12 years 
controlled by the Imperius curse himself it must have been fun 
showing off his knowledge.

> I mean its kinda strange for a DE to do if he want please his 
master 
> and a Potter who isn't able to controlled is for sure not a thing 
> what makes Voldi happy, or? This could even lead that Harry can 
> escape from Voldemort. 

How could being able to resist the Imperius curse help Harry once he 
was captured? He was doomed regardless of what he did or knew, if it 
hadn't been for the wand - and neither the real nor fake Moody knew 
anything about that.

Salit





From Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com  Wed Sep 24 06:58:25 2003
From: Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com (arcum42)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 06:58:25 -0000
Subject: Scabber is NOT a rat (was Hyperbolic Chapter Titles )
In-Reply-To: <bkpfl5+jdt7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkrfah+gflu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81423

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "entropymail" <entropymail at y...>
wrote:
> > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "meltowne" <meltowne at y...> 
> > wrote:
> 
> > >When Ron 
> > > tried to cast spells on scabbers, he was trying to turn a RAT
into 
> > > something yellow:
> > > 
> > >           "Sunshine, daisies, butter mellow,
> > >           Turn this stupid fat rat yellow."
> > > 
> > > The spell failed, not because Ron was a lousy spellcaster, but 
> > > because Scabbers wasn't really a rat!  He was a human in
disguise.
> 
> I don't think it had anything to do with whether Scabbers was an
> actual rat or animagus rat. I've always thought that it becomes
clear,
> later on in the book, why the spell doesn't work: it comes from Fred
> and George! And, as we come to know, the twins are always happy to
> have a laugh at someone else's expense, especially if it's Ron. They
> just wanted to make him look silly by "teaching" him a bogus spell.
I
> mean, with all of those foreign-sounding spells we've come to know
so
> well (imperius, crucio, accio...), that whole "sunshine, daisies,
> butter mellow" thing sounds a bit ridiculous, doesn't it?
> 
Well, we do have canon of another, similar spell involving Scabbers
working...

"Bone of the father, unknowingly given, you will renew your son!
 Flesh of the servant - willingly given - you will revive your master.
 Blood of the enemy... forcibly taken... you will resurrect your foe."

It makes me wonder if we'll hear more about this type of spell later
on. Given the appearances in books 1 and 4, in the interest of
symmetry, I'm going to predict another spell of this type being cast
in book 7, by someone opposing Voldemort, possibly also involving
Peter...

--Arcum




From Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com  Wed Sep 24 07:55:56 2003
From: Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com (arcum42)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 07:55:56 -0000
Subject: Re McGonagall/Teachers was Re: Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <bkqj01+42pt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkrimc+5oto@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81424

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "elfundeb2" <elfundeb at c...>
wrote:

>So if Karkaroff was there, perhaps Bagman was the coward. That still
>leaves the one who has left forever. How about ESE McGonagall? Did
>anyone notice she wasn't in Moody's photograph of the old Order?
>Well, as long as it's anybody But Lupin.

I'd chalk Minerva not being in the original order up to timing.
Dumbledore was originally the Transfiguration teacher in the 40's. He
left, and came back in 1970 to be headmaster. She was then the
Transfiguration teacher. The Ootp was formed in the 70's, so
Dumbledore may simply not have known her that well when it was
formed. 

An odd thing, looking at the timeline of events; I honestly can say
that the only competent teacher I know for a fact Dumbledore has hired
is Lupin... :) (Oh, and possibly Firenze...)  

We don't know hire dates for Sprout, Vector, Sinistra, Hooch, Binns,
or Flitwick, though Flitwick was teaching in '75, and may well
pre-date Dumbledore as headmaster.  

Dumbledore has hired, in this order: Trelawney, Snape, Quirrell,
Lockhart, Hagrid, Lupin, Crouch, and Firenze (Umbridge doesn't count,
though DD really should have hired someone...). Perhaps interviewing
and hiring teachers is one of his weaknesses?

--Arcum




From Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com  Wed Sep 24 08:24:32 2003
From: Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com (arcum42)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 08:24:32 -0000
Subject: (was tame werewolf ?): now  werewolf powers?
In-Reply-To: <bkqobi+icnn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkrkc0+cs2a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81425

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lziner" <lziner at y...> wrote:
> Your post leads me to a question.  What powers would he have as a 
> werewolf.  Do they have any magical powers except biting people?  
> Does anyone know? 
> 
Off the top of my head, traditionally werewolves have superhuman
strength, and much better hearing and sense of smell then usual.

--Arcum




From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Sep 24 08:29:36 2003
From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 08:29:36 -0000
Subject: (was tame werewolf ?): now  werewolf powers?
In-Reply-To: <bkqobi+icnn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkrklg+iahk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81426

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lziner" <lziner at y...> wrote:
> Your post leads me to a question.  What powers would he have as a 
> werewolf.  Do they have any magical powers except biting people?  
> Does anyone know? 
> 
> lz - still thinking it would be difficult for wolf Lupin to 
> effectively battle a DE.I say chuck the potion Remus.

Sources differ on what powers werewolves are supposed to have. The
only thing we know for sure is that they turn into murderous beasts at
full moon (according to Fantastic Beasts & WTFT). We don't know if
they're immune to magic and we can't even be quite sure about the
silver issue in JKR's universe until she chooses to tell us

Remus with or without the Wolfsbane: The big problem would (IMO) be
that if he doesn't keep his human mind, he won't be able to tell
friends and enemies apart, he'll be dangerous to *anyone*. The
werewolf would go for the closest human throat (and BTW, we want the
Death Eaters defeated, not turned into werewolves). (IMO again) Sirius
underestimating what a werewolf can do was probably one of the things
that lead to "The Prank".

Alshain  





From grannygoodwitch613 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 12:53:36 2003
From: grannygoodwitch613 at yahoo.com (Granny Goodwitch)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 05:53:36 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Ron's big moment? (WAS: Why Ron Loves Hermione)
Message-ID: <20030923125336.32783.qmail@web20704.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81427


On22September Ravenclaw Bookworm wrote:

"...So Ron took a one-two punch during the fight. First was something to
do with planets, then the brain. ...According to Madam Pomgrey, thoughts could 
leave deeper scarring than almost anything else, though since she 
had started applying copious amounts of Dr. Ubbly's Oblivious 
Unction, there seemed to be some improvement...." 



Granny responds:  Thank you Dear, for reminding me of this scenario.  It struck me as VERY surreal at the time.  As you reminded us, "nothing was said about his episode of silliness".  That is, Madame Pomfrey concentrated strickly on softening whatever damage, scarring, had been done.  We're really left hanging, not even knowing whose brain it was that so aggressively attacked, or even why Ron in particular.  But, Ron did report seeing Uranus, ('Harry, we saw Uranus up close!' ) and from a little Astrology research, discovered the planet's significance: 

Uranus rules the sign Aquarius (anyone know Ron's Sign?) and is the planet of surprise and all that is unexpected. It also rules the future and all new technology -- all that has just been invented and all that is yet to come.
Innovative, unpredictable, resourceful and experimental.  This planet also rules the breaking up of any established patterns or structures, creating sudden -- even radical  change.
 Uranus can turn over anything traditional, conventional or orthodox in its path, which it deems no longer of value or having outlived its usefulness. This planet produces quick, liberating results.  Uranus is strongly objective, rather than emotional.  Since Uranus also holds sway over social change, it also regulates the global brotherhood of man and all humanitarian concerns.

This brings me back to my initial idea that Ron is a "sleeper"; and is to accomplish something of real significance.  However, as we see in canon, such an impending change would indeed produce trauma, "scarring" .  JKR threw in Uranus for some reason.

"Granny"  





From george_mitsuoka at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 17:32:18 2003
From: george_mitsuoka at yahoo.com (yoshiharu kubo)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 17:32:18 -0000
Subject: hey...
Message-ID: <bkq032+7ua3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81428

Newby here, so bear with me please if I ask anything "Duh! Not this 
again!"-question.

Which house Sirius were in Hogwarts?

His friendship with James give me clue that he's a Gryffindor, 
however, in PS/SS once Hagrid told Harry that all bad wizards he ever 
knew belong to Slytherins, well, that time Sirius Black was still 
famous for being a very bad dark-wizard who gave in his own best-
friends to Voldemort. Surely Hagrid thought that he's a bad wizard 
too, does this hint that Sirius is a Slytherin?

Er, sorry again if this question had been asked before.
~Cheers





From feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca  Tue Sep 23 18:34:21 2003
From: feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca (feetmadeofclay)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 18:34:21 -0000
Subject: Jewish Goblins? (was: Re: Death Eaters)
In-Reply-To: <bkq2nl+6c89@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkq3nd+k16a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81429

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "entropymail" 
<entropymail at y...> wrote:

> But I also wanted to note something that strikes me every time JKR
> mentions the Dark Mark.  The placement of the Mark on each Death 
Eater
> (the forearm; God, I love it when Snape pulls back the sleeve of his
> robe to reveal his Mark to Fudge in GoF!) is quite similar to the
> numbered tattoos which were inflicted upon prisoners of the German
> concentration camps. 


No it isn't!  DE chose to be Death Eaters.  For whatever reason, it 
is more than likely Snape made a choice to be branded.  Marking 
yourself as a supporter of someone or something is very common.  It 
is not uncommon for Neo Nazis to be marked with swastikas.  

Victims of Hitler were marked as prisoners.  Numbers were used to 
keep track of them.  It was more accurate and efficient than marking 
the clothes.

Snape has good reason to be ashamed of his mark.  Victims of Hitler 
have no such reason.

Golly





From lawtrainer at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 21:33:19 2003
From: lawtrainer at yahoo.com (Jana Fisher)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 21:33:19 -0000
Subject: Did Voldemort kill Petunia & Lily's parents?
In-Reply-To: <bkprpc+kjjv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkqe6v+2d0i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81430

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "meltowne" <meltowne at y...> > > 
> Since Petunia is protecting Harry because she has a blood link, 
then 
> we must assume that neither Petunia nor Lily was adopted, as some 
> have suggested.  There's still something we're missing about the 
> family - why were they so excited about Lily being a witch, and why 
> did that make Petunia hate her?  In PS/SS she hadn't seen her 
sister 
> in several years.>>End Snip

See post 77807, it refers to the theory that Petunia is a squib, 
hence the jealousy/hatred she feels at her sister being a wizard.





From neonsister at ameritech.net  Tue Sep 23 22:02:32 2003
From: neonsister at ameritech.net (Tracy)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:02:32 -0000
Subject: Did I Miss Something?
In-Reply-To: <bkq8dl+3nur@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkqfto+610r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81431

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Missy" <missygallant2000 at y...> 
wrote:
> > As I recall, she also wore a tartan or plaid nightshirt in POA 
when 
> > Ron woke up with Sirius Black brandishing a knife above him. 
Either 
> > *way* in character for some mugglish mission, or wizards wear 
> > muggle-style nightshirts, or she's from Scotland or something.

Tracy:
Not just the tartan nightshirt, but in chapter 23 of GoF she 
is "wearing dress robes of tartan and had arranged a rather ugly 
wreath of thistles around the brim of her hat" at the Yule Ball.  The 
thistle is a national symbol of Scotland, if I remember correctly.  

Tracy *has a Black Watch tartan coat, but alas, no thistled hat*






From ffionmiles at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 24 08:46:59 2003
From: ffionmiles at hotmail.com (ffimiles)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 08:46:59 -0000
Subject: Ron's big moment? (WAS: Why Ron Loves Hermione)
In-Reply-To: <20030923125336.32783.qmail@web20704.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bkrlm3+b58o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81432

 
> 
> Granny responds:  Thank you Dear, for reminding me of this 
scenario.  It struck me as VERY surreal at the time.  As you reminded 
us, "nothing was said about his episode of silliness".  That is, 
Madame Pomfrey concentrated strickly on softening whatever damage, 
scarring, had been done.  We're really left hanging, not even knowing 
whose brain it was that so aggressively attacked, or even why Ron in 
particular.  But, Ron did report seeing Uranus, ('Harry, we saw 
Uranus up close!' ) and from a little Astrology research, discovered 
the planet's significance: 
> 
> Uranus rules the sign Aquarius (anyone know Ron's Sign?) and is the 
planet of surprise and all that is unexpected. It also rules the 
future and all new technology -- all that has just been invented and 
all that is yet to come.
> Innovative, unpredictable, resourceful and experimental.  This 
planet also rules the breaking up of any established patterns or 
structures, creating sudden -- even radical  change.
>  Uranus can turn over anything traditional, conventional or 
orthodox in its path, which it deems no longer of value or having 
outlived its usefulness. This planet produces quick, liberating 
results.  Uranus is strongly objective, rather than emotional.  Since 
Uranus also holds sway over social change, it also regulates the 
global brotherhood of man and all humanitarian concerns.
> 
> This brings me back to my initial idea that Ron is a "sleeper"; and 
is to accomplish something of real significance.  However, as we see 
in canon, such an impending change would indeed produce 
trauma, "scarring" .  JKR threw in Uranus for some reason.
> 
> "Granny"

Ron was born in March, and so is a pisces, if that helps.

I thought perhaps someone had put the confundus charm on him - or 
perhaps a very powerful cheering charm - if you remember, Ron had to 
be led away  to calm down after Harry'd overdone the cheering charm 
on him in an exam.

But yes, the lack of explanation later does, if we interpret JKR's 
style, mean something more profound happened to him. 
Ffi




From fakeplastikcynic at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 23 23:36:40 2003
From: fakeplastikcynic at hotmail.com (martha)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 23:36:40 -0000
Subject: Jewish Goblins? (was: Re: Death Eaters)
In-Reply-To: <02E73128.614147F2.00170183@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bkqle8+oaar@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81433

Nemi said:

><snipped> Because of World War one Germany had to pay huuuuuge depts 
>to france and several other countries.  /Money they didn't have./  
>So when Hitler got into power he started printing huge sums of 
>money, it drove the vaule down, but the fines were phrased 
>as "______ marks." not "Equivlent to _____ franks" or "Equivlent to 
>______ pounds of gold."
> 
> And a Mark is a Mark, even if it's worth less than a single lire.
> 
> Needless to say this made Hitler very popular. <more snippage>

This probably counts as OT so I'll try and keep this post short, but 
I feel I should point out a couple of errors here: hyperinflation 
took place under the Weimar government, *before* the Nazis came to 
power. And the extra banknotes were printed not for the purpose of 
paying off reparations to other European countries, but in order that 
there were enough banknotes in everyday circulation that wages could 
be paid and so on. This did lead to the value of the Mark decreasing 
very rapidly, to the point that many workers took their wages home in 
wheelbarrows, but couldn't buy a loaf of bread with them. After the 
Nazi seizure of power in 1933 that particular system of currency was 
abolished completely. Many historians argue that one of the things 
that made Hitler/the Nazi party very popular was that the economy was 
built up again and became very strong and unemployment was, at the 
height of Nazi power, virtually unheard of. (You were right about the 
drumming-up of antisemitism though.)

I've just read back ove what I've said and it comes across as being 
rather bitchy - it's not meant to sound like that, but I feel it's 
important to get facts right on this sort of thing. (Well, that and 
that fact that I got a D at history A-Level and the module on the 
Weimar government and Nazi rise to power is the only bit I learned 
properly. *grins*)

I hope that's helpful, anyway,

~ Martha

ADMIN Note:  Please send replies to this post to our sister list, HPFGU-OTChatter, at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/?yguid=119489448

Thanks!




From feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca  Wed Sep 24 00:09:06 2003
From: feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca (feetmadeofclay)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 00:09:06 -0000
Subject: Apparating
In-Reply-To: <bkqmed+u5jv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkqnb2+as4e@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81434

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Potterfanme" <fc26det at a...> 
wrote:
> I am curious why there is such a point made about not being able to 
> apparate or disapparate on the Hogwarts grounds.  All anyone would 
> have to do is pass through the front gates and apparate away.  The 
> knight bus goes to the front gates and it basically apparates 
doesn't 
> it?  After all, when you are riding on it you see where it is going 
> but if you are waiting for it you don't see it until you hear the 
> loud bang and there it is.  Granted it would take a little bit to 
get 
> out the gates but from there you should be home free.  
> Susan


LOL!  It never occured to me they were trying to keep people IN 
Hogwarts.  You make it sound like a prison.  I would assume kids do 
often try to get away. Though I would think it is probably against 
the rules to leave the grounds without permission. 

I always assumed the reason apparition was blocked was to keep people 
from getting in.  Presumably if you could apparate about the place, 
the kids would not be safe in their houses. Passwords would be 
irrelevant.  

Golly





From suzie_t666 at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 24 00:26:49 2003
From: suzie_t666 at hotmail.com (Paul Smith)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 00:26:49 -0000
Subject: Wormtail and non-prophecy activities
Message-ID: <bkqoc9+48i7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81435

First posted late in June to no response, and as far as I'm aware 
hasn't been discussed since.  Hope this time it will get people 
thinking.

Hey everyone,

I don't think anyone else has questioned this, but for me it's one of 
the biggest mysteries to come out of OOP: where was Wormtail for the 
entire year? He is referred to a couple of times, we saw him in 
Snape's memory but we are never given information about what he's up 
to. And there was me waiting excitedly for what he might do with his 
new silver super-hand! I've given it a little thought and I suppose 
Wormtail's abscence might be due to a mission he is completing for 
Voldemort. I remember noticing Harry hearing something scuttling 
behind the wall at Grimmauld Place the first time he was there. Was 
that Wormtail as Scabbers? Highly unlikely I know, but it seems 
speculations are all we can make on the subject.

Along the lines of speculations, here's my favourite one at the 
moment. After reflection on the book, it feels like the cause of 
neither good nor evil was especially advanced. Voldemort didn't hear 
the rest of the prophecy and Harry went through little else but pain 
and anger through his fifth year. It's pretty hard for me to accept 
that the only thing Voldemort was thinking about was the prophecy, 
and that the only thing the Order were thinking about was keeping the 
prophecy out of evil hands. Surely both groups had other goals? We 
are aware of the attempts to recruit the Dementors and the giants 
(was Wormtail involved with the Dementors at all?), but is that 
really everything either Voldemort or Dumbledore could think of? 
Okay, I have to admit I don't have any clue as to what Wormtail could 
have been doing for a whole year that would keep him out of Harry's 
way. If he'd been at Hogwarts Crookshanks would have been on his 
tail; if he's been the one communicating with the Dementors why 
didn't they suck out his soul (takes messages to them as a rat?), and 
what else is there?

I'd love to hear anyone else's ideas on what Wormtail did for the 
year, I suppose my best guess is that he was delivering messages from 
Voldemort to the Dementors as a rat, but if that was the case why 
couldn't Voldemort have just gone and sorted it himself?
As you can see, this is driving me nuts, as so many things about OOP 
are. Please help!

Paul Smith, who's very happy it didn't turn out to be Z. Smith who 
was the sneak, but who's fuming at Harry and Dumbledore for failing 
to prevent Sirius's death.





From mario.pitre at videotron.ca  Wed Sep 24 01:29:31 2003
From: mario.pitre at videotron.ca (oiramertip)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 01:29:31 -0000
Subject: Fawkes and the basilisk
In-Reply-To: <bknklm+gd15@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkqs1r+vin0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81436

What about the simple fact that Fawkes eyes are bathing in 
Phoenix Healing Tears? Wouldn't that be enough to shield his eyes 
(himself) from the effect of looking at into the Basilisks eyes? 

Just a thought.!

Mario





From dadrucchi at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 02:52:52 2003
From: dadrucchi at yahoo.com (Tom Hugh)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 02:52:52 -0000
Subject: Ron's big moment? (WAS: Why Ron Loves Hermione)
In-Reply-To: <bkolg1+uek9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkr0u4+3opf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81437

Ravenclaw Bookworm said:

> Notice the qualifiers "according to" and "seemed to be."  And 
> nothing was said about his episode of silliness.  This just screams 
> *important clue* to me.  Thoughts on what they mean?

SNIP

It was a spell that one of the death eaters used, it was in the book, 
did you miss it? Anyway, they probably lifted it later, like the 
tarantalegra spell on Neville. Those uncertainties in language are 
pretty common in brittish diction I would say.

I don?t think its anything to worry about.

Dadruchi









From melpethaven at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 03:03:52 2003
From: melpethaven at yahoo.com (melpethaven)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 03:03:52 -0000
Subject: Halloween 1981
Message-ID: <bkr1io+4gkh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81438

After reviewing many posts about what might have happened at Godric's 
Hollow the night Harry's parents died...I have been thinking. Does 
Harry know when his parents died?? By canon we know, therefore he 
knows, where, how, who, and why but I can't find canon that he knows 
when. 

Several dates are consistent throught the books, Sept 1 - Arriving 
feast, June 30th - leaving feast, Harry's (and now Nevelle's) 
Birthday- July 31, Christmas - Dec. 25th, and the Halloween feast. 
Never have I read that the last feast has been anything but a 
celebration. Never does Harry mention that "it is the anniversary of 
his parents death" or reference to "this is the night my parents 
died" or any memoriam regarding that date even in passing. 

Since noone volunteers info to Harry and he sure doesn't ask like a 
normal kid, you would think by now almost sixteen years later someone 
or at least Hermione would have mentioned it since it is part of 
wizard history. Wouldn't that take the cake if he gets that info in 
Prof Binn's history class?
Frodo's Mum





From moviebec at yahoo.com.au  Wed Sep 24 03:08:54 2003
From: moviebec at yahoo.com.au (moviebec)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 03:08:54 -0000
Subject: Do wizards have wills?
Message-ID: <bkr1s6+64l6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81439

Hi,
This is my first post so feel free to shoot me down if this has been 
discussed before, but do wizards have wills?
I have wondered since reading OoP what will happen to sirius' 
possesions, ie, the Black family house as its being used as 
headquarters. Will the house pass to blood relatives, ie, Bellatrix 
or Narcissa, or will Harry have claim as he was Sirius' godson, as 
estates often are passed from father to son?
If Sirius did have a will, who do you think he would have left his 
house to? Harry or donated it to the Order? I also wonder who his 
money will go to, as i beleive he has a fair bit that he inherited.
(firebolts aint cheap!)
Plus what legality would there be to this as he was and still is 
considered by the wider ww that he was a criminal in hiding? Other 
than those who were present in the dept of mysteries no one else 
knows he's dead.
Im leaning towards wizards not having will's after Molly's reaction 
to the boggart/dead family members scene. 

"And whats going to happen if Arthur and I get killed, who's g-g-
going to look after Ron and Ginny?"Page 161 OoP Australian edition.

Lupin reassures her that the order would look after the kids, but 
wouldn't that responsibility fall to Bill as the oldest brother?

moviebec, from Aus






From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz  Wed Sep 24 03:08:13 2003
From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:08:13 +1200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <bkqm2m+700v@eGroups.com>
References: <bkqj01+42pt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20030924150443.00ac70f0@pop3.xtra.co.nz>

No: HPFGUIDX 81440

At 23:47 23/09/2003 +0000, you wrote:
>There is one big gaping hole in this fascinating theory. One more
>person knows that Barty Crouch Jr. was killed (is he dead?) by the
>dementors - Fudge - who was completely controled by Lucius Malfoy. Do
>you think he did not tell Lucius about Crouch Jr.'s execution?
>
>Salit

Another detail, When I was reading that, I had the impression that there
might have been more behind it.  I am wondering if that scene was set to
silence the other witness they had to LV's return.  Certainly helped MOM
discredit the report.

Tanya





From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz  Wed Sep 24 04:05:31 2003
From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 16:05:31 +1200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dumbledore's Spies
In-Reply-To: <bkqtog+9bge@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20030924160156.031619b0@pop3.xtra.co.nz>

No: HPFGUIDX 81441

Jake wrote:
>2) DD had an invisibility cloak that James "left with him."  Why did
>James leave it with him?  Why would James give DD (a much more
>powerful wizard, who, by his own admission does not need an
>invisibility cloak to be invisible, an invisibility cloak)?
>Answer:
>DD had a spy at the Potters that fateful night.  I don't know who.

That is an interesting point.  However, the first thing that comes to my
mind is the fact that Snape was more than once on the verge of
discovering Harry under the cloak when he was in a room etc.  Just
how well dose he know about it?  If I recall correctly, he was feeling
ahead of him in one scene.  Considering no one else took that line.

Tanya





From hedwigstalons at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 05:51:59 2003
From: hedwigstalons at yahoo.com (hedwigstalons)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 05:51:59 -0000
Subject: The Phoenix & the Snowy Owl  (was The Phoenix & the Wand)
In-Reply-To: <bkpq24+3r9v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkrbdv+ipe8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81442

n_longbottom01: 
> If Harry is going to get a new pet at some point in the series, I 
> think there is a good chance that it will be Fawkes.
 
<snip>

> what about Hedwig?  Does something have to happen to Hedwig to 
> make room for this new pet?  Could Hedwig's death the future death 
> that is going to make JKR cry as she writes it?  

OK, I am NOT liking that Hedwig might die. She is my favorite "pet" 
so far. If I were JKR, I too would cry if I had to kill a pet. 
(Remember Jack the dog in the Little House series? or the Old Dan and 
Little Anne?) Anyway, if Harry does inherit Fawkes, then maybe he 
gives Hedwig to someone else, or Hedwig chooses a new "master" 
herself -- perhaps Neville?

HedwigsTalons





From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Wed Sep 24 09:14:12 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 09:14:12 -0000
Subject: Re McGonagall/Teachers was Re: Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <bkrimc+5oto@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkrn94+b5q0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81443

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arcum42" <Arcum_Dagsson at c...> 
wrote:
> Dumbledore has hired, in this order: Trelawney, Snape, Quirrell,
> Lockhart, Hagrid, Lupin, Crouch, and Firenze (Umbridge doesn't 
count,
> though DD really should have hired someone...). Perhaps interviewing
> and hiring teachers is one of his weaknesses?

I disagree. Let's consider his hirelings one by one:

He was planning to abandon divination completely, but then
hired Trelawney after she demonstrated that she was indeed a seer. 
She was hired so he could keep her around in case she made more 
predictions, but also to protect her from Voldemort if he tried to 
break into her subconscious memories to retrieve the prophecy. Her 
teaching credentials were irrelevant since Dumbledore did not 
consider divination a worthwhile subject anyway :-).

Firenze - not such a bad choice.

Snape is a nasty piece of work and mean to his students, but he knows 
his subject in and out and sets very high standards. He is a good 
teacher whose students have a very high OWL pass rate.

Quirell: we don't know what he was like before Voldemort started 
controling him, except for Hagrid's testimony that he was "brilliant".
Not enough information.

Hagrid was a mediocre teacher in his first 1.5 years but greatly 
improved afterwards. There is no question that his knowledge of his 
subject exceeds anyone else's, not to mention his enthusiasm. He only 
needs some on the job experience.

Lupin was an excellent teacher. No contest.

Crouch. Well, Dumbledore never hired him, has he? He hired Moody whom 
we have never seen teach. I am guessing he would have been very 
similar to Crouch as he tried to immitate him and Crouch was an 
excellent teacher.

Lockhart is the only choice I don't understand, as I am sure that 
Dumbledore knew he was a fraud. Perhaps he had no other candidates 
and took him as a last resort. Or maybe it was his quirky sense of 
humor? Lockhart was one of the funniest characters in the entire 
series...

Salit





From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Wed Sep 24 09:26:18 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 09:26:18 -0000
Subject: Halloween 1981
In-Reply-To: <bkr1io+4gkh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkrnvq+is8d@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81444

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "melpethaven" 
<melpethaven at y...> wrote:
> After reviewing many posts about what might have happened at 
Godric's 
> Hollow the night Harry's parents died...I have been thinking. Does 
> Harry know when his parents died?? By canon we know, therefore he 
> knows, where, how, who, and why but I can't find canon that he 
knows 
> when. 

I don't have the book in front of me, but I am fairly certain that in 
SS/PS Hagrid tells Harry that his parents died on Halloween night, 
when he gives him the Hogwarts letter and tells him about his past. I 
too wondered why Harry never thinks about Halloween as his parents' 
death anniversary.

Salit





From deemarie1a at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 09:36:23 2003
From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 09:36:23 -0000
Subject: The Phoenix, the Snowy Owl & Buckbeak  (was The Phoenix & the Wand)
In-Reply-To: <bkqlb7+4r5n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkroin+soei@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81445

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "slgazit" <slgazit at s...> wrote:
> I believe that Fawkes is the obvious candidate for Harry's next 
pet. 
> But that will not happen till book 7: Clearly he can't bring him to 
> the Dursleys during the summer so it will have to happen after he 
is 
> done with them, and Dumbledore has to die first for the phoenix to 
> change hands.
> 
> Salit

I never thought of Fawkes as a "pet".  Dumbledore never refers to 
Fawkes as his pet.  It seems to me, that Fawkes comes with the 
position of headmaster.  Somehow, and I have no canon to support me, 
Fawkes may be the "school mascot".  (I really don't like that term, 
but it's the best I can come up with.)  I think Fawkes is much older 
than anyone suspects.  I think he was Godric Griffindor's companion.  
Fawkes knew the sword was concealed in the sorting hat.  It was 
Riddle who assumed that DD had sent Fawkes to Harry.  But DD said 
that Harry's loyalty was what called Fawkes to him.  DD never sent 
Fawkes.  The phoenix is such a magical creature, that like a wizard's 
wand, the phoenix chooses who it will be loyal to.  If, as many 
listies assume, Fawkes will become Harry's "pet", I do not see DD's 
death involved in that.  Fawkes already seems quite fond of Harry.  
He saved Harry's life in Cos, and healed Harry's leg in GoF.  These 
incidents seem to be clues as to whom Fawkes will "belong" to at the 
end of the story.

D - of course, I am not JKR.  And who knows where she is leading us 
in regards to this.  I look forward to finding out!




From elfundeb at comcast.net  Wed Sep 24 10:19:37 2003
From: elfundeb at comcast.net (elfundeb2)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 10:19:37 -0000
Subject: Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <bkqm2m+700v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkrr3p+d1j3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81446

I, Debbie wrote:
> > Barty Crouch Jr. was Voldemort's faithful servant, but the DEs 
> > thought he was dead, so they must think it's someone else.  What 
> > former DE is at Hogwarts?  Why, Snape!  He must be the faithful 
> > servant.  Now that the dementor had Barty Jr. for dinner, who's 
> going 
> > to tell the DEs who the faithful servant really was?  Voldemort 
> > doesn't seem the type to explain his failures to his henchmen.
> 
Salit responded:
> There is one big gaping hole in this fascinating theory. One more 
> person knows that Barty Crouch Jr. was killed (is he dead?) by the 
> dementors - Fudge - who was completely controled by Lucius Malfoy. 
Do 
> you think he did not tell Lucius about Crouch Jr.'s execution?

No, I don't think Fudge told anyone.  In GoF, when Fudge was told 
about Crouch Jr., he immediately summoned a dementor to have Crouch 
Jr. silenced.  He doesn't want anyone to know that a Death Eater 
managed to escape from Azkaban; it isn't good for his reputation, it 
doesn't contribute to keeping order and calm in the WW, and most of 
all, it could lead to more questions that would make people 
understand that Voldemort has risen again under his watch.

I also doubt Fudge is controlled by Lucius in any kind of literal 
sense.  He has the kind of influence over Fudge that comes from 
throwing one's money around strategically in the face of less wealthy 
government officials.  Unless Fudge is ever-so-evil (and I don't 
think he is), he's not associating with Lucius because he's a former 
DE.  So there would be no reason for him to tell Lucius.

Debbie




From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Wed Sep 24 10:51:48 2003
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 10:51:48 -0000
Subject: Apparating
In-Reply-To: <bkr90k+6398@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkrt04+6iui@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81447

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Hagrid" <aussie_lol at y...> 
wrote:
> --- "jakedjensen" <jakejensen> wrote:
> > --- "Potterfanme" <fc26det> 
> > > I am curious why there is such a point made about not being 
able 
> > > to apparate or disapparate on the Hogwarts grounds.  
> > 
> > I think there are a couple of reasons:
> > 
> > 1) Plot.  ... lame plotlines.  Imagine, baddies would be able 
> > to just aparate into Harry's bedroom ...
> > 
 
Yeah, but there isn't really a difference, if they just use a portkey 
to get into Harry's bedroom.

> > 2) Battle.  I predict that in one of the final two books there 
will 
> > be a massive battle on Hogwarts grounds.  Once again, not being 
> > able to app/disapp will make the battle more interesting.  More 
of 
> > a seige the castle sort of thing.
> > > > Jake
> > (who hasn't posted in awhile because he's busy working on the PhD)
> 
> A massive Battle? Woo Hoo!
 

Oh, I agree. Personally, I think that Hogwarts ground is the place, 
were the finale battle in book 7 will take place. It's also a perfect 
opportunity for JKR to use most of their characters, because they are 
already there. Of course there are some characters, who are absent 
from Hogwarts, like the older Weasleys, but, if, for example, 
Trelawney makes a third prophecy, that Hogwarts will be attacked by 
Voldemort, it would give JKR a reason, to bring some Order members to 
Hogwarts, to guard it.

Hickengruendler




From fredwaldrop at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 11:02:39 2003
From: fredwaldrop at yahoo.com (Fred Waldrop)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 11:02:39 -0000
Subject: McGonagall a Muggle? (Was: Did I Miss Something?)
In-Reply-To: <bkps9s+ukrl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkrtkf+ihl0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81448

<"Doriane" <delwynmarch at y... wrote:>
Is it because she doesn't explain things to them, because they are 
not interested in knowing her wizarding life, or because she *thinks* 
they couldn't understand anyway ? Do you see how this last line of 
reasoning could lead, after a few decades of complete immersion in 
the WW, to the kind of comments McGonagall made about Muggles ? So I 
don't necessarily consider those comments as a proof that she's not 
Muggle-born.


<Jessryn wrote>
It has always seemed to me that Hermione has as close of a 
relationship with her parents that someone in her situation can have. 
I see her explaining things about her life to them. Somethings, 
however, you just have to see to understand. Quidditch, for example, 
from the discription we get in the books, I was still confused and 
couldn't quite imagine the game. Seeing it visually on the screen 
helped me a lot. She is also prohibited from using magic in front of 
them so demonstration cannot help them understand.
 
I took the statement that you mentioned as meaning there was finally 
something she didn't have to explain indepth for her parents to 
understand. She could just say, "Mum, Dad, I made Prefect," and they 
could reply, "That's great."
______________________________________________________________________

Hello all, Fred Waldrop here

I agree with Doriane more than I do with Jessryn.
Yes, in the beginning Hermione had a close relationship with her 
parents, but canon does not support that anymore. 
In the first year, PS/SS, Hermione went home to see her parents as 
much as possible, (for christmas and summer holidays). In the second 
year, CoS, she stays at school for christmas, same in the third year, 
PoA. By the time the forth year arrives, she not only stays at school 
for christmas but we also see her not staying home during summer 
vaction. She goes to Ron's house, and we are not sure how long she 
was there before Harry gets there.
And in OotP, we are not sure if she even goes home for the summer 
holidays, she cancels her christmas vaction with her parents and 
walks away from her parents at the train station to stand with the 
rest of the witchs and wizards to "bully" the Duersleys.
So, I think that in 5 years we can see how a "muggle-born" witch can 
change how she feels about muggles she loves (not saying she doesn't 
love her family, just that she feels separated from them), just think 
how someone that has been a witch for over 60 years would feel about 
muggles.

Just my opinion;
Fred 





From EnsTren at aol.com  Wed Sep 24 11:34:38 2003
From: EnsTren at aol.com (EnsTren at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 07:34:38 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Jewish Goblins?
Message-ID: <0091C289.44EA543F.00170183@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81449

In a message dated 9/23/2003 8:01:22 PM Eastern Daylight Time, hpfanmatt at gmx.net writes:

> Although I suppose EnsTren could answer more reliably, I think that
> you are misunderstanding his/her post.  The point, as I read it, is
> not that the Goblins are supposed to *represent* Jews, but that the
> *discrimination* against the Goblins is reminiscent of a certain brand
> of anti-Semitism -- demonizing (goblinizing?) an entire group because
> some members are successful in business or, particularly, in finance
> ("How now, Shylock, what news among the merchants"!).  In this sense,
> EnsTren's point is similar to the prior thread discussing how various
> brands of "otherness" in the books can be analogized to the otherness
> felt by members of the gay/lesbian community (see post # 77983 and its
> progeny).  Neither claim requires JKR to have intended any precise
> symmetry, much less that she have "indulged in" a stereotype.  But,
> given the prevalence of prejudice and discrimination as themes in the
> books, it is rather difficult to believe that Rowling does not intend
> us to draw *any* connection to prejudices in the real world.
> 

<snip>

/THANK YOU/ Matt.  I was looking for the right words to express myself and boom, here you are with them.  My post was misread.  I really need to learn to keep my writing on target, let me see if I can boil down to the points I wanted to make.

In the middle ages and afterwards Jews were not allowed to own land and certain bussinesses.  So in order to make enough money to survive they became bankers and money lenders.

My thought was what if due to the Goblin rebellions we hear so much about if a same sort of ban was placed upon the Goblins?

After WWI Germany had to pay off depts, like really huge fines for the whole country because they had allied against the rest of europe.

My second thought was what if the Goblins had a simular fine on them, leading they to be more sensitive than usual to their galleons.  And getting very angry when it's stolen out from under them presumablely from the MoM.

> 
> -- Matt
> 
> P.S.: Laura definitely misread EnsTren in attributing to him/her a
> claim that "2 Jews were in charge of the German government before
> WWII."  What EnsTren said was that "prior to World War two Jews were
> in control of the German goverment."  Notwithstanding the punctuation,
> it is clear that the "two" was in reference to "World War 
> II" and not
> to "two Jews."

Yes, thank you again, I had read her responce and I did not even coprehend what she was refering too.

I believe two Jews /Were/ incharge of the goverment, you best ask Martha about that though as she has her fact straighters than I.  *hugs martha*  I had been refering to the Weimer goverment though.


Nemi



From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 12:33:25 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 12:33:25 -0000
Subject: Jewish Goblins?
In-Reply-To: <0091C289.44EA543F.00170183@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bks2ul+6nhr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81450

hpfanmatt at g... writes:
> 
<snip> The point, as I read it, is not that the Goblins are supposed 
to *represent* Jews, but that the *discrimination* against the 
Goblins is reminiscent of a certain brand of anti-Semitism -- 
demonizing (goblinizing?) an entire group because some members are 
successful in business or, particularly, in finance.<snip> 
In this sense, EnsTren's point is similar to the prior thread 
discussing how various brands of "otherness" in the books can be 
analogized to the otherness felt by members of the gay/lesbian 
community (see post # 77983 and its progeny).  Neither claim requires 
JKR to have intended any precise symmetry, much less that she 
have "indulged in" a stereotype.  But, given the prevalence of 
prejudice and discrimination as themes in the books, it is rather 
difficult to believe that Rowling does not intend us to draw *any* 
connection to prejudices in the real world. <snip>

Nemi:
<snip>
> In the middle ages and afterwards Jews were not allowed to own land 
and certain bussinesses.  So in order to make enough money to survive 
they became bankers and money lenders.
> 
> My thought was what if due to the Goblin rebellions we hear so much 
about if a same sort of ban was placed upon the Goblins?
> 
> After WWI Germany had to pay off depts, like really huge fines for 
the whole country because they had allied against the rest of europe.
> 
> My second thought was what if the Goblins had a simular fine on 
them, leading they to be more sensitive than usual to their 
galleons.  And getting very angry when it's stolen out from under 
them presumablely from the MoM.

> I believe two Jews /Were/ incharge of the goverment, you best ask 
Martha about that though as she has her fact straighters than I.  
*hugs martha*  I had been refering to the Weimer goverment though.

Laura:

Sigh.  I must say that the timing on this discussion is most 
unfortunate, coming 3 days before the celebration of the New Year and 
the succeeding holidays.  

I agree that JKR is trying to make a point about prejudice in the 
RW.  She does so most effectively without having to resort to 
caricatures.  Nemi is suggesting (if I'm reading the posts correctly) 
that the goblins, due to their money-handling ability and the wary 
distance wizards keep from them, are reminiscent of the Jews in 
Europe.  Matt suggests that this is part of JKR's anti-prejudice 
subtext which reminded some readers of anti-gay prejudice in the RW. 
The comparison would be correct if JKR had included a character with 
stereotypical gay or lesbian traits but had not identified that 
character as such.  (Whatever stereotypical gay or lesbian traits are-
men knowing all the words to all the songs in "The Wizard of Oz"?  
women wearing flannel shirts and Doc Martens? *rolls eyes*)

If JKR had wanted to suggest that the goblins were in charge of 
Gringotts as punishment for their rebellions (which sounds pretty 
unlikely, don't you think?  Why would the WW penalize 
insurrectionists by putting them in charge of the only bank in the 
country?  Seems a bit...disingenuous, to say the very least.), I 
believe she would have done so, but left out any descriptions that 
could lead to the type of conclusion to which Nemi has come.  That 
is, she wouldn't have made them ugly, clever with money and lacking 
in basic social skills.   I would respectfully suggest that the 
reading Nemi and Matt propose is both overly simplistic and overly 
specific.

I want to be clear, Nemi, that although I find your theory 
unconvincing, I truly don't think you meant to be hurtful.  I hope 
I've responded to your post without rancor-that's certainly what I 
meant to do.  I hope you continue to post here and take part in the 
discussion!

As for Matt, I think you're doing a disservice to JKR if you think 
she would try to make a valid point in such an insensitive way.  If 
she had created a magical race with stereotyped characteristics of 
African-Americans, Asians, Arabs or gays or lesbians, her readers 
would have jumped on her, and deservedly so.  She is, I believe, 
addressing bigotry in general and not any sort in particular.  I 
think that because of the way she portrays prejudice-she shows it 
from the point of view of the holder of the prejudiced belief rather 
than the victims of the beliefs.  We don't get inside the heads of 
centaurs, giants, goblins or house-elves, although we see something 
of how they feel about wizards and witches.  JKR wants to show us way 
a society built on ethnic/racial stereotypes works (or doesn't). To 
the extent that we see victims of prejudice in the WW as having 
specific equivalents in the RW, I think that's our reading in and not 
JKR's intention.

A couple of corrections:
The Jews became moneylenders not as punishment per se but because 
Christian theology prevented Christians from engaging in this 
practice.  Jewish understanding of the morality of lending at 
interest is different from the traditional Christian one.  The 
prohibitions imposed on the Jews regarding engaging in various 
professions could, I suppose, be seen as a punishment-the crimes 
being deicide and refusing to see the error of their ways. But it 
wasn't direct and particular punishment for a direct and particular 
act, such as Nemi suggests with the goblins and their rebellions.  
The anti-Jewish prohibitions grew over time, starting when the Roman 
Empire became Christian and proceeding from there.

There has never been any time, to my knowledge, that the head of any 
German government before WWII was Jewish. 






From fc26det at aol.com  Wed Sep 24 12:35:47 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 12:35:47 -0000
Subject: Apparating
In-Reply-To: <bkqnb2+as4e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bks333+ijq0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81451

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "feetmadeofclay" 
<feetmadeofclay at y...> wrote: 
> LOL!  It never occured to me they were trying to keep people IN 
> Hogwarts.  You make it sound like a prison.  I would assume kids do 
> often try to get away. Though I would think it is probably against 
> the rules to leave the grounds without permission. 
> 
> I always assumed the reason apparition was blocked was to keep 
people 
> from getting in.  Presumably if you could apparate about the place, 
> the kids would not be safe in their houses. Passwords would be 
> irrelevant.  
> 
> Golly

LOL is right!  I think you missed my point!!  I didn't mean for it to 
sound like a prison <grin>.  Though I think Harry may sometimes feel 
like it is when everyone is angry with him!  It just seems that most 
feel certain people can't have gone places due to the fact that they 
can't apparate from the grounds.  My point is that it would only take 
the time to walk out of the front gates to be able to apparate.  Not 
knowing just how far away the front gates are from the castle, it is 
hard to say how much time it would take to get off the grounds.  

For instance, a lot of posters feel that Snape could not possibly 
have been at the graveyard.  Why not?  Yes he was at Hogwarts at the 
end of the TWT but what is to say that when the dark mark burned, he 
didn't apparate from outside the gates then when Harry portkeyed 
back, he simply apparated back and slipped through the gates and 
showed up as tho he was never gone.

Obviously everyone is free to come and go as they please as evidenced 
in OOP when the DA leaves on the Thestrals.  Could there be some sort 
of spell on the gates to let someone know when a person passes 
through them?  Of course, if this was the case, Snape would have 
known or been able to find out if the DA had left the grounds.  Too 
many questions!

Susan-who always enjoys a little friendly banter with Golly!! 




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Wed Sep 24 12:40:08 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 12:40:08 -0000
Subject: Re McGonagall/Teachers was Re: Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <bkrimc+5oto@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bks3b8+2u7d@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81452

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arcum42" <Arcum_Dagsson at c...> 
wrote:
> 
>

Arcum: 
> Dumbledore has hired, in this order: Trelawney, Snape, Quirrell,
> Lockhart, Hagrid, Lupin, Crouch, and Firenze (Umbridge doesn't 
count,
> though DD really should have hired someone...). Perhaps interviewing
> and hiring teachers is one of his weaknesses?
> 


Geoff:
Well, I detest Snape but he seems to know his job (reminds me of 
people I worked with in teaching!)and Remus Lupin seemed to do a 
pretty good job with the DADA class as, in fact, did fake 
Crouch/Moody.




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Wed Sep 24 12:51:17 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 12:51:17 -0000
Subject: Ron's big moment? (WAS: Why Ron Loves Hermione)
In-Reply-To: <bkr0u4+3opf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bks405+in64@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81453

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tom Hugh" <dadrucchi at y...> 
wrote:
> Ravenclaw Bookworm said:
> 
> > Notice the qualifiers "according to" and "seemed to be."  And 
> > nothing was said about his episode of silliness.  This just 
screams 
> > *important clue* to me.  Thoughts on what they mean?
> 
> SNIP
> 

Dadruchi:
> It was a spell that one of the death eaters used, it was in the 
book, 
> did you miss it? Anyway, they probably lifted it later, like the 
> tarantalegra spell on Neville. Those uncertainties in language are 
> pretty common in brittish diction I would say.
> 
> I don?t think its anything to worry about.


Geoff:
I don't follow your statement... According to my OOTP, Ron is present 
when everybody uses the Reductor Curse to smash the shelves. When 
they get into the bell-jar room and seal the door, they then wonder 
where Ron, Luna and Ginny are.  We don't see Ron again until they are 
in the rotating room and the missing three come in through a 
different door and Ron is already confused.




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Wed Sep 24 12:54:42 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 12:54:42 -0000
Subject: Halloween 1981
In-Reply-To: <bkr1io+4gkh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bks46i+7lhv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81454

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "melpethaven" 
<melpethaven at y...> wrote:
> After reviewing many posts about what might have happened at 
Godric's 
> Hollow the night Harry's parents died...I have been thinking. Does 
> Harry know when his parents died?? By canon we know, therefore he 
> knows, where, how, who, and why but I can't find canon that he 
knows 
> when. 
> 
> 

<snip>


Frodo's Mum:
> Since noone volunteers info to Harry and he sure doesn't ask like a 
> normal kid, you would think by now almost sixteen years later 
someone 
> or at least Hermione would have mentioned it since it is part of 
> wizard history. Wouldn't that take the cake if he gets that info in 
> Prof Binn's history class?


Geoff:
Hagrid speaking:
"All anyone knows is, he turned up in the village where you was all 
living, on Hallowe'en ten years ago. You was just a year old."
(PS UK edition p.45)




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Wed Sep 24 13:02:30 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 13:02:30 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Spies
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20030924160156.031619b0@pop3.xtra.co.nz>
Message-ID: <bks4l6+crba@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81455

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Tanya Swaine <swaine.t at x> wrote:
> Jake wrote:
> >2) DD had an invisibility cloak that James "left with him."  Why 
did
> >James leave it with him?  Why would James give DD (a much more
> >powerful wizard, who, by his own admission does not need an
> >invisibility cloak to be invisible, an invisibility cloak)?
> >Answer:
> >DD had a spy at the Potters that fateful night.  I don't know who.
> 

Tanya:
> That is an interesting point.  However, the first thing that comes 
to my
> mind is the fact that Snape was more than once on the verge of
> discovering Harry under the cloak when he was in a room etc.  Just
> how well dose he know about it?  If I recall correctly, he was 
feeling
> ahead of him in one scene.  Considering no one else took that line.
> 


Geoff:
That has just raised a question in my mind. I checked Tanya's 
reference and it is in GOF, the chapter "The Egg and the Eye". The 
thought then occurred to me - perhaps someone can indicate chapter 
and verse - how does Snape know that Harry has an Invisibility Cloak?




From ffionmiles at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 24 13:18:51 2003
From: ffionmiles at hotmail.com (ffimiles)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 13:18:51 -0000
Subject: Ron's big moment? (WAS: Why Ron Loves Hermione)
In-Reply-To: <bks405+in64@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bks5jr+97l8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81456

"Tom Hugh" <dadrucchi at y...> 
> wrote:
> > Ravenclaw Bookworm said:
> > 
> > > Notice the qualifiers "according to" and "seemed to be."  And 
> > > nothing was said about his episode of silliness.  This just 
> screams 
> > > *important clue* to me.  Thoughts on what they mean?
> > 
> > SNIP
> > 
> 
> Dadruchi:
> > It was a spell that one of the death eaters used, it was in the 
> book, 
> > did you miss it? Anyway, they probably lifted it later, like the 
> > tarantalegra spell on Neville. Those uncertainties in language 
are 
> > pretty common in brittish diction I would say.
> > 
> > I don?t think its anything to worry about.
> 
> 
> Geoff:
> I don't follow your statement... According to my OOTP, Ron is 
present 
> when everybody uses the Reductor Curse to smash the shelves. When 
> they get into the bell-jar room and seal the door, they then wonder 
> where Ron, Luna and Ginny are.  We don't see Ron again until they 
are 
> in the rotating room and the missing three come in through a 
> different door and Ron is already confused.

I think tom was referring to Luna saying that she thought Ron had 
been hit be a spell or something, as the DEs were hitting them left 
right 'n' cetnre with spells in the planets room, and blew up one of 
the planets.  So from her assumption, we can assume that he was hit 
by some sort of curse/charm - e.g confundus or a really powerful 
cheering charm.

Ffi




From missygallant2000 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 13:39:39 2003
From: missygallant2000 at yahoo.com (Missy)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 13:39:39 -0000
Subject: Did I Miss Something?
In-Reply-To: <bkqf3g+s8o6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bks6qr+lnuo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81457

 (Since McGonagall is such a 
> > German sounding name- it should be leiderhosen?)
> > 
> > Missy
> 
> Geoff:
> Put the lederhosen back in the Kleiderschrank. I think Professor 
> McGonagall is Scots through and through. It's a pairfectly guid 
Scuts 
> name....
> 
> Have you not heard of the poet McGonagall in the 19th century who 
> wrote the most excruciating poetry including the lament on the Tay 
> Bridge railway disaster in 1879?

Yes- I am well aware that McGonagall is Scottish.  I just tend to 
lean towards the sarcastic.  McGonagall is actually a clan with their 
own tartan.

I am in the camp that doubts McGonagall is evil.  There just aren't 
enough indications of that for me, and far too many indications of 
her loyalty to Albus.  I do think there is a lot more to Minerva 
McGonagall's story, and I hope we find out about that in book 6.  
There are definitely some secrets in her past, but I do not believe 
that any of those secrets are that she is a death eater, or that she 
is evil, or anything like that.  

I am more inclined to believe that she is perhaps the missing 
Godmother for Harry.  But I do not believe she is a blood relative.  
Just someone who was very trusted by Harry and Lily, and is therefore 
interested in keeping Harry safe, and was upset about the fact that 
he would spend his childhood in such a horrible place. 

Missy




From entropymail at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 13:41:28 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 13:41:28 -0000
Subject: Snapes Dark Mark (was: Jewish Goblins?)
In-Reply-To: <bkq3nd+k16a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bks6u8+hide@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81458

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "feetmadeofclay"
<feetmadeofclay at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "entropymail" 
> <entropymail at y...> wrote:

But I also wanted to note something that strikes me every time JKR
mentions the Dark Mark.  The placement of the Mark on each Death 
Eater(the forearm; God, I love it when Snape pulls back the sleeve of
his robe to reveal his Mark to Fudge in GoF!) is quite similar to the
numbered tattoos which were inflicted upon prisoners of the German
concentration camps. 

Then Golly:
No it isn't!  DE chose to be Death Eaters. Victims of Hitler were
marked as prisoners.  Numbers were used to keep track of them.  It was
more accurate and efficient than marking the clothes. Snape has good
reason to be ashamed of his mark.  Victims of Hitler have no such reason.


Now me again:

Yes, but don't forget the last part of my post: "Of course, the DE
don't correlate with those in the concentration camps. If anything,
the DE would correlate more closely with the Nazis and Hitler Youth.
But I still think it's an interesting bit of imagery." I realize that
the DE's marking was most likely done willingly; the concentration
camp prisoners' was not.  But the imagery is still strikingly similar
(to me, anyway! <g>).

As for Snape showing his Mark to Fudge, it must surely be, if you
agree that he is now a former and reformed DE, something he is
mortally ashamed of. For him to willingly show it to Fudge, and have
him be reminded of Snape's illicit past after so many years of working
towards redemption, shows us that (1)Snape clearly perceives the
danger of this dire situation and is trying to convey this to Fudge in
the most immediate and alarming way he can think of and (2)his
strength of character is such that he would do something which is
obviously so distasteful to him, simply for the "greater good". Love
that Snapie!

:: Entropy ::







From missygallant2000 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 13:46:32 2003
From: missygallant2000 at yahoo.com (Missy)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 13:46:32 -0000
Subject: Facial expressions
In-Reply-To: <3F708D3E.5819.AA50469@localhost>
Message-ID: <bks77o+56ja@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81459

> My favorite is Ron, blissfully re-playing in his mind the sight of 
Draco, the Amazing Bouncing 
> WonderFerret.  ;->  I wish I had my books handy, so I could quote 
it.  I just love that bit.  :-D
> 
> ***
> Tammy
> tammy at m...

I like the one you mentioned.  But I think my favorite is when Harry 
and Ron have arrived at Hogwarts and crashed into the tree.  Harry 
quickly tells McGonagall that since they weren't officially in school 
yet, their house shouldn't have anything taken away.  She almost 
smiles.  Then agrees with them.

I also have a vivid image in my head of Harry knee deep in a stairway 
hiding under the invisibilty cloak, waving his arms frantically at 
Professor Moody.
Missy




From missygallant2000 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 14:33:30 2003
From: missygallant2000 at yahoo.com (Missy)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 14:33:30 -0000
Subject: Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <bkl5o4+cpme@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bks9vq+37uf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81460

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "troublenbass" 
<Notyourpoet at b...> wrote:
> Hello all. I am barely a grownup, but a college student whose 
mother is also a 
> part of this board. However, I do believe that I can add to the 
discussion.
> 
> I have a question - and I am not sure if it has been tackled in 
previous posts.
> 
> In GoF, Voldemort counts his Deatheaters:
> "And here we have six missing Death Eaters...three dead in my 
service. One, 
> too cowardly to return...he will pay. One, who I believe has left 
me forever...he 
> will be killed, of course. And one, who remains my most faithful 
servant, and 
> who has already reentered my service."
> p.651
> 
> Well, I know Crouch is the last one mentioned. Snape is either too 
cowardly or 
> has left forever - thus, who is the third?
> And who were the three that died?
> 
> Also, who is Sirius's brother...and where is he mentioned?


OK- forgive me, as OoP is at home, and so I can't remember the name 
of this kid I hadn't thought twice about until now.  BUT- when they 
meet the Thestrals, there is a Slytherin that can see them.  Could 
the relative he saw die be the third dead, missin DE?

I believe the cowardly and left forever are referring to Karkaroff 
(cowardly), and at the time, I thought Snape was the left forever.  
But now I wonder.  My bets are on Fudge.  (Just because I've worked 
in gov't and want the symbol of corrupt gov't to be evil)
Missy 




From altered.earth at ntlworld.com  Wed Sep 24 14:42:48 2003
From: altered.earth at ntlworld.com (digger)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:42:48 +0100
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Jewish Goblins?
In-Reply-To: <bks2ul+6nhr@eGroups.com>
References: <bks2ul+6nhr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F71AD68.4010908@ntlworld.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81461

Sorry , but I have got attributions hopelessly mangled in the process, 
and I apologise unreservedly in advance:


jwcpgh wrote:
> hpfanmatt at g... writes:
>  >
> <snip> The point, as I read it, is not that the Goblins are supposed
> to *represent* Jews, but that the *discrimination* against the
> Goblins is reminiscent of a certain brand of anti-Semitism --
> demonizing (goblinizing?) an entire group because some members are
> successful in business or, particularly, in finance.
> 
> Laura:

> I agree that JKR is trying to make a point about prejudice in the
> RW.  She does so most effectively without having to resort to
> caricatures.  Nemi is suggesting (if I'm reading the posts correctly)
> that the goblins, due to their money-handling ability and the wary
> distance wizards keep from them, are reminiscent of the Jews in
> Europe.  
> The Jews became moneylenders not as punishment per se but because
> Christian theology prevented Christians from engaging in this
> practice.  Jewish understanding of the morality of lending at
> interest is different from the traditional Christian one.  The
> prohibitions imposed on the Jews regarding engaging in various
> professions could, I suppose, be seen as a punishment-the crimes
> being deicide and refusing to see the error of their ways. But it
> wasn't direct and particular punishment for a direct and particular
> act, such as Nemi suggests with the goblins and their rebellions. 
> The anti-Jewish prohibitions grew over time, starting when the Roman
> Empire became Christian and proceeding from there.
> 

digger:
Lets not ascribe the moneylender/keeper in the middle ages exclusively 
to the Jewish community. The Medici family and the Knights Templar were 
both Christian organisations that exerted great political power by 
virtue of taking control of intercontinental banking in their time, 
albeit mostly after the Jews had been removed from this situation.

Let us think on the power that being owed money by someone conveys.
It drove Phillip IV (le Bel) to terrible acts against the Templars, and 
the Medicis suffered expulsion from Florence and loss of political 
power, precisely because they had foreign powers in such great debt to 
them. War was and is very expensive, and in the middle ages was funded 
by loans from Jews, Templars, and Medicis. If you want to wipe out your 
debt, wipe out the people that you are in hock to. Its an easy route to 
a more healthy cash flow!

I get the feeling Fudge has a MOM financial crisis looming that makes 
Ludo Bagman's look very small-time indeed, and that it will be crucial 
in the Goblins deciding whose side they are on. Bill Weasley will be on 
hand to help them in that decision. Why do I think so? Because of those 
'nutty' reports in The Quibbler about Fudge trying to take control of 
Gringotts. I have this odd feeling they are on a par with Ron's jokey 
predictions; they will prove to be true.

Roll on Book Six say I.

"digger"




From missygallant2000 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 14:50:20 2003
From: missygallant2000 at yahoo.com (Missy)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 14:50:20 -0000
Subject: Well-conveyed Facial Expressions (WAS Re: Did I Miss Something?)
In-Reply-To: <bkqjp1+hu5c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bksavc+5jjq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81462

Oh I have another one.  The look on Harry's face when the dwarf 
tackles him to sing him the Valentine, and the look on the faces of 
everyone standing around as the dwarf sings "His eyes are as green as 
a fresh pickled toad..."  LOL!  I have such a mental image of that 
bit.  
Missy




From missygallant2000 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 14:56:46 2003
From: missygallant2000 at yahoo.com (Missy)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 14:56:46 -0000
Subject: tame werewolf ?
In-Reply-To: <bkqapf+95d8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bksbbe+irhk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81463

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lziner" <lziner at y...> wrote:
> I was re-reading POA and had this thought.  If Lupin takes his 
> wolfsbane and is attacked, how could he fight back?  He couldn't 
use 
> a wand.  His mind would be that of a wizard but his body that of a 
> wolf.  Not much of a match for a DE. It might be time for dear 
Remus 
> to "go-off" the wolfsbane.  At least as a werewolf, he would be 
> ferocious and stand at least a "biting" chance in a battle.
> 
> Lziner

But why would he be attacked?  DE's go after human victims.  In his 
werewolf state, Lupin is no longer human.  His mind and body are that 
of a werewolf.  So why would the DE's go after him?

Remember that the way Sirius was able to escape was that he was a 
dog, and the DE's couldn't sense his human emotions.  And he just 
slipped through the bars.  

Why wouldn't it work that way with Lupin and his werewolf-ing self?

I know that the DE's can be ordered to attack, but is there something 
specific about Lupin as a werewolf that could be identified?  I 
really don't think he needs to worry about it.
Missy




From navarro198 at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 24 15:22:52 2003
From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:22:52 -0000
Subject: Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <bkq712+vlds@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkscsc+ulnm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81464

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tom Wall" <thomasmwall at y...> 
wrote:
First off, Bagman and Snape are at the Tournament and/or accounted 
for after the fact, as is McGonagall; since we know you can't 
apparate on the grounds, that pretty much solves that problem. 

Bookworm:
Does it?  I just skimmed Chapter 35 (Veretaserum) and found no 
mention of Bagman, and Snape and McGonnagal only appear about 10 
pages in when they arrive with Dumbledore in Fake!Moody's office.  
When Harry first comes to outside of the maze, the only people 
mentioned are Dumbledore, Fudge, and Fake!Moody.  They couldn't have 
apparated, but we know that portkeys definately work on Hogwarts 
grounds.

Tom: 
But he's the headmaster of Durmstrang, which is a Very Valuable 
Position that I'd be excited about, if *I* were the Dark Lord. *And* 
he's been teaching all of his students the Dark Arts, which isn't 
exactly what you could feasibly call a renunciation of the old ways.

Bookworm:
Karkaroff is still a mystery to me.  If he was a coward, I would 
think it would be easier for him to respond to Voldemort's summons 
than not.  (Think of how kids do what bullies tell them to do even 
when they are scared. They are usually more scared of getting 
beaten.) So there is something that scares him more than actually 
seeing Voldemort again. Such as fear of what Voldemort will do to 
him.  What did Karkaroff do after Voldemort's first defeat that 
might anger Voldemort?  If he was just afraid of a return to 
the "olden days" it seems strange that he would give up his post as 
Headmaster by literally running away.

Ravenclaw Bookworm




From marie_mouse at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 24 15:26:42 2003
From: marie_mouse at hotmail.com (Marie Jadewalker)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:26:42 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Philosophy (WAS:  MAGIC DISHWASHER: Spying Game Philosophy
In-Reply-To: <bkhm1q+896m@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bksd3i+4k82@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81465

First, a disclaimer.  I haven't read anywhere close to everything 
that people have used to speculate about the prophecy, so if this is 
plowing old ground, I sincerely appologize.  I know others have 
questioned Dumbledore's straightforward interpretation of the 
prophecy, and things Debbie said here made me see one reason why he 
may have done so.  

> Debbie:
> 
> Yes!  As a leader, Dumbledore uses a laissez-faire approach.  
> Dumbledore's dilemma is that his best weapon is Harry, a living 
> human being.  He does not manipulate others into doing what he 
> wants them to do, and certainly not Harry.  To give Harry all the 
> information at the beginning ? or even as soon as he asked ? would 
> be manipulative.  Because of the nature of the prophecy, it would 
> be the equivalent of telling Harry exactly what's expected of him.  
> It would be an attempt to control a weapon that he cannot control.  
> The best Dumbledore can do is to provide Harry with the tools he 
> will need if he chooses to take on the role.   As I see it, this is 
> Dumbledore's entire plan:  to keep Harry alive until he could 
> decide for himself.
> 
> In fact, one of the reasons I hated chapter 37, The Lost Prophecy, 
> was because I didn't ? and still don't ? see Dumbledore's decision 
> not to tell Harry about the prophecy sooner as a mistake.  What 
> Dumbledore now sees as a *mistake* was to treat Harry as a human 
> being and not as a weapon.
> 
[snip quote]
 
> I think Dumbledore overstates his error here; it is the lament of 
> one grieving the loss of Sirius.  The DEs were astonished to 
> discover that Harry did not know about the prophecy, because they 
> cannot conceive that Dumbledore would treat Harry as more than a 
> weapon.  Were it not for his and Harry's grief, I don't think he 
> would ever assert that caring for Harry for himself was a mistake, 
> because that's the great divide that separates good from evil.  

[snip]

> And isn't it Dumbledore's heart that allowed Harry the freedom to 
> grow in the understanding that leads him to make the choices he 
> makes?  Dumbledore lets others learn things for themselves because 
> he values them as human beings and not as occupiers of particular 
> roles.  Harry was no exception.  Dumbledore's refusal to use Harry 
> in the way the DEs expected him to may have resulted in Sirius' 
> death, but it may have saved Harry, and will save countless others 
> down the road if the end result is to vanquish Voldemort in the 
> future.  If Dumbledore had simply told Harry at age 11 what he was 
> expected to do, Harry might have rebelled.  Why should he sacrifice 
> himself for Dumbledore, whose idea of TLC was to leave him with the 
> Dursleys?  And in OOP, Harry *did* rebel, in large part because he 
> thought Dumbledore didn't care about him.
> 
> I've never been part of the MD camp, and don't get there after OOP, 
> notwithstanding Dumbledore's references to his plan.  See, I think 
> Dumbledore's plan was to keep Harry alive until he gained enough 
> understanding to choose for himself whether to accept the 
> responsibility of being the weapon.  The lie that Pip points out 
> (claiming that Dumbledore's Army is his own creation) is made to 
> protect Harry at nobody's expense but his own.  And I also think 
> Dumbledore has done it exactly right, notwithstanding his own 
> protestations to the contrary.
> 
> The conflict between our love of humanity and our love for 
> individuals has always existed, and being a leader means that 
> sometimes very hard choices must be made.  Dumbledore has told 
> Harry something he did not want to have to tell him because he 
> cared about him.  But if a plan to improve the condition of 
> humanity is not combined with a love of those humans as 
> individuals, then people are nothing more than weapons.  Dumbledore 
> won't make Harry his weapon; Harry must choose that for himself.  
> To be honest, Harry seems to have chosen to be the weapon even 
> without Dumbledore's information.

As numerous people have observed, it is very important to Dumbledore 
that people be allowed to make choices.  I also somehow doubt that 
the prophecy will end up being as simple as the kill-or-be-killed 
interpretation that Dumbledore let Harry leave his office with.  How 
do those two things fit together?  Well, I agree that Dumbledore was 
questioning his past choices because he was grieving for Sirius 
(although I don't think he made particularly bad choices either), but 
there may be more to it than that.  

What if Dumbledore HAS worked out another possible interpretation of 
the prophecy?  What if he believes that the only way for Voldemort to 
be permanently vanquished is for Harry to be unwilling to kill him, 
even if not doing so would mean his own death?  If Harry's current 
anguish about having to become a murderer persists, he might make 
that choice, even if he believes he can kill Voldemort.  So even if 
Dumbledore realizes that the outcome of this hypothetical encounter 
would not be Harry's death, Harry has to believe it would be.  
Because only then can he make the truly noble choice TO die because 
to do otherwise would make him someone he doesn't want to be, someone 
who would see himself as unworthy of love (as his self reflection 
seems to indicate).  We know (or believe, anyway) that Lily's self-
sacrificial love of Harry stopped Voldemort the first time and forged 
a link between Voldemort and Harry.  I think Dumbledore may believe 
Harry's power that the Dark Lord knows not lies in his unwillingness 
to kill, but if Dumbledore tells him that directly, it will nullify 
Harry's choice.  He cannot truly choose to die rather than kill if he 
thinks that doing so would not actually result in his death, and that 
is why Dumbledore let him make such a simplistic interpretation of 
the prophecy.  He respects Harry's right to choose, and more than 
that, he knows that the choice will have to be genuine to be 
effective.  

I think he is also, as others have discussed, trying to help Harry 
become the person who would make the right choice.  Not directly, but 
through conversations like the one in POA when he praised him for 
showing mercy to Peter
 perhaps it is not Peter who will eventually 
save him.  Perhaps Harry's final salvation will come not through 
Harry being the kind of person who WOULD show mercy to not just a 
Peter Petigrew who was weak and cowardly, but even to a Tom Riddle 
who is a merciless killer.  Voldemort certainly would not understand 
that sort of thought.  And that might just be his undoing.    

~Marie  




From missygallant2000 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 15:31:54 2003
From: missygallant2000 at yahoo.com (Missy)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:31:54 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Spies
In-Reply-To: <bks4l6+crba@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bksdda+a7hi@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81466

> 
> Geoff:
> That has just raised a question in my mind. I checked Tanya's 
> reference and it is in GOF, the chapter "The Egg and the Eye". The 
> thought then occurred to me - perhaps someone can indicate chapter 
> and verse - how does Snape know that Harry has an Invisibility 
Cloak?

Because he saw Harry remove it in CoS.  And while it was laying on 
the ground, Snape put it on.  Snape probably assumed Harry took it 
with him when they all left the shrieking shack.  

Missy




From missygallant2000 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 15:44:52 2003
From: missygallant2000 at yahoo.com (Missy)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:44:52 -0000
Subject: Wormtail and non-prophecy activities
In-Reply-To: <bkqoc9+48i7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkse5k+q0h5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81467

I haven't the vaguest notion where Scabbers was during this year.  
The turning himself into a rat and doing some spying is a theory.  

I will say I do not think he was at Grimmauld Place.  I believe the 
scratching you refer to was Phinneus going in and out of the picture 
on the wall in the boy's bedroom.

As for Scabbers, perhaps he's on a mission different than what you 
described.  He is supposedly dead, and at this point, LV doesn't want 
to tip his hand too much.  Pettigrew shoing up and saying "HI England-
 Here I am, sorry about that being dead bit" would not fit into LV's 
plan.  Peter is perhaps staying close to LV to continue to grovel and 
simper and care for him.  Or he is most likely on special missions 
recruiting help in other parts of the world.  (Probably Europe)

Missy




From lziner at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 16:09:34 2003
From: lziner at yahoo.com (lziner)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 16:09:34 -0000
Subject: tame werewolf ?
In-Reply-To: <bksbbe+irhk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bksfju+6r9e@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81468

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Missy" <missygallant2000 at y...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lziner" <lziner at y...> wrote:
> > <snip> Remus  to "go-off" the wolfsbane.  At least as a werewolf, 
he would be 
> > ferocious and stand at least a "biting" chance in a battle.
> > 
> > Lziner
> 
>  But why would he be attacked?  DE's go after human victims.  In 
his 
> werewolf state, Lupin is no longer human.  His mind and body are 
that 
> of a werewolf.  So why would the DE's go after him?
> 
> Remember that the way Sirius was able to escape was that he was a 
> dog, and the DE's couldn't sense his human emotions.  And he just 
> slipped through the bars.  
> 
> Why wouldn't it work that way with Lupin and his werewolf-ing self?
> 
> I know that the DE's can be ordered to attack, but is there 
something 
> specific about Lupin as a werewolf that could be identified?  I 
> really don't think he needs to worry about it.
> Missy

I think you misunderstood my post.  
1.  Lupin is a order member so any DE would go after him in any form
2.  Sirius escaped Dementors not DE's
3.  On wolfsbane, he keeps his wizard mind but stays in his werewolf 
body which I think may be dangerous for him. (no wand)
lz






From Koinonia2 at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 24 16:11:22 2003
From: Koinonia2 at hotmail.com (koinonia02)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 16:11:22 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Spies
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20030924160156.031619b0@pop3.xtra.co.nz>
Message-ID: <bksfna+4n65@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81469

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Tanya Swaine 
<swaine.t at x>Message 81441 
 
>That is an interesting point. However, the first thing that comes 
>to my mind is the fact that Snape was more than once on the verge of
>discovering Harry under the cloak when he was in a room etc. Just
>how well dose he know about it? If I recall correctly, he was 
>feeling ahead of him in one scene. Considering no one else took 
>that line.


"K":
I hear this often but have yet to find where Snape is on the verge 
of discovering Harry under the cloak. I can't find that in the 
books. The only place where Snape appears to sense Harry is in the 
movie and that scene is totally different from canon.


Geoff/Message 81455

>That has just raised a question in my mind. I checked Tanya's 
>reference and it is in GOF, the chapter "The Egg and the Eye". The 
>thought then occurred to me - perhaps someone can indicate chapter 
>and verse - how does Snape know that Harry has an Invisibility 
>Cloak?

"K": 

Yes, but in that chapter Snape has his hands out like a blind man. 
He doesn't appear to see Harry. 

GoF
But Snape's black eyes were darting from the egg in Filch's arms to 
the map in Moody's hand, and Harry could tell he was putting two and 
two together, as only Snape could...

"Potter," he said quietly.
~~~~~~~~

It is only after this that Snape mentions he believes Potter is 
there in the Invisibility Cloak. It is then that Snape stretchs out 
his hands.

Of course some might say Snape can indeed see Harry but is 
just 'acting' as if he can't. Snape did, after all, make an effort 
to have Filch leave the area with him. I guess it all depends on how 
much acting one thinks Snape is doing in the books. ;-)

"K"







From navarro198 at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 24 16:25:05 2003
From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 16:25:05 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Spies
In-Reply-To: <bksdda+a7hi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bksgh1+1j9l@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81470

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Missy" 
<missygallant2000 at y...> wrote:
> > 
> > Geoff:
> > That has just raised a question in my mind. I checked Tanya's 
> > reference and it is in GOF, the chapter "The Egg and the Eye". 
The 
> > thought then occurred to me - perhaps someone can indicate 
chapter 
> > and verse - how does Snape know that Harry has an Invisibility 
> Cloak?
> 
> Because he saw Harry remove it in CoS.  And while it was laying on 
> the ground, Snape put it on.  Snape probably assumed Harry took it 
> with him when they all left the shrieking shack.  
> 
> Missy

Snape didn't actually see Harry remove it.  (CoS, Ch19, p358 US) "I 
found this at the base of the Whomping Willow," said Snape, throwing 
the cloak aside, careful to keep this [sic] wand pointing directly 
at Lupin's chest."Very useful, Potter, I thank you...."

How did he know it was Harry's?  Lucky guess?

Ravenclaw Bookworm




From psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 23 13:53:29 2003
From: psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com (psychobirdgirl)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:53:29 -0000
Subject: The Phoenix & the wand
In-Reply-To: <bkotoh+65lp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkpj8p+34qu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81471

Bboy wrote:

> What happens to Voldemort's wand when he dies; tricky question. 
What
> happened to Grindlewald's wand when Dumbledore defeated him? What
> happened to James and Lily's wands? For that matter what will 
happen
> to Dumbledore's wand when he dies?
> 
> My guess is, assuming they are not buried with them, that either 
they
> are returned to the next of kin as personal property, or in the 
case
> of no next of kin, they are held in a Ministry evidence storage 
room. 
> 
> I can't prove that, so it's not much more than a guess.


now me(psychobirdgirl):

  I think that the wand going to the next of kin is a big 
possibility, considering that Neville has been using his dads wand 
this whole time.


psychobirdgirl





From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz  Wed Sep 24 09:00:23 2003
From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 21:00:23 +1200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Did Voldemort kill Petunia & Lily's
  parents?
In-Reply-To: <bkqe6v+2d0i@eGroups.com>
References: <bkprpc+kjjv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20030924205714.03213560@pop3.xtra.co.nz>

No: HPFGUIDX 81472

Lawtrainer wrote:

>See post 77807, it refers to the theory that Petunia is a squib,
>hence the jealousy/hatred she feels at her sister being a wizard.


This is entirely possible, but my question is, when it was said about
Squibs in the books.  It referred to children of both pure bloods, and
that child having no magical powers.  Now what confuses me is that
how could Petunia be a squib if her parents were muggles?  Wouldn't
she just be an ordinary muggle in that case?

Tanya





From melpethaven at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 12:28:19 2003
From: melpethaven at yahoo.com (melpethaven)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 12:28:19 -0000
Subject: Wormtail and non-prophecy activities
In-Reply-To: <bkqoc9+48i7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bks2l3+jfqj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81473

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Paul Smith" <suzie_t666 at h...> 
wrote:
> I don't think anyone else has questioned this, but for me it's one 
of 
> the biggest mysteries to come out of OOP: where was Wormtail for 
the 
> entire year? He is referred to a couple of times, we saw him in 
> Snape's memory but we are never given information about what he's 
up 
> to. And there was me waiting excitedly for what he might do with 
his 
> new silver super-hand! I've given it a little thought and I suppose 
> Wormtail's abscence might be due to a mission he is completing for 
> Voldemort. > 
> > Okay, I have to admit I don't have any clue as to what Wormtail 
could 
> have been doing for a whole year that would keep him out of Harry's 
> way. If he'd been at Hogwarts Crookshanks would have been on his 
> tail; if he's been the one communicating with the Dementors why 
> didn't they suck out his soul (takes messages to them as a rat?), 
and 
> what else is there?
> 
> Best guess is that he is at Hogwarts lying very low. I doubt that 
Mrs Norris and Crookshanks are the only cats there, just the only 
ones mentioned in canon. It is a big castle with probably a lot of 
rodents to satisfy any palate. Besides he knows that M.Map. He helped 
write it. He knows every hiding place and then some. He is the new 
spy at Hogwarts. Hope he doesn't organize the rats.(shades of "Ben")
Need more cats!!!Oh..Oh.. don't snakes eat rats and mice?? 
Frodo's MUM





From feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca  Wed Sep 24 13:02:52 2003
From: feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca (feetmadeofclay)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 13:02:52 -0000
Subject: Apparating
In-Reply-To: <bks333+ijq0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bks4ls+kd3j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81474

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Potterfanme" <fc26det at a...> 
wrote:

> Obviously everyone is free to come and go as they please as 
evidenced 
> in OOP when the DA leaves on the Thestrals.  Could there be some 
sort 
> of spell on the gates to let someone know when a person passes 
> through them?  Of course, if this was the case, Snape would have 
> known or been able to find out if the DA had left the grounds.  Too 
> many questions!
> 
> Susan-who always enjoys a little friendly banter with Golly!!

Golly: I find it really interesting that some rules are bound by 
magic and others are not.  For instance the houses are secretly 
placed and Gryffindor is protected by an enchanted portrait.  

Quills are magiked to prevent cheating.  Apparating onto the grounds 
is not blocked, but kids are not kept magically on the grounds.  

It would be interesting to know why there is no spell to make sure 
that kids don't go into the forest or off the grounds. Presumably 
magical wards are possible.  

Golly





From moviebec at yahoo.com.au  Wed Sep 24 13:25:57 2003
From: moviebec at yahoo.com.au (moviebec)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 13:25:57 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Spies
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20030924160156.031619b0@pop3.xtra.co.nz>
Message-ID: <bks615+rog9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81475

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Tanya Swaine <swaine.t at x> wrote:
> Jake wrote:
> >2) DD had an invisibility cloak that James "left with him."  Why 
did
> >James leave it with him?  Why would James give DD (a much more
> >powerful wizard, who, by his own admission does not need an
> >invisibility cloak to be invisible, an invisibility cloak)?
> >Answer:
> >DD had a spy at the Potters that fateful night.  I don't know who.
> 
> That is an interesting point.  However, the first thing that comes 
to my
> mind is the fact that Snape was more than once on the verge of
> discovering Harry under the cloak when he was in a room etc.  Just
> how well dose he know about it?  If I recall correctly, he was 
feeling
> ahead of him in one scene.  Considering no one else took that line.
> 
> Tanya

Maybe the invisibility cloak was confiscated by DD while James was 
still at school. We know James and Sirius were rivaled only by the 
weasley twins for the mischeif they got up to. Sirius himself has 
admitted in OoP that the pair often were in detention at the same 
time but in separate locations, as they would communicate via the 
pair of enchanted mirrors. Maybe both James and DD forgot about the 
confiscated cloak. In PS/SS DD realised he'd need to give Harry an 
appropriate tool to find the mirror of erised, James' invisibility 
cloak, without being caught out of bed at night by other staff, 
namely Snape as Tanya pointed out above.

moviebec






From raps29 at aol.com  Wed Sep 24 14:24:37 2003
From: raps29 at aol.com (raps029)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 14:24:37 -0000
Subject: Did Voldemort kill Petunia & Lily's parents?
In-Reply-To: <bkprpc+kjjv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bks9f5+l168@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81476

> Ruth:
> 
> > I've been developing a theory about Petunia's feelings toward 
> Harry.  
> > I also think that Voldemort killed Harry's grandparents, possibly 
> > before Harry was born.  Petunia blamed Lily and WW for the death 
of 
> > her parents and kept herself from feeling the pain of loss by 
> > refusing to have anything to do them.   
> > 
<parts snipped>
>
>meltowne:
>
>There's still something we're missing about the 
> family - why were they so excited about Lily being a witch, and why 
> did that make Petunia hate her?  In PS/SS she hadn't seen her 
sister 
> in several years.


Ruth again:

We see several examples of muggle parents being proud of their 
magical children:

Justin Finch-Fletchley says "...I think she's [His mother] begun to 
see how useful it'll be to have a fully trained wizard in the 
family..."  CoS pg 94 US 

Hermione's parents are proud of her and I have the impression that 
the Creevey's are happy about their sons.

I think most parents would be glad to have someone with magical 
talent in the family.  I know I would :)

We don't know that Petunia hated Lily when she was a student at 
Hogwarts, although she may have been jealous of her.  My theory is 
that Petunia had stayed away from Lily since the murder of her 
parents.  James told her that when the murderers were caught they 
would be sentenced to the wizard prison.  That's why she knows about 
the dementors.  

Ruth





From jakejensen at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 24 16:44:24 2003
From: jakejensen at hotmail.com (jakedjensen)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 16:44:24 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Spies
In-Reply-To: <bksfna+4n65@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkshl8+2k10@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81477

I must admit that when I originally posted this "spy theory" I 
secretly thought Snape might have been DD's "wizard on the spot."  
However, it is also possible that someone else was there spying for 
DD.  Here are some possibilities:

1) Mundungus Fletcher
2) One of the Weasleys
3) Lupin
4) Mad-eye Moody
5) Figg
6) Hagrid (not a great "spy," but he was the first person there)
7) One of the Longbottoms

Jake

PS.  Someone backchanneled me asking, "why do I think DD even knew 
where the Potter's were since he wasn't their secret keeper?"  If I 
understand that spell correctly, only the secret keeper can tell 
another person the secret.  So, Sirius or Wormtail could have told DD 
where the Potters were, without sacrificing the location, because DD 
could not tell others.  Moreover, the secret keeper could tell all of 
the "spies" without sacrificing the secret as well.  For more info on 
this, see OOTP (Grimauld Place).   




From navarro198 at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 24 16:54:25 2003
From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 16:54:25 -0000
Subject: Ron's experience in MoM (WAS Ron's big moment?)
In-Reply-To: <bks5jr+97l8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bksi81+5p7j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81478

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ffimiles" <ffionmiles at h...> 
wrote:
> > Geoff:
> > I don't follow your statement... According to my OOTP, Ron is 
> present when everybody uses the Reductor Curse to smash the 
shelves. When they get into the bell-jar room and seal the door, 
they then wonder where Ron, Luna and Ginny are.  We don't see Ron 
again until they are in the rotating room and the missing three come 
in through a different door and Ron is already confused.

> Ffi:
> I think tom was referring to Luna saying that she thought Ron had 
> been hit be a spell or something, as the DEs were hitting them 
left right 'n' cetnre with spells in the planets room, and blew up 
one of the planets.  So from her assumption, we can assume that he 
was hit by some sort of curse/charm - e.g confundus or a really 
powerful cheering charm.

Bookworm:
There isn't anything in the scene about planets - that was my 
interpretation based on Ron's joke. (US p787-796) When they use the 
Reductor Curse, they smashed the glass spheres holding the 
prophecies.  Then Harry, Hermione, and Neville run into the bell-jar 
room (with the time-turners), notice Ron, Ginny and Luna are 
missing, then fight their way into the rotating hallway.  Ron, Ginny 
and Luna rejoin the others in the hallway.  Luna tells Harry, "I 
don't know what they hit him with <snip> but's he's gone a bit 
funny, I could hardly get him along at all..."  From there they ran 
into the Brain Room.

It makes me wonder how Ron "saw Uranus", especially after reading 
Granny's post #81427 which reads in part: "This planet also
rules the breaking up of any established patterns or structures, 
creating sudden -- even radical change."  Which ties in *very* 
nicely with Pip!Squeak's excellent theory (post #81010) about 
Dumbledore's goals.

Ravenclaw Bookworm




From navarro198 at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 24 17:29:19 2003
From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 17:29:19 -0000
Subject: Do wizards have wills?
In-Reply-To: <bkr1s6+64l6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bksk9f+54nf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81479

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "moviebec" <moviebec at y...> 
wrote:
> Hi,
> This is my first post so feel free to shoot me down if this has 
been 
> discussed before, but do wizards have wills?
> I have wondered since reading OoP what will happen to sirius' 
> possesions, ie, the Black family house as its being used as 
> headquarters. 

Welcome.  This has been discussed before - many times, so there 
seems to be interest in the subject. If yahoomort is feeling 
friendly try a search on "inheritance".  I just did and got about 5 
pages of links.  Lot's of discussions back and forth.  Have fun.
Ravenclaw Bookworm




From missygallant2000 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 17:33:45 2003
From: missygallant2000 at yahoo.com (Missy)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 17:33:45 -0000
Subject: tame werewolf ?
In-Reply-To: <bksfju+6r9e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkskhp+j4t8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81480

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lziner" <lziner at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Missy" 
<missygallant2000 at y...> 
> wrote:
> > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lziner" <lziner at y...> 
wrote:
> > > <snip> Remus  to "go-off" the wolfsbane.  At least as a 
werewolf, 
> he would be 
> > > ferocious and stand at least a "biting" chance in a battle.
> > > 
> > > Lziner
> > 
> >  But why would he be attacked?  DE's go after human victims.  In 
> his 
> > werewolf state, Lupin is no longer human.  His mind and body are 
> that 
> > of a werewolf.  So why would the DE's go after him?
> > 
> > Remember that the way Sirius was able to escape was that he was a 
> > dog, and the DE's couldn't sense his human emotions.  And he just 
> > slipped through the bars.  
> > 
> > Why wouldn't it work that way with Lupin and his werewolf-ing 
self?
> > 
> > I know that the DE's can be ordered to attack, but is there 
> something 
> > specific about Lupin as a werewolf that could be identified?  I 
> > really don't think he needs to worry about it.
> > Missy
> 
> I think you misunderstood my post.  
> 1.  Lupin is a order member so any DE would go after him in any form
> 2.  Sirius escaped Dementors not DE's
> 3.  On wolfsbane, he keeps his wizard mind but stays in his 
werewolf 
> body which I think may be dangerous for him. (no wand)
> lz

Oh dear Heavens!  I am a dink.  OK- now I know the answer to how many 
days in a row can I sit on the floor until my boss buys me a new desk 
before my brain turns to jello.

You are so right.  I read that post, took a left turn at Albequerque 
and somehow wound up in Albus Dumbledore's dunce corner.  

Yes the DE's would go after Lupin, if they could find him.  As long 
as he's in Grimmauld, and DD doesn't tell anyone where the Order's 
headquarter's is, the DE's shouldn't be able to find him.

But to be on the safe side, he should continue to take the potion.  I 
agree with the poster who said that we don't want the DE's turned to 
werwolves.  Just imagine how much dangerous that would make the 
situation.  28 nights a month they just try to kill you, the other 
two they'll either kill you or make you a killer.  No that is no good 
at all.

Lupin should take the potion, and have a guard or two to watch out 
for him while he's a wolf and sleeping it off in a corner.  The guard 
coulds then protect him in the event of an attack.  Of course, I 
wouldn't recommend Mundungus for this job.

Missy (who is very sorry for her mental lapse into delirium or 
whatever it was that caused her to be stupid about the original post.)




From navarro198 at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 24 17:34:14 2003
From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 17:34:14 -0000
Subject: The Phoenix & the Snowy Owl  (was The Phoenix & the Wand)
In-Reply-To: <bkrbdv+ipe8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkskim+8n8p@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81481

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hedwigstalons" 
<hedwigstalons at y...> wrote:
> n_longbottom01: 
> > If Harry is going to get a new pet at some point in the series, 
I think there is a good chance that it will be Fawkes.
>  
> <snip>
> 
HedwigsTalons:
<snip> Anyway, if Harry does inherit Fawkes, then maybe he 
> gives Hedwig to someone else, or Hedwig chooses a new "master" 
> herself -- perhaps Neville?
> 

Is there a reason Harry can't have two pets?
Ravenclaw Bookworm




From missygallant2000 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 17:41:42 2003
From: missygallant2000 at yahoo.com (Missy)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 17:41:42 -0000
Subject: Wormtail and non-prophecy activities
In-Reply-To: <bks2l3+jfqj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bksl0m+a6i0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81482


> > 
> > Best guess is that he is at Hogwarts lying very low. I doubt that 
> Mrs Norris and Crookshanks are the only cats there, just the only 
> ones mentioned in canon. It is a big castle with probably a lot of 
> rodents to satisfy any palate. Besides he knows that M.Map. He 
helped 
> write it. He knows every hiding place and then some. He is the new 
> spy at Hogwarts. Hope he doesn't organize the rats.(shades of "Ben")
> Need more cats!!!Oh..Oh.. don't snakes eat rats and mice?? 
> Frodo's MUM

There are a lot of cats.  Just none of them belong to central 
characters.  But WAY back in Sorcerer's Stone, the first time Harry 
boards the Hogwarts Express it talks about there being cats of every 
color walking around.  So, I'd bet a lot of kids bring their cats.  
(I know I would, but it would be hard to decide on just one of them.)

Missy




From eschaafin at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 16:30:33 2003
From: eschaafin at yahoo.com (Sophie)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 16:30:33 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Spies
In-Reply-To: <bks4l6+crba@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bksgr9+js02@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81483

Geoff:
> That has just raised a question in my mind. I checked Tanya's 
> reference and it is in GOF, the chapter "The Egg and the Eye". The 
> thought then occurred to me - perhaps someone can indicate chapter 
> and verse - how does Snape know that Harry has an Invisibility Cloak?



I'm not sure if Snape knew earlier, but by the last line of ch. 18 in
PoA, we know that Snape knows of its existance.  And at teh beginning
of ch. 19, he reveals that he knows it's Potters.  "I found this at
the base of the whomping willow,"..... "Very useful, Potter, I thank
you...."


Sophie





From eschaafin at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 16:51:16 2003
From: eschaafin at yahoo.com (Sophie)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 16:51:16 -0000
Subject: Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <bkscsc+ulnm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bksi24+j4ae@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81484

I've been trying to figure out some of Voldemort's motivations in the
graveyard scene when he names some of the Death eaters. He doesn't
seem to deliberatly skip any of them, just kind of randomly names or
talks to  some of them.  My assumption about lord thingy's personality
is that he would have named Snape, Bagman, Fudge,  any of the people
that Harry knows, to show Harry how much deceit there is, and how
worthless Dumbledore's cause is.
Along the lines of, 'See how much ofthe government I control?' 
Voldemort had absolutly no intention of letting Harry live through the
night, so he wouldn't have feared that Harry would go back to
Dumbledore and say, 'guess who else is a death eater!!'

But on the other hand, maybe Voldemort was so uninterested in Harry,
that he completely ingnored the chance to cause additional emotional
trauma to him.



Sophie






From dcyasser at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 18:35:37 2003
From: dcyasser at yahoo.com (dcyasser)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 18:35:37 -0000
Subject: Ron's experience in MoM (WAS Ron's big moment?)
In-Reply-To: <bksi81+5p7j@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkso5p+838h@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81485

> Bookworm:
> There isn't anything in the scene about planets - that was my 
> interpretation based on Ron's joke. (US p787-796) 
<snip>
> 
> It makes me wonder how Ron "saw Uranus", especially after reading 
> Granny's post #81427 which reads in part: "This planet also
> rules the breaking up of any established patterns or structures, 
> creating sudden -- even radical change."  Which ties in *very* 
> nicely with Pip!Squeak's excellent theory (post #81010) about 
> Dumbledore's goals.

> Ravenclaw Bookworm

Right before Ron's joke, Luna says "Four of them chased us into a 
dark room full of planets, it was a very odd place, some of the time 
we were just floating in the dark-" (US hardcover p.795) 

dc, still wondering which way this leads Ron




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Wed Sep 24 19:01:40 2003
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 19:01:40 -0000
Subject: Ron's experience in MoM (WAS Ron's big moment?)
In-Reply-To: <bkso5p+838h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkspmk+2q1i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81486

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dcyasser" 
<dcyasser at y...> wrote:

> Right before Ron's joke, Luna says "Four of them chased us 
into a  dark room full of planets, it was a very odd place, some of 
the time  we were just floating in the dark-" (US hardcover p.795) 
> 

Am I the only one who thinks Ron must have had a close 
encounter with Jupiter, planet of mirth (thus the word 'jovial') and 
kingship? There are hints associating Ron and the Weasleys 
with royalty all through the series.

Pippin




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Wed Sep 24 19:08:59 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 19:08:59 -0000
Subject: BADD ANGST TBAY, Part II
Message-ID: <bksq4b+onkl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81487


It's a new day in Theory Bay: The sun is shining brightly, reflecting 
off the highly-polished MAGIC DISHWASHER in the Safe House. The storm 
brewing in the bay has subsided for the moment, as has the raucous 
party at the Safe House. 
 
Pip!Squeak and Melody are out front, talking animatedly to each other 
and occasionally casting bemused glances at the new boat in the Bay, 
the S.S. BADD ANGST. This rather Leaky Vessel attempted to crash 
their party, and is now docked several feet away; Captain Remnant and 
First Mate Jen seem to be doing a little repair work--patching a 
crack here, mending a sail there, generally making the boat fit for a 
long-term excursion around the bay.
 
A forlorn figure is polishing a slightly battered canon on board, 
muttering to himself under his breath. Stoned!Harry casts a fierce 
look at the Safe House and continues to mutter about the party, 
lamenting the fact that no one would let him "just TRY a fire 
whiskey...butterbeer, butterbeer--I'm sick of butterbeer and pumpkin 
juice! I'm 15 YEARS OLD and I happen to know a whole lot more than 
anyone gives me credit for." 
 
Jen, sensing a disturbance in the field, tries to console Stoned!
Harry, "of course you do, dear! You are VERY bright and talented and 
don't worry--before you know it, you'll be old enough for fire whisky 
and wishing you were young again!"
 
Stoned Harry turns to glare at Jen now, swiping the canon with wild 
abandon and looking as if he might take a whack at Jen, "That's it! 
I've done more than ALL of you, even more than Dumbledore!" Jen, 
taking a step back in shock, covers her mouth with one hand and grabs 
the railing to steady herself with the other. Captain Remnant, a 
slightly amused expression on his face said, "You've done it now Jen--
you get to handle this one! Why don't you take our refurbished vessel 
out for a spin with Stoned!Harry--and explain a little more about 
Dumbledore while you're at it? Oh, and load up the new canon on the 
way!" Captain Remnant, who is a fair and amiable captain and doesn't 
mind sharing the shipboard duties, then disappears under deck....
 
Stoned!Harry takes a few more abysmal slaps at the canon with his 
towel, sits down and covers his face in his hands. Jen hears him 
muttering about Dumbledore, "he ignored me all year....he made a 
MISTAKE......" Uncovering his face, Stoned! Harry glares at Jen, "And 
I overheard Pip!Squeak at the party last night saying he has a 
Agenda, something to do with a Fire! Tell me what that means, and 
don't mollycoddle me!" 
 
Jen, whose urge to so-call *mollycoddle* Stoned!Harry is ebbing away, 
takes a deep breath, collects her thoughts and steers out into the 
Bay for a second spin aboard the BADD ANGST. "Alright," she says 
finally, her anger subsided, "I'll tell you what I understand about 
Dumbledore and his Plan."
 
"Well, go on then," Stoned Harry says defiantly, "will this have as 
much Bang as Dumbledore and the Fire?"
 
**********************************************************************
Well, no. This version of Dumbledore's Plan is not splashy, no 
parties will be held in its honor and surely Stoned!Harry will lose 
interest before we're done. But there is a little angst, a little 
prophecy, and a light to be shed on the mysterious character who is 
Dumbledore..... This is a long one, and some will argue--"this is 
canon, not a theory!" Yes, there is much that is proven, but in light 
of the updated MAGIC DISHWASHER theory and the fact we have two books 
to go, I'd say where Dumbldore goes from here IS still speculative. 
 
So while much of this theory is a comment on who Dumbledore is, his 
*Plan* is still open to possibilities.......one of which is BADD 
ANGST--"Boundaries Always Direct Dumbledore's Actions-Now Go Stop 
Tom! (All canon from US versions).
 
Dumbledore's Philosophy:

To fully understand Dumbledore's Plan we must explore Dumbledore's 
Philosophy, the core being his belief in Free Choice. Much has been 
said and written about Dumbledore's views on free will and every 
person's ability to choose his/her own thoughts and actions. And just 
as Dumbledore believes strongly in the freedom of choice, he also 
respects the limitations this belief places on anyone who wants to 
foster change:
 
"It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than 
our abilities." (COS, chap.18, p. 333) (Interesting debate on this 
one, post 81223, CatLady)
 
Dumbledore, speaking to Fudge in "The Parting of the Ways" in GOF 
(chap. 36,p. 708): " You place too much importance, and you always 
have done, on the so-called purity of blood! You fail to recognize 
that it matters not what someone is born, but what they grow to be!"
 
"I have no power to make other men see the truth, or to overrule the 
Minister for Magic...." (Dumbledore, POA, chap. 21,p. 393)
 
"...Hasn't your experience with the Time-Turner taught you anything, 
Harry? The consequences of our actions are so complicated, so 
diverse, that predicting the future is very difficult, indeed....." 
(Dumbledore, POA chap. 21, p. 426).

Lord Voldemort is the ultimate opponent of free choice; His agenda, 
to force others to do his bidding by any means possible--or be 
killed, is in direct opposition with Dumbledore's core philosophy. 
Therefore, Dumbledore's goal is for LV to be defeated. And we know 
this is Dumbledore's goal because he explicitly states this:

"The only one against whom I intend to work," said Dumbledore, "is 
Lord Voldemort. If you are against him, then we remain, Cornelius, on 
the same side."  (GOF, chap. 36, p. 709).


Dumbledore's Plan:

Dumbledore employs a three-part plan in the fight against Lord 
Voldemort, intending to first impede LV's progress and bring him out 
in the open (achieved in OOTP) and ultimately, to defeat him once and 
for all.

1. Creating a strong and unified counterforce--

"Time is short, and unless the few of us who know the truth stand 
united, there is no hope for any of us." (Dumbledore, GOF, chap. 36, 
p. 712)
 
"The second step you must take--and at once," Dumbledore pressed 
on, "is to send envoys to the giants." (GOF, Chapter 36, p. 708)
 
"I say to you all, once again--in the light of Lord Voldemort's 
return, we are only as strong as we are united, as weak as we are 
divided.....Differences of habit and language are nothing at all if 
our aims are identical and our hearts are open." (Dumbledore, GOF, 
chap. 37, p. 723)
 
"The fountain we destroyed tonight told a lie. We wizards have 
mistreated and abused our fellow for too long, and we are now reaping 
our reward." (Dumbledore, OOTP, chap. 37, p. 834)

"Thanks to you, Dumbledore was able to recall the Order of the 
Phoenix about an hour after Voldemort returned," said Sirius.
"So what's the Order been doing?" said Harry, looking around at them 
all.
"Working as hard as we can to make sure Voldemort can't carry out his 
plans," said Sirius.  (OOTP, chap 5, p. 92).


2.  Respect for and use of the Deeper Mysteries of Magic--

There is a mysterious "ancient magic" that Dumbledore ascribes to 
more fully than to the "Laws of Man" (in this case, the MOM). These 
deep mysteries appear to actualize in the form of binding connections 
between people or between people and magical objects:
 
"You would be protected by an ancient magic of which he {Voldemort} 
knows, but which he despises, and which he has always, therefore, 
underestimated--to his cost. I am speaking of course of the fact that 
your mother died to save you." (Dumbledore, OOTP, Chap. 37, pps. 835-
836)
 
"She {Petunia} may have taken you grudgingly, furiously, unwillingly, 
bitterly, yet she still took you, and in doing so, she sealed the 
charm I placed upon you." (Dumbledore, OOTP, chap. 37, p. 836)


 ".....When one wizard saves another wizard's life, it creates a 
certain bond between them....This is magic at its deepest, most 
impenetrable, Harry." (Dumbledore, POA, chap. 22, p. 426)

The Fidelius Charm is "An immensely complex spell
..involving the 
magical concealment of a secret inside a single, living soul.  The 
information is hidden inside the chosen person, or Secret Keeper
." 
(Prof. Flitwick, POA, chap. 10, p. 205)

"Once a champion has been selected by the Goblet of Fire, he or she 
is obliged to see the tournament through to the end. The placing of 
your name in the goblet constitutes a binding, magical contract." 
(Dumbledore, GOF, chap. 16, p. 256)

Now Dumbledore appears to not only have a deep respect for 
this "ancient magic" but he also has been able to use this against 
Voldemort numerous times because LV "despises and underestimates 
it."  One example, the blood protection, is quoted above.  Others 
include:

* Phoenix tail feathers in the brother wands to produce the Priori 
Incantatem (GOF, chap. 36, p. 697) 
* Hiding the Philosopher's Stone in the Mirror of Erised so only one 
wanting to "find it, but not use it" could retrieve the Stone. 
(Dumbledore, SS, chap. 17, p. 300)


3. Respect for Harry's Freedom of Choice Regarding the Prophecy?

The Prophecy is at the core of Dumbledore's Plan, but there's a twist 
to it. First some bakground:

Dumbledore has been *Called* to shoulder many difficult and 
burdensome tasks in his very long life, especially the defeat of the 
dark wizard Grindelwald and the formation of the Order of the Phoenix 
during Voldemort's reign of terror. And, in perhaps his most 
difficult and troubling role, Dumbledore was "chosen" to receive the 
Prophecy on that fateful night in the Hog's Head.
 
Surely the prophecy was the first ray of hope for Dumbledore after 
many dark years! For we already know that the MOM and OOTP were 
losing ground in the First War, and that Voldemort was taking over 
the WW:
 
"Dark days, Harry. Didn't know who ter trust, didn't dare get 
friendly with strange witches and wizards....terrible things happend. 
He was takin' over." (Hagrid, SS, chap. 4, pps 54-55)
 
Every week, news comes of more deaths, more disappearances, more 
torturing...the Ministry of Magic is in disarray, they don't know 
what to do, they're trying to keep everything hidden from the 
Muggles, but meanwhile, Muggles are dying, too. (Sirius, GOF, chap. 
27, pps. 526-527)
 
"....you weren't in the Order then, you don't understand, last time 
we were outnumbered twenty to one by the Death Eaters and they were 
picking us off one by one." (Lupin, OOTP, chap. 9, p.177)
 
Dumbledore was effectively handed the future of the WW when he was 
chosen to hear the prophecy. "The One with the Power to Vanquish the 
Dark Lord Approaches" (OOTP, chap.37, p. 841) and Dumbledore alone 
carries the enormous burden of trying to protect an infant into 
adulthood who will be targeted by a very powerful Dark Lord and his 
equally powerful followers. Dumbledore's choices, his actions, his 
omissions could allow Voldemort to take over completely.

But here's the twist I'm proposing as the Limitation on the Prophecy, 
a form of ancient magic that Dumbledore realizes early on: The 
Prophecy cannot be activated if Harry is "forced" to conquer the Dark 
Lord.  My words: "Only One wishing to vanquish the Dark Lord by 
choice, rather than force, will have the power to do so." No, that's 
not canon, mere speculation, but it dovetails nicely with why 
Dumbldore was chosen to hear the Prophecy!

So Dumbledore starts making decisions about protecting Harry, until 
such time that Harry is able to choose his "destiny" for himself. And 
Dumbledore believes Harry is the *only* one who has the power, no one 
else can "vanquish" Voldemort--not Dumbledore, not the Potters, and 
not the Longbottoms, even though all of these people have certainly 
been a match for LV. 

Since Dumbledore knows he cannot kill Voldemort, what did DD mean in 
the scene at MOM when he tells Voldemort, "We both know there are 
other ways of destroying a man, Tom....Merely taking your life would 
not satisfy me, I admit" (OOTP, chap. 36, p. 814)? I don't believe 
even then that Dumbledore allows himself to harbor hatred in his 
heart for Tom/Voldemort. True to his nature, DD's deepest desire for 
Voldemort is to find redemption within himself before he dies, to see 
the error of his choices, and unearth some sliver of the humanity 
Harry possesses in such great abundance. The moment when Tom unearths 
his essence, his soul, from under Voldemort's cover, he would
surely be destroyed by the evil of his choices and the life he made 
for himself, unable to continue living as either Voldemort or Tom 
Riddle. And perhaps that is how Harry will defeat him in the end, by 
providing the means through which Tom truly sees the Darkness he 
created by his choices. 

Telling Harry the Prophecy was the final step in Dumbledore's plan to
safely bring Harry to this point where he will be able to make the 
Final Choice for himself. Dumbledore, the master, will have to step 
aside now as Harry prepares to face his fate and that of the 
Wizarding World on his own terms. 

**************************************************************
The sun is setting and Stoned!Harry nods off, lulled to sleep by the 
drone of Jen's voice and the lapping of the waves. The sunset is 
beautiful, though, and Jen doesn't mind at all that Stoned!Harry 
drifted off?his future will be here soon enough, she thinks.  

Besides, this story was for her, to remind her of who Dumbledore 
truly is, and to see that the WW has indeed evolved into a better 
place during his lifetime, because of his influence.  "It's the Cycle 
of Life after all, no person, no energy needs to be wasted in the 
process, since we all have the power of transformation within" she 
reminds herself happily, impressed to have thought of a Dumbledore-
ism all on her own






From constancevigilance at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 19:12:35 2003
From: constancevigilance at yahoo.com (Susan Miller)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 19:12:35 -0000
Subject: Filks from the Young Wizard's Songbook, part 4
Message-ID: <bksqb3+108um@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81489

(Reposted because I forgot the subject.)

Constance Vigilance and Mad-Eye Moody continue digging through his 
trunk.

Constance says, "It was nice of JDR to find that page of The Yound 
Wizard's Songbook that got away. I wonder if there are any more out 
there? Oh, look, under these extra sneakoscopes, here are some more."

Harry Doodle Dandy

Harry Potter rode to school
A flying Ford Angleeya
Came to a stop in a tree top.
Said Snape, "I'm glad to see ya!"

"Expulsion is the standard way
To settle up the damages."
McGonagle said "Not today",
And filled a plate with sandwiches.


Hedwig Owl* 
*Who loves to eat Three Blind Mice

(sing as a round)

Hedwig Owl
She how she flies
To carry a letter to Grimmauld Place
Under the radar of what's-her-face.
Filch's suspicions are way off base.
Hedwig Owl


After moving aside a case of Flesh-Eating Slug repellant, Constance 
yelps triumphantly and holds up a page. "At last, here are the words 
to that pesky ditty I keep hearing being hummed about in TBAY!"


FITD

The Farmer In The Dell
The shipping quest will quell
Hi-ho, the derry-o
And who with whom will dwell?

Cho is hot for Ced
Nevermind the fact he's dead
Hi-ho, the derry-o
Well, that is what she said.

Harry's kissing Cho
Underneath the mistletoe.
Hi-ho, the derry-o
I think that's finished, though.

Hermione's after Har,
Or maybe after Vic.
Hi-ho, the derry-o
Well, she can take her pick.

Ron will pick a fight
With Hermione every night.
Hi-ho, the derry-o
Think it's love? You're right.

Luna fancies Ron
Even when his mind is gone.
Hi-ho, the derry-o
His cluelessness goes on.

Luna, in this mix,
Is the one nobody picks.
Hi-ho, the derry-o
But wait until book six.

~ Constance Vigilance






From editor at texas.net  Wed Sep 24 19:47:35 2003
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 19:47:35 -0000
Subject: Texas Quidditch & move to Chatter
Message-ID: <bksscn+gbna@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81490

I found the following site off The Leaky Cauldron. I post it here 
because the concept upon which it is based *is* canon, and so all of 
you can access it.

HOWEVER--any discussion of the revelations of this site must be 
carried on over on Chatter, because it will inevitably range into the 
uncanonical. I'd think.

~Amandageist, impressed

http://www.texasquidditch.com/





From foxmoth at qnet.com  Wed Sep 24 19:52:32 2003
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 19:52:32 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Philosophy (WAS:  MAGIC DISHWASHER: Spying Game Philosophy
In-Reply-To: <bkhm1q+896m@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkssm0+sp81@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81491

Debbie:

> It does seem odd that he doesn't tell the students how to 
protect  themselves from the basilisk, though I think his 
knowledge that  there's a basilisk comes partly from performing 
legilimency on Harry (witness the scene in Dumbledore's office 
after Justin is attacked).  
> However, Dumbledore cannot counter the basilisk alone.  
Because he is  not a parselmouth, he can't simply go down to 
the Chamber of Secrets  himself.  Harry, as a parselmouth, is 
the only weapon he has, and  it's to Dumbledore's credit, I think, 
that he doesn't use him as  such.  
> 

Pippin:
Dumbledore knows nothing about Diary!Riddle. From his point 
of view it looks like Voldemort has managed to penetrate the 
school's defenses from a thousand of miles away, is flaunting 
his ability to do so by using a weapon he knows Dumbledore will 
associate with him, and is timing the attacks in order to implicate 
Harry. Dumbledore may be forgiven for thinking that Voldemort is 
baiting him and that his best strategy will be to wait him out.

In any  case, basilisk-proofing the school will not protect 
anybody, since the real danger is not the basilisk but the person 
controlling it. It would be like stealing one bullet from an enemy 
gun.

Debbie:
> > I didn't - and still don't - see Dumbledore's decision 
not to tell Harry about the prophecy sooner as a mistake.  What  
Dumbledore now sees as a *mistake* was to treat Harry as a 
human  being and not as a weapon.
> 
> David responded:
> 
> I don't understand the argument here.  You seem to be saying 
that  Dumbledore has a dilemma: either keep Harry in 
ignorance, and allow  him the freedom to make his own choices, 
or tell him the truth and  so manipulate him; to turn him into a 
weapon, as you put it.
> This seems a false dilemma to me.  True, when Harry is very 
young,  to burden him with too much knowledge might be to 
paralyse him, but as he gets older he should be able to bear the 
truth without losing his freedom - indeed knowing more makes 
him more free because his  choices are better informed.
> 
> 
> Debbie:
> 
> Harry already understands by the end of PS/SS that Voldemort 
is after him.  But it's one thing for a child to have the knowledge 
that he will be forced to defend himself, and it's another to know 
that the entire WW is depending on him to vanquish Voldemort. 

 Dumbledore was right to withhold that, I think, until Harry better 
understood his own will and knew the WW a bit better.  
Dumbledore says he made a mistake by not telling him 
everything five years ago, and I simply don't agree with this.

Pippin:

Dumbledore says the happiest man is the one content to see 
himself exactly as he is. Keeping back the truth in order to spare 
Harry's feelings was no kinder in the end than it would have 
been to let him go on staring endlessly at his lost parents in The 
Mirror of Erised. 

And Voldemort *is* going after Harry anyway. Are you saying that 
Harry should let himself be killed because the Wizarding World 
isn't worth fighting for? He could hide out on Privet Drive instead 
of challenging the Dark Lord, I suppose. But as he said in 
PS/SS, "It's only  dying a bit later than I would have, because I'm 
never going over to the Dark Side!" Those who don't resist 
Voldemort can still be victims of him.

Nor is it a question of whether Harry ought to be considered as a 
weapon  instead of a human being.  Harry is going to suffer just 
as much as anybody if Voldemort wins. According to 
Dumbledore's own beliefs, his genuine concern for Harry's 
happiness and well-being would have been better served by 
telling him everything.

What led Dumbledore astray was empathy. With hindsight, 
Dumbledore sees that he took so much delight in Harry's  
feelings of triumph that he kept telling himself that Harry wasn't 
ready to know the truth.  

And Harry did need to know. It was because Harry didn't know 
about the Prophecy that he fell into the Dark Lord's trap. If Harry 
had known about the Prophecy, he would have realized 
Voldemort was lying ("I can not touch it.....but you can") and he 
never would have gone to the Ministry, or he would have gone 
more warily. Whether as weapon or individual, Harry cannot 
afford to know less about his situation that Voldemort does.

It seems to me that JKR is exploring the relationship between 
empathy and compassion. She sees the ability to show 
compassion, to care  about the suffering of  strangers as our 
ultimate strength, and the power that Voldemort knows not. We 
develop this power through empathy: our ability to identify with 
other people's feelings. 

Since Voldemort denies empathy, he knows nothing of 
compassion at all. But Voldemort understands that those who 
feel empathy have a weakness. It is  easiest to empathize with 
people  who are similar to ourselves. Indifference towards the 
suffering of others leads to injustice, and thus to a sense of 
injury that Voldemort is all too ready to exploit.

Pippin






From siskiou at earthlink.net  Wed Sep 24 19:53:25 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 12:53:25 -0700
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ron's big moment? (WAS: Why Ron Loves Hermione)
In-Reply-To: <bkr0u4+3opf@eGroups.com>
References: <bkr0u4+3opf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <19090720513.20030924125325@earthlink.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 81492



Hi,

Tuesday, September 23, 2003, 7:52:52 PM, Tom wrote:

> I dont think its anything to worry about.

Whatever spell it was, I definitely think it was a bit more
insidious than just making Ron giddy and silly.

There was blood coming from his mouth, he was very pale and
he basically collapsed.

I found this whole scene very frightening (Ron is one of my
favorites, and I was scared for his life here, and even more
when the additional attack from the brain happened).

I do hope, JKR won't just let this dangle like so many other
things I thought would evolve into something significant and
were never mentioned again (at least until now).

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net

Visit our two pet bunnies: http://home.earthlink.net/~siskiou/





From lawtrainer at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 19:32:49 2003
From: lawtrainer at yahoo.com (Jana Fisher)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 19:32:49 -0000
Subject: Did Voldemort kill Petunia & Lily's parents?
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20030924205714.03213560@pop3.xtra.co.nz>
Message-ID: <bksrh1+mbo0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81493


> Lawtrainer wrote:
> 
> >See post 77807, it refers to the theory that Petunia is a squib,
> >hence the jealousy/hatred she feels at her sister being a wizard.
> 
> Tanya Swaine wrote:
> This is entirely possible, but my question is, when it was said 
> about Squibs in the books.  It referred to children of both pure bloods, 
> and that child having no magical powers.  Now what confuses me is that
> how could Petunia be a squib if her parents were muggles?  Wouldn't
> she just be an ordinary muggle in that case?


That is a good point, however I cannot find anything on Yahoomort or 
Lexicon that quotes actual canon stating that Lily and Petunia's 
parents were muggles.  Lexicon states they are muggles, but does not 
quote canon.  Does anyone have anything regarding this?

Jana (wishing she could read Harry Potter books at work)






From Meliss9900 at aol.com  Wed Sep 24 20:21:55 2003
From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 16:21:55 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Ron's experience in MoM (WAS Ron's big moment?)
Message-ID: <16b.24230204.2ca356e3@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81494

In a message dated 9/24/2003 11:58:48 AM Central Standard Time, 
navarro198 at hotmail.com writes:

> 
> Bookworm:
> There isn't anything in the scene about planets - that was my 
> interpretation based on Ron's joke. (US p787-796) When they use the 
> Reductor Curse, they smashed the glass spheres holding the 
> prophecies. <snipped>

  Luna tells Harry, "I > don't know what they hit him with <snip> but's he's 
> gone a bit 
> funny, I could hardly get him along at all..."  From there they ran 
> into the Brain Room.
> 
> It makes me wonder how Ron "saw Uranus", especially after reading 
> Granny's post #81427 which reads in part: "This planet also
> rules the breaking up of any established patterns or structures, 
> creating sudden -- even radical change."  Which ties in *very* 
> nicely with Pip!Squeak's excellent theory (post #81010) about 
> Dumbledore's goals.
> 
> Ravenclaw Bookworm
> 

Simple  US edition page 795

"I think her ankle's broken, I heard something crack," whispered Luna, who 
was bending over her and who aone seemed unhurt.  "Four of them chased us into a 
dark room full of planets, it was a very odd place, some of the time we were 
just floating in the dark --" 

That's how Ron saw Uranus .. Luna also says that she "blew up Pluto" in one 
of the DE's face

Melissa



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 20:22:34 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 20:22:34 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Staff Was Re McGonagall/Teachers 
In-Reply-To: <bkrimc+5oto@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bksuea+72hn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81495

arcum wrote:
> Dumbledore has hired, in this order: Trelawney, Snape, Quirrell,
> Lockhart, Hagrid, Lupin, Crouch, and Firenze (Umbridge doesn't 
> count,though DD really should have hired someone...). Perhaps 
> interviewing and hiring teachers is one of his weaknesses?

Lockhart could have been an adequate teacher in spite of being a 
fraud, though. He knew the spells, in the academic sense of being 
able to go through the motions: he had at least witnessed and/or 
could talk about the things he said he had done. Compared with 
Umbridge's completely passive (-aggressive) "sit down, shut up, and 
read" method (which was also theory-based) of "teaching," Lockhart is 
exemplary. The fact Lockhart's "teaching" was nothing more than a 
forum for his ego is something that might not have become clear until 
he was actually at Hogwarts. Isn't it strange that there appear to be 
no guidelines around what "teaching" DADA consists of? Isn't it odd 
that there does not seem to be any equivalent to teaching 
certification in the WW? There are O.W.L. exams and N.E.W.T. exams, 
but no standard qualifications for the *teachers*!

Dumbledore has been letting Binns put students to sleep in History of 
Magic classes for *how* many years now? I wonder if a perusal of 
which classes have competent teachers might lead to any insight into 
what Dumbledore thinks the important subjects are (and I hope this 
hasn't been done before; or at least not recently)... 

Transfiguration is taught by McGonagall, an excellent teacher. Charms 
is taught by Professor Flitwick, who is exceedingly competent. 
Potions is taught by the utterly nasty but effective Professor Snape.
Astronomy is taught so efficiently by Professor Sinistra that we 
never see her.(Is she, as her name implies, sinister? Or just left-
handed?) Care of Magical Creatures is taught (mostly) by Hagrid.
Divination: Trelawny, Firenze (we already know what Dumbledore thinks 
of Divination; did he hire a new teacher just in order to Ministry-
proof Hogwarts against another assignee?). History of Magic is taught 
by a ghost who was boring even before that. Arithmancy is taught by 
Professor Vector, another cipher to readers. Herbology is taught by 
Professor Sprout, who is competent if uninspiring. Madame Hooch and 
Madame Pomfrey are adequate, if somewhat one-dimensional.

Does Dumbledore maintain the teaching staff (he's the headmaster and 
I don't see it as terribly relevant which ones he hired and which he 
merely retained) he thinks most appropriate in an academic sense, the 
one he thinks the students will learn most from in terms of 
enlightening them socially, or a bit of both? If we assume it's the 
first or the latter, then is it too far a stretch to wonder if 
Dumbledore actually wants to keep students ignorant of the history of 
the WW for some reason? And what's with the DADA teacher shortage, 
anyway? And isn't it also interesting that we have canon of 
Dumbledore saying he trusts Professor Snape, while we also appear to 
have canon (someone recalled JKR saying) that the reason Dumbledore 
hasn't indulged Professor Snape's ambition to teach DADA is that he's 
wary of what affect that might have on Snape? His trust is apparently 
tempered with caution.

Is there a teacher shortage in the WW to parallel the one I know is 
currently present in places in the RW? Those who feel a calling to 
teach and follow it in the RW face uphill battles over salaries and 
with administrators, overcrowding, and lack of parental support. Is 
JKR reflecting on her own teaching experience? One can't help but 
notice that she herself seemed to give up the classroom with some 
alacrity.

Sandy




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Wed Sep 24 20:29:22 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 20:29:22 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Spies
In-Reply-To: <bks4l6+crba@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bksur3+659m@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81496


> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Tanya Swaine <swaine.t at x> 
wrote:
> 
 
> Tanya:
> > That is an interesting point.  However, the first thing that 
comes 
> to my
> > mind is the fact that Snape was more than once on the verge of
> > discovering Harry under the cloak when he was in a room etc.  Just
> > how well dose he know about it?  If I recall correctly, he was 
> feeling
> > ahead of him in one scene.  Considering no one else took that 
line.
> > 
> 
> 
> Geoff:
> That has just raised a question in my mind. I checked Tanya's 
> reference and it is in GOF, the chapter "The Egg and the Eye". The 
> thought then occurred to me - perhaps someone can indicate chapter 
> and verse - how does Snape know that Harry has an Invisibility 
Cloak?

and again (later):
Someone emailed me privately to remind me of the occasion which was 
when Snape came into the Shrieking Shack with it.

However, may I point out to at least two posters who came back on 
this one that it was in POA and /not/ COS.




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Wed Sep 24 20:43:40 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 20:43:40 -0000
Subject: Re McGonagall/Teachers was Re: Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <bkrn94+b5q0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bksvls+262g@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81497

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "slgazit" <slgazit at s...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arcum42" 
<Arcum_Dagsson at c...> 
> wrote:
> > Dumbledore has hired, in this order: Trelawney, Snape, Quirrell,
> > Lockhart, Hagrid, Lupin, Crouch, and Firenze (Umbridge doesn't 
> count,
> > though DD really should have hired someone...). Perhaps 
interviewing
> > and hiring teachers is one of his weaknesses?
> 
> I disagree. Let's consider his hirelings one by one:
> 


<snip>


Salit:
> Lockhart is the only choice I don't understand, as I am sure that 
> Dumbledore knew he was a fraud. Perhaps he had no other candidates 
> and took him as a last resort. Or maybe it was his quirky sense of 
> humor? Lockhart was one of the funniest characters in the entire 
> series...
> 

I'm not sure I agree. I think he was potentially one of the most 
sinister.... The fact that he had amassed all the material for his 
books fraudulently and was then also prepared to destroy Harry and 
Ron's memories and allow Ginny to die to keep the matter under wraps 
still raises the hairs on the back of my neck. Nooo. Me no like 
Professor Lockhart.




From stratton at app.com  Wed Sep 24 20:45:51 2003
From: stratton at app.com (Brad)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 20:45:51 -0000
Subject: Kreacher
Message-ID: <bksvpv+r5qk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81498

With the last of the Blacks now dead, what becomes of Kreacher? Is 
Sirius' relation to Tonks enough to make her his new master? 
Otherwise, what stops him from leaving Grimmauld Place and going to 
the Narcissa or Voldemort and telling her/him everything?




From hulahulagirl205 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 19:05:23 2003
From: hulahulagirl205 at yahoo.com (Nadia Kennedy)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 12:05:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Dumbledore's Spies
In-Reply-To: <bks4l6+crba@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030924190523.15716.qmail@web60104.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81499

Geoff:

That has just raised a question in my mind. I checked Tanya's 
reference and it is in GOF, the chapter "The Egg and the Eye". The 
thought then occurred to me - perhaps someone can indicate chapter 
and verse - how does Snape know that Harry has an Invisibility Cloak?

Nadia responds:-

Hello!

Actually I can. In PoA, "The Servant of Lord Voldemort", second paragraph down.

"I found this at the base of the Whomping Willow," said Snape, throwing the cloak aside, careful to keep his wand pointing directly at Lupin's chest. "Very useful, Potter, I thank you..."





From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Wed Sep 24 20:35:09 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Coyotes Child)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:35:09 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] BADD ANGST TBAY, Part II
References: <bksq4b+onkl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000d01c382db$5ea00560$0ce879a5@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81500


>From: "Jen Reese" <stevejjen at earthlink.net>

>But here's the twist I'm proposing as the Limitation on the Prophecy,
>a form of ancient magic that Dumbledore realizes early on: The
>Prophecy cannot be activated if Harry is "forced" to conquer the Dark
>Lord.  My words: "Only One wishing to vanquish the Dark Lord by
>choice, rather than force, will have the power to do so." No, that's
>not canon, mere speculation, but it dovetails nicely with why
>Dumbldore was chosen to hear the Prophecy!

You can also think of it this way:  In order to properly fulfill one's
destiny, one must have three things -
  - Knowledge.  The knowledge of our destiny is locked deep within each of
us until some event, be it internal or external, reveals it to us.  (In this
case, Dumbledore showing Harry the prediction was an external event.)
  - Desire.  One must truly desire, with their heart and their being, to
fulfil their destiny.  The more pronounced and important that destiny, the
stronger the desire to obtain it must be.  (If one is forced, coerced, or
otherwise had the decision made for them, then they lack the true desire to
achieve their destiny.)
  - Will.  The more trials one must face to achieve one's destiny, the
stronger their will must be in order to overcome the onus that comes with
it.  (If Harry does not have the desire to do what he must, through someone
else making his decisions for him, he will have already surrendered his will
to the person who made his decision for him, and will not have the required
strength to fulfil his destiny.)

(As a side note, I think Neville will somehow play an increasing role in
things and how Harry achieves whatever it is ends up doing.)

Iggy McSnurd,
the Prankster

"When you dance, dance with your whole being.
  When you weep, weep as though your heart is breaking,
   When you laugh, laugh from your soul.
  Do all these things, and you will always live your life to its fullest."

-- Iggy McSnurd








From eschaafin at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 20:41:11 2003
From: eschaafin at yahoo.com (Sophie)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 20:41:11 -0000
Subject: Did Voldemort kill Petunia & Lily's parents?
In-Reply-To: <bksrh1+mbo0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bksvh7+ubtm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81501

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jana Fisher" <lawtrainer at y...>
wrote:
 
> That is a good point, however I cannot find anything on Yahoomort or 
> Lexicon that quotes actual canon stating that Lily and Petunia's 
> parents were muggles.  Lexicon states they are muggles, but does not 
> quote canon.  Does anyone have anything regarding this?
> 
> Jana (wishing she could read Harry Potter books at work)



I just read this this morning... and am a bit confused:
towards the beginning of ch 33 (The Death eaters) in GoF, Voldemort
says (referring to his father):
'A muggle and a fool... very like your dear mother.'

I presume that voldemort is using muggle and muggle-born as
interchangable.  

Sophie  





From shirley2allie at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 24 21:12:52 2003
From: shirley2allie at hotmail.com (Shirley)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 21:12:52 -0000
Subject: Wormtail and non-prophecy activities
In-Reply-To: <bks2l3+jfqj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkt1ck+3t9h@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81502

 "Paul Smith" wrote:
>>snip<<where was Wormtail for the entire year? >>snip again<<

Frodo's MUM wrote:
 Best guess is that he is at Hogwarts lying very low. <<snip>> He is 
the new spy at Hogwarts. 

now Shirley:
But why would he be at Hogwarts?  Crookshanks could probably sniff 
him out if he was anywhere near the Gryffindor tower.  And when you 
say "new" spy; who was the old one?  

I'm not trying to shoot you down; I just don't see that as his 
assignment.  In fact, LV seems to have so little regard for him - he 
always calls him Wormtail and never Peter, have you noticed? - that 
I'd think he'd just keep him around as a servant/lackey/scapegoat.

Shirley, who wonders what that new 'silver super-hand' looks like 
when he becomes Scabbers....




From navarro198 at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 24 21:43:03 2003
From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 21:43:03 -0000
Subject: Ron's experience in MoM (WAS Ron's big moment?)
In-Reply-To: <16b.24230204.2ca356e3@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bkt357+3uvp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81503

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Meliss9900 at a... wrote:
Melissa:
> Simple  US edition page 795
> 
> "I think her ankle's broken, I heard something crack," whispered 
Luna, who was bending over her and who aone seemed unhurt.  "Four of 
them chased us into a dark room full of planets, it was a very odd 
place, some of the time we were just floating in the dark --" 
> 
> That's how Ron saw Uranus .. Luna also says that she "blew up 
Pluto" in one of the DE's face

Oops.  That's what happens when you skim too fast.  I had looked for 
a reference to the planet room when they first entered the 
Department of Mysteries and couldn't find it so concluded I had 
imagined it.  Anyway, in answer to the post I was originally 
responding to, I think whatever Ron was reacting to was more than 
just a confundus or cheering charm.  Thanks to Melissa and dc for 
catching it.

Pippin's comment about Jupiter being related to mirth and kingship -
 "Weasley is our king" anyone?

Ravenclaw Bookworm






From navarro198 at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 24 21:53:50 2003
From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 21:53:50 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Spies
In-Reply-To: <bksur3+659m@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkt3pe+2ahb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81504

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" 
<gbannister10 at a...> wrote:
> However, may I point out to at least two posters who came back on 
> this one that it was in POA and /not/ COS.

Boy, am I being careless today.  I even had the book open in front 
of me <turning redfaced>.  Time to go back to lurking...
Ravenclaw Bookworm




From eberte at vaeye.com  Wed Sep 24 22:23:04 2003
From: eberte at vaeye.com (ellejir)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 22:23:04 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Staff Was Re McGonagall/Teachers
In-Reply-To: <bksuea+72hn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkt5g8+foe0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81505

Sandy (aka msbeadsley) wrote:

> Lockhart could have been an adequate teacher in spite of being a 
> fraud, though. He knew the spells, in the academic sense of being 
> able to go through the motions: he had at least witnessed and/or 
> could talk about the things he said he had done.  <huge snip>

Elle (me):
Actually, Lockhart was *terrible* at performing the spells (think of 
his woeful performance in dueling club encounter with Snape, his 
inept attempt to repair Harry's broken arm and his inability to 
control the pixies.)  His only real magical talent was in the area of 
memory charms (as he himself admitted to Ron and Harry.)  
It is a puzzle as to why DD would have hired such a buffoon. Was he 
not aware that Lockhart was a fraud (if so, so much for all-knowing!
Dumbledore), or was he trying to expose the students to all types of 
people (including conceited idiots) as Sandy suggested? (Or perhaps 
did JKR just think that CoS needed some more comic relief?)







From deemarie1a at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 22:36:03 2003
From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 22:36:03 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Staff Was Re McGonagall/Teachers
In-Reply-To: <bkt5g8+foe0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkt68j+afb7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81506

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ellejir" <eberte at v...> wrote:
> Elle (me):
> Actually, Lockhart was *terrible* at performing the spells (think 
of 
> his woeful performance in dueling club encounter with Snape, his 
> inept attempt to repair Harry's broken arm and his inability to 
> control the pixies.)  His only real magical talent was in the area 
of 
> memory charms (as he himself admitted to Ron and Harry.)  
> It is a puzzle as to why DD would have hired such a buffoon. Was he 
> not aware that Lockhart was a fraud (if so, so much for all-knowing!
> Dumbledore), or was he trying to expose the students to all types 
of 
> people (including conceited idiots) as Sandy suggested? (Or perhaps 
> did JKR just think that CoS needed some more comic relief?)

Well, as to Lockhart being a competent teacher...Back when I was in 
school, I remember I had a couple of teachers that were certainly on 
a par with Lockhart, yet I did learn from them.  Let's face it, the 
books he wrote were very accurate descriptions of how monsters, etc. 
were defeated.  He only lied in the fact that he was the wizard who 
performed the feats of dering do.  Even Molly Weasly admitted he knew 
how to get rid of pests in his writing.

DD may have realized that by reading Lockhart's book the kids could 
learn some of what they needed to know. I do not think it was ever 
DD's intention to keep Lockhart more than one year.  It's just that 
it is difficult to find a teacher for that position.  Perhaps he was 
in negotiations or trying to convince Lupin to teach and Lupin being 
the person he is was simply refusing because of his werewolfism.  It 
took DD more than 1 year to convince him to become the DADA professor.

D




From l10r77 at juno.com  Wed Sep 24 23:46:07 2003
From: l10r77 at juno.com (l10r77)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 19:46:07 -0400
Subject: tame werewolf ?
References: <1064421245.13304.11178.m11@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <002f01c382f6$09db0460$8d694b43@Lisa>

No: HPFGUIDX 81507

Missy writes:
But why would he be attacked?  DE's go after human victims.  In his
werewolf state, Lupin is no longer human.  His mind and body are that
of a werewolf.  So why would the DE's go after him?

Remember that the way Sirius was able to escape was that he was a
dog, and the DE's couldn't sense his human emotions.  And he just
slipped through the bars.

Why wouldn't it work that way with Lupin and his werewolf-ing self?

I know that the DE's can be ordered to attack, but is there something
specific about Lupin as a werewolf that could be identified?  I
really don't think he needs to worry about it.
Missy

Now me:
I'm confused. Are you referring to Dementors? DE's are a totally different
group. It's the Dementors that feed off of human emotions. It's the
Dementors that Sirius escaped from. Or did I miss something?
Lisa





From dcyasser at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 25 00:23:58 2003
From: dcyasser at yahoo.com (dcyasser)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 00:23:58 -0000
Subject: Ron's experience in MoM 
In-Reply-To: <bkt357+3uvp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bktciu+hapl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81508

My Dear Ravenclaw Bookworm,
Let me join the "oops" club, because I thought I had posted this 
thought in my original response to your question about what exactly 
happened to Ron at the MoM, especially regarding the brain and its 
scars. Alas, I had only reposted your post. Bad list member.
So let me try again

 "According to Madame Pomfrey,
thoughts could leave deeper scarring than almost anything else, 
though since she had started applying copious amounts of Dr. Ubbly's 
Oblivious Unction, there seemed to be some improvement." (US 
hardcover p.847)

What a feast! 

First off I'll admit that I have not been properly able to sort 
through all that happened to Ron at the Department of Mysteries and 
its significance; I find it rather dizzying to contemplate what was 
meant by showing him in such an addled (and eventually dangerous) 
state. Both there and in Madame Pomfrey's comment, I wonder does 
Ron in this instance represent the wizarding world or human nature
? easily confused, attacked and overwhelmed by the opinions of 
others (Daily Prophet and Ministry)? We don't know what kind of curse
he is under, therefore we don't know why he is behaving the way he
is, but he doesn't make sense. Shown to be without common sense or 
judgment, he recklessly calls the brain out of the tank, and it 
attacks him, and even though he fights it, it leaves him with the 
deep scars of someone else's thoughts. Wow, sounds like the 
cultural media coloring our unconscious perception even when we try 
to avoid it; or sounds like the entire wizarding world believing 
Harry is a nutter because the Daily Prophet says so. 
Now that Harry is proved right, will the WW forget they ever doubted 
him? Yup ? copious amounts of oblivious unction ? one part
time, one part revisionist history, will absolve them!

Then there's a completely different take: maybe Ron's
difficulties and this specific curse, making him giggle and lurch 
and tell juvenile jokes, was to show that Harry and Hermione had 
matured beyond Ron in terms of action and responsibility, 
particularly when they ditched Quidditch for the more pressing 
matter of Grawp, while Ron was finally achieving Quidditch glory. I 
don't really like this thought so don't try to back it up much. 

Back to the deeper scarring, it could lead us back to Brooding!
Harry, as if he isn't scarred enough already, being further
scarred by his thoughts of guilt over Sirius, anger at Snape and 
Dumbledore, and angst about the future in general. Harry is stubborn 
in his opinions, after all; they have certainly marked him. Do they 
open him up to, er, persuasions from LV?

Or perhaps, for the Ron-is-an-evil-betrayer theorists, Ron is the 
one who has physically been scarred by someone else's
thoughts
 will these unknown thoughts, or his own brooding, leave 
him scarred enough to do the unthinkable? 

So many theories, so little time to type! 
Cheers
dc








From lziner at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 25 00:33:04 2003
From: lziner at yahoo.com (lziner)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 00:33:04 -0000
Subject: tame werewolf ?
In-Reply-To: <002f01c382f6$09db0460$8d694b43@Lisa>
Message-ID: <bktd40+d64g@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81509

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "l10r77" <l10r77 at j...> wrote:
> Missy writes:
> But why would he be attacked?  DE's go after human victims.  In his
> werewolf state, Lupin is no longer human.  His mind and body are 
that
> of a werewolf.  So why would the DE's go after him?
> 
> Remember that the way Sirius was able to escape was that he was a
> dog, and the DE's couldn't sense his human emotions.  And he just
> slipped through the bars.
> 
> Why wouldn't it work that way with Lupin and his werewolf-ing self?
> 
> I know that the DE's can be ordered to attack, but is there 
something
> specific about Lupin as a werewolf that could be identified?  I
> really don't think he needs to worry about it.
> Missy
> 
> Now me:
> I'm confused. Are you referring to Dementors? DE's are a totally 
different
> group. It's the Dementors that feed off of human emotions. It's the
> Dementors that Sirius escaped from. Or did I miss something?
> Lisa

See post 81480 - Missy had a rare lapse in posting and apologizes :)





From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 25 00:34:56 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 00:34:56 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Spies
In-Reply-To: <bkt3pe+2ahb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bktd7g+49k7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81510

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "scoutmom21113" 
<navarro198 at h...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" 
> <gbannister10 at a...> wrote:
> > However, may I point out to at least two posters who came back on 
> > this one that it was in POA and /not/ COS.
> 
> Boy, am I being careless today.  I even had the book open in front 
> of me <turning redfaced>.  Time to go back to lurking...
> Ravenclaw Bookworm

Laura:

Even before the Shrieking Shack scene, there was the scene when Snape 
catches Harry coming back from Hogsmeade after he's thrown mud at 
Draco.  Snape says something to the effect that Draco saw Hary's head 
and askes him how his head could be in Hogsmeade.  He is no dummy and 
could probably surmise from Draco's report that Harry had an 
Invisibility Cloak.  It also wouldn't surprise me if Snape knew that 
James had one, since he made it his business to sneak around and find 
out what MWPP were up to.  Dear, trusting Severus...:-)




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 25 01:07:28 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 01:07:28 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Spies
In-Reply-To: <bksgh1+1j9l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bktf4g+7rob@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81511

> > > That has just raised a question in my mind. I checked Tanya's 
> > > reference and it is in GOF, the chapter "The Egg and the Eye". 
> > > The thought then occurred to me - perhaps someone can indicate 
> > > chapter and verse - how does Snape know that Harry has an 
> > > Invisibility Cloak?
 
> > Because he saw Harry remove it in CoS.  And while it was laying 
> > on the ground, Snape put it on.  Snape probably assumed Harry 
> > took it with him when they all left the shrieking shack.  
> > Missy

> Snape didn't actually see Harry remove it.  (CoS, Ch19, p358 US) "I 
> found this at the base of the Whomping Willow," said Snape, 
> throwing the cloak aside, careful to keep this [sic] wand pointing 
> directly at Lupin's chest."Very useful, Potter, I thank you...."
> 
> How did he know it was Harry's?  Lucky guess?

Hem hem. First, ain't y'all talkin' about PoA and not Cos (which only 
goes to Chapter 18)? Secondly, I'm guessing Snape figured out that 
the "talking head" Draco saw earlier in PoA *was* Harry, everything 
else covered with the invisibility cloak. There may even be a mention 
in the text of Snape figuring this out but I'm not feeling so 
ambitious as to check that right now. Anybody else?

Sandy




From greatraven at hotmail.com  Thu Sep 25 01:25:10 2003
From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 01:25:10 -0000
Subject: Re McGonagall/Teachers was Re: Death Eaters
In-Reply-To: <bksvls+262g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bktg5m+avik@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81512

--
> >
> 
> Salit:
> > Lockhart is the only choice I don't understand, as I am sure that 
> > Dumbledore knew he was a fraud. Perhaps he had no other
candidates 
> > and took him as a last resort. Or maybe it was his quirky sense
of 
> > humor? Lockhart was one of the funniest characters in the entire 
> > series...
> > 
> 
> I'm not sure I agree. I think he was potentially one of the most 
> sinister.... The fact that he had amassed all the material for his 
> books fraudulently and was then also prepared to destroy Harry and 
> Ron's memories and allow Ginny to die to keep the matter under
wraps 
> still raises the hairs on the back of my neck. Nooo. Me no like 
> Professor Lockhart.

True. And yet, there was a certain pathos about him in OoP, even 
though you knew what had happened to him was his own fault.

I do remember it said somewhere in CoS that he'd got the job because 
he was the only applicant. Maybe they really aren't lining up for the 
job, after hearing about the "jinx" on it - Quirrell is the first one 
*we* encounter, but weven in the first novel it mentions DADA is a 
jinxed job. Sue B






From Berkana_01 at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 23 20:12:32 2003
From: Berkana_01 at hotmail.com (berkana_dianic)
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 20:12:32 -0000
Subject: Buckbeak, was Re: The Phoenix & the Snowy Owl  
In-Reply-To: <bkpq24+3r9v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkq9fg+nvl4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81513

n_longbottom01 wrote:
> Maybe Buckbeak will be Harry's new pet instead?  Buckbeak needs 
> someone now that Sirius is gone.  Buckbeak wouldn't usurp Hedwig's 
> role... so I could see Harry owning both without too much conflict.


Oh my god, I totally forgot about Buckbeak....Who now will take care 
of him, now that Sirius has died?

ml

joanna
x





From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Wed Sep 24 15:01:28 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 10:01:28 -0500
Subject: An intro, and a long letter...
Message-ID: <006f01c382ad$407701c0$1994aec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81514

Greetings from one of the newest member of this group, Ignatious
Pallandramius McSnurd, Esq., Ph.D., Joviality Integration Specialist
Extrodinaire.  (But, you can call my Iggy McSnurd, the Prankster.)

I have actually only started reading the HP books about 3 years ago, but
have become an avid fan since then.  (I read the first 4 books 3 times in a
row within 6 weeks the first time I read them. and read OoP 3 times in the
first week.. Reading it straight through on the first day in less than 10
hours.)

I live in Alabama with my wife (having moved from California to come down
here to be with her, an Internet romance that actually turned out well. And
eventually marry her and have a child.) of 2 years, and have a 13 year old
step son and 2 year old daughter.  (My step son's birthday, incidentally, is
July 31st, he wears glasses, and can never keep his hair neat.)

I'm a fan of comedy, action, and fantasy movies.  I love fantasy literature,
and am an independent student of philosophy, psychology, and religion..
(read as "a student of human nature and thought.")  My taste for music is as
wide and varied as my taste for humor.  My turn ons include.  Oops. Wrong
type of intro.   = )


Well, here's my first letter. Please bear with the length, as I had a lot of
things I wanted to comment on.  (Please also bear with me if I cover
anything that's already been beaten into the ground.  I've tried to read up
all I can so far, but may have missed something.)

**********


There's a question about why Harry couldn't see the Thestrals from his first
visit to Hogwarts if he witnessed the death of his parents.

Hagrid tells them that Thestrals can be seen only by those who have seen
death (seen, not witnessed).

While Harry, technically, witnessed his parent's deaths, it never states in
the books (IIRC), that he SAW them die.  He saw the flash of green light,
and heard their voices and screams.  This qualifies (even in a court of law)
as witnessing the event.  Only in the movie does it show the child actually
looking at the events as they unfold.

It can be assumed that when you SEE someone die, a part of you witnesses
their life force as it departs their body, which "unlocks" that part of your
being which allows you to see things like the Thestrals.

As for why he didn't see the Thestrals on the way to the train station in
the carriages, there are a couple of possibilities as I see them:  As
someone else said, it takes a little time for your mind / soul to register
and understand what it has seen.  Alternately, the Thestrals may have begun
to appear to his vision as ghostly shapes, but he was too preoccupied with
his own feelings to register it.  (I'm sure that we've all experienced that
kind of blindness when something bad has happened to us.)


Arcum:
>Dumbledore has hired, in this order: Trelawney, Snape, Quirrell,
>Lockhart, Hagrid, Lupin, Crouch, and Firenze (Umbridge doesn't count,
>though DD really should have hired someone...). Perhaps interviewing
>and hiring teachers is one of his weaknesses?


IMHO, Lupin and Firenze are not the only competent teachers AD has hired.
Snapes is VERY competent as both a teacher and as a Potions Master. Of
course, as a person, he leaves a bit to be desired.  (Remember that Lupin
states in PoA that his tonic is a very difficult one to make and that Snapes
is the only one at the school with the skills to do so.)

Also, Hagrid got off to a rough start as the CoMC teacher, but what teacher
doesn't?  He knows his stuff probably even better than Grubbly-Plank.  The
only thing working against him is his own sense of what he feels is
interesting and/or dangerous.  (And, as we all know, for him, dangerous IS
interesting.)


"lziner" <lziner at y...> wrote:
> Your post leads me to a question. What powers would he have as a
> werewolf. Do they have any magical powers except biting people?
> Does anyone know?


OK. Even without magical powers, let's list the advantages that a wolf has
over a human:  speed, strength, incredible endurance, 10 times or more acute
sense of smell, acute hearing that you can actively "home in" on things
with, teeth, agility, the natural ability to move more quietly and hide
better than humans, and even just the fear that's been ingrained into people's minds about wolves (however wrongly that's been, but that's a personal
opinion).

Do you think all of this would prove to be enough to be able to even take
down an experienced wizard if you really wanted to?

And if you add in the traditional super abilities for Werewolves, you also
increase all those factors listed above by about 3 times, and add in the
ability to almost instantly heal any damage that's not made by silver, and
you have a veritable engine of destruction.  (I'd shudder to think of what
he'd be if he was able to retain his full intellect in Werewolf form.)


"Granny":
>This brings me back to my initial idea that Ron is a "sleeper"; and is to
accomplish something of real significance. However, as we see in canon,
such an impending change would indeed produce trauma, "scarring" . JKR threw
in Uranus for some reason. >>> 


I like what you researched and the info you gave.  Remember one thing: it
could have just been a silly reference since at one point in Divination,
while they were discussing Astrology, Ron asked Lavender "Hey Lavender, can
we see Uranus?"  (Please forgive if I got who he asked wrong.  I can't seem
to find my copy of PoA at the moment.) As silly a mood as he was in, the
joke may have just come to his mind again.

That's not to say it's not important. It's simply to say that it may only be
a reference to an earlier joke.

(Something HAS just occurred to me, though.  The brains in the tank were
possibly taken from important people from the wizarding world.  Could the
brain possibly been that of a powerful Auror who died in battle with LV or
the DE?  Or, it could also be the brain of a powerful wizard who wasn't an
Auror.  Imagine if the brain was that of one of the original OoP members who
died, or Nostradamus, or Merlin himself.  Off on a bit of a tangent there,
but it would definitely be something interesting to watch out for.)

As for thoughts leaving scars worse than physical injury, I'm sure that
anyone who has been abused, experienced a personally strong tragedy, or
suffers from some form of mental disability (panic attacks, for example),
can tell you that the mental scars left to you can remain LONG after any
physical ones heal.  This is why Dr. Ubbly's Oblivious Unction would be so helpful. It makes you forget the thoughts that left the scars.

RE: Ron as a "sleeper":  IMHO, quite possibly, just as Neville has recently
awakened to a lot of his true potential as part of the DA and in the fight
in the Ministry (OoP).  As for Ron doing something significant, he has
already gotten them past the chessboard, and more importantly, he (perhaps
more than anyone else and less stated than anyone else) has been the rock
that Harry has been able to lean on through everything that's happened.
Ultimately, in Harry's life being as it is, he is doing one of the most
significant thins in the world, being Harry's best friend and truly faithful
compatriot.

Golly:
>Snape has good reason to be ashamed of his mark. Victims of Hitler have no
such reason. >>>

Please forgive if my comments on this offend anyone, but they are relevant.

I would like to point out that in traditional Hebrew law, one does not alter
the body, this includes no tattoos if you're kosher / orthodox.  If you do,
you are going against the will and design of JHVH, and therefore tainting
your own body and soul.

An aspect of Hitler insisting on this being done (as he was actually
knowledgeable of Hebrew law, his grandmother was Jewish if I recall
correctly. Or I may have been informed wrongly..) may have been in order to
not only destroy the Jews bodies, but to endanger their souls as well.  (Of
course, he also didn't seem to realize that, if the tattoo was given by
force, JHVH will understand, and therefore the Jew's souls were not truly
tainted.)

On the other hand, whereas Hitler had the Jews tattooed possibly to taint
their souls, LV insisted on every DE being tattooed / branded in order to
own their souls.  (Taking things a little further, anything done with the
left arm / hand is said to be on the heart side of the body, and therefore
is an action performed with the soul.  Tattooing the left arm would be a
more sure binding of the heart and soul than anywhere on the body other than
directly over the heart, which would be harder to see when the signal was
sent out.)  BTW: If anyone who does a Tarot reading doesn't ask you to cut
the deck with your left hand, or someone tries to read your rich palm, they
don't know what they're talking about.  Just a little bit of trivia there.

Frodo's Mum:
>Several dates are consistent throughout the books, Sept 1 - Arriving
>feast, June 30th - leaving feast, Harry's (and now Neville's)
>Birthday- July 31, Christmas - Dec. 25th, and the Halloween feast.
>Never have I read that the last feast has been anything but a
>celebration. Never does Harry mention that "it is the anniversary of
>his parents death" or reference to "this is the night my parents
>died" or any memoriam regarding that date even in passing.


The first HP book states that they died when Harry was one year old.  It
never gives an exact date, not does it say he died ON his first birthday.  A
child who is 18 months old is still a year old.


D (deemarie1a at y...) wrote:
>I think Fawkes is much older than anyone suspects. I think he was Godric
Griffindor's companion. Fawkes knew the sword was concealed in the sorting
hat. It was Riddle who assumed that DD had sent Fawkes to Harry. But DD
said that Harry's loyalty was what called Fawkes to him. DD never sent
Fawkes. The phoenix is such a magical creature, that like a wizard's wand,
the phoenix chooses who it will be loyal to. >>>


Of course, people may have overlooked 2 other options.

1:  Fawkes gave the feather that's in Harry's wand.  It's entirely possible
that, because of this, he was able to have some sort of empathic view of
what was going on a the time and felt Harry's danger, and extreme loyalty.
This is why Fawkes went to save Harry.

2:  If Fawkes is the constant companion of the Headmaster of Hogwarts, might
him coming to Harry's rescue and helping him on so many other occasions not
be a sign that Harry will become the new Headmaster later in life?  (Might
Fawkes not sense this somehow and treat him accordingly?)


About the Apparating / Disapparating on Hogwart's grounds thing:  There were
comments that if you could Apparate onto the grounds, that people would just
pop into the Gryffindor Tower, go to Harry's room, and kill him in his
sleep.

People are missing something important that would allow them to do that
anyhow.  The fireplaces are connected with the Floo network.  How else would
Harry have been able to talk with Sirius in the fireplace?  (Of course, this
also makes one wonder why Sirius needed the passwords in the first place in
PoA.  He could have snuck into someone else's house, stolen some Floo
Powder, and just used the network to get in.)


A little set of comments about the Gringott's Goblins as the bankers and
such:

  1:  It may be that JKR used Goblins instead of Dwarves because using the
latter would have begun turning into a more clich, Dungeons and Dragons
type of thing.  (Dwarves hoarding the money and being good with the
machines, Elves running through the woods instead of Centaurs, etc.)

  2:  Goblins, much like Dwarves, were noted in many types of folklore as
being good with their hands, exceedingly clever, and have the ability to
construct amazing things.  In fact, in some forms of folklore, the term
"goblin" and "dwarf" are used almost interchangeably.

  3:  It may be that the Goblins are so miserly simply because it's a trait
that's just so common in their race.  It could also be that the ones who are
naturally so tend to gravitate to the jobs at Gringott's.  (Remember,
Ebineezer Scrooge was a miser and a moneylender.. but he wasn't
representative of the human race.  It simply tends to be a job that people
with this traits lean to.)  After all, the only Goblins we've seen so far
are associated with Gringott's.  Could there not be a town somewhere with a
Goblin known for making weapons?  Or complex toys?

  4:  The Goblins who work for Gringott's may seem miserly, greedy, and
hard-core on the rules regarding money, security, and collections because 
it's their job.  There are many people out in the world who take their
occupations VERY seriously. And if Goblins are a serious and industrious
race in general, then I can easily see them behaving as they do in the
books.


Regarding the look of triumph in AD's eyes when he learns that Harry's blood
had been used in raising LV back to the living:

  I have a little theory here - The blood was not necessarily used to form
the blood in LV's body.  It was used as part of the ritual of life.  The
essence, and therefore the protection, from Harry became part of LV.  I
think we can all agree on this.

Now, taking a little something from the Muggle world, it becomes a little
more important:  Genetics.  Harry's DNA is in the blood that went into
making LV's body.  Therefore, part of Harry's DNA is in LV's new body from
the birthing process, thus making Harry (at least, genetically) the father
of LV's new body.  Since AD's spell of protection effect is based on family,
LV is now a member of Harry's family. In a way.

Since we never find out exactly how the spell works, it can be something as
simple as "lucky coincidences" siding with Harry and deflecting LV's actions
against him.  This seems to be supported in the fact that, while LV can now
safely touch and interact with Harry, our hero still gets saved by the most
miraculous of events.


OK, a bit about the death of Sirius.

>From what I have managed to read so far in the group, a number of people
feel that Sirius' death was a plot flub, a general mistake, or some other
reason that doesn't make any real sense.

To me, it makes perfect sense.  Remember, in OotP, it was Harry witnessing
the death of Sirius that ultimately saved him.  When LV was in control of
Harry, and was trying to kill him, it was Harry's immense love of Sirius,
and the bond that had formed, which had allowed Harry to throw off LV's
control.  In essence, JKR sacrificed Sirius so that Harry would find the
strength to survive.


>Geoff:
>That has just raised a question in my mind. I checked Tanya's
>reference and it is in GOF, the chapter "The Egg and the Eye". The
>thought then occurred to me - perhaps someone can indicate chapter
>and verse - how does Snape know that Harry has an Invisibility Cloak?

Well, for one thing, he wore it to sneak up on Harry, Sirius, and the others
in PoA.  When the cloak flew off of Harry and Hermione in their rush to the
willow, Snapes later found it and picked it up on his own way to the tree.
(IIRC, it actually states that Snapes saw the cloak blow off them, so he
knew where to find it.  This is all revealed when Harry and Hermione use the
Time Turner and they witness the events from hiding.)


On the Missing Death Eaters

Missy:
>I believe the cowardly and left forever are referring to Karkaroff
>(cowardly), and at the time, I thought Snape was the left forever.
>But now I wonder. My bets are on Fudge. (Just because I've worked
>in gov't and want the symbol of corrupt gov't to be evil.)


It's my suspicion that LV knows, somehow, that Snape is the one who is lost
to him forever and will possibly use him to unknowingly feed false
information to AD and the OoP.  This can not only be used to help trap Harry
or AD, but can gradually discredit Snape and throw a strong amount of
suspicion that Snape has gone back to the DE, by choice, and is acting as a
triple agent.  (With AD and the Oop thinking that Snape is acting as a
double agent for them against LV, and later thinking that he's actually
really working for LV.)

Just a theory.  = )



Your friend in Humor,

Iggy McSnurd,
the Prankster


"Blessed are the easily amused. for they shall be."











From eschaafin at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 15:39:09 2003
From: eschaafin at yahoo.com (Sophie)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:39:09 -0000
Subject: Apparating  And Portkeys (Snape in the Graveyard)
In-Reply-To: <bks333+ijq0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bksdqt+vseh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81515

Susan, "Potterfanme" <fc26det at a...> wrote:
<snip>
> For instance, a lot of posters feel that Snape could not possibly 
> have been at the graveyard.  Why not?  Yes he was at Hogwarts at the 
> end of the TWT but what is to say that when the dark mark burned, he 
> didn't apparate from outside the gates, then when Harry portkeyed 
> back, he simply apparated back and slipped through the gates and 
> showed up as tho he was never gone.
> <snip>


Is there any reason why another portkey couldn't have been set up for
others (like Snape, Bagman, etc.) to the graveyard?


Sophie





From vam0609 at aol.com  Wed Sep 24 15:40:10 2003
From: vam0609 at aol.com (kuligkutig)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:40:10 -0000
Subject: tame werewolf ?
In-Reply-To: <bksbbe+irhk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bksdsq+mptl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81516


Lziner wrote:
> > If Lupin takes his wolfsbane and is attacked, how could he fight 
> > back?  He couldn't use a wand.  His mind would be that of a wizard 
> > but his body that of a wolf.  Not much of a match for a DE. 
<snip>

Missy:
> But why would he be attacked?  DE's go after human victims.  In his 
> werewolf state, Lupin is no longer human.  His mind and body are 
that of a werewolf.  So why would the DE's go after him? <snip>


I think you're confusing DE's with Dementors. DE's are Death Eaters, 
Lucius Malfoy, Bellatrix and their friends. Dementors were the guards 
of Azkaban. 

"kuligkutig" 





From jamess at climax.co.uk  Wed Sep 24 16:03:53 2003
From: jamess at climax.co.uk (James Sharman)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 17:03:53 +0100
Subject: Karkaroff (was Re: Death Eaters)
Message-ID: <495A161B83F7544AA943600A98833B53016036BF@mimas.fareham.climax.co.uk>

No: HPFGUIDX 81517

Bookworm:
> Karkaroff is still a mystery to me.  If he was a coward, I would 
think it would be easier for him to respond to Voldemort's summons 
than not.  So there is something that scares him more than actually 
seeing Voldemort again. Such as fear of what Voldemort will do to 
him.  What did Karkaroff do after Voldemort's first defeat that 
might anger Voldemort?  <snip> >>>

James:
He sold out other Death Eaters to gain his own freedom. Remember the 
Pensieve scene in DD's office.




From president0084 at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 16:16:27 2003
From: president0084 at yahoo.com (president0084)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 16:16:27 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Spies
In-Reply-To: <bksfna+4n65@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bksg0r+r3er@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81518

Snape knows Harry has a cloak because in the POA when Harry sneaks 
into town, Malfoy sees Harry only half covered by the cloak.

It wouldn't be to hard to add one plus one equals Harry got a cloak.

"president0084" 




From jayandjay22 at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 24 21:29:35 2003
From: jayandjay22 at hotmail.com (fourjays22)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 21:29:35 -0000
Subject: Lockhart (was Re McGonagall/Teachers)
In-Reply-To: <bkrn94+b5q0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkt2bv+27oh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81519

Salit:
> Lockhart is the only choice I don't understand, as I am sure that 
> Dumbledore knew he was a fraud. Perhaps he had no other candidates 
> and took him as a last resort. Or maybe it was his quirky sense of 
> humor? Lockhart was one of the funniest characters in the entire 
> series...

Lockhart was the only person who applied for the job I believe.  
There is a discussion about this in CoS (sorry, I don't have the page 
reference handy).  Hermione says something along the lines that GL 
must be OK because Dumbledore thought him the best man for the job 
and Hagrid says he was the ONLY man for the job.  Hagrid continues 
that it is hard to get applicants because people are starting to 
believe the job is jinxed (which makes me wonder if there was a DADA 
teacher prior to Quirrell who also suffered an unhappy fate).  

I also think GL is hysterically funny, though quite sinister at the 
end.  

Julie, newbie from California who just reread CoS





From lucchaser at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 21:43:51 2003
From: lucchaser at yahoo.com (Lady Luck)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 21:43:51 -0000
Subject: Kreacher
In-Reply-To: <bksvpv+r5qk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkt36n+3peo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81520

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Brad" <stratton at a...> wrote:
> With the last of the Blacks now dead, what becomes of Kreacher? Is 
> Sirius' relation to Tonks enough to make her his new master? 
> Otherwise, what stops him from leaving Grimmauld Place and going to 
> the Narcissa or Voldemort and telling her/him everything?


Lucchaser:
Personally I think they should just kill him off, but not give him
what he wants, his head on the mantel with the rest of his family. Oh
no, they should burn him. So, that way we wouldn't have any problems 
of Kreacher running off telling everyone secrets and things.

p.s. I'm feeling a little evil today and Kreacher makes me sick.






From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Wed Sep 24 22:03:56 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 17:03:56 -0500
Subject: Lockhart/McGonagall/Teachers 
References: <bksvls+262g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003c01c382e7$c13f1920$0ce879a5@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81521

Geoff wrote:
> I'm not sure I agree. I think he was potentially one of the most
> sinister.... The fact that he had amassed all the material for his
> books fraudulently and was then also prepared to destroy Harry and
> Ron's memories and allow Ginny to die to keep the matter under wraps
> still raises the hairs on the back of my neck. Nooo. Me no like
> Professor Lockhart.
>

I think, when you boil it down, we have some of the teachers fitting into,
or breaking, certain stereotypes.

1:  Lockhart -  The good looking, charming, bon vivant who shows the world a
charismatic side of himself.  Strives to appear as though he's an earnest
mentor to Harry, and a potential friend to everyone else.  Inside, he's
actually a conniving schemer only out to further his own ends and promote
himself no matter who he uses to do it.  "Parasites of hide within the most
innocent and appealing of shapes to better lure in their host."  (IMHO, the
only reasons LV didn't try to recruit him are because he was probably still
in school at the time of LV's reign of terror, and LV would also get too
darn sick of his high annoyance factor.)

2:  Snapes - Evil looking, dark, brooding, and ill tempered.  He requires
strict discipline, but shows favoritism to those of his own House.  Probably
enjoys the fear he inspires in many of the students, and uses it as a way to
avenge a little of the wounded pride he suffered when he was in school.  Is
most often likely to target the popular or famous students.  However, he
appears to have a strong sense of duty, and is the fallen angel back on the
path of redemption.  "Behold, for the prodigal son once lost to us has
returned."

3:  Quirrell - Possessed of an inner evil all his own, but not ambitious or
strong enough to pursue his goals.  Deceptive and cunning, he is
nevertheless, weak and susceptible to the will of those stronger and more
cruel than himself.  His aptitude with Trolls indicates a willingness and
ability to manipulate underlings who are stronger than he in body, but weak
in mind.  "Even the puppet may seem to dance and have a life of its own, if
one cannot see the master of its strings."

4:  Hagrid - Big, bumbling, gruff in a good natured way, slow to rile, but
violently protective of his loved ones.  He appears, at first glance, to be
stupid, but he bears a knowledge, experience, and wisdom of his own that is
only hampered by his overly earnest personality.  Loyal, kind, and loving,
he has overcome his heritage through the kind understanding of those who
take the time to understand and befriend him.  "Don't judge a book by its
cover."  (A simple statement for an essentially simple person.)

5:  Trelawny - Secluded and alone in her life, yearning for friends but
unable to make the first move.  Tries to live up to the reputation of her
famous ancestor, yet tries too hard.  Fashioning the image of mystique
around herself that she believes others expect, yet she ultimately does it
to cover for her own insecurities.  Truly gifted in the sight, but blinded
by the trappings of the seer.  "Patience, my child.  Be yourself, flow
freely within yourself, and your gifts will come to you."

6:  Umbridge - Like the poisonous toad she resembles, Umbridge adheres only
to her ambition and belief that the ends justify the means in making sure
the law is upheld.  Her fear of "non-humans" or "half-breeds" may very well
stem not from some traumatic event in her past, but because they are outside
of her jurisdiction and, therefore, her control.  She works hard to place
harsher and harsher restrictions upon those around her in an effort to
obtain power.  She is the flip-side to Voldemort on the same black coin.
While he spreads chaos, she works to impose order to its dangerous
conclusion.  "Order is as the falling snow.  The right amount and you have a
vision of beauty.  Too much, and it becomes a glacier that crushes all else
under itself."


Hrm... I think I had better stop here... I used to be a Psychology major in
college and the analyst in me is beginning to type this for me.  *grin*


As an odd side note, my second e-mail was sent through, but not my first...
which included my introduction.  Well, we shall wait and see what happens.


Iggy McSnurd,
the Prankster


"Laugh, and the whole world laughs with you.  Sneeze, and it's goodbye
Seattle!"
  - C.D. Bayles  in "Roxanne"








From jade_sirocco at yahoo.com  Wed Sep 24 23:20:49 2003
From: jade_sirocco at yahoo.com (Liz Hildebrandt)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 16:20:49 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Who is in Slytherin?
Message-ID: <20030924232049.89978.qmail@web41005.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81522

(Apologies if this topic has been covered; I made a
cursory search but I haven't yet completely figured
out how to navigate this groups.  Also, hi.)

I've been trying to comprehend Slytherin.  It seems to
just be a respository for nasty people, but what
exactly is it supposed to be?  According to the
Sorting, Slytherin people are cunning and ambitious
and probably ruthless.  Yet according to the history,
Salazar Slytherin would only take in purebloods.  That
was his thing.  The password in year 2 was "pureblood"
so that must still be active in some way.  

It doesn't seem that these two things would coincide
all the time.  Anyone can be cunning, ambitious, and
ruthless, and it does tend to happen in people who are
not privileged.  How do they deal with that?  Is
there just a lot of in-house racism?  Yet there seems
to be loyalty (to some extent) within the house and
you never hear of a non-pureblood in Slytherin.  

Was Tom Riddle Slytherin?  (It might say somewhere; I
can't recall.)  If so, how did he get in?  

We've seen only a few Slytherin characters and so far
everyone who is cunning, ambitious, and ruthless also
happens to be pureblood, nasty, and racist.  (Snape is
a possible exception.  It's hard to tell what's going
on in his head when it comes to the pureblood issue.) 
So what does make up a Slytherin?  Who is chosen?  

Liz





From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz  Thu Sep 25 00:10:24 2003
From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 12:10:24 +1200
Subject: Dumbledore's Staff Was Re McGonagall/Teachers
In-Reply-To: <bkt5g8+foe0@eGroups.com>
References: <bksuea+72hn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20030925120444.02d03ba0@pop3.xtra.co.nz>

No: HPFGUIDX 81523

Elle wrote:
>Actually, Lockhart was *terrible* at performing the spells (think of
>his woeful performance in dueling club encounter with Snape, his
>inept attempt to repair Harry's broken arm and his inability to
>control the pixies.)  His only real magical talent was in the area of
>memory charms (as he himself admitted to Ron and Harry.)
>It is a puzzle as to why DD would have hired such a buffoon. Was he
>not aware that Lockhart was a fraud (if so, so much for all-knowing!
>Dumbledore), or was he trying to expose the students to all types of
>people (including conceited idiots) as Sandy suggested? (Or perhaps
>did JKR just think that CoS needed some more comic relief?)


One thing to note.  I am assuming that only that which is said is in
the book.  Final chapter of book 2 has a brief explanation by Ron that
Lockhart messed up the memory charm.  Dumbledore then says that
he impaled himself on his own sword.  Not that I can see did Ron say
that it was his method for writing the books.  I guess then that maybe
Dumbeldore knew before.  But as to the reason for hiring him, I have no
idea of the long term advantage.

Tanya





From lhuntley at fandm.edu  Thu Sep 25 03:19:19 2003
From: lhuntley at fandm.edu (Laura Ingalls Huntley)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 23:19:19 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] An intro, and a long letter...
In-Reply-To: <006f01c382ad$407701c0$1994aec7@rick>
Message-ID: <0D4698D5-EF07-11D7-A21B-000A95E29F3E@fandm.edu>

No: HPFGUIDX 81524

Iggy:
> IMHO, Lupin and Firenze are not the only competent teachers AD has 
> hired.
> Snapes is VERY competent as both a teacher and as a Potions Master. Of
> course, as a person, he leaves a bit to be desired.  (Remember that 
> Lupin
> states in PoA that his tonic is a very difficult one to make and that 
> Snapes
> is the only one at the school with the skills to do so.)
>

First of all: Welcome!  Second of all, I hope you know you have just 
made a highly debatable assertion.  I will not argue that Snape is 
(most likely) a superb potions brewer.  However, as I'm sure you've 
experienced in your own education, just because a teacher may be 
brilliant in their field, does NOT mean they can *teach*.  Snape, IMO, 
is a prime example of this.  I would consider him a *terrible* teacher. 
  Not only are his methods biased and unfair, but severely *impair* the 
learning of students such as Neville.  And he doesn't *care*.  As far 
as I'm concerned, I like a teacher who likes teaching.  Period.

Now, there are those on this list *coughs, looks pointedly at some of 
you*  who argue that Snape's style of teaching is a tried and true 
method from bygone (and much better, mind you) era.  While this may be 
so, I still cannot fathom more than a small percentage of students 
*thriving* under the kind of treatment he gives the Gryffindors.  The 
rest, well...perhaps they learn some kind of "life lesson" *resists 
urge to roll eyes*.

Minerva McGonagall...*sigh*...now *there's* a teacher.

Re: the part of your post about thestrals....I have four words for you.

Go. Read. The. FAQ.

(Okay, okay, I know...that's technically three words and an acronym.  
Sheesh.  ^_~)


Laura (who, very fortunately, found a Buffy inclined friend at college 
today, and is v. excited as this new acquaintance owns 3 seasons on 
DVD. ^_^)




From hannahwonder at aol.com  Thu Sep 25 00:22:22 2003
From: hannahwonder at aol.com (hannahwonder at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 20:22:22 EDT
Subject: Snape's Worst Memory (and the purpose thereof)
Message-ID: <c5.385b177f.2ca38f3e@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81525

Golly said:
<<Dumbeldore trusts him.  Which makes him trustworthy.  He's still a jerk.  
He's just a jerk on the side of right. 
(snip) 
But just because he's a jerk doesn't make him spawn of the devil or a racist. 
 He's just an ordinary nasty person.  Lots of ordinary people are not evil 
war mongering neo nazis without actually being nice people.  >>

Hannah (me):
Alright, you've got me here. :) I was interpreting "jerk" closer to "evil war 
mongering, etc," I suppose, or rather that his jerkiness comes from being 
inherently /bad/ in the way other characters are inherently /bad,/ which I don't 
think is true for Snape. That was my thought in regard to why the penseive 
scene was included. In any case, I much better understand your point of view now, 
so thank you!
Hannah




From Batchevra at aol.com  Thu Sep 25 02:16:20 2003
From: Batchevra at aol.com (Batchevra at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 22:16:20 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Jewish Goblins? (was: Re: Death Eaters)
Message-ID: <15b.2518fef4.2ca3a9f4@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81526

In a message dated 9/24/03 4:44:09 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca writes:

> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "entropymail" 
> <entropymail at y...> wrote:
> 
> >But I also wanted to note something that strikes me every time JKR
> >mentions the Dark Mark.  The placement of the Mark on each Death Eater
> >(the forearm; God, I love it when Snape pulls back the sleeve of his
> >robe to reveal his Mark to Fudge in GoF!) is quite similar to the
> >numbered tattoos which were inflicted upon prisoners of the German
> >concentration camps. 
> 
> No it isn't!  DE chose to be Death Eaters.  For whatever reason, it 
> is more than likely Snape made a choice to be branded.  Marking 
> yourself as a supporter of someone or something is very common.  It 
> is not uncommon for Neo Nazis to be marked with swastikas.  

I know this information is off topic, but I should remark that the SS in 
Hitler's Germany also had a tattoo, under their left armpit. It had their SS 
number and their blood type. 

Batchevra


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From Batchevra at aol.com  Thu Sep 25 03:22:51 2003
From: Batchevra at aol.com (Batchevra at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 23:22:51 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Scabber is NOT a rat (was Hyperbolic Chapter Titles )
Message-ID: <192.2024397e.2ca3b98b@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81527

In a message dated 9/22/03 10:38:48 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca writes:

> Sirius said the 
> Dementors could not sense animal emotions - thus imply when he was in 
> dog form he was a dog.  
> 
> 

In POA, pg 272 Sirius says, "Dementors can't see, you know... They feel their 
way towards people by sensing their emotions... they could tell that my 
feelings were less-less human, less complex when I was a dog... but they thought, 
of course, that I was losing my mind like everyone else in there, so it didn't 
trouble them." 

The Dementors can sense animal emotions, they are just not as strong as 
people's emotions. 

Batchevra


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From ratalman at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 25 04:10:14 2003
From: ratalman at yahoo.com (ratalman)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 04:10:14 -0000
Subject: Who is it that Wormtail is supposed to murder, in GoF?
Message-ID: <bktpr6+597c@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81528

Who is it that Wormtail is supposed to murder, in GoF?  And 
does Wormtail succeed in committing the murder he is 
supposed to commit?

On p.10, GoF, hardcover ed.,  Wormtail says to LV:  "and if we 
proceed, if I murder--"  "If?" whispered the second voice.  "If?  If 
you follow the plan, Wormtail, the ministry need never know that 
anyone else has died.  You will do it quietly and without fuss; I 
only wish that I could do it myself, but in my present condition...  
Come, Wormtail, one more death and our path to Harry Potter is 
clear.   I am not asking you to do it alone.  By that time, my
faithful servant will have rejoined us--"

I suppose this "one more death" could be Barty Crouch Sr, but I 
don't see how the ministry could fail to notice his death.  It can't 
be Bertha Jorkins, since she is already dead by LV's hand, killed 
after she had been questioned.  It can't be Moody since Crouch 
Jr tells us he needed Moody to be kept alive to help with his 
impersonation and to provide hair for the polyjuice potion.  I don't 
see how it could be Cedric, for how could anyone have predicted 
that Harry would come to Tom Riddle Sr's graveyard 
accompanied by another tri-wizard champion?   Could it be 
Sirius Black?

Robyn




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Thu Sep 25 06:54:21 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 06:54:21 -0000
Subject: An intro, and a long letter...
In-Reply-To: <006f01c382ad$407701c0$1994aec7@rick>
Message-ID: <bku3et+v1r8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81529

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Iggy McSnurd" 
<coyoteschild at p...> wrote:
> 
> 

<mega snip>

> The first HP book states that they died when Harry was one year 
old.  It
> never gives an exact date, not does it say he died ON his first 
birthday.  A
> child who is 18 months old is still a year old.
> 
> 


Geoff:
I have already posted that we do know when Lily and James died. 
Hagrid confirms that it was on Hallowe'en when he comes to the house 
on the rock at the beginning of PS.




From a_williams1 at uop.edu  Thu Sep 25 07:36:37 2003
From: a_williams1 at uop.edu (Aesha Malikah Takreem Williams)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 00:36:37 -0700
Subject: Who sets the password?
Message-ID: <000b01c38337$c08530a0$d8430a0a@bre.uop.edu>

No: HPFGUIDX 81530

    Liz (jade_sirocco) mentioned that in 2nd year, the Slytherin password was "pureblood". I wonder if this is an indication that the prefects set the password, because it seems like it would be improper for the word "pureblood" to be the password... and I highly doubt Dumbledore would choose it, and I think Snape might not, either (since he's not working for the Dark Lord anymore, does he harbor the same racist tendencies? Or did he just decide world domination, mass murder and torture weren't the ways to go about getting rid of "their kind"?) I mean, it seems to me that pureblood has at the very least a bad connotation... it seems to be the opposite of the word "mudblood", which we all know is a horrible thing to call someone. Then again, perhaps pureblood isn't used the same way that mudblood is. 
    But then I thought a prefect in one of the books said that McGonagall gave them the password. But perhaps I'm confusing that with Alicia's statement about McGonagall telling her she was captain. 

Aesha

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Thu Sep 25 08:22:59 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 08:22:59 -0000
Subject: An intro, and a long letter...
In-Reply-To: <006f01c382ad$407701c0$1994aec7@rick>
Message-ID: <bku8l3+rfl3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81531

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Iggy McSnurd" 
<coyoteschild at p...> wrote:
> The first HP book states that they died when Harry was one year 
old.  It
> never gives an exact date, not does it say he died ON his first 
birthday.  A
> child who is 18 months old is still a year old.

They died on Halloween. Hagrid tells Harry that on their first 
meeting.

> 2:  If Fawkes is the constant companion of the Headmaster of 
Hogwarts, might
> him coming to Harry's rescue and helping him on so many other 
occasions not
> be a sign that Harry will become the new Headmaster later in life?  
(Might
> Fawkes not sense this somehow and treat him accordingly?)

I don't think Fawkes is always the Headmaster's companion.
In CoS when Harry enters Riddle's diary, he enters the headmaster's 
office when Prof. Dippet (?) had the job. He muses about the 
difference between the office then and now, and specifically notes 
Fawkes' absense.

Salit





From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Thu Sep 25 09:35:40 2003
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 09:35:40 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Staff Was Re McGonagall/Teachers
In-Reply-To: <bksuea+72hn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkuctc+5j47@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81532

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
 
> Divination: Trelawny, Firenze (we already know what Dumbledore 
thinks 
> of Divination; did he hire a new teacher just in order to Ministry-
> proof Hogwarts against another assignee?).  

I think the main reason is, that he wanted Trelawney to keep at 
Hogwarts. Umbridge would have hired a new teacher, who would have 
need Trelawney's room, but Firenze doesn't. The moment Trelawney 
would leave Hogwarts, Death Eaters would probably try to kidnap her, 
in hope to find out the full prophecy, or in case she makes another 
prophecy. After all, Dumbledore risked a fiendship with the other 
centaurs, and I think he wouldn't done this, if there wasn't a really 
good reason.

Hickengruendler




From queen_amidalachic at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 25 11:21:03 2003
From: queen_amidalachic at yahoo.com (Maria)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 11:21:03 -0000
Subject: Who is it that Wormtail is supposed to murder, in GoF?
In-Reply-To: <bktpr6+597c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkuj2v+75jh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81533

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ratalman" <ratalman at y...> 
wrote:
> I suppose this "one more death" could be Barty Crouch Sr, but I 
> don't see how the ministry could fail to notice his death.  It 
can't 
> be Bertha Jorkins, since she is already dead by LV's hand, killed 
> after she had been questioned.  It can't be Moody since Crouch 
> Jr tells us he needed Moody to be kept alive to help with his 
> impersonation and to provide hair for the polyjuice potion.  I 
don't 
> see how it could be Cedric, for how could anyone have predicted 
> that Harry would come to Tom Riddle Sr's graveyard 
> accompanied by another tri-wizard champion?   Could it be 
> Sirius Black?
> 
> Robyn


Hmmm, I have the English edition which has different words put in.
 
Pg 15, English edition, softcover:
"and if we proceed, if I curse--"  
"If?" whispered the second voice.  "If?  If 
you follow the plan, Wormtail, the ministry need never know that 
anyone else has disappeared.  You will do it quietly and without  
fuss;"

Because words such us curse and disappeared were used, I assumed that 
Wormtail and Crouch Jr, in the future were going to attack and curse 
Moody ... and because the plan worked, the Ministry didn't know.  

It couldn't have been Cedric becuase, he was not supposed to take the 
cup with Harry. He was a mistake in the plan. Only Harry was supposed 
to win it, not tie with Cedric.

Maria.
http://www.geocities.com/queen_amidalachic/index.html





From silmariel at telefonica.net  Thu Sep 25 11:53:34 2003
From: silmariel at telefonica.net (Carolina)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 13:53:34 +0200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Who is in Slytherin?/Thestrals/Karkaroff/Kreacher
In-Reply-To: <20030924232049.89978.qmail@web41005.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20030924232049.89978.qmail@web41005.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <200309251353.35046.silmariel@telefonica.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 81534

#81522 Who is in Slytherin by Liz Hildebrandt: 
> We've seen only a few Slytherin characters and so far
> everyone who is cunning, ambitious, and ruthless also
> happens to be pureblood, nasty, and racist.  

> So what does make up a Slytherin?  Who is chosen?  

I found this post by chance, #51271 (by Eileen), you may like it, 
and its replies. 

It gives a series of reasons to like Slytherin or to be sorted into 
it, without being a racist. Including:

The word Slytherin sounds cool.
Green and Silver may be your favourite colors.
There's people cunning and ambitious at eleven.
If you can't stand some Gryffindor characters, is easy ending 
apreciating their opponents.

I'll add you can just love serpents.

#81524  **Laura Ingalls Huntley: (replying to Iggy's 81514) -An 
intro and a long...

<<Re: the part of your post about thestrals....I have four words for 
you.

Go. Read. The. FAQ.>>

Being picky, we should add that seeing death must be a figure of 
speech, because, as (sorry don't remember who) someone pointed out, 
Harry didn't see Cedric die. He had his eyes closed due to intense 
scar pain. 

#81517 Karkaroff (was Re: Death Eaters) by James Sharman

Bookworm:
> Karkaroff is still a mystery to me.  If he was a coward...  What 
did Karkaroff do after Voldemort's first defeat that 
might anger Voldemort?  <snip> >>>

James replied:
>He sold out other Death Eaters to gain his own freedom. Remember 
the Pensieve scene in DD's office.

I just wanted an excuse to play with Karkaroff mistery. I don't 
think he is dead, to start. I'll try to add one and one.

Durstram teaches Dark Arts. 
Bulgarian wizards study at D.
Romania is really close to Bulgaria (think they have common 
frontier) and home-base of Vampires.
Hermione still writes to Victor.
Charlie has easy access to the area, too. 
Dumbledore has not expressed concerns about Vampires.

I think we have place for a complete off-screen subplot here, just 
imagining what a ff writer could do with all this.

#81520 "Kreacher" by Lucchaser:
<<... they should just kill him off, .... So, that way we wouldn't 
have any problems of Kreacher running off telling everyone secrets 
and things.>>

<<p.s. I'm feeling a little evil today and Kreacher makes me sick.>>

:) No, no, no, don't kill him. He can still be of use use in this 
Spy war, we don't know what false information he has been given, 
and I think his betrayal was expected, Keacher at any point tried 
to sell the image that his loyalty was with the Order, or at least 
my impression is he was depicted clearly as a classism lover, 
mudblood hater.

Then, personally I think Kreacher is very funny, as Sirius mother 
portrait. But hey, Dobby and Winky make me sick.

silmariel








From jessrynn at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 25 05:21:33 2003
From: jessrynn at yahoo.com (jessrynn)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 05:21:33 -0000
Subject: McGonagall a Muggle? (Was: Did I Miss Something?)
In-Reply-To: <bkrtkf+ihl0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bktu0t+mfp9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81535

I wrote:
> It has always seemed to me that Hermione has as close of a 
> relationship with her parents that someone in her situation can 
have. 

I guess I should have clarified here a little more. Of course her 
relationship with her parents has changed, some of that is the 
condition of her living in an entirely different world, but not all 
of it. I think some of it comes from living at a boarding school, and 
how that changes the relationship that you have with your parents. I 
don't, however, believe that Hermione has disassociated with her 
Muggle upbringing or her parents.


Fred wrote:
> I agree with Doriane more than I do with Jessryn.
> Yes, in the beginning Hermione had a close relationship with her 
> parents, but canon does not support that anymore. 
> In the first year, PS/SS, Hermione went home to see her parents as 
> much as possible, (for christmas and summer holidays). In the 
>second year, CoS, she stays at school for christmas, same in the 
>third year, PoA. By the time the forth year arrives, she not only 
stays at school 
> for christmas but we also see her not staying home during summer 
> vaction. She goes to Ron's house, and we are not sure how long she 
> was there before Harry gets there.

I don't really see any of this as Hermione distancing herself from 
her muggle heritage or her parents. Part of the reason is that in all 
these situations Ron, the only other person in school for whom we get 
detailed information about holiday plans(you could go ahead and add 
Ron's siblings to that), also stays at school, and most would say he 
is still close with his parents. 

Most of these situations also have extenuating circumstances in which 
Hermione simply has to face divided loyalties. Unlike when she was a 
child she no longer just loves her parents, but Harry and Ron too. 
They are her family at school. Most of what she does in staying for 
the holidays is done for Harry's benefit.

In CoS both Ron and Hermione stay, because over the holiday break is 
when they are going to use the Polyjuice potion. In PoA they both 
stay, because this is right after Harry finds out about Sirius 
Black's "betrayal" of his parents and they don't want him to be 
alone. In GoF, the Yule Ball is over Christmas break and that 
provides a reason to stay, because it is a special event.

When we get to the summer after GoF all I have is speculation. It is 
possible that Hermione stayed with the Weasley's for her own 
protection. Harry is protected with the Dursleys, Hermione is not 
with her parents. At this point they don't really know what Voldemort 
is after, so Hermione could arguably be a target. Ron is with his 
parents only because they can provide protection and are involved in 
the movement as well. 


> And in OotP, we are not sure if she even goes home for the summer 
> holidays, she cancels her christmas vaction with her parents and 
> walks away from her parents at the train station to stand with the 
> rest of the witchs and wizards to "bully" the Duersleys.
> So, I think that in 5 years we can see how a "muggle-born" witch 
can 
> change how she feels about muggles she loves (not saying she 
doesn't 
> love her family, just that she feels separated from them), just 
think 
> how someone that has been a witch for over 60 years would feel 
about 
> muggles.

In OotP it is about the greater cause of stopping Voldemort(helping 
both the WW and Muggles), which would explain why Hermione would 
cancel her Christmas with her parents, she wants to be useful. Also 
there is the aspect of protection. As for the scene at the train 
station, she greets her parents lovingly, and does not walk away from 
them to join the wizards and witches but to support Harry. 

Separation from her parents may be there, but it comes more from her 
expanding relationships than from anything muggle/wizard.










From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Thu Sep 25 03:36:23 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 22:36:23 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Teaching styles (was - An intro, and a long letter...)
References: <0D4698D5-EF07-11D7-A21B-000A95E29F3E@fandm.edu>
Message-ID: <005101c38316$326f9b00$7c96aec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81536

From: "Laura Ingalls Huntley" >
> First of all: Welcome!

Thanks... Glad to be here.

(Bows and sweeps his jester's cap of amid a loud jingling of bells.)

>Second of all, I hope you know you have just
> made a highly debatable assertion.  I will not argue that Snape is
> (most likely) a superb potions brewer.  However, as I'm sure you've
> experienced in your own education, just because a teacher may be
> brilliant in their field, does NOT mean they can *teach*.  Snape, IMO,
> is a prime example of this.  I would consider him a *terrible* teacher.
>   Not only are his methods biased and unfair, but severely *impair* the
> learning of students such as Neville.  And he doesn't *care*.  As far
> as I'm concerned, I like a teacher who likes teaching.  Period.

Personally, I feel he is still a very compitent teacher.

While I disagree with how he treats some of his students (I had a social
studies teacher in high school for four long semesters who treated me much
like Snapes treats Neville and Harry combined...  A truly horrific
experience...), he does impart the required knowledge to the vast majority
of his class.

The only people you really see being prejudiced against are Neville (because
of his complete lack of potions talent), Harry (because of Snape's hatred of
him), Ron, and occasionally Hermione (both primarily due to their
association with Harry.)  Not that this makes it right by any means.

I have had a number of teachers who were complete jerks, but knew their
subject and taught the information well.  I have also known a number of
friendly, but barely compitent teachers.  Given my choice between the two,
I'd rather have the former.

(Of course, given my ultimate choice, I agree that McGonigall would be an
ideal teacher.  Knoes her subject to a "T", imparts the knowledge well, and
honestly cares about her students.)

>
> Now, there are those on this list *coughs, looks pointedly at some of
> you*  who argue that Snape's style of teaching is a tried and true
> method from bygone (and much better, mind you) era.  While this may be
> so, I still cannot fathom more than a small percentage of students
> *thriving* under the kind of treatment he gives the Gryffindors.  The
> rest, well...perhaps they learn some kind of "life lesson" *resists
> urge to roll eyes*.

Ultimately, I think it's a dice roll... Just as there are many types of
students and teachers, finding the perfect combination is a toss up.  After
all, I'm sure that McGonigall may even treat the Slytherins a bit
differently than she treats the Gryffindors... It's just not nearly so
extreme and you don't see it in the books.

I've actually seen a number of students do exceedingly well under that
teacher who treated me so abominably.  (Fortunately, I found out a few years
after I was out of high school, that the other teachers in her department
banded together and not only got her dismissed from the school, but also
banned from teaching at any school in the county.)


Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster...








From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Thu Sep 25 11:41:33 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 06:41:33 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Who sets the password?
References: <000b01c38337$c08530a0$d8430a0a@bre.uop.edu>
Message-ID: <034001c38359$f9ea0f60$628faec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81537

>From: "Aesha Malikah Takreem Williams
>     Liz (jade_sirocco) mentioned that in 2nd year, the Slytherin password
was "pureblood". I wonder if this is an indication
>that the prefects set the password, because it seems like it would be
improper for the word "pureblood" to be the
>password... and I highly doubt Dumbledore would choose it, and I think
Snape might not, either (since he's not working for
>the Dark Lord anymore, does he harbor the same racist tendencies? Or did he
just decide world domination, mass murder
>and torture weren't the ways to go about getting rid of "their kind"?) I
mean, it seems to me that pureblood has at the very
>least a bad connotation... it seems to be the opposite of the word
"mudblood", which we all know is a horrible thing to call
>someone. Then again, perhaps pureblood isn't used the same way that
mudblood is.

Well, we have seen indications that the passwords can, and do, change
regularly.  It could be that, after the first message on the wall in CoS, it
was changed to "PureBlood."  It seems to me something the Slytherins would
do, both to constantly remind themselves that they are safe from the Heir's
wrath, and to bolster their own egos.

As for who specifically sets the password... I would think it would be the
head of each house, since they can tailor it to the goals, attitudes, or
plain mood of that house at that time.


Iggy McSnurd,
the Prankster


"When life gives you lemons, make lemonade...
   And sell it for $5 a bottle like those bottled water people do."

-- Iggy McSnurd








From fc26det at aol.com  Thu Sep 25 13:12:08 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 13:12:08 -0000
Subject: Apparating  And Portkeys (Snape in the Graveyard)
In-Reply-To: <bksdqt+vseh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkupj8+5dba@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81538

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sophie" <eschaafin at y...> wrote:
 
> Is there any reason why another portkey couldn't have been set up 
for
> others (like Snape, Bagman, etc.) to the graveyard?
> 
> 
> Sophie

The only reason I can think of is that it seems portkeys are 
monitored very closely by the MOM.  Crouch Jr. would not have cared 
about that as Harry was not supposed to return.  I don't think that 
Snape would want to be found out though.

Susan




From kkearney at students.miami.edu  Thu Sep 25 14:03:14 2003
From: kkearney at students.miami.edu (corinthum)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 14:03:14 -0000
Subject: Who is it that Wormtail is supposed to murder, in GoF?
In-Reply-To: <bktpr6+597c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkusj2+iq9h@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81539

Robyn wrote:

> Who is it that Wormtail is supposed to murder, in GoF?  And 
> does Wormtail succeed in committing the murder he is 
> supposed to commit?
> 
> On p.10, GoF, hardcover ed.,  Wormtail says to LV:  "and if we 
> proceed, if I murder--"  "If?" whispered the second voice.  "If?  
If 
> you follow the plan, Wormtail, the ministry need never know that 
> anyone else has died.  You will do it quietly and without fuss; I 
> only wish that I could do it myself, but in my present 
condition...  
> Come, Wormtail, one more death and our path to Harry Potter is 
> clear.   I am not asking you to do it alone.  By that time, my
> faithful servant will have rejoined us--"
> 
> I suppose this "one more death" could be Barty Crouch Sr, but I 
> don't see how the ministry could fail to notice his death.

If all had gone according to plan (and Crouch Sr. hadn't started 
resisting the Imperius Curse), the ministry might not have noticed 
his death for some time.  He had been calling in sick for weeks, and 
though the public was starting to be worried by this, the Ministry 
itself showed little to no concern.  So yes, I think Voldemort was 
referring to Crouch Sr with this comment.

-Corinth 




From meriaugust at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 25 13:59:13 2003
From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 13:59:13 -0000
Subject: Who sets the password?
In-Reply-To: <034001c38359$f9ea0f60$628faec7@rick>
Message-ID: <bkusbh+ddkv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81540

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Iggy McSnurd" wrote: "As for 
who specifically sets the password... I would think it would be the
head of each house, since they can tailor it to the goals, attitudes, 
or plain mood of that house at that time."

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Actually, it is implied in PoA that it is the portrait that covers 
the entrance that sets the password. Sir Cadogan (who takes over for 
the Fat Lady when she is attacked by Sirius Black) keeps making up 
such difficult ones (like "Scurvy cur" and "Odsbodkins") that Neville 
asks for the week's in advance, which leads to Sirius to be able to 
get into the tower. Though admittedly there is no portrait over the 
Slytherin common room door, perhaps the wall is enchanted to choose 
passwords. 

Meri 







From eschaafin at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 25 14:35:12 2003
From: eschaafin at yahoo.com (Sophie)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 14:35:12 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's spies
Message-ID: <bkuuf0+b7dq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81541

I just came across an interesting passage in PoA ch 10 (Marauder's map).
It's when Fudge, McGonagall, Hagrid, etc. were talking at three
broomsticks.
Getting ready to tell the story about the potters' secret keeper, he says:
"Not many people knew You-know-who was after them.  Dumbledore... had
a number of useful spies.  One of them tipped him off, and he alerted
James and Lily at once."

How likely is it, do you think, that Snape was that spy?  What sort of
wierd dynamic would that set up?  Snape would have made an effort to
save the life of James ad Lily.  That must count for something. 

Sophie







From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Thu Sep 25 14:39:07 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 14:39:07 -0000
Subject: Who is it that Wormtail is supposed to murder, in GoF?
In-Reply-To: <bkusj2+iq9h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkuumb+kfbc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81542

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "corinthum" <kkearney at s...> 
wrote:
 
> If all had gone according to plan (and Crouch Sr. hadn't started 
> resisting the Imperius Curse), the ministry might not have noticed 
> his death for some time.  He had been calling in sick for weeks, 
and 
> though the public was starting to be worried by this, the Ministry 
> itself showed little to no concern.  So yes, I think Voldemort was 
> referring to Crouch Sr with this comment.



Jen: You know, I've always assumed it was Crouch, Sr., but now I'm 
wondering.

In the scene where Crouch!Moody is under the influence of Veritaserum 
he makes it clear that they wanted Crouch, Sr. alive so he could 
communicate with the Ministry and no one would suspect he was other 
than ill. He's only killed when he escapes from Wormtail and attempts 
going to Hogwarts to tell Dumbledore what's happening.

So this doesn't fit in with the quote Robyn posted, where Voldemort 
says, "If you follow the plan, Wormtail, the Ministry need never know 
that anyone else has died."  Need *never* know?  They would 
eventually know if Crouch, Sr. died.

Robyn suggested Sirius, and he seems like a possibility--Harry and 
others would realize something happened to Sirius, but the Ministry 
might not ever *know* even if they continue their investigation.  
That would fit in too with Voldemort's quote, "Come, Wormtail, one 
more death and our path to Harry Potter is clear." They would know by 
then that Sirius escaped and Wormtail would suspect, given Sirius's 
loyalty to James, that he's trying to protect Harry now.

Crouch!Moody doesn't talk about a planned murder while under the 
influence of Veritaserum, but he wouldn't have necessarily known 
about it if it's between LV and Wormtail. 

Interesting post, Robyn! Any other possibilities of people the MOM 
need *never* know about?

Jen




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Thu Sep 25 14:44:08 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 14:44:08 -0000
Subject: Who is it that Wormtail is supposed to murder, in GoF?
In-Reply-To: <bktpr6+597c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkuuvo+gs4i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81543

Oh, I just had another thought--perhaps it was Frank Bryce and he is 
indeed murdered later in that scene just not by Wormtail. 

They would definitely need him gone in order to stay at the Riddle 
House and have the graveyard scene at the end of GOF, and the MOM 
would never know b/c, as we find out later, Dumbledore is the only 
one reading Muggle newspapers.

So they need to murder him for the plan, but just weren't expecting 
it to happen right that minute.  Jen




From dcyasser at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 25 14:52:09 2003
From: dcyasser at yahoo.com (dcyasser)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 14:52:09 -0000
Subject: Who is it that Wormtail is supposed to murder, in GoF?
In-Reply-To: <bkuuvo+gs4i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkuvep+4ovm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81544

This topic has been debated at length, but there are always new 
theories.  Somewhere in some interview, and I'll look for it if I 
find the time, JKR said she had intended to kill off Mad-Eye Moody, 
but she liked his character so much she kept him instead. That, to 
me, suggests that Moody was the one who was supposed to be killed in 
GoF, when he is attacked by Wormtail and Crouch Jr.  We all know JKR 
reworked the plot a great deal, so I contend the "one more death" is 
something she simply missed correcting the first time around, and 
that it would have been Moody. 
cheers
dc
 




From persephone_kore at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 25 15:00:26 2003
From: persephone_kore at yahoo.com (persephone_kore)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 15:00:26 -0000
Subject: Bullies and Heroes (Was Re: Snape's Worst Memory..., Was Re:Hyperbolic chapter)
In-Reply-To: <78.47ab2869.2ca0e7e8@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bkuvua+s2v7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81545

Hannah wrote:
> 
> I'm so glad for the penseive scene because it makes me interested in 
> how Harry is eventually going to deal with how he feels toward Snape: 
> how can he reconcile Snape's rudeness and his responding anger with 
> the sympathy/guilt he feels for Snape being tormented as a child by 
> Harry's father? How can a reader reconcile it? I, for one, cannot,  
> and that makes me all the more eager for book 6. :)

Now PK: 

I think we must be using "reconcile" differently here, because I found
this very puzzling -- I admit that Harry is certainly feeling
contradictory emotions, but I don't see any particular logical
difficulty -- and not being quite as stuck in Harry's viewpoint as
Harry naturally is, /I/ don't have any real emotional difficulty
observing that both all parties involved have behaved abominably to
each other and that in at least Harry's and Snape's cases this is
emotionally understandable, though still not justified. 

So. Harry can sympathize with what Snape went through as a child; he's
been there, or somewhere similar, and it makes him sick to think what
part his father took in it. He can probably recognize that Snape's
anger with him for prying is justified -- and still be angry in return
for the way Snape expressed it and the assumptions Snape made about
him and the cessation of the Occlumency lessons. 

In fact, I hope that what Harry will figure out is essentially what
Geoff said in a different reply -- that a person can be extremely
unpleasant and even hate you and still be on your side, that doing
wrong in one area or on one occasion doesn't constitute the whole of
your character, and that you can understand why someone behaves as
they do and feel sympathy without thinking they're right -- not to
mention that feeling sympathy in one area also doesn't mean you have
to sympathize with everything. ;) There can be jerks on the right
side, and the same person can be an abominable bully in one context
and a hero in another. People are often inconsistent and contradictory. 

One good way to do this, I suspect, would be for someone to tell him
about admirable things James did (instead of just generalities)
without excusing the not-so-admirable ones.....

PK




From persephone_kore at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 25 15:01:31 2003
From: persephone_kore at yahoo.com (persephone_kore)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 15:01:31 -0000
Subject: Bullies and Heroes -- ack! Correction
In-Reply-To: <bkuvua+s2v7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkv00b+3skt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81546

Erk! I meant Golly, not Geoff. Bother. Very sorry about that....

PK




From n_longbottom01 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 25 15:04:19 2003
From: n_longbottom01 at yahoo.com (n_longbottom01)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 15:04:19 -0000
Subject: Buckbeak, was Re: The Phoenix & the Snowy Owl
In-Reply-To: <bkq9fg+nvl4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkv05j+khl4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81547

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "berkana_dianic" 
<Berkana_01 at h...> wrote:
> 
> 
> Oh my god, I totally forgot about Buckbeak....Who now will take 
care 
> of him, now that Sirius has died?
> 
> ml
> 
> joanna
> x

Now me, n_longbottom01:

I think Buckbeak must still have some role to play in the series; why 
else would JKR keep him around for OoP?  I liked the idea of Sirius 
and Buckbeak on the run together after they make their escape at the 
end of PoA, but once Sirius was confined to his house, it would have 
been a good time for JKR to find a nice herd of Hippogriffs in a 
secluded spot in South America that Buckbeak would have been safe 
with.  If Buckbeak has no further role in the story, it wouldn't be 
too hard to come up with a happily-ever-after senario for him, and 
write him out of the series.  Kreature would have had to find another 
way to create a distraction for Sirius at the end of OoP, but I'm 
sure he could have come up with something.

I mean, can you imagine keeping a Hippogriff in your bedroom?  And 
you can't take him out for a walk?  Man, I'd hate to change that 
litter box.  Scourgify, scourgify, SCOURGIFY!!!  

Maybe Lupin will take care of Buckbeak now?  I can't see anyone at 
Hogwarts taking care of him, because of the danger of Draco Malfoy 
spotting him.  I wouldn't mind seeing Hagrid and Buckbeak reunited, 
but I'm not sure how that would work.

n_longbottom01




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Thu Sep 25 15:09:36 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 15:09:36 -0000
Subject: Thought on Wormtail's activities in OOTP (was non-prophecy activities)
In-Reply-To: <bkt1ck+3t9h@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkv0fg+dfih@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81548

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Shirley" <shirley2allie at h...> 
wrote:
> But why would he be at Hogwarts?  Crookshanks could probably sniff 
> him out if he was anywhere near the Gryffindor tower.  And when you 
> say "new" spy; who was the old one?  
> 
> I'm not trying to shoot you down; I just don't see that as his 
> assignment.  In fact, LV seems to have so little regard for him - 
he 
> always calls him Wormtail and never Peter, have you noticed? - that 
> I'd think he'd just keep him around as a servant/lackey/scapegoat.


Jen:

At the end of GOF we find out from Crouch!Moody under Veritaserum 
that "Wormtail neglected his duty. He was not watchful enough" and he 
allowed Crouch Sr. to escape to Hogwarts and attempt to tell 
Dumbledore about LV's plan.

So then we see Wormtail again at the graveyard scene. I've always 
wondered if LV didn't keep Wormtail around to supply his hand for the 
potion, then punish him *very* severely for almost botching the whole 
plan in the first place, perhaps so severely that he wasn't able to 
perform any duties in OOTP. As Shirley pointed out, LV has only 
contempt for him and now that LV has his DE's back--why does he need 
Peter?

I don't think LV killed him though, b/c surely the silver hand and 
Peter's life debt to Harry will play a major role in the future. But 
what if LV's punishment is the final straw and Peter has renounced 
him and disappeared? We already know he is having second thoughts in 
GOF, perhaps because of the life-debt, when he suggests LV use 
someone besides Harry in the potion.  That always seemed like such an 
uncharacteristically bold move on Peter's part to me. 

And if Peter disappeared, i don't think LV has enough time or 
resources to try to find him with all the other activities he's 
involved with in OOTP. Peter would be esp. adept at hiding given his 
animagus abilities.

Jen





From missygallant2000 at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 25 15:53:51 2003
From: missygallant2000 at yahoo.com (Missy)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 15:53:51 -0000
Subject: Ron's experience in MoM
In-Reply-To: <bktciu+hapl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkv32f+bk6q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81549

<snip>
>  "According to Madame Pomfrey,
> thoughts could leave deeper scarring than almost anything else, 
> though since she had started applying copious amounts of Dr. 
Ubbly's 
> Oblivious Unction, there seemed to be some improvement." (US 
> hardcover p.847)
> 

OK- I have a different take on this.  I'm pretty certain that Ron was 
hit by some sort of charm in the planet room.  This lead him to be 
confused, giggly, whatever you want to call it when Harry met them 
outside the room.  

Then, Ron in his giggly state sees the brain, comes up with the ever 
classic, "Accio Brain!" (which the mental picture still makes me 
giggle).  The brain had those tentacles that wrap themselves into 
Ron, and if I recall correctly, Ron then seems to be in pain.  I just 
thought those tentacles were physical manifestations of thoughts.  
And when they dug into Ron, they left scarring.




From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au  Thu Sep 25 16:09:20 2003
From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 16:09:20 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Staff Was Re McGonagall/Teachers
In-Reply-To: <bksuea+72hn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkv3vg+9ab5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81550

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...> 
wrote:
> arcum wrote:
> > Dumbledore has hired, in this order: Trelawney, Snape, Quirrell,
> > Lockhart, Hagrid, Lupin, Crouch, and Firenze 
>
> Madame Hooch and Madame Pomfrey are adequate, if somewhat 
> one-dimensional.
> 

Another teacher to add to the list that DD hired is Kettleburn, CoMC 
that Hagrid replaced. (see POA) With his loss of limbs, I don't think 
his position was pre-dating DD as Headmaster. 

If Buckbeak was condemned for that scrath, how often did Kettleburn 
call Macnair in to execute other Magical Creatures.  ~aussie~




From navarro198 at hotmail.com  Thu Sep 25 16:33:52 2003
From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 16:33:52 -0000
Subject: Ron's experience in MoM
In-Reply-To: <bkv32f+bk6q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkv5dg+odgl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81551

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Missy" 
<missygallant2000 at y...> wrote:
The brain had those tentacles that wrap themselves into 
> Ron, and if I recall correctly, Ron then seems to be in pain.  I 
just 
> thought those tentacles were physical manifestations of thoughts.  
> And when they dug into Ron, they left scarring.

I agree.  My pondering wants to take this a step farther - what were 
those thoughts and what kind of scarring (besides the 
physical/external) did they leave.  And was all the giggling just to 
put him in a state where he wasn't thinking clearly, or are the 
hints of planets a clue for us?  

Ravenclaw Bookworm




From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 25 16:43:43 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 16:43:43 -0000
Subject: Who is it that Wormtail is supposed to murder, in GoF?
In-Reply-To: <bkuj2v+75jh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkv5vv+t2q7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81552

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Maria" wrote:
> Hmmm, I have the English edition which has different words put in.
>  
> Pg 15, English edition, softcover:
> "and if we proceed, if I curse--"  
> "If?" whispered the second voice.  "If?  If 
> you follow the plan, Wormtail, the ministry need never know that 
> anyone else has disappeared.  You will do it quietly and without  
> fuss;"
> 
> Because words such us curse and disappeared were used, I assumed 
that Wormtail and Crouch Jr, in the future were going to attack and 
curse Moody ... and because the plan worked, the Ministry didn't 
know.  


hg:
It makes perfect sense if the words curse/disappeared are correct, 
but just this past week I myself was agonizing over that passage, and 
I have the American version, which is murder/death.

Who makes edits when it goes to American publishers?  My husband 
thinks JK herself makes those changes, but I wondered if some 
American editor has a heavy hand with the red pencil.  I can't see 
any good editorial reason to change the passage, especially when it 
so obviously changes the meaning considerably.  If we go by the 
English version, it clearly means Moody, as he's to be kept alive, 
and he'll have disappeared with no one knowing anything about it.  If 
we go by the American version, it's all of a sudden a mystery.

What was unsettling to me about it was that Wormtail is clearly 
reluctant to do this act, and LV reminds him that he won't have to do 
it alone.  Only because of that do I think my husband may have a 
point, that JK herself made that change for clarity's sake, 
because "curse/disappeared" could so easily mean Moody, if she does 
indeed mean someone else.

Don't know if I've muddied the waters further...
hg.




From navarro198 at hotmail.com  Thu Sep 25 17:14:15 2003
From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 17:14:15 -0000
Subject: Karkaroff (was Re: Death Eaters)
In-Reply-To: <495A161B83F7544AA943600A98833B53016036BF@mimas.fareham.climax.co.uk>
Message-ID: <bkv7p7+2lu2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81553

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, James Sharman <jamess at c...> 
wrote:
> Bookworm:
What did Karkaroff do after Voldemort's first defeat that 
> might anger Voldemort?  <snip> >>>
> 
> James:
> He sold out other Death Eaters to gain his own freedom. Remember 
the Pensieve scene in DD's office.

Bookworm:
So does that make him the coward or the traitor?  I lean toward the 
traitor, which leaves the coward spot open for Bagman (reasons in my 
earlier post #81348).

Ravenclaw Bookworm




From rredordead at aol.com  Thu Sep 25 17:28:45 2003
From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 17:28:45 -0000
Subject: In defence of Peter (was: Thoughts on Wormtail's activities in OOTP )
In-Reply-To: <bkv0fg+dfih@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkv8kd+cjhn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81554

Shirly wrote:
(Snip) In fact, LV seems to have so little regard for him - he 
always calls him Wormtail and never Peter, have you noticed? - that 
I'd think he'd just keep him around as a servant/lackey/scapegoat.

Jen:
(Snip)
We already know he is having second thoughts in GOF, perhaps because 
of the life-debt, when he suggests LV use someone besides Harry in 
the potion.  That always seemed like such an uncharacteristically 
bold move on Peter's part to me. 

Now me:  
I think the biggest mistake anyone can make about Peter 'Wormtail' 
Pettigrew is to underestimate him.  And we're all doing it.  I think 
it's easy for us to pigeon hole him into the role of a weak easily 
influenced follower/coward *BUT* don't forget Peter is an 
accomplished animagi (it doesn't matter how long it took for him to 
achieve it, he did it, and at a very young age). He blew apart a 
whole street killing 12 people and faked his own death. He convinced 
James Potter, Sirius Black, Alibus Dumbledore with the secret-keeper 
switch, while letting them susspect Lupin of being the spy.  Fooled 
the whole WW into believing he was dead for 13 years and had enough 
wits about him to convince Harry not to let be killed seconds before 
Sirius and Lupin are about to blast him to pieces.  This is not the 
actions of a looser.

Peter is not a dummy, an idiot, dimwitted or slow.  He is in fact, I 
believe, a very intelligent wizard, a little sycophantic at times and 
a follower (which is not necessarily a negative trait) who uses his 
ability to take orders and fly under the radar to his advantage.  He 
is the perfect spy as he proved back during the first reign of 
Voldemort.

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.

Mandy






From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Thu Sep 25 17:45:19 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 17:45:19 -0000
Subject: Who is it that Wormtail is supposed to murder, in GoF?
In-Reply-To: <bkuumb+kfbc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkv9jf+gmk0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81555

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" <stevejjen at e...> wrote:
> 
> Crouch!Moody doesn't talk about a planned murder while under the 
> influence of Veritaserum, but he wouldn't have necessarily known 
> about it if it's between LV and Wormtail. 
> 
> Interesting post, Robyn! Any other possibilities of people the MOM 
> need *never* know about?
> 
> Jen

I've always assumed that the planned victim was Moody.
Once the Portkey was in place, and with sufficient Polyjuice Potion 
in his hipflask for  his escape, Crouch!Moody no longer  needed the
original.

Bye-bye Alistair!

Kneasy




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Thu Sep 25 18:07:07 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 18:07:07 -0000
Subject: In defence of Peter (was: Thoughts on Wormtail's activities in OOTP )
In-Reply-To: <bkv8kd+cjhn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkvasb+6dfd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81556

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ghinghapuss" <rredordead at a...> 
wrote:
> I think the biggest mistake anyone can make about Peter 'Wormtail' 
> Pettigrew is to underestimate him.  And we're all doing it.  

I think 
> it's easy for us to pigeon hole him into the role of a weak easily 
> influenced follower/coward 
> Peter is not a dummy, an idiot, dimwitted or slow. 

Trust 
> me LV doesn't give out *gifts* like a silver hand if he doesn't 
have 
> an important use for it.


Jen: I definitely don't underestimate Peter! You make excellent 
points, but I don't think you read my post closely if you think I was 
pigeon-holing him as a weak, worthless person. Instead I was offering 
a suggestion that he may have even been bold and clever enough to be 
in hiding from LV.

I believe Peter is actually going to play a pivotal role in the 
series, and I happen to believe he will save Harry in some way before 
the end, at great risk to himself and probably by giving his own life
(see my post 80512, Wormtail the Hanged Man, if you're interested).

The fact that Peter didn't show up in OOTP is interesting and in the 
previous post I was trying to offer possibilities for where he might 
be.  I don't think given the events in the graveyard and with the 
granting of the silver hand that Peter is merely going to continue 
being LV's favorite scape-goat (and that IS the character he plays in 
GOF even though he obviously has the stregths you mentioned in your 
post).

Jen




From constancevigilance at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 25 18:15:07 2003
From: constancevigilance at yahoo.com (Susan Miller)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 18:15:07 -0000
Subject: In defence of Peter (was: Thoughts on Wormtail's activities in OOTP )
In-Reply-To: <bkv8kd+cjhn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkvbbb+t7sd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81557

Shirly wrote:
 (Snip) In fact, LV seems to have so little regard for him - he 
 always calls him Wormtail and never Peter, have you noticed? - that 
 I'd think he'd just keep him around as a servant/lackey/scapegoat.

Constance Vigilance (Me):
Actually, I don't think Wormtail is an insult to Peter. He and his 
buddies used their nicknames as conspiritorial secret aliases. I 
think LV is used to nicknames, having given himself one, and tends to 
keep up the habit. Besides, it is handy to have the name Peter 
Pettigrew out of circulation. He is supposed to be dead, after all. 
And it does add to the mystique. If you think of it, Dumbledore calls 
Tom by his name. I believe the purpose of that is to puncture the 
mystique and bring him back to his earthly roots.

Constance Vigilance




From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Thu Sep 25 14:58:03 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 09:58:03 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: McGonagall a Muggle? (Was: Did I Miss Something?)
References: <bktu0t+mfp9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <002701c38375$6caa0580$5291aec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81558


>From: "jessrynn"
>
> When we get to the summer after GoF all I have is speculation. It is
> possible that Hermione stayed with the Weasley's for her own
> protection. Harry is protected with the Dursleys, Hermione is not
> with her parents. At this point they don't really know what Voldemort
> is after, so Hermione could arguably be a target. Ron is with his
> parents only because they can provide protection and are involved in
> the movement as well.

Jessrynn brings up a very good point here.

1:  It's widely known, even among the DE, that Hermione is a close friend of
Harry's.

2:  It's also widely known that her parents are Muggles who are not able to
understand the WW (even if they try... which evidence supports, having seen
them in Diagon Alley and chatting with the Weasleys.).  This makes them
rather ineffectual in defending her against LV and the DE.

3:  It's well known what lengths Harry will go to aid a friend, which is why
LV lured him in to the MoM with Sirius.

4:  Hermione would be MUCH easier to capture and/or influence as bait for a
trap than Sirius.  Even though something happening to her would raise more
of a general alarm, it would be much more effective if done right.

5:  Her staying at the OoP Headquarters could also been as much to protect
Hermione's parents as herself.  If LV or the DE came to capture her, they
would have no compunction whatsoever of killing or torturing her parents to
get what they want.  Remove Hermione to a safe house, and her parents are
much safer.  Granted, they could be used to lure her out, but she would be
backed by a band of Phoenix members on the trip, most likely... thus making
things much more difficult for LV and crew.

Just my $0.25

Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster


"Ever wonder if Blue from 'Blue's Clues', or Boots from 'Dora the Explorer'
are really Animagi?"

--  Iggy McSnurd







From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Thu Sep 25 15:06:45 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 10:06:45 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Buckbeak, was Re: The Phoenix & the Snowy Owl
References: <bkv05j+khl4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <005a01c38376$a5614220$5291aec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81559



> Now me, n_longbottom01:
>
> I think Buckbeak must still have some role to play in the series; why
> else would JKR keep him around for OoP?  I liked the idea of Sirius
> and Buckbeak on the run together after they make their escape at the
> end of PoA, but once Sirius was confined to his house, it would have
> been a good time for JKR to find a nice herd of Hippogriffs in a
> secluded spot in South America that Buckbeak would have been safe
> with.  If Buckbeak has no further role in the story, it wouldn't be
> too hard to come up with a happily-ever-after senario for him, and
> write him out of the series.  Kreature would have had to find another
> way to create a distraction for Sirius at the end of OoP, but I'm
> sure he could have come up with something.

Fun little thought here:

 Kreacher refuses to feed Buckbeak, because he was Siriu's companion... So
Buckbeak gets hungry enough and catches the scummy little House Elf by
surprise and devours him... messily of course.  Kreacher spends the rest of
eternity as a little pile of manure in the corner of the room.

> Maybe Lupin will take care of Buckbeak now?  I can't see anyone at
> Hogwarts taking care of him, because of the danger of Draco Malfoy
> spotting him.  I wouldn't mind seeing Hagrid and Buckbeak reunited,
> but I'm not sure how that would work.
>

Actually, I can see Sirius as leaving the house to either Tonks, the Order,
Harry, or even Lupin.  In either case, I can also see Lupin moving in so he
has a stable place to live.

Comments?

Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster

*Smiles as he pictures the look of amazement on Kreacher's face when
Buckbeak catches him.*









From jayandjay22 at hotmail.com  Thu Sep 25 17:43:59 2003
From: jayandjay22 at hotmail.com (fourjays22)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 17:43:59 -0000
Subject: Snape's Worst Memory (and the purpose thereof)
In-Reply-To: <c5.385b177f.2ca38f3e@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bkv9gv+t276@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81560

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, hannahwonder at a... wrote:
> Golly said:
> <<Dumbeldore trusts him.  Which makes him trustworthy.  He's still 
> a jerk.  He's just a jerk on the side of right. 
> (snip) 
> But just because he's a jerk doesn't make him spawn of the devil or 
>  a racist. He's just an ordinary nasty person.  Lots of ordinary people are 
> not evil war mongering neo nazis without actually being nice people.  >>

Very good point.  One of my favorite lines in OoP is when Harry is 
complaining to Sirius and Sirius tells him (paraphrasing).  "The 
world isn't divided into good people and death eaters."   This line 
really stood out to me -- I thought it was very important for Harry 
to realize there are unpleasant, mean or misguided people in the WW 
who aren't necessarily servants of Lord Voldemort.   Also, Harry 
learned in OoP that people he idolized (his dad, Dumbledore) are 
capable of mistakes or even very mean-spirited behavior.  I felt with 
this line, JKR was cautioning Harry (and the reader) not to look at 
the books or the characters as clear cut representations of "good" 
and "evil."  

Julie





From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Thu Sep 25 17:42:19 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 12:42:19 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Ron's big moment? (WAS: Why Ron Loves Hermione)
References: <20030923125336.32783.qmail@web20704.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <001301c3838c$61084d60$7c95aec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81561


Ok... Quoting Granny here:

> Uranus rules the sign Aquarius (anyone know Ron's Sign?) and is the planet
of surprise and all that is unexpected. It also
>rules the future and all new technology -- all that has just been invented
and all that is yet to come.
> Innovative, unpredictable, resourceful and experimental.  This planet also
rules the breaking up of any established patterns
>or structures, creating sudden -- even radical  change.
> Uranus can turn over anything traditional, conventional or orthodox in its
path, which it deems no longer of value or having
>outlived its usefulness. This planet produces quick, liberating results.
Uranus is strongly objective, rather than emotional.
>Since Uranus also holds sway over social change, it also regulates the
global brotherhood of man and all humanitarian
>concerns.
>

Now, aside from my earlier comments about Ron's joke about seeing Uranus...
one that has proven to be unfounded in being the sole explanation... My
goof, of course.   (The joke based reference, in PoA, may have been an
elaborite joke setup by JKR for the OotP... After all, she DOES supposedly
have the entire general outlines of the entire series done, yet open to
revision.  If she sets up elaborite back-grounding and obscure references,
might she not do the same with the occasional joke? *grin*) I have an idea
or two based on what Granny wrote above, along with other group
observations.

Here goes:

The influence of Uranus instituting radical change over the established
order is an interesting one... If Ron saw Uranus up close, he MAY have seen
(in some odd way, once the insight hits him) that the MoM is due for a
massive overhaul and upheaval in both its staffing, and its methodology.

Fudge has just seen proof that LV is still alive and kicking, which has
completely shaken his stubbornly held to convictions.

A number of members of the Ministry are now probably aware of the existence
of the OotP, and might wish to begin joining them... especially Aurors and
Unspeakables... thus causing a shift in balance of the Trinity... (which I
shall call the fundamental struggle between the MoM, LV and his team, and
the OotP...)  Even if they do not join the OotP, I can see a decent number
of the MoM beginning to work more towards the ideals of the OotP, rather
than the strict definitions of the MoM.

Much like the effects of the Tower card of the Tarot, Uranus can lead to a
shattering of the illusions a person, or group of people, form about
themselves.  In essence, their Ivory Tower crashes to the ground.  By the
fact that the WW now knows the truth of LV's return, many will also begin to
figure out how the MoM duped them and suppressed that information.  This
would seriously jeopardize the MoM as it currently stands.  People in the WW
are likely to begin demanding that the entire workings, and administration,
of the MoM be reviewed and evaluated.  They may even begin demanding that
Fudge is replaced.


Ok... taking something a little further...  Luna blew up Pluto (not
Jupiter.. OotP, ch 35, pg 796, "Beyond the Veil").  Looking up the aspect of
Pluto, I found the following:  (Please realize that I will be doing some
EXTREME editing of what they have there.  If you want to read more in depth,
visit the site.)

>From - www.dominantstar.com

Core meaning:

Pluto is considered the Great Transformer of the cosmos and is epitomized by
Einstein's idea that energy can neither be created nor destroyed. While the
organization of energy is altered, metamorphosed, and transformed into new
forms, the actual essence of energy does not perish. Pluto rules both this
transformative alteration and the constant process that determines such
far-reaching and profound change.

Pluto also symbolizes the in-depth transformation processes that occur
within the human psyche. While such processes have an enduring effect on the
personality and the structure of consciousness they originate at a level far
removed from the ego-complex and its ordinary functions and concerns. Pluto
thus symbolizes the archetypal world of the collective unconscious (a
terrain first brought to the attention of the contemporary world through the
research of Carl Jung).

*snip*

Improper manifestation of the energy:

The attempt to transform another person against his or her will.

Destructive mass-transformation that affects large numbers of people,
places, or things and the psychic inflation that results in channeling such
massively destructive energy.

*snip*

Keynote phrases for Pluto:

Wisdom gained through in-depth metamorphosis and transformation, a process
sometimes experienced as horrifying, annihilating, or ego fracturing.
Rebirth.
The tripartite archetypal process of: complete breakdown into constituent
elements; realignment and metamorphosis; transformation, regeneration, and
renewal.
The process whereby the personal ego or will (Sun) undergoes an thorough
transformation through the intercession of the transpersonal Self -- also
referred to as the Divine Will; the Cosmic Will; the imago Dei; or the god
in man.
The experience of God as a terrifying and insurmountable obstacle upon
which the identity is smashed apart and -- ultimately -- reborn.
The deus absconditus -- the "hidden" or "concealed God" -- whose presence
is manifested particularly during experiences of profound, irrevocable
change.
The final planetary form of yang consciousness in the symbolic solar
system.
The yang energy experienced as a transpersonal cosmic identity or spirit.



That should be enough...

Looking at the above information, one can see that while the positive aspect
of Uranus promotes social and organizational change if an established
organization (mass of people), Pluto's positive aspect promotes a
metamorphosis and rebirth of the self on a spiritual or psychic level.

We can also see that LV can easily be recognized as a negative aspect of
Pluto... causing mass destruction, controlling or changing others against
their wills, etc.

LV was seen as being almost a dark god among the WW, with the fear and awe
in which he was held... People feared to even whisper his name much like the
manner in which many fear to even speak any of the names for the Devil or
other "dark entities."  He was trying to change the world into what he
wished it to be, and to do so from complete concealment.

Soon after Luna shattered Pluto, the hidden aspect of LV's activities was
shattered in LV having to show up at the MoM himself... thus revealing his
presence and rebirth.

Harry experienced a horrible and terrifying experience in being dominated
and possessed by LV.  In turn, this ultimately led to increased knowledge of
what is expected of him, and the wisdom that comes with the knowledge of who
you are in side, and what you truly care about.

Which all takes me to my most profound theory both about the astrology
influence, and the nature of Harry's destiny:

LV has also undergone a wide variety of changes in his physical construction
(or lack thereof...) yet he has never truly been destroyed.  Pluto, here,
exercises its strongest influence.

Now, assuming that astrology plays as much of a role in things as this group
feels it does, then Harry (ultimately) CANNOT kill LV, only change him.

The prophecy states that the Dark Lord must die... It doesn't say that Tom
Riddle must be slain, or even LV himself... The Dark Lord is an ASPECT of
who LV is.

It might be possible for Harry to "kill" the Dark Lord by making him cease
to exist... doing this not through destroying LV's body, mind, or spirit,
but by "redeeming" him and teaching him those things... somehow... that LV
does not understand:  Love, Compassion, Empathy, and the ability to look
beyond your own desires to the greater good.

In essence, he "kills" the Dark Lord, but not Tom Riddle.

Comments?


Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster

"Gaze not only upon the one Aspect, that you forget the others."
  - Iggy McSnurd


Oh, one last thought... since we're talking Astrology here...

"Mars is unusually bright..."

Firenze and the other Centaurs were saying this in PS/SS...  He explains the
meaning in OotP...

For those of you who don't know... Mars is currently the closest it has been
to Earth in a few hundred years.  So close that not only can you see it with
the naked eye easily, but it shows up with a reddish orange color.

I wonder if she knew that Mars would be unusually bright in the RW as well
when she wrote this.

Just a thought.









From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Thu Sep 25 15:19:23 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 10:19:23 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Who is it that Wormtail is supposed to murder, in GoF?
References: <bkuvep+4ovm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <007a01c3837a$0ac5f4a0$5291aec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81562

From: "dcyasser"

> This topic has been debated at length, but there are always new
> theories.  Somewhere in some interview, and I'll look for it if I
> find the time, JKR said she had intended to kill off Mad-Eye Moody,
> but she liked his character so much she kept him instead. That, to
> me, suggests that Moody was the one who was supposed to be killed in
> GoF, when he is attacked by Wormtail and Crouch Jr.  We all know JKR
> reworked the plot a great deal, so I contend the "one more death" is
> something she simply missed correcting the first time around, and
> that it would have been Moody.
> cheers
> dc

I'd also like to add to this that the "one more death" couldn't have been
Barty Crouch Sr., since it was stated in GoF (perhaps someone who can fine
their copy can look this up for me...) that the fake Moody killed Crouch Sr.
and transfigured him into a bone in order to cover up for Wormtail's goof of
letting him escape.  This is, IMHO, solid enough evidence that Crouch Sr.
was not supposed to be the added death.


(Oh, and odd little theory that's WAY out in left field here:  What if the
death wasn't intended to be in GoF, but in OotP?  That one could easily be
Bode... since, IIRC, he was an Unspeakable who worked in the Dept. of
Mysteries... the same department that was guarding the prophecy...  Like I
said... an oddball theory, but one I wanted to mention... *grin*)


Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster


I can see it now, the Healers examining Bode while his wife is there.

*points to Mr. Bode*  "This Bode's ill..."

*points to Mrs. Bode* "But this Bode's well..."

(I love a good pun... *grin*)

-- Iggy McSnurd








From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Thu Sep 25 15:05:32 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (B Arrowsmith)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 16:05:32 +0100
Subject: Pets-U-Like  (was Re: The Phoenix and the Snowy Owl)
Message-ID: <B5282498-EF69-11D7-A748-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81563

Fawkes.
That's it, is it? The promised  new pet for Harry will be Fawkes.
How boring. Boring, predictable and therefore, to my mind, suspect.
Come on! Stretch your imaginations a bit. Be inventive.
How can you expect to second-guess JKR without a bit of lateral 
thinking?
OK, let's view the field for possibilities.

Not  all that many runners, especially  if you rule out another owl 
(Pig, Errol, Hermes). What would he want another for? No  reason, 
unless his eventual career is to form the  WW equivalent of UPS.
For all the fuss about owls, cats, toads in PS/SS, the menagerie is 
remarkably bare.

That bloody cat, now. Or part cat, part kneasle, could be useful. If 
Hermione finally succumbs to a rampaging mob of pissed-off Elves who 
finally realise that, like many politicised idealists, Hermione has 
absolutely no intention of  listening to the views of the minority she 
so resolutely patronises, Crookshanks could leech onto Harry. Kneasles, 
so we're  told, can always tell friend from enemy and always find their 
way home. Hmm. Useful, under some circumstances, but there could be 
drawbacks. For one, Hermione is  such a busybody that it'd be like her 
to join the Ghost Gang instead of progressing to her tooth-flossing 
final repose. Another Moaning Myrtle, intent  on making sure Harry 
sticks to the straight and narrow, backed up by a smug moggy with a 
face like  pushed-in tomato. Hectoring Hermione and her  furry friend. 
Not much appeal there.

Hagrid is bound to cop it in the neck sooner or later, agreed?  So 
who'll take Fang? Wouldn't recommend Grawp, he'd think he was lunch. 
Lovely, friendly animal (Fang, not Grawp), drools at one end and wags 
at the other. Knows his way around the Dark Forest and a damn good 
early warning system - when he runs away, follow him - fast; something  
nasty is coming. Mind you, he can be brave. He tried to help Hagrid 
when Umbridge was handing  out severance slips in her own inimitable 
manner.  Be a lot of fun at the Dursleys too;  Vernon blowing blood 
vessels twice daily.
Every boy should have a dog, and since Harry's lost Sirius, Fang'd make 
a good replacement; better tempered, just as affectionate, probably 
more intelligent.

What about  Trevor? Anyone  seen  him lately? Begetter of all sorts  of 
theories way back when, but he seems to be failing to keep up with the 
plot. The thing is, Neville is getting more self-confident,  
blossoming, you might say. And sticking your head above the parapet is 
very definitely the wrong thing to do when Voldy is having one of his 
nasty turns. Might be the last thing you do. Some-one should warn him, 
or Trevor will be looking for a new billet. Hedwig won't mind. Owls 
love frogs and toads. Of course, it's a different toad each time, but 
it's not Hedwig's fault he has a healthy appetite. It's a miracle 
Trevor's lasted this long at Hogwarts with all the avian predators 
swooping around the place. Is  this why he keeps disappearing? Poor 
bugger. Probably hiding in one of  the bathrooms for the duration. 
Can't even escape to the lake; if the squid doesn't get him the 
Merpeople'll have him on a half shell, sprinkled with a piquant garnish 
before you can say 'sushi'. Unless, of course,  the old theories come 
to pass; TOADMASTER I & II would be a nice surprise for the next book. 
He must do something, he was introduced way back at the beginning. The 
immediate thought was "Ah! Magic TOADstools! I still have hopes he'll 
get an intestinal upset and the products turn out to be a 
Bella-repellant.

We can rule  out Buckbeak. Apart from the fact that there's still a 
valid death warrant extant, he's not really domesticated. Can't see him 
going down well with Petunia, house-proud as she is. Cleaning out the 
bird cage will take on a whole new dimension; shoving him out of the 
bedroom window to  exercise would take some muscle, too. Harry would 
soon have to answer some awkward questions about the sudden decline in 
small animals around Privet Drive. Expect complaints from Mrs Figg when 
she finds feathers and hoof-prints where her cats used to be.

Then there's everybody's favourite, Fawkes. Mobile field hospital, 
people carrier, Basilisk blinder, etc. etc. I'm against  this on  
principle. Much too useful, much too powerful. Too  much  of  a trump 
card for Harry. The little toe-rag is supposed to suffer, not win in a 
stroll.  Fawkes has had his purple passage, as deus ex machina in CoS. 
Can't use  him in a major role again, too much like rewinding the plot. 
No, when Dumbledore finally gets the Black Spot and we get the 
obligatory death scene, Harry with tears in his  eyes, on his knees 
beside a stricken Dumbledore who brokenly whispers some maudlin last 
words carefully calculated to pluck the heart strings, I hope Fawkes 
flies up, bursts into flame, and a wind gets  up and disperses the 
ashes so he can't be re-born again. Much better, more suited to an epic 
tale. Where's the satisfaction in him being passed on like Grandads 
watch?

That's about it, for the current crop. JKR could decide to introduce 
something new, wouldn't put it past her. Wind  us up again. I've been 
flipping through FBaWTFT; can't see any obvious suspects.
One thing's for sure though, it'll be *very* interesting if Harry 
drowsily wakes one morning to a Parceltongue whisper of "A friend sent 
me. I'm your  new pet. Just for a while."

Kneasy




From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 25 18:53:36 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 18:53:36 -0000
Subject: Apparating  And Portkeys (Snape in the Graveyard)
In-Reply-To: <bkupj8+5dba@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkvdjg+o1q4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81564

> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sophie" <eschaafin at y...> 
wrote:
>  
> > Is there any reason why another portkey couldn't have been set up 
> for others (like Snape, Bagman, etc.) to the graveyard?
> >  
> > Sophie
> 

Potterfanme (Susan):
The only reason I can think of is that it seems portkeys are 
> monitored very closely by the MOM.  Crouch Jr. would not have cared 
> about that as Harry was not supposed to return.  I don't think that 
> Snape would want to be found out though.
> 
> Susan

hg:
Interesting ideas.  And what about this -- why was the cup a two-way 
portkey?  Truly, Harry was indeed not supposed to return.  Was Voldy 
going to go to Hogwarts and blow away Dumbledore?  Pardon me if this 
has been discussed, but I've been thinking about it lately.
hg.





From rmatovic at ssk.com  Thu Sep 25 19:41:13 2003
From: rmatovic at ssk.com (Rebecca M)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 19:41:13 -0000
Subject: Who is it that Wormtail is supposed to murder, in GoF?
In-Reply-To: <bkv5vv+t2q7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkvgcp+2ruc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81565



> hg:
> It makes perfect sense if the words curse/disappeared are correct, 
> but just this past week I myself was agonizing over that passage, 
and 
> I have the American version, which is murder/death.
> 
> Who makes edits when it goes to American publishers?  


A likely scenario:  the manuscript goes to the English publisher and 
after initial edit goes to the Ameican publisher.  Amercian 
publisher starts going through it to needlessly and annoyingly de-
English it.  Meanwhile some editing continues in England, and any 
substantive edits are supposed to be passed on/coordinated with US.

JKR/editor realize reviewing the early chapter that it's 
inconsistent with the ending (since JKR has decided to keep Mad Eye 
around for the future, per interview).  Correction is made in 
English version but somehow doesn't get transferred to American 
version and American editor doesn't catch the inconsistency.

So the American would be the "original", but the English version 
would be consistent with the actual ending.

Rebecca
(and think how extra gruesome GOF ending would have been if JKR 
hadn't changed her mind and it was Moody's corpse they found in his 
locked trunk.)




From annemehr at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 25 19:56:52 2003
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 19:56:52 -0000
Subject: Apparating
In-Reply-To: <bkrt04+6iui@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkvha4+plmv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81566

Potterfanme (if I am reading the nested quotes correctly):
> > > > I am curious why there is such a point made about not being 
> able 
> > > > to apparate or disapparate on the Hogwarts grounds.  
> > > 
> > > I think there are a couple of reasons:
> > > 
> > > 1) Plot.  ... lame plotlines.  Imagine, baddies would be able 
> > > to just aparate into Harry's bedroom ...
> > > 

Hickengruendler replied: 
> Yeah, but there isn't really a difference, if they just use a portkey 
> to get into Harry's bedroom.

Annemehr:
Back in the mists of time, someone theorised that Hogwarts is also
normally impervious to Portkeys, which it would need to be, for the
same security reasons as for Apparition.  This would also explain why
Crouch!Moody had to use the Triwizard Cup to portkey Harry to the
graveyard -- only Dumbledore is able to circumvent the portkey
restriction and he was the one who made the Cup a portkey to the edge
of the maze.  Then Crouch!Moody could just superimpose the stop to the
graveyard.  There's no proof, of course, but it makes me feel better!  :)

Annemehr







From prisoneroflittlewhinging at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 25 20:14:25 2003
From: prisoneroflittlewhinging at yahoo.com (Suzy)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 20:14:25 -0000
Subject: McGonagall a Muggle? (Was: Did I Miss Something?)
In-Reply-To: <002701c38375$6caa0580$5291aec7@rick>
Message-ID: <bkvib1+9srj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81567

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Iggy McSnurd" 
<coyoteschild at p...> wrote:
> 2:  It's also widely known that her parents are Muggles who are not 
able to understand the WW (even if they try... which evidence 
supports, having seen them in Diagon Alley and chatting with the 
Weasleys.).  This makes them rather ineffectual in defending her 
against LV and the DE.<


I've always wondered if Hermie's parents even know what's going on.  
I think it was Dean (?) who said that he wasn't fool enough to tell 
his parents what goes on at Hogwarts.  Maybe Hermione keeps it all to 
herself, as well.  If they do know, I can't imagine them letting her 
be part of a world where she's such a target.  If I were her mother, 
and had no choice but to let her stay in the WW to keep her safe, I'd 
be right there by her side.  Sort out those priorities and forget the 
dental practice.

Alternatively, if they don't know about LV etc., I still wonder what 
Hermione is telling them in order to be able to spend so much time 
away from home?  That she needs to study?  

Suzy - Priz of Little Whinging






From Yahtzee63 at aol.com  Thu Sep 25 20:16:44 2003
From: Yahtzee63 at aol.com (Yahtzee63 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 16:16:44 EDT
Subject: Buckbeak
Message-ID: <2b.484b7a29.2ca4a72c@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81568


In a message dated 9/25/03 2:56:34 PM, HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com writes:


> Actually, I can see Sirius as leaving the house to either Tonks, the Order,
> Harry, or even Lupin.? In either case, I can also see Lupin moving in so he
> has a stable place to live.
> 

My personal take on it is that Sirius would leave the house to Harry 
outright, but perhaps leave Lupin with the right to inhabit it for as long as he 
wishes. Lupin's the one in more immediate need, and if Sirius got around to writing 
his will, he'd no doubt think of that. Also, it appears in OOTP that Lupin's 
living there, at least part-time, already -- and Sirius would not want Lupin 
to be made homeless.



Yahtzee


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 25 20:48:24 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 20:48:24 -0000
Subject: Apparating
In-Reply-To: <bkvha4+plmv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkvkao+b2ia@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81569

> Annemehr:
> Back in the mists of time, someone theorised that Hogwarts is also
> normally impervious to Portkeys, which it would need to be, for the
> same security reasons as for Apparition.  This would also explain 
why Crouch!Moody had to use the Triwizard Cup to portkey Harry to the
> graveyard -- only Dumbledore is able to circumvent the portkey
> restriction and he was the one who made the Cup a portkey to the 
edge of the maze.  Then Crouch!Moody could just superimpose the stop 
to the graveyard.  There's no proof, of course, but it makes me feel 
better!  :)
> 
> Annemehr

hg:
So does this answer my question of a few posts ago, namely why is it 
a two way portkey?  The explanation would be that Dumbledore made it 
a portkey that led the winner to the outside of the maze, but Crouch 
added the graveyard to it; so when Harry picked it up again in the 
graveyard, it did it's original job of leading Harry to the edge of 
the maze.  It does make sense, if I'm following you right.
hg.




From fc26det at aol.com  Thu Sep 25 21:23:08 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 21:23:08 -0000
Subject: McGonagall a Muggle? (Was: Did I Miss Something?)
In-Reply-To: <bkvib1+9srj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkvmbs+sokc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81570

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Suzy" 
<prisoneroflittlewhinging at y...> wrote:

> Alternatively, if they don't know about LV etc., I still wonder 
what 
> Hermione is telling them in order to be able to spend so much time 
> away from home?  That she needs to study?  
> 
> Suzy - Priz of Little Whinging


If I remember correctly, you are exactly right!  When Hermoine shows 
up at Grimmauld Place, Harry asks her why she isn't skiing.  She 
tells him that it really isn't her thing and she told her parents 
that anybody who wanted to do good this year stayed at school over 
the holiday.  So by that I don't think they even know she isn't at 
school.
Susan




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Thu Sep 25 21:48:49 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 21:48:49 -0000
Subject: Pets-U-Like  (was Re: The Phoenix and the Snowy Owl)
In-Reply-To: <B5282498-EF69-11D7-A748-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bkvns1+ut3r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81571

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> What about  Trevor? Anyone  seen  him lately? Begetter of all 
sorts  of 
> theories way back when, but he seems to be failing to keep up with 
the 
> plot. The thing is, Neville is getting more self-confident,  
> blossoming, you might say. And sticking your head above the parapet 
is 
> very definitely the wrong thing to do when Voldy is having one of 
his 
> nasty turns. Might be the last thing you do. Some-one should warn 
him, 
> or Trevor will be looking for a new billet. Hedwig won't mind. Owls 
> love frogs and toads. Of course, it's a different toad each time, 
but 
> it's not Hedwig's fault he has a healthy appetite. 

Geoff:
Odd, I've always considered Hedwig to be a "she". It is a girl's name 
after all.

You haven't considered the possibilities of Aunt Marge's dog :-) Now 
that would be interesting... 

...or a Thestral. Good for cleaning you up when you cut yourself 
shaving.




From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Thu Sep 25 21:55:09 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 21:55:09 -0000
Subject: Snape's Worst Memory (and the purpose thereof)
In-Reply-To: <c5.385b177f.2ca38f3e@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bkvo7t+iu29@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81572


    Well, I mentioned it before, but I'll add my  bit again. I 
*think* that JKR added this in the book to show how both Sirius and 
Snape both have the same wrong view of Harry. They think he's James.
Sirius tells Harry this, basically, and I think that's why it took 
him so long to show up at the end. He was still depressed about 
losing his best friend again. 
    Will Snape and Harry ever get close? I can't say, but I might 
hazzard a guess and say that if something really bad happens to 
force them to have to trust one another, they might, but otherwise, 
I can't really see it happening.


  Jeff




From deemarie1a at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 25 22:31:42 2003
From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 22:31:42 -0000
Subject: Pets-U-Like  (was Re: The Phoenix and the Snowy Owl)
In-Reply-To: <bkvns1+ut3r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkvqce+itu8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81573

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" 
<gbannister10 at a...> wrote:
> 
> ...or a Thestral. Good for cleaning you up when you cut yourself 
> shaving.

EWWWWWWWWWWW!

D - :-) I know I am going to hear from our list elves for this post, 
but I just couldn't resist!




From patricia at obscure.org  Thu Sep 25 23:16:47 2003
From: patricia at obscure.org (Patricia Bullington-McGuire)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 19:16:47 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Pets-U-Like  (was Re: The Phoenix and the Snowy
 Owl)
In-Reply-To: <B5282498-EF69-11D7-A748-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0309251858270.10630-100000@tiamat.obscure.org>

No: HPFGUIDX 81574

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003, B Arrowsmith wrote:

> One thing's for sure though, it'll be *very* interesting if Harry 
> drowsily wakes one morning to a Parceltongue whisper of "A friend sent 
> me. I'm your  new pet. Just for a while."

Patricia writes:
You know, I've always felt like we ought to see that boa constrictor from 
PS/SS again at some point.  I wonder if he ever made it to Brazil.

and Iggy wrote:

> "Ever wonder if Blue from 'Blue's Clues', or Boots from 'Dora the
> Explorer' are really Animagi?"

Patricia writes:
I hadn't considered that, but Ms. Frizzle from the Magic Schoolbus is 
clearly a witch.

----
Patricia Bullington-McGuire	<patricia at obscure.org>

The brilliant Cerebron, attacking the problem analytically, discovered
three distinct kinds of dragon: the mythical, the chimerical, and the
purely hypothetical.  They were all, one might say, nonexistent, but each
nonexisted in an entirely different way ... 
                -- Stanislaw Lem, "Cyberiad" 





From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 25 23:33:00 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 23:33:00 -0000
Subject: Apparating  And Portkeys (Snape in the Graveyard)
In-Reply-To: <bkvdjg+o1q4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bkvtvc+1nlo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81575

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hermionegallo"
<hermionegallo at y...> wrote:
> > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sophie" <eschaafin at y...> 
> wrote:
> >  
> > > Is there any reason why another portkey couldn't have been set
> > > up for others (like Snape, Bagman, etc.) to the graveyard?
> > >  
> > > Sophie
> > 
> 

bboy_mn:
To Sophie, ...but why? Why would they use a portkey when all they
would have to do is slip away in the excitement, walk out the front
gate and apparate to where ever they wanted to go.

Notice that when ever anyone leaves, like Fudge leaving at the end of
PoA and at the end of GoF, or when they leave Dumbledore's office in
OotP, he/they leave the room. If he were going to apparate, why not
just apparate?

I do believe it is general Apparation courtesy to not apparate into
people's homes, or into and out of the room you are in. General
courtesy says you exit the room, and more or less, apparate in
private. Again, this isn't law or a rule, just a general courtesy.

None the less, we have extended examples. When Fudge sends McNair for
a Dementor, McNair exits the castle and heads for the front gate. My
conclusion based on this exiting the room and heading for the front
gate, is that you must leave Hogwart's ground to apparate. Not that
big a deal under normal circumstances. 


> Potterfanme (Susan):
> The only reason I can think of is that it seems portkeys are 
> > monitored very closely by the MOM.  ...edited...
> > 
> > Susan

> 
> hg:
> why was the cup a two-way portkey?  Truly, Harry was indeed not 
> supposed to return. ...edited...
>
> hg.

bboy_mn:

Now to the portkey, there are many theories related to this 'return
portkey'. The simplest and least fanciful is that Portkey charms are
like wrapping paper. The last one on is the first on off. 

So, Dumbledore put on a charm to take the winning champion to the edge
of the maze, based on the fact that that is the point that Harry
returned to. Moody/CrouchJr added a charm to take the user to the
graveyard. When Harry and Cedric touched the Cup, that 'to the
graveyard' Portkey enchantment was used; first layer of charmed
'wrapping paper' was taken off. That leaves the original 'to the edge
of the maze' charm. When Harry touched it again, that charm was
activated and he was take back to the Quidditch stadium and the edge
of the maze.

Other theories speculate that Voldemort intended to send Harry's dead
body back to Dumbledore, or that Dead!Harry, the DE's, and Voldemort
planned to return and attack Dumbledore.

Just a thought.
bboy_mn




From oppen at mycns.net  Thu Sep 25 23:46:03 2003
From: oppen at mycns.net (Eric Oppen)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 18:46:03 -0500
Subject: Hogwarts apparition ban?
Message-ID: <008601c383bf$2f675840$b3570043@hppav>

No: HPFGUIDX 81576

I wonder...is the "can't apparate at Hogwarts" thing something that was
_added to_ the school?

Or did the Founders Four pick that place because of something there that
prevented apparation?  (Can't have the little blighters Apparating out just
before exam time, can we?)




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Thu Sep 25 23:47:32 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 23:47:32 -0000
Subject: Pets-U-Like  (was Re: The Phoenix and the Snowy Owl)
In-Reply-To: <B5282498-EF69-11D7-A748-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <bkvuqk+r0tg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81577

Laura:

Now Kneasy, you're not going all sentimental on us, are you?  I can't 
tell which you like less, animals or humans...<bg>


Just in case you haven't already read it, Kneasy's post is here-
perhaps you'd like soda and a twist with  your bile...


--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> Fawkes.
> That's it, is it? The promised  new pet for Harry will be Fawkes.
> How boring. Boring, predictable and therefore, to my mind, suspect.
> Come on! Stretch your imaginations a bit. Be inventive.
> How can you expect to second-guess JKR without a bit of lateral 
> thinking?
> OK, let's view the field for possibilities.
> 
> Not  all that many runners, especially  if you rule out another owl 
> (Pig, Errol, Hermes). What would he want another for? No  reason, 
> unless his eventual career is to form the  WW equivalent of UPS.
> For all the fuss about owls, cats, toads in PS/SS, the menagerie is 
> remarkably bare.
> 
> That bloody cat, now. Or part cat, part kneasle, could be useful. 
If 
> Hermione finally succumbs to a rampaging mob of pissed-off Elves 
who 
> finally realise that, like many politicised idealists, Hermione has 
> absolutely no intention of  listening to the views of the minority 
she 
> so resolutely patronises, Crookshanks could leech onto Harry. 
Kneasles, 
> so we're  told, can always tell friend from enemy and always find 
their 
> way home. Hmm. Useful, under some circumstances, but there could be 
> drawbacks. For one, Hermione is  such a busybody that it'd be like 
her 
> to join the Ghost Gang instead of progressing to her tooth-flossing 
> final repose. Another Moaning Myrtle, intent  on making sure Harry 
> sticks to the straight and narrow, backed up by a smug moggy with a 
> face like  pushed-in tomato. Hectoring Hermione and her  furry 
friend. 
> Not much appeal there.
> 
> Hagrid is bound to cop it in the neck sooner or later, agreed?  So 
> who'll take Fang? Wouldn't recommend Grawp, he'd think he was 
lunch. 
> Lovely, friendly animal (Fang, not Grawp), drools at one end and 
wags 
> at the other. Knows his way around the Dark Forest and a damn good 
> early warning system - when he runs away, follow him - fast; 
something  
> nasty is coming. Mind you, he can be brave. He tried to help Hagrid 
> when Umbridge was handing  out severance slips in her own 
inimitable 
> manner.  Be a lot of fun at the Dursleys too;  Vernon blowing blood 
> vessels twice daily.
> Every boy should have a dog, and since Harry's lost Sirius, Fang'd 
make 
> a good replacement; better tempered, just as affectionate, probably 
> more intelligent.
> 
> What about  Trevor? Anyone  seen  him lately? Begetter of all 
sorts  of 
> theories way back when, but he seems to be failing to keep up with 
the 
> plot. The thing is, Neville is getting more self-confident,  
> blossoming, you might say. And sticking your head above the parapet 
is 
> very definitely the wrong thing to do when Voldy is having one of 
his 
> nasty turns. Might be the last thing you do. Some-one should warn 
him, 
> or Trevor will be looking for a new billet. Hedwig won't mind. Owls 
> love frogs and toads. Of course, it's a different toad each time, 
but 
> it's not Hedwig's fault he has a healthy appetite. It's a miracle 
> Trevor's lasted this long at Hogwarts with all the avian predators 
> swooping around the place. Is  this why he keeps disappearing? Poor 
> bugger. Probably hiding in one of  the bathrooms for the duration. 
> Can't even escape to the lake; if the squid doesn't get him the 
> Merpeople'll have him on a half shell, sprinkled with a piquant 
garnish 
> before you can say 'sushi'. Unless, of course,  the old theories 
come 
> to pass; TOADMASTER I & II would be a nice surprise for the next 
book. 
> He must do something, he was introduced way back at the beginning. 
The 
> immediate thought was "Ah! Magic TOADstools! I still have hopes 
he'll 
> get an intestinal upset and the products turn out to be a 
> Bella-repellant.
> 
> We can rule  out Buckbeak. Apart from the fact that there's still a 
> valid death warrant extant, he's not really domesticated. Can't see 
him 
> going down well with Petunia, house-proud as she is. Cleaning out 
the 
> bird cage will take on a whole new dimension; shoving him out of 
the 
> bedroom window to  exercise would take some muscle, too. Harry 
would 
> soon have to answer some awkward questions about the sudden decline 
in 
> small animals around Privet Drive. Expect complaints from Mrs Figg 
when 
> she finds feathers and hoof-prints where her cats used to be.
> 
> Then there's everybody's favourite, Fawkes. Mobile field hospital, 
> people carrier, Basilisk blinder, etc. etc. I'm against  this on  
> principle. Much too useful, much too powerful. Too  much  of  a 
trump 
> card for Harry. The little toe-rag is supposed to suffer, not win 
in a 
> stroll.  Fawkes has had his purple passage, as deus ex machina in 
CoS. 
> Can't use  him in a major role again, too much like rewinding the 
plot. 
> No, when Dumbledore finally gets the Black Spot and we get the 
> obligatory death scene, Harry with tears in his  eyes, on his knees 
> beside a stricken Dumbledore who brokenly whispers some maudlin 
last 
> words carefully calculated to pluck the heart strings, I hope 
Fawkes 
> flies up, bursts into flame, and a wind gets  up and disperses the 
> ashes so he can't be re-born again. Much better, more suited to an 
epic 
> tale. Where's the satisfaction in him being passed on like Grandads 
> watch?
> 
> That's about it, for the current crop. JKR could decide to 
introduce 
> something new, wouldn't put it past her. Wind  us up again. I've 
been 
> flipping through FBaWTFT; can't see any obvious suspects.
> One thing's for sure though, it'll be *very* interesting if Harry 
> drowsily wakes one morning to a Parceltongue whisper of "A friend 
sent 
> me. I'm your  new pet. Just for a while."
> 
> Kneasy




From constancevigilance at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 26 00:25:29 2003
From: constancevigilance at yahoo.com (Susan Miller)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 00:25:29 -0000
Subject: Hogwarts apparition ban?
In-Reply-To: <008601c383bf$2f675840$b3570043@hppav>
Message-ID: <bl011p+7us3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81578

Eric Oppen wrote:
> I wonder...is the "can't apparate at Hogwarts" thing something that 
was
> _added to_ the school?
> 
> Or did the Founders Four pick that place because of something there 
that
> prevented apparation?  (Can't have the little blighters Apparating 
out just
> before exam time, can we?)

Oh! Oh! I guessed the real answer in my filk Salazar S. Slytherin 
(post 78599). Ya see, what I heard tell was, Old Sal hated children 
so much that he put the Anti-Apparition Jinx on Hogwarts to make sure 
that everybody had to get there the hardest possible way! 

;-)

Constance Vigilance




From FilkMavenGB at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 26 00:39:47 2003
From: FilkMavenGB at hotmail.com (Gail Bohacek)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 20:39:47 -0400
Subject: (FILK) Ignoring Igor
Message-ID: <BAY9-F66JJ8MncObJch0002db51@hotmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81579

Trying to get out of a filking funk here...


Ignoring Igor


(A FILK by Gail Bohacek to the tune of _Suddenly Seymour_ from the musical 
_Little Shop Of Horrors_)

This is my all-time favorite musical.  These are my two all-time favorite HP 
characters.  It can't get much better than this.

Midi is here: http://www.whitewater.k12.wi.us/whs/drama/horrors/suddenly.htm

Dedicated to Wendy St. John...she knows why!


Snape:

Karkaroff comes
With something to discuss
He's making me feel
Like I'm being stalked
Behaving strange
He's making a fuss
It's not a big deal
But he wants to talk

Ignoring Igor
Is what I am doing
I try to avoid him
But he's always there
Ignoring Igor
But he keeps pursuing
With great persistence
Igor is scared

Karkaroff:

I have good reason
For the way I act
I'm a stool pigeon
You were a spy
Now it sure looks like
The Dark Lord's coming back
I'm very concerned
I can't deny

Ignoring Igor
You're trying to pretend
That this isn't hap'ening
We haven't a prayer
Ignoring Igor
I can not comprehend
All your resistance

Snape:

Igor is scared

Karkaroff (lifting the sleeve of his robes and pointing at the Dark Mark on 
his arm):

Look at the Dark Mark, it's getting clearer
You must have noticed, what do you say?

Snape (snarling, looking around nervously):

It's not that urgent so
We can talk later
People are watching
Now put it away!

Karkaroff (Snape):

Ignoring Igor  (Ignoring Igor)
Now don't you slip off  (Leave me, Karkaroff)
Ignoring Igor  (Ignoring Igor)
It's a nightmare!  (They will stare!)

Both:

I don't know why you're
Acting in this way
By (I'm) keeping your (my) distance
By (I'm) keeping your (my) distance
By (I'm) keeping your (my) distance
Igor is scared


-Gail B...Let It Be Naked

_________________________________________________________________
Frustrated with dial-up? Get high-speed for as low as $29.95/month 
(depending on the local service providers in your area).  
https://broadband.msn.com




From annemehr at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 26 00:44:29 2003
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 00:44:29 -0000
Subject: Apparating
In-Reply-To: <bkvkao+b2ia@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl025d+5rog@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81580

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hermionegallo"
<hermionegallo at y...> wrote:
> > Annemehr:
> > Back in the mists of time, someone theorised that Hogwarts is also
> > normally impervious to Portkeys, [...] This would also explain 
> why Crouch!Moody had to use the Triwizard Cup to portkey Harry to the
> > graveyard -- only Dumbledore is able to circumvent the portkey
> > restriction and he was the one who made the Cup a portkey to the 
> edge of the maze.[...]
> 
> hg:
> So does this answer my question of a few posts ago, namely why is it 
> a two way portkey?  The explanation would be that Dumbledore made it 
> a portkey that led the winner to the outside of the maze, but Crouch 
> added the graveyard to it; so when Harry picked it up again in the 
> graveyard, it did it's original job of leading Harry to the edge of 
> the maze.  It does make sense, if I'm following you right.
> hg.

Annemehr:
Yes, that would neatly explain why the Cup was not only a "two-way"
portkey, but also why Harry ended up at the edge of the maze instead
of back at the center, as well as answering the all-consuming question
"Why didn't he just use Harry's toothbrush?"  The only thing that
makes me uncomfortable about the theory is that, under Veritaserum,
Crouch Jr. says "I offered to carry the Triwizard Cup into the maze
before dinner.  Turned it into a Portkey. ..." (GoF, the very end of
ch. 35).  The wording is strange if he knew he was adding a stop to an
existing portkey.

There are other theories, too:

1) The Magic Dishwasher had it that Crouch Jr. put both stops in, that
Voldemort fed Harry some false info *in case* he escaped, and, um, I
forget what they would have done with the portkey if Harry had died
(use it to attack Hogwarts? send Harry's dead body back? destroy it as
superfluous?)

2) Non-Dishwashery Crouch Jr. put both stops in, Voldemort was sure
Harry would die and:
a: would use Portkey to stage attack, or
b: would use Portkey to send Harry's body back as message to Dumbledore.

3) Crouch Jr. *could* have used Harry's toothbrush.  The whole thing
is one big plot hole just to put the big graveyard scene in June.

Personally, I find the "Crouch inserted the graveyard stop on
Dumbledore's portkey" theory covers everything best.

Annemehr
sorry that she couldn't find the original thread that lead to this
theory, not for lack of trying...




From greatraven at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 26 00:51:47 2003
From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 00:51:47 -0000
Subject: Sirius's property (Was Re: Buckbeak)
In-Reply-To: <2b.484b7a29.2ca4a72c@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bl02j3+5k7p@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81581

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Yahtzee63 at a... wrote:
> 
> In a message dated 9/25/03 2:56:34 PM, HPforGrow
nups at yahoogroups.com 
writes:
> 
> 
> > Actually, I can see Sirius as leaving the house to either Tonks, 
the Order,
> > Harry, or even Lupin.? In either case, I can also see Lupin
moving 
in so he
> > has a stable place to live.
> > 
> 
> My personal take on it is that Sirius would leave the house to
Harry 
> outright, but perhaps leave Lupin with the right to inhabit it for 
as long as he 
> wishes. Lupin's the one in more immediate need, and if Sirius got 
around to writing 
> his will, he'd no doubt think of that. Also, it appears in OOTP
that 
Lupin's 
> living there, at least part-time, already -- and Sirius would not 
want Lupin 
> to be made homeless.
> 
> 
> 
> Yahtzee
> 
True, he probably would leave it to Harry, along with his money, and 
this leads me to another question - what happens to the property of 
someone who was on the run at his death? Where *is* his will? 
Possibly, now, he will be posthumously cleared of all charges and, of 
course, it would be impossible to find the house by anyone not 
authorised anyway. But I did wonder, in PoA, how Sirius's vault was 
still available to him, whatever name he used in that owl post
letter. 
Maybe Gringott's is like a Swiss bank? It's said there's still money 
belonging to the Romanoffs in one of those, and no heirs to collect.

Just wondering. Sue B




From greatraven at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 26 00:55:15 2003
From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 00:55:15 -0000
Subject: Snape's Worst Memory (and the purpose thereof)
In-Reply-To: <bkvo7t+iu29@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl02pj+n15l@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81582

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jeffl1965" <jeffl1965 at h...> 
wrote:
> 
>     Well, I mentioned it before, but I'll add my  bit again. I 
> *think* that JKR added this in the book to show how both Sirius and 
> Snape both have the same wrong view of Harry. They think he's James.
> Sirius tells Harry this, basically, and I think that's why it took 
> him so long to show up at the end. He was still depressed about 
> losing his best friend again. 
>     Will Snape and Harry ever get close? I can't say, but I might 
> hazzard a guess and say that if something really bad happens to 
> force them to have to trust one another, they might, but otherwise, 
> I can't really see it happening.
> 
> 
>   Jeff

Sue B:

And in *this* universe, something bad probably *will* happen to force 
them together! (g) Whether they will ever *like* each other is
another matter.




From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Thu Sep 25 17:49:22 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 12:49:22 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: In defence of Peter (was: Thoughts on Wormtail's activities in OOTP )
References: <bkv8kd+cjhn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <002701c3838d$65d21500$7c95aec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81583

Mandy:

> 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
the Prankster




"Someone's been sleeping in my bed," said the Baby Bear.  "And she's still
here!"

So then the three bears mauled Goldilocks and ate her.

The end...

(From a fairy tale my uncle, Morbid McSnurd, told me once...)










From LilDancinQT86 at aol.com  Thu Sep 25 18:19:37 2003
From: LilDancinQT86 at aol.com (theredshoes86)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 18:19:37 -0000
Subject: *ALL THE CLUES LEAD UP TO THE HEART OF IT ALL*
Message-ID: <bkvbjp+577s@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81584

  =============================================
JEREMY PAXMAN: Unlikely pairings? Not Hermione and Draco Malfoy or
anything like that?

JK ROWLING: 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. No-one has ever - I
have gone and looked at some of it and no-one's ever ... There is one
thing that if anyone guessed I would be really annoyed as it is kind
of the heart of it all. And it kind of explains everything and no-
one's quite got there but a couple of people have skirted it. So you
know, I would be pretty miffed after thirteen or fourteen years of
writing the books if someone just came along and said I think this
will happen in book seven. Because it is too late, I couldn't divert
now, everything has been building up to it, and I've laid all my
clues.
=============================================
taken from:
http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.net/bbcinterview3.shtml

more interesting chats are listed in this website:
http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.net/transcripts.shtml

any ideas???


Laura (theredshoes86)






From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Thu Sep 25 21:39:34 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 16:39:34 -0500
Subject: The Death of Sirius
Message-ID: <007301c383ad$86010320$1890aec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81585

I got a direct mail from someone on the list who, in the course of the
letter, asked me why it had to be Sirius that died.

I thought I would like to post my reply on that question to the list as a
whole.  (Please forgive if someone already posted something like this...
*chuckle*)


As for why it had to be Sirius... Well, the only alternatives of people who
were as close to him would be Ron, Hermione, and Dumbledore.  Do you REALLY
think JKR would be willing to sacrifice one of them at this point?

*quirks an eyebrow at you.*

The relationship with Sirius was that, in essence, Sirius was to be Harry's
salvation from the loneliness of never having known his parents, and someone
who would provide him with a real family, rather than just shelter as the
Dursleys do.  Having that salvation ripped from him, especially as sudden
and traumatic a manner, effected Harry deeply.  So deeply that, in the midst
of LV almost managing to defeat him, the one person he thought of wasn't
himself, but Sirius.  This shows a deep and intense love (in a son to
father/friend way) for Sirius... so intense that LV couldn't overcome it.

You will see that, in most of her books, it's not his willpower that's
Harry's most potent weapon against LV.. it's love.

Love of his mother, that she sacrificed herself for him... it protects him.
Love he feels for his friends, that he is willing to protect them.
Love he feels for Dumbledore, that he exhibits such loyalty as to call
    Fawkes to him in a time of need.
Love he feels for all people, that grants him the compassion to spare the
    life of Peter Pettigrew.
Love he feels for his schoolmates that gives him the strength to return
    Cedric's body to his parents.
Love he feels even for the memory of his parents that gives him the strength
    to trust they will protect him in the duel with LV.
Love he feels for Hagrid that makes him willing to risk his own life to help
    clear his friend's name.

and, ultimately

Love he feels for Sirius that, even in the face of death, allows him to
think of nothing but that he will be with Sirius again, and thus, purge the
influence of LV from him.



Well, there it is...  Feel free to comment.

Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster

"And now, in the center ring of the Weasley Brother's Circus,
  we have Draco Malfoy, the Amazing, BOUNCING FERRET!!"

-- Iggy McSnurd, clown and ringmaster.







From jfite at midsouth.rr.com  Thu Sep 25 21:49:32 2003
From: jfite at midsouth.rr.com (n8483483)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 21:49:32 -0000
Subject: Harry's summer
Message-ID: <bkvntc+ofvh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81586

I am wondering why Harry must return to the Dursley's for the summer 
after OP.  Everyone knows Vold. is back.  I understand about the 
protection thing but can't Harry be harmed by someone other than 
Vold. while at the Dursley's?  Why subject him to the horrors of the 
Dursley's when he could just go to Ron's house and be protected by 
the order?  Didn't they say they would send for him soon anyway?

   Do I understand the protection thing right? 
  He has been allowed to leave the other summers and he does not 
have to return during the Winter break.  

Wouldn't he be safer and happier somewhere (anywhere) else?

G.F





From jfite at midsouth.rr.com  Thu Sep 25 21:56:46 2003
From: jfite at midsouth.rr.com (n8483483)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 21:56:46 -0000
Subject: Hagrid's wand
Message-ID: <bkvoau+mqa4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81587

Does Hagrid have an official wand?  Was he really cleared of all 
charges?  I thought not but maybe I missed something.  When he was 
looking for the giants, he said he was not allowed to use magic.
  
    I don't recall reading about him having a wand (other than his 
umbrella).  Shouldn't he have one now?  Won't he need one for the 
great battles coming soon?

Will he be allowed to finish his training?

Sorry, if this has been covered recently.  I did a search but didn't 
find what I was looking for.

G.F.





From hannahwonder at aol.com  Thu Sep 25 22:36:52 2003
From: hannahwonder at aol.com (hannahwonder at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 18:36:52 EDT
Subject: Bullies and Heroes (was Re: Snape's Worst Memory...)
Message-ID: <b9.36ba99f5.2ca4c804@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81588

In a message dated 9/25/03 11:55:58 AM, persephone_kore at yahoo.com writes:
<< Now PK: 

I think we must be using "reconcile" differently here, because I found this very puzzling -- I admit that Harry is certainly feeling contradictory emotions, but I don't see any particular logical difficulty -- and not being quite as stuck in Harry's viewpoint as Harry naturally is, /I/ don't have any real emotional difficulty observing that both all parties involved have behaved abominably to each other and that in at least Harry's and Snape's cases this is emotionally understandable, though still not justified. 

(snip) >>

Now Hannah:
Perhaps reconcile was not the word I was looking for -- I meant more how 
Harry can figure out how he feels toward Snape overall, not just disliking him for when he's mean and feeling sorry for him when he was picked on. It can be 
very difficult to feel sorry for someone who is as mean to you as Snape is to 
Harry, thus the sympathy can /seem/ contradictory, even though the event for 
which Harry feels sorry for him and the events for which Harry dislikes him are 
separate. 

<<
PK:

In fact, I hope that what Harry will figure out is essentially what Golly said in a different reply -- that a person can be extremely unpleasant and even hate you and still be on your side
(snip)

 >>

Now Hannah:
I agree with you completely here. I didn't mean to say that Snape (or anyone) 
is incapable of being both awful to Harry and true to Dumbledore, more that 
it's hard for Harry to understand that, or understand how he feels about that. 
However, I oughtn't've said that it was difficult for a reader to understand 
this. I know that Snape is a nasty character albeit on the side of right, but I 
don't know very much about it beyond that. To see Snape as only the Mean Good 
Guy is unfair and one demensional. That is the reason I'm glad for the 
pensieve scene: it adds another level to Snape, making his whole existence more 
complicated and interesting. I like Snape because he is the Mean Good Guy, but 
also because it seems we will learn more about him than that.

Also, Julie said:

<<I felt with this line ["The world isn't divided into good people and death 
eaters."], JKR was cautioning Harry (and the reader) not to look at the books 
or the characters as clear cut representations of "good" and "evil."  >>

And I can only add to that: "good but rather unpleasant," one categorization 
I seem to be plenty guilty of! <g>

Hannah




From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Thu Sep 25 23:11:32 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 18:11:32 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Pets-U-Like  (was Re: The Phoenix and the Snowy Owl)
References: <bkvns1+ut3r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000c01c383ba$5f5ea620$938faec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81589



>
> Geoff:
> Odd, I've always considered Hedwig to be a "she". It is a girl's name
> after all.
>


All of the books refer to Hedwig as a "she."


Ummm... I may have missed something (being a newbie here, as I am..), but
where did the issue, or even the idea, of Harry getting a new pet come into
this?

If it's because he doesn't have "Snuffles" around anymore... Snuffles wasn't
a pet and should not be thought of one, IMHO.  Snuffles was an alias Sirius
used.  (To think of him as a pet would be tantamount to thinking of your
parents as walking wallets and such.  It does them a great disrespect.)

If it's not because of Snuffles... what is the topic from?

Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster







From autumeda at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 26 01:06:28 2003
From: autumeda at yahoo.com (autumeda)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 01:06:28 -0000
Subject: FILK: "DA, or Elvis Costello Meets the Sorting Hat" (OoP)
Message-ID: <bl03ek+q70v@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81590

Ooh, hermionegallo beat me to it, but can I post mine anyway?  Like 
Odile Falaise, I've had "Oliver's Army" knocking around my head since 
I read OoP. - Autumeda

OoP Filk, sung to the tune of Elvis Costello's "Oliver's Army":

"Dumbledore's Army, or Elvis Costello Meets the Sorting Hat"

Everyone's talking
We're gonna meet tonight
While Fudge is sleepwalking
Hogwarts is readying for a fight
You-Know-Who's supporters organize
But The Boy Who Lived has a surprise

Dumbledore's Army is here to stay
Dumbledore's Army are on their way
And I will never tell anyone else about D.A.

Umbridge is coughing
There's no one in Defense
Her students all are off in
The secret Room of Requirements
Grab your wand and check your Galleon
Who knew homework could be so much fun?

Dumbledore's Army is here to stay
Dumbledore's Army are on their way
And I will never tell anyone else about D.A.

Death Eaters roam the land  (Roam the land)
Escaped from Azkaban  (Azkaban)
The Dementors terrorize
Helped along by The Prophet's lies
But the wizards and witches need to open their eyes

It's thanks to Granger
We learn to laugh at danger here
And it could be arranged
With just a word in Mr. Potter's ear
Make a corporeal Patronus
Even You-Know-Who's afraid of us

Dumbledore's Army is here to stay
Dumbledore's Army are on their way
And I will never tell anyone else about D.A.
(Oh Oh Oh Oooohwoh Oh Oh Oohwoh)





From ALICAT999 at WESTNET.COM.AU  Thu Sep 25 14:22:09 2003
From: ALICAT999 at WESTNET.COM.AU (alicia)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 22:22:09 +0800
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Dumbledore's Spies
References: <bksg0r+r3er@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <002301c38370$68732be0$ee84adca@e7d8c1>

No: HPFGUIDX 81591

president0084:
  
> Snape knows Harry has a cloak because in the POA when Harry sneaks into town, 
> Malfoy sees Harry only half covered by the cloak.

> It wouldn't be to hard to add one plus one equals Harry got a cloak.

It is true that Snape could perceive that Harry has an invisibility cloak from what Draco saw near the Shrieking Shack in POA, but it doesn't explain how he knew someone was there in PS, when he cornered Quirell, asking him where his loyalties lay.

"Alicia"




From octaviaempressofmars at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 26 01:35:24 2003
From: octaviaempressofmars at hotmail.com (belsum)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 01:35:24 -0000
Subject: Did Voldemort kill Petunia & Lily's parents?
In-Reply-To: <bksrh1+mbo0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl054s+hgmd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81592


> > Lawtrainer wrote:
> > 
> > >See post 77807, it refers to the theory that Petunia is a squib,
> > >hence the jealousy/hatred she feels at her sister being a wizard.

belsum:
Great post, thanks for the reference.  (And of course I happen to agree 
with it!)

> > 
> > Tanya Swaine wrote:
> > This is entirely possible, but my question is, when it was said 
> > about Squibs in the books.  It referred to children of both pure bloods, 
> > and that child having no magical powers.  Now what confuses me is that
> > how could Petunia be a squib if her parents were muggles?  Wouldn't
> > she just be an ordinary muggle in that case?

belsum:
I have convinced myself that Lily and Petunia's parents were themselves 
squibs.  This would explain their excitement at having a witch in the 
family and exacerbate Petunia's feelings of jealousy, manifesting 
itself in her extreme hatred of the wizarding world.

> Lawtrainer wrote:
> That is a good point, however I cannot find anything on Yahoomort or 
> Lexicon that quotes actual canon stating that Lily and Petunia's 
> parents were muggles.  Lexicon states they are muggles, but does not 
> quote canon.  Does anyone have anything regarding this?

belsum:
This is what I have been searching for in my latest rereads of the 
books.  I have been unable to find anything that explicitly confirms 
the true nature of Harry's maternal family.  Certainly Dumbledore has 
never said "Harry, there is zero wizard blood in the Evans family."  





From sofdog_2000 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 26 01:36:51 2003
From: sofdog_2000 at yahoo.com (sofdog_2000)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 01:36:51 -0000
Subject: Harry's summer
In-Reply-To: <bkvntc+ofvh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl057j+aaig@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81593

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "n8483483" <jfite at m...> wrote:
> I am wondering why Harry must return to the Dursley's for the summer 
> after OP.  Everyone knows Vold. is back.  I understand about the 
> protection thing but can't Harry be harmed by someone other than 
> Vold. while at the Dursley's?  Why subject him to the horrors of the 
> Dursley's when he could just go to Ron's house and be protected by 
> the order?  Didn't they say they would send for him soon anyway?
> 
>    Do I understand the protection thing right? 
>   He has been allowed to leave the other summers and he does not 
> have to return during the Winter break.  
> 
> Wouldn't he be safer and happier somewhere (anywhere) else?
> 
> G.F

Sof:

Well, in GoF Voldemort says that even he cannot touch Harry in the care of his 
Muggle relatives. This implies that no wizard can harm Harry. Also, the blood 
charm seems far too critical to abandon. Once Harry fails to go home, or is no 
longer welcome to return to Privet Drive it will be broken. It makes sense -
whether one regards Harry as a person or as the big gun in the war - to 
maintain that sanctuary as a last resort. 

You never know what chain of events might make it necessary for him to 
retreat there and hold out. 




From queen_amidalachic at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 26 03:55:37 2003
From: queen_amidalachic at yahoo.com (Maria)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 03:55:37 -0000
Subject: Portkey and Floo in Hogwarts.
Message-ID: <bl0dbp+6lvh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81594

Hello there. 
Reading OOTP has got me wondering about Hogwart's protection. We have 
seen that Harry and co can Floo out of Hogwarts, and portkeys taking 
Harry out and back to the school. But does this travelling system 
protect the school from Voldemort and his Death Eaters? Or is 
Voldemort simply waiting to become more powerful, not only himself, 
but his army and then attempt to raid Hogwarts? Then again ... the 
Floo network and portkeys, although monitored is still too risky.

Maria 
http://www.geocities.com/queen_amidalachic/index.html





From gorda_ad at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 26 04:19:43 2003
From: gorda_ad at hotmail.com (adsong16)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 04:19:43 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Philosophy (WAS:  MAGIC DISHWASHER: Spying Game Philosophy
In-Reply-To: <bksd3i+4k82@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl0eov+6nej@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81595

First, an introduction:

I have been lurking on the list for a couple of weeks now, and my husband 
thinks I'm a total nut, but hey, what are you gonna do. I live in Pennsylvania, I 
am a musician, and I am working on my dissertation. (well, not just now, 
obviously... er... anyway, moving on).  I just want to say that it's WONDERFUL 
to be able to discuss the books in such depth, with such articulate, intelligent 
people, and yes, well, other nutters. *wink*

And now on to the business at hand:

Marie:
> What if Dumbledore HAS worked out another possible interpretation of 
> the prophecy?  What if he believes that the only way for Voldemort to 
> be permanently vanquished is for Harry to be unwilling to kill him, 
> even if not doing so would mean his own death?  If Harry's current 
> anguish about having to become a murderer persists, he might make 
> that choice, even if he believes he can kill Voldemort.  So even if 
> Dumbledore realizes that the outcome of this hypothetical encounter 
> would not be Harry's death, Harry has to believe it would be.  
> Because only then can he make the truly noble choice TO die because 
> to do otherwise would make him someone he doesn't want to be, someone 
> who would see himself as unworthy of love (as his self reflection 
> seems to indicate).  We know (or believe, anyway) that Lily's self-
> sacrificial love of Harry stopped Voldemort the first time and forged 
> a link between Voldemort and Harry.  I think Dumbledore may believe 
> Harry's power that the Dark Lord knows not lies in his unwillingness 
> to kill, but if Dumbledore tells him that directly, it will nullify 
> Harry's choice.  He cannot truly choose to die rather than kill if he 
> thinks that doing so would not actually result in his death, and that 
> is why Dumbledore let him make such a simplistic interpretation of 
> the prophecy.  He respects Harry's right to choose, and more than 
> that, he knows that the choice will have to be genuine to be 
> effective.  

I think you may be up to something here. We know that in the heat of the 
moment Harry has *wanted* to kill people, but has in practice been incapable 
of it. First, he tries to kill Sirius in PoA, before he finds out the truth about the 
Secret-keeping. But he just points at Sirius with his wand and can't bring 
himself to do it. Then of course he prevents Lupin and Sirius from killing Peter, 
who deserves it even more. In OoP he runs after Bellatrix to kill her, but is 
even unable to perform the Cruciatus Curse on her correctly. (Sure, this could 
be because he's never performed it before and has never been taught how to 
do it. But it could also be because he is in fact *incapable* --read: too pure of 
heart-- of performing an Unforgivable curse).

We also know that JKR tends to lead us in one direction and then do a 180 
degree turnaround. For example, in Chapter 12 of GoF Harry envisions 
himself wining the Triwizard Cup and everyone cheering for him. And at this 
point, I for one was thinking "well, the hero always wins so he probably will 
get the cup at the end, somehow". But it was a trick, and although he does 
win, the scene of him holding the cup in front of the school after coming back 
from the graveyard could not be more diametrically different than what he had 
imagined.

All of the above leads me to this: it's too obvious for Harry to *literally* kill LV, 
besides the fact that he may not actually be *able* to do it. Some people have 
suggested other ways in which LV could be defeated (being stripped of his 
magical powers, being somehow reedemed ala Darth Vader, etc.) Marie's 
suggestion above that Harry might choose to die, rather than kill, might hit 
close to target. 

OTOH,  I somehow don't envision Harry sacrificing himself unless someone 
else was on the line (his friends, the WW, take your pick). It is also true that 
according to the prophecy, only Harry has *the power* to vanquish LV. So 
allowing himself to be killed by LV would only ensure LV's success, wouldn't 
it? 

Marie's suggestion that Harry's mercy will vanquish LV is brilliant. But in order 
to do it, Harry would have to *know* that it would vanquish him, otherwise 
he'd be handing LV the WW in a silver platter. Quite a little cunundrum. 

Of course, how JKR is going to bring Harry out of the whole ordeal without 
some blood in his hands (which IMHO is the only way to bring Harry out, 
otherwise the point of the story --about the power of love-- would be lost) is 
the crux of the question, isn't it?

I hope that made sense... 

Gorda





From bakanarie at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 26 03:38:01 2003
From: bakanarie at hotmail.com (narie)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 03:38:01 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Spies
In-Reply-To: <bkshl8+2k10@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl0cap+7cdl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81596

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jakedjensen" 
<jakejensen at h...> wrote:
> I must admit that when I originally posted this "spy theory" I 
> secretly thought Snape might have been DD's "wizard on the spot."  
> However, it is also possible that someone else was there spying 
> for DD.  Here are some possibilities:
> 
> 1) Mundungus Fletcher
> 2) One of the Weasleys
> 3) Lupin
> 4) Mad-eye Moody
> 5) Figg
> 6) Hagrid (not a great "spy," but he was the first person there)
> 7) One of the Longbottoms
> 
> Jake
> 
> PS.  Someone backchanneled me asking, "why do I think DD even knew 
> where the Potter's were since he wasn't their secret keeper?"  If 
> I understand that spell correctly, only the secret keeper can tell 
> another person the secret.  So, Sirius or Wormtail could have told 
> DD where the Potters were, without sacrificing the location, because 
> DD could not tell others.  Moreover, the secret keeper could tell all 
> of the "spies" without sacrificing the secret as well.  For more info 
> on this, see OOTP (Grimauld Place).

The only problem with this theory is that then the spy would have 
known who the secret keeper was, as the secret can only be revealed 
by that specific person. If that was the case, you would have hoped 
*someone* would have informed Dumbledore or the Ministry of the fact 
that Pettigrew was the Potter's secret keeper, and not Black.

Also, a question that has been nagging me - would the Fidelius charm 
still work once the Potters had died, or does their death mean the 
end of the charm? 

I can't really think of any other way Hagrid and Sirius would have 
been able to find them if the secret was still, well, secret. For 
that matter, if the secret was still secret, and from my 
understanding of the spell (which is rather sketchy, granted), how 
did anyone manage to find the bodies of Lily and James to confirm 
their deaths?


Cheers,
narie. replying from digest, and 100 posts behind.





From kimberley42 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 26 03:18:34 2003
From: kimberley42 at yahoo.com (Kim)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 03:18:34 -0000
Subject: Buckbeak
Message-ID: <bl0b6a+aibk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81597

Does each hippogriff have such a unique appearance that it is easy to
distinguish each indivual hippogriff?

If, instead, they all look alike, why not turn Buckbeak loose with the
rest of his herd?   Especially by now, I can't imagine any M.O.M.
official could tell one from another, so Buckbeak should be safe
enough.

---Kimberley  





From Yahtzee63 at aol.com  Fri Sep 26 02:56:47 2003
From: Yahtzee63 at aol.com (Yahtzee63 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 22:56:47 EDT
Subject: Sirius' property
Message-ID: <1db.1176a225.2ca504ef@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81598

Sue says: 

>>I did wonder, in PoA, how Sirius's vault was still available to him, 
whatever name he used in that owl post letter.<<

Here's a thought -- what if the goblins just don't care about crimes in the 
wizarding world? They may be as apart from wizards and witches as house-elves 
and centaurs and the rest; the ties might only be economic. There's no saying 
that the goblins would care about a wizard's criminal status any more than a 
Dementor would.

Which would open up some very interesting issues -- it's dangerous enough to 
the wizarding world if the Dementors go to Voldemort's side, but what if the 
goblins did? If the entire wizarding economy folded, all hell would break loose 
--



Yahtzee


http://www.thechicagoloop.net/yahtzee
YahtzeeFicUpdates at yahoogroups.com


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 26 07:43:23 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 07:43:23 -0000
Subject: An intro, and a long letter...
In-Reply-To: <006f01c382ad$407701c0$1994aec7@rick>
Message-ID: <bl0qms+rnrc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81599

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Iggy McSnurd"
<coyoteschild at p...> wrote:
>
> ...edited...
> There's a question about why Harry couldn't see the Thestrals from 
>his first visit to Hogwarts if he witnessed the death of his parents.
> 

bboy_mn:

Excellent post, a lot of interesting points. However, there are a few
I must comment on.

JKR knew how Thestrals worked when she wrote 'Goblet of Fire' in
which, to some extent, Harry witnessed Cedric's death, but she said
she couldn't let Harry see the Thestrals at the end of that book
because she would have had to leave the whole issue of where they
suddenly came from hanging until the next book. 

Since she gets to invent the world she creates, her solution was to
say the people need time to process death. Different times for
different people. Harry was still processing Cedric's death at the 
end of that book. That conviniently allowed her to wait until the next
book to introduce Therstrals and explain them.

We don't know that Harry witnessed his parents death or that he ever
saw them dead. It seems reasonable that an 18 month old baby might
have been in a cradle or a bassinet, although I only speculate, these
seem more common in Europe, and by extension in the somewhat behind
the times wizard world. Cradles and bassinets have closed sides on
them so you can't see out. Unless Harry was sitting up, he wouldn't
have been able to see his parents death or see them dead, and he
certainly wouldn't have had a mind mature enough to process the
implication of death.


> Iggy, the Prankster continues:

> Snapes is VERY competent as both a teacher and as a Potions Master.
> Of course, as a person, he leaves a bit to be desired.  
> 

bboy_mn:

Snape is a competent teacher???? What are you smoking? (just a joke)

Snape is a horrible teacher; he bullies and intimidates his sutudents,
and is consistently unfair and unreasonable.

But I will concede that he is truly a Master Portions Master.


> earlier poster:
>
> ... JKR threw in Uranus for some reason. >>> 


> now Iggy again: 
> 
> ... it could have just been a silly reference ..., Ron asked 
> Lavender "Hey Lavender, can we see Uranus?"  As silly a mood as he 
> was in, the joke may have just come to his mind again.
> 

bboy_mn:

I'm with you on this one Iggy. I think people are looking a little to
deep here for significants. I'm not say there is no significants, but
I don't think it is deeply profound.

It was a BUTT joke by a kid who was dazed and confused, physically and
mentally stunned, and in a state approximating intoxication;
befuddled. I think the 'intoxication' was a result of being stunned,
and not a primary characteristic of the mystery charm he was hit with.

>
> ...edited... 
> 

> Iggy continues:
> 
> 
> About the Apparating / Disapparating on Hogwart's grounds thing:  
> ... if you could Apparate onto the grounds, that people would just
> pop into the Gryffindor Tower, ...
> 
> People are missing something important that would allow them to do 
> that anyhow.  The fireplaces are connected with the Floo network.  
> How else would Harry have been able to talk with Sirius in the 
> fireplace?  
> 

bboy_mn:

People (Lupin for example) have used the fireplaces to travel within
the boundaries of the castle, but we have never seen anyone enter or
exit the castle by floo network.

You are right, we have seen 'fire talking' occur between someone
inside and someone outside the castle, but the ability to 'fire talk'
does not guarantee the ability to transport whole bodies.

It would seem a reasonable and moderately safe concession to allow
communication by Floo Network, but also seems very likely that there
would be enchantments limiting the Floo capability, and thereby
preventing the tranport of persons.


>
> ...edited..
> 
> Your friend in Humor,
> 
> Iggy McSnurd,
> the Prankster

Just a thought.

bboy_mn






From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Fri Sep 26 09:19:52 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 09:19:52 -0000
Subject: Pets-U-Like  (was Re: The Phoenix and the Snowy Owl)
In-Reply-To: <000c01c383ba$5f5ea620$938faec7@rick>
Message-ID: <bl10bo+3k1u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81600

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Iggy McSnurd" <coyoteschild at p...> 
wrote:
> 
> Ummm... I may have missed something (being a newbie here, as I am..), but
> where did the issue, or even the idea, of Harry getting a new pet come into
> this?
> 


It  was a comment made by JKR in an interview.

Kneasy




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Fri Sep 26 10:09:14 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:09:14 -0000
Subject: Pets-U-Like  (was Re: The Phoenix and the Snowy Owl)
In-Reply-To: <bkvns1+ut3r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl138a+5q5o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81601

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" <gbannister10 at a...> 
wrote:
> 
> You haven't considered the possibilities of Aunt Marge's dog :-) Now 
> that would be interesting... 
> 
> ...or a Thestral. Good for cleaning you up when you cut yourself 
> shaving.


Good point.
I did wonder whether  Aunt Marge's dog was a disguised Crup; this 
would explain why it seemed to hate everyone it met. 
Harry has some Muggle blood so it'd probably  be anti-him too.
But I quailed at presenting  the theory that Aunt Marge is a witch;
possible, but not  enough canon to support it - yet! One for
later, perhaps.

Thestrals, though. No, I hadn't considered those. Mind you,  if
Harry wandered around asking people  if they'd seen his invisible
pet, he'd end up in the bed next to the Longbottoms in no time.

Kneasy





From sibel_saya at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 26 10:30:42 2003
From: sibel_saya at hotmail.com (sibel_saya)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:30:42 -0000
Subject: The Death Chamber
Message-ID: <bl14gi+3k6g@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81602


I don't think anyone has brought this up, but I don't really trust 
that archive search so forgive me if this has been discussed to death.

Am I the only one who has wondered what the Death Chamber really is? 
And this mysterious Black Veil that Sirius fell through? Is this some 
kind of execution chamber for criminals so bad even the Dementors and 
Azkaban are too good for them? Or something a little less obvious? 
Also the voices Harry heard behind the veil. Is Dumbledore wrong? Is 
there some way for the dead to come back? Are they really just behind 
the veil? I know this post is pretty much all questions but I'm a 
pretty questioning gal.
  Any thoughts??

Sibel




From ffionmiles at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 26 12:07:08 2003
From: ffionmiles at hotmail.com (ffimiles)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 12:07:08 -0000
Subject: The Death Chamber
In-Reply-To: <bl14gi+3k6g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl1a5c+67ha@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81603

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sibel_saya" <sibel_saya at h...> 
wrote:
> 
> I don't think anyone has brought this up, but I don't really trust 
> that archive search so forgive me if this has been discussed to 
death.
> 
> Am I the only one who has wondered what the Death Chamber really 
is? 
> And this mysterious Black Veil that Sirius fell through? Is this 
some 
> kind of execution chamber for criminals so bad even the Dementors 
and 
> Azkaban are too good for them? Or something a little less obvious? 
> Also the voices Harry heard behind the veil. Is Dumbledore wrong? 
Is 
> there some way for the dead to come back? Are they really just 
behind 
> the veil? I know this post is pretty much all questions but I'm a 
> pretty questioning gal.
>   Any thoughts??
> 
> Sibel

I'm afraid all I'm going to do is ask more questions - because I've 
wondered about the veil too - I mean, what happened to Sirius' body?  
did he just vanish and become spirit-form or do they keep they're 
physical shape in there? I I am reminded somewhat of the world of the 
dead in Philip Pullman's Dark Materials trilogy - there, everyone is 
sort of a pale imitation of their live self until they are released 
into the living world again and become one with the universe, sort of 
thing...

The dimensions of the room suggest that there is some audience 
participation in some form because it's similar to the court room.

I definately think we'll be returing to the MOM to find out mroe 
about these rooms.
It was also interesting that Harry, Luna, Ginny and Neville were 
mesmorised byt the veil (Harry and Luna could also here the voices) 
but Ron and Hermione didn't seem so srongly affected, though Hermione 
was scared and dragged Harry back from something that turned out to 
be extremely dangerous.  Why weren't they affected in the same way?

Ffi




From mom31 at rochester.rr.com  Fri Sep 26 12:28:02 2003
From: mom31 at rochester.rr.com (mom31)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 08:28:02 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] *ALL THE CLUES LEAD UP TO THE HEART OF IT ALL*
References: <bkvbjp+577s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001a01c38429$a0cd23b0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>

No: HPFGUIDX 81604


  Laura (theredshoes86) said:


    =============================================
  JEREMY PAXMAN: Unlikely pairings? Not Hermione and Draco Malfoy or
  anything like that?

  JK ROWLING: 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. No-one has ever - I
  have gone and looked at some of it and no-one's ever ... There is one
  thing that if anyone guessed I would be really annoyed as it is kind
  of the heart of it all. And it kind of explains everything and no-
  one's quite got there but a couple of people have skirted it. So you
  know, I would be pretty miffed after thirteen or fourteen years of
  writing the books if someone just came along and said I think this
  will happen in book seven. Because it is too late, I couldn't divert
  now, everything has been building up to it, and I've laid all my
  clues.
  =============================================
  taken from:
  http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.net/bbcinterview3.shtml

  more interesting chats are listed in this website:
  http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.net/transcripts.shtml

  any ideas???




  Joj says:

  Well, given that she was answering a shipping question, I think she's talking about the way Harry defeats Voldemort. It's the power he knows not of.  I think it will have to do with love (friendship or romantic), Ron and Hermione, and a BIG sacrifice on one of the trios part. Just how wicked is JK?  I believe she would do just about anything.   

  I, for one, would be very disappointed to figure it out.  It would be like knowing all you Christmas presents in June.  

  Joj,  who's husband thinks she's crazy for thinking JK might kill off Harry.  "They're children's books" , he says.  Well, I can forgive him his ignorance, since he's only seen the movies.  :-)

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Fri Sep 26 12:46:54 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 12:46:54 -0000
Subject: Snape's Worst Memory (and the purpose thereof)
In-Reply-To: <bl02pj+n15l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl1cfu+bpdk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81605

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sbursztynski" 
<greatraven at h...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jeffl1965" <jeffl1965 at h...> 
> wrote:
> > 
> >     <snip>
 
> >     Will Snape and Harry ever get close? I can't say, but I might 
> > hazzard a guess and say that if something really bad happens to 
> > force them to have to trust one another, they might, but 
otherwise, 
> > I can't really see it happening.
> > 
> > 
> >   Jeff
> 
> Sue B:
> 
> And in *this* universe, something bad probably *will* happen to 
force 
> them together! (g) Whether they will ever *like* each other is
> another matter.


  Jeff:

    Indeed! I won't guess what, but I'm sure it'll be something very 
bad. :) Who knows, maybe Snape gets disabled, and Harry has to bathe 
him!! EEK!!!! I think I'd rather die. :)


   Jeff




From entropymail at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 26 12:48:56 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 12:48:56 -0000
Subject: The Death Chamber
In-Reply-To: <bl14gi+3k6g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl1cjo+rcts@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81606

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sibel_saya" <sibel_saya at h...>
wrote:
> Am I the only one who has wondered what the Death Chamber really is? 
> And this mysterious Black Veil that Sirius fell through? Is this some 
> kind of execution chamber for criminals so bad even the Dementors and 
> Azkaban are too good for them? Or something a little less obvious? 
> Also the voices Harry heard behind the veil. Is Dumbledore wrong? Is 
> there some way for the dead to come back? Are they really just behind 
> the veil? I know this post is pretty much all questions but I'm a 
> pretty questioning gal.

Well, when Harry had his discussion with Nearly Headless Nick about
death, Nick told Harry that he knows "nothing of the secrets of
death", but then goes on to say "I believe learned wizards study the
matter in the Department of Mysteries--".  

This is probably what Nick is talking about; a place which has been
devised to study death. Perhaps even speak to the dead. Because of the
amphitheater-like setup of the room, it may be some sort of study hall
or, perhaps, an observation room like those you might see in a
teaching hospital.  

Just my thoughts!

:: Entropy ::






From altered.earth at ntlworld.com  Fri Sep 26 13:01:07 2003
From: altered.earth at ntlworld.com (digger)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 14:01:07 +0100
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Death Chamber
In-Reply-To: <bl1a5c+67ha@eGroups.com>
References: <bl1a5c+67ha@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F743893.1030401@ntlworld.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81607

ffimiles wrote:

> 
> I definately think we'll be returing to the MOM to find out mroe
> about these rooms.
> It was also interesting that Harry, Luna, Ginny and Neville were
> mesmorised byt the veil (Harry and Luna could also here the voices)
> but Ron and Hermione didn't seem so srongly affected, though Hermione
> was scared and dragged Harry back from something that turned out to
> be extremely dangerous.  Why weren't they affected in the same way?
> 
> Ffi


digger:

My guess: Harry and Luna were fascinated by the veil because they are 
not afraid of death. Hermione fears death, so she was instincivly 
scared of it. Ginny and Neville have had brushes with death too, so they 
were less frightened by it.

I also think we are going to see more of the death chamber. I hope Harry 
drags Voldemort through it towards the end of book 7. But Harry being 
our hero, and brim full of love, he will get spat out again, thus 
'dying' and yet living on.






From zanelupin at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 26 13:43:28 2003
From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 13:43:28 -0000
Subject: Sirius's property (Was Re: Buckbeak)
In-Reply-To: <bl02j3+5k7p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl1fq0+t0u3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81608

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sbursztynski" 
<greatraven at h...> wrote:

Yahtzee:

>>My personal take on it is that Sirius would leave the house to
Harry outright, but perhaps leave Lupin with the right to inhabit it 
for as long as he wishes. Lupin's the one in more immediate need, 
and if Sirius got around to writing his will, he'd no doubt think of 
that. Also, it appears in OOTP that Lupin's living there, at least 
part-time, already -- and Sirius would not want Lupin to be made 
homeless.<<

Sue B:

>True, he probably would leave it to Harry, along with his money, 
and this leads me to another question - what happens to the property 
of someone who was on the run at his death? Where *is* his will? 
Possibly, now, he will be posthumously cleared of all charges and, 
of course, it would be impossible to find the house by anyone not 
authorised anyway. <snip> <
 

KathyK:

I don't think anyone will know Sirius is dead other than those who 
were at the DoM until his name is cleared.  No one in the Order has 
any reason to open what could be a very ugly can of worms over 
Sirius's property.  Does he have a will?  Who gets 12 Grimmauld 
Place?  If he doesn't have a will, does the house go to one of his 
Voldemort-loyal Black relatives?  Depending on how the property is 
distributed, it could go to Narcissa or Draco.  And the Order 
wouldn't want that to happen.

If someone who was at the Ministry were to reveal Sirius' death, it 
would be one of the Death Eaters.  As they are now revealed as Death 
Eaters and locked up in Azkaban, would they really be concerned with 
telling the Ministry that Sirius is dead?  Especially if the WW 
still sees him as Voldemort's most feared Death Eater.  Why give up 
that power over everyone else by telling the Ministry that he's 
dead.  And they certainly wouldn't go around telling people that 
Sirius was never really a Death Eater to begin with.  Once again, 
they'd be giving up a great advantage.

Once Sirius' name is cleared, however, it will be safe for the Order 
to tell the world that he's dead.  And it would then be to the DE's 
advantage to tell the world how Bellatrix killed so easily did away 
with one of the good guys.  Then they can begin to contend with the 
possible sticky situation that is Sirius's property distribution.

That leads to the question of how quickly Sirius' name will be 
cleared.  The general WW may be willing to believe Harry and 
Dumbledore about him now that Voldemort has been proven alive.  
Their credibility has increased immmensly.  But will the Ministry be 
so easy to persuade?  As long as Fudge remains Minister, I think the 
path to clearing Sirius will be very difficult.  

Fudge obviously has been delivered a crippling blow with the 
revelation of LV's return.  Will he continue to eat humble pie and 
publicly announce Harry and Dumbledore were right about Sirius as 
well?  I'm not convinced it will be so easy to persuade the Ministry 
officials to clear Sirius.  Perhaps they will eventually do so and 
perhaps I'm underestimating the weight Harry and Dumbledore will now 
carry with the Ministry.  

But if and when Fudge and co. are ousted from power, depending on 
who the new Minister would be (I will hope Arthur Weasley, but I'm 
not sure this is very likely at this point), it will be easier for 
the Order to get Sirius' name cleared.  

I hope that wasn't too much babbling,

KathyK (trying to jump back into the main list after only a six day 
break and finding it intimidating)  




From altered.earth at ntlworld.com  Fri Sep 26 13:39:36 2003
From: altered.earth at ntlworld.com (digger)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 14:39:36 +0100
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Death Chamber
In-Reply-To: <bl1cjo+rcts@eGroups.com>
References: <bl1cjo+rcts@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F744198.1030605@ntlworld.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81609

entropymail wrote:

> Nick told Harry  "I believe learned wizards study the
> matter in the Department of Mysteries--". 
> 
> This is probably what Nick is talking about; a place which has been
> devised to study death. Perhaps even speak to the dead. Because of the
> amphitheater-like setup of the room, it may be some sort of study hall
> or, perhaps, an observation room like those you might see in a
> teaching hospital. 
> 
> Just my thoughts!
> 
> :: Entropy ::
> 

digger:

yes, my reading of it exactly. See my post 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/66829.

Following on from myself again (shame-faced)
The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of Harry dragging 
Voldy through the veil. Because if Harry is willing to sacrifice 
himself, he could be returned to the land of the living, as a 
'bodhisattva', so he can finish his 'work' on earth. It would have to be 
a purely selfless sacrifice though, and not because he wants to see all 
his loved ones again. So I stay steadfast to my DeadLand!Harry theory, 
that Harry will make contact with the dead, and yet not die.  That would 
make sense of JKR mentioning the possibility of Harry dying at the end, 
and yet leave him around for a sequel. Quite apart from all the 
religious parallels ;-)

digger




From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Fri Sep 26 14:28:50 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 14:28:50 -0000
Subject: Goblins (was: Sirius' property)
In-Reply-To: <1db.1176a225.2ca504ef@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bl1if2+59s5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81610

> Yahtzee wrote: (snip)
> Here's a thought -- what if the goblins just don't care about crimes 
in the wizarding world? They may be as apart from wizards and witches 
as house-elves and centaurs and the rest; the ties might only be 
economic. There's no saying that the goblins would care about a 
wizard's criminal status any more than a Dementor would.

Yes, this is actually canon! In POA, Sirius sends Harry a Firebolt, 
then near the end of the book tells him that he used his own 
Grongott's account. So the convicted murderer's money was not frozen 
or confiscated or anything.


> Which would open up some very interesting issues -- it's dangerous 
enough to the wizarding world if the Dementors go to Voldemort's side, 
but what if the goblins did? If the entire wizarding economy folded, 
all hell would break loose .
> Yahtzee <

And I agree with you here, too. I think Book 6 will see a very chaotic 
WW including another goblin insurrection that Bill may help reverse 
after much havoc has been wreaked. And of the many threads supposing 
an attack on Hogwarts and/or the MoM, the ones I like the best include 
the use of goblins and their tunnels. Sudden, unexpected, mysterious 
and undefended as far as we know.

-Remnant
Can't wait for Book 6!




From dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu  Fri Sep 26 14:39:23 2003
From: dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu (Arya)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 14:39:23 -0000
Subject: The Death Chamber
In-Reply-To: <bl1cjo+rcts@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl1j2r+r6ma@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81611

> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sibel_saya" <sibel_saya at h...>
wrote: Am I the only one who has wondered what the Death Chamber 
really is?  And this mysterious Black Veil that Sirius fell through? 
Is this some kind of execution chamber for criminals so bad even the 
Dementors and Azkaban are too good for them? Or something a little 
less obvious? 
SNIP

THEN ENTROPY WROTE:
Well, when Harry had his discussion with Nearly Headless Nick about
death, Nick told Harry that he knows "nothing of the secrets of
death", but then goes on to say "I believe learned wizards study the
matter in the Department of Mysteries--".  
This is probably what Nick is talking about; a place which has been
devised to study death. Perhaps even speak to the dead. Because of the
amphitheater-like setup of the room, it may be some sort of study hall
or, perhaps, an observation room like those you might see in a
teaching hospital.  
Just my thoughts!
:: Entropy ::

ME:
I would say that the Death Chamber Room was indeed some place for 
capital punishment.  I might assume that the Dementors were only 
placed at Azkaban as prison guards after the first fall of Voldemort--
Dumbledore cites their removal as one of--if not the--first things to 
do after Voldemort was reborn.  I hardly think this would be such an 
issue if the dementors had been at Azkaban before and never left 
Ministry control nor do I think that if there had been hard evidence 
that the Dementors had been linked to Voldemort before, that they 
would be trusted to guard prisoners and then not sen as a risk to 
remain at Azkaban even with rumors of Volde's return.  I think the 
Dementors at Azkaban, therefore to be development only within the 
last 15 years or so--of course not any longer as they all left at the 
end of OotP.  

Therefore, I would say that other means of metting out justice must 
have been used prior to incarceration with Dementors--I think it 
quite likely that the worst convicted criminals might have been made 
into Death studies and sent to walk beyond the veil.  
In fact, as I think about this, perhaps if this were true, then 
Sirius--being apprehended a day or so after the Fall, might have been 
one of the first to have been shunted away from not having to go 
beyond the veil and rather to live in the Dementors' prison.  I think 
it would be ironic, given that Sirius did indeed, end up having to go 
beyond the veil.  Hmmm.

Arya




From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Fri Sep 26 13:33:00 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 08:33:00 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:Dumbledore's Philosophy (WAS:  MAGIC DISHWASHER: Spying Game Philosophy
References: <bl0eov+6nej@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <004b01c38432$b5d56c00$828faec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81612

>From Gorda:

> Marie's suggestion that Harry's mercy will vanquish LV is brilliant. But
in order
> to do it, Harry would have to *know* that it would vanquish him, otherwise
> he'd be handing LV the WW in a silver platter. Quite a little cunundrum.
>
> Of course, how JKR is going to bring Harry out of the whole ordeal without
> some blood in his hands (which IMHO is the only way to bring Harry out,
> otherwise the point of the story --about the power of love-- would be
lost) is
> the crux of the question, isn't it?

And now, to quote myself here:

>Now, assuming that astrology plays as much of a role in things as this
group
>feels it does, then Harry (ultimately) CANNOT kill LV, only change him.
>
>The prophecy states that the Dark Lord must die... It doesn't say that Tom
>Riddle must be slain, or even LV himself... The Dark Lord is an ASPECT of
>who LV is.
>
>It might be possible for Harry to "kill" the Dark Lord by making him cease
>to exist... doing this not through destroying LV's body, mind, or spirit,
>but by "redeeming" him and teaching him those things... somehow... that LV
>does not understand:  Love, Compassion, Empathy, and the ability to look
>beyond your own desires to the greater good.
>
>In essence, he "kills" the Dark Lord, but not Tom Riddle.
>

Modifying the end of my theory... the Dark Lord simply ceases to exist and
die on his own if Harry manages to make Tom Riddle understand, and possibly
even feel, love.


I woke up this morning with an insight that takes this a step further and
supports this theory even more:

In GoF, AD has a look of triumph in his eye and said that one hurdle was
overcome.

What if he's figured out the same conclusion I have, and realized that LV
gaining the source of Harry's protection will actually be a key to the Dark
Lord's downfall?  The protection is based on the love of his mother... a
love which infuses every cell of Harry's being.  Harry's blood is now part
of LV's body... as is the protection.  You can't have the protection without
having its source.  Therefore, the love Harry's mother felt for him now also
courses through LV...

Even though he doesn't realize it, and the essence of that love is not
"unlocked" yet, it still lies dormant in his system.

I think that something Harry does in their final confrontation will "unlock"
that dormant love that lies in LV's body, and it will purge Tom Riddle of
the evil and hatred within himself that forms the Dark Lord.

I also think that if Harry shows mercy to LV, and that's the turning point,
it will have to be despite himself.  If he KNOWS that it will defeat LV,
then he's not doing it out of true mercy or love, he's doing it in an effort
to destroy a foe... which (ultimately) is not mercy.  On the other hand,
doing it DESPITE everyone's advice to the contrary, doing it because his
heart tells him he MUST... now that's love and mercy.  It's also what's most
likely to make LV feel that remorse and guilt that will aid in purging the
Dark Lord.

I can see it now... The final conflict has passed... Tom Riddle is still
alive... both are weakened and lying near the Black Veil after another fight
in the Dept of Mysteries.

*****

Tom raised his head wearily, meeting Harry's gaze.  "W... Why did you save
me?  You could have let me fall through the veil and be rid of me
forever..."

"Because..." Harry said, wiping a trickle of blood from his forehead, "I
couldn't.  I knew Tom Riddle was in there somewhere... before you became
him... you had to be..."

A bewildered look crossed Tom's face as he thought for a moment.  "But, if
you had been wrong, you would have died yourself."

"It was a chance I knew I had to take."  Harry shrugged, grimacing slightly
at the flash of pain that shot through his bruised shoulder.  "I could see
it in your eyes.. somehow... when you tried to kill me earlier.  Like
something in you was fighting against it..."


A rustle of robes sounded from above, accompanied by the sound of footsteps
coming down the auditorium stairs.

"You are quite right, Harry."  Dumbledore said, looking at the both of them.
"The boy Tom was when he was sent to the orphanage, the one who still knew a
mother's love, was still buried deep in Lord Voldemort.  It was your blood,
the blood that contained a mother's love, that made the difference.  That
boy was able to feel a mother's love again, and that began to wave him up
and make him aware of what Voldemort was doing... and that it was wrong."


*****


(*yeesh*  If JKR ever reads that, and I'm right.. I think I'll be getting
one HECK of an angry letter... *laugh*)

Comments?

Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster


"They have Lion Fish, and Tiger Sharks, but do they have Bear Eels?  (Oh
my!)"

-- Iggy McSnurd








From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Fri Sep 26 13:39:24 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 08:39:24 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Death Chamber
References: <bl1a5c+67ha@eGroups.com> <3F743893.1030401@ntlworld.com>
Message-ID: <005201c38433$9b0991c0$828faec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81613

> ffimiles wrote:
>
> >
> > I definately think we'll be returing to the MOM to find out mroe
> > about these rooms.
> > It was also interesting that Harry, Luna, Ginny and Neville were
> > mesmorised byt the veil (Harry and Luna could also here the voices)
> > but Ron and Hermione didn't seem so srongly affected, though Hermione
> > was scared and dragged Harry back from something that turned out to
> > be extremely dangerous.  Why weren't they affected in the same way?
> >


I think Hermione was scared not because she was particularly affected by the
curtain, rather that she understood what the chamber was more than the
others did.  Also, she saw the effect that the curtain was having on Harry,
Neville, Luna, and Ginny, so she did her best to try to protect them from
it.

As for why those four were affected, It was for the same reason they could
see the Thestrals... they has seen death.  The Veil, in its way, is death
itself in a mote physical and tangible form.  Also, they could hear
voices... probably of loved ones on the other side.  The more important the
people who had died were to you, the louder and more clearly you heard their
voices.  Harry and Luna both lost parents, so that's probably why they heard
the voices loud enough that it was worth mentioning.

Comments?

Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster


"If all the world's a stage... Where does the audience sit?"

--  Iggy McSnurd







From feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca  Fri Sep 26 13:53:26 2003
From: feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca (feetmadeofclay)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 13:53:26 -0000
Subject: Snape's Worst Memory (and the purpose thereof)
In-Reply-To: <bkv9gv+t276@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl1gcm+1dsi@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81614

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "fourjays22" <jayandjay22 at h...> 
wrote:

> 
> Very good point.  One of my favorite lines in OoP is when Harry is 
> complaining to Sirius and Sirius tells him (paraphrasing).  "The 
> world isn't divided into good people and death eaters."   This line 
> really stood out to me -- I thought it was very important for Harry 
> to realize there are unpleasant, mean or misguided people in the WW 
> who aren't necessarily servants of Lord Voldemort.  

> Julie

I was under the impression Harry already knew this.  He was quite 
wary of Lockhart and knew Lockhart was a selfish person who couldn't 
be completely trusted.  I don't think Harry thought Skeeter was a 
good person, but he never suspected she was a DE.  

He doesn't trust Snape but I think it is Ron who continues to think 
Snape is behind stuff.  I don't remember that Harry suspecting him 
much. (but then Harry's not very curious about stuff)

Harry knew that Sirius wasn't all good after POA.  Or at least I 
thought I had learned that.

I felt this was a rehash and a little trite.  Most teenagers knows 
that people come in all variaties.  Unless you are a very trusting 
and optimistic person, I doubt that this would need to be told.  Ron 
perhaps fits that mould.  I would expect Harry to be far more cynical 
after what he has been through and the number of times Hogwarts' 
student body has turned on him.  He never suspected that Petunia was 
evil.  Harry should have understood this.  So should the 15 year old 
readers. If I suspected that Umbridge was a DE, it was because she 
shares DE views on racial purity.  

Besides I think this line will come to haunt Rowling thematically.  
I'm fairly sure Umbridge will side with Voldemort.  She's a racist 
and Harry's support is growing.  The only way for her to save her 
pride is to side against Harry which suits her politics. I have 
feeling she will be toadying to a new mater very soon.   

I still find HP's politics very black and white.





From feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca  Fri Sep 26 14:00:44 2003
From: feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca (feetmadeofclay)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 14:00:44 -0000
Subject: They are children's books (Was: the heart of it all)
In-Reply-To: <001a01c38429$a0cd23b0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
Message-ID: <bl1gqc+ad64@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81615

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mom31" <mom31 at r...> wrote:

> 
> 
>   Joj says:

>   Joj,  who's husband thinks she's crazy for thinking JK might kill 
off Harry.  "They're children's books" , he says.  Well, I can 
forgive him his ignorance, since he's only seen the movies.  :-)

Golly: They are children's books.  And children's books have beloved 
characters that die all the time.  

Charlotte's web for instance...    

Children often deal with death.  So their stories do as well.  It is 
a depressing way to end a series.  But if you are a christ figure, 
you have to die. 

Golly





From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Fri Sep 26 14:44:59 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 14:44:59 -0000
Subject: Snape's Worst Memory (and the purpose thereof)
In-Reply-To: <bl1cfu+bpdk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl1jdb+6p16@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81616

>   Jeff:
> 
>     Indeed! I won't guess what, but I'm sure it'll be something very 
> bad. :) Who knows, maybe Snape gets disabled, and Harry has to bathe 
> him!! EEK!!!! I think I'd rather die. :)
> 
>    Jeff


I do think Harry and Snape will be forced to reconcile by a 
catastrophe: Dumledore's death (or dissappearance, if you prefer). End 
of Book 6, DD is betrayed by his confidence in someone and vanquished, 
leaving Harry vulnerable. Snape whisks him away somewhere, where Harry 
finally realizes that Snape really is a good guy. Then Snape tells 
Harry more of the backstory with his parents, the prophecy, et al.

What do you think?

-Remnant
Forced to imagine the bathing of Snape: "Um, Harry, I've dropped the 
soap--can you help me find it?" :{ Darn you, Jeff!




From csgkll8 at aol.com  Fri Sep 26 14:13:26 2003
From: csgkll8 at aol.com (napnoy2003)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 14:13:26 -0000
Subject: The Death Chamber
In-Reply-To: <bl14gi+3k6g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl1hi6+coqb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81617

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sibel_saya" <sibel_saya at h...> 
wrote:
> 
> I don't think anyone has brought this up, but I don't really trust 
> that archive search so forgive me if this has been discussed to 
death.
> 
> Am I the only one who has wondered what the Death Chamber really 
is? 
> And this mysterious Black Veil that Sirius fell through? Is this 
some 
> kind of execution chamber for criminals so bad even the Dementors 
and 
> Azkaban are too good for them? Or something a little less obvious? 



Everyone in the books (well, alright, Ollivander's the only example 
that springs to mind) talks about what a great wizard Voldemort is, 
evil but great.  Could it be that the arch is a creation or finding 
of Voldemorts, something to do with his efforts to make himself 
immortal  "they who knew the steps I took to guard myself against 
mortal death?"  GOF.  Anyone who goes through the arch dies, but if 
they are powerful enough to re-emerge will be immortal?

It would follow that following LV's demise and that of his followers, 
their experiments would come to light, and where else would they end 
up BUT the DOM in the MOM, to be studied.  It could all link in with 
the prophesy, that Harry and LV will both go through the veil.

Any thoughts?





From lawtrainer at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 26 14:28:45 2003
From: lawtrainer at yahoo.com (Jana Fisher)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 14:28:45 -0000
Subject: Apparating
In-Reply-To: <bkvha4+plmv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl1iet+dnlb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81618

> Potterfanme (if I am reading the nested quotes correctly):
> > > > > I am curious why there is such a point made about not being 
> > able 
> > > > > to apparate or disapparate on the Hogwarts grounds.  

Maybe this has been questioned before, however if you cannot apparate 
or disapparate on Hogwarts, how does Dobby in COS, when Harry is in 
the hospital and hears Dumbledore bringing in Colin Creevey (I think 
it was him, I don't have the books here).  How does Dobby make the 
loud crack, that I assume is associated with apparating.  I say 
assume based on canon when Percy is apparating, and Fred & George 
learn to apparate.

Jana (wishing her full time job was reading HP, and no one would care 
I was looking up canon at work)





From silmariel at telefonica.net  Fri Sep 26 15:13:44 2003
From: silmariel at telefonica.net (Carolina)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 17:13:44 +0200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] BADD ANGST TBAY, Part II
In-Reply-To: <bksq4b+onkl@eGroups.com>
References: <bksq4b+onkl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <200309261713.44508.silmariel@telefonica.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 81619

Jen Reese wrote:

<snipping TBAY>

> So while much of this theory is a comment on who Dumbledore is,
> his *Plan* is still open to possibilities.......one of which is
> BADD ANGST--"Boundaries Always Direct Dumbledore's Actions-Now Go
> Stop Tom! (All canon from US versions).
>
> Dumbledore's Philosophy:

> And just as Dumbledore believes strongly in
> the freedom of choice, he also respects the limitations this
> belief places on anyone who wants to foster change:

Balance gods are often the more cruel. As I agree free will is 
important for him, I also hope he values all species freedom, not 
only his. As things are, only humans have a voice and killing 
Voldie won't change this little fact.

I can't agree respecting free will makes him so limited. He should 
also respect his own free will, and the free will of those unnamed 
creatures. 

While I think there is an option for a peaceful ending, after all, 
Jo is the writer so it's up to her, I also see an escenario that 
can be developed into an open war. Just there, in the second 
prophecy, I still have to see The Dark Lord raising more powerfull 
and blablabla... Voldie is still pretty lame compared to: 

> Every week, news comes of more deaths, more disappearances, more
> torturing...the Ministry of Magic is in disarray, they don't know
> what to do, they're trying to keep everything hidden from the
> Muggles, but meanwhile, Muggles are dying, too. (Sirius, GOF,
> chap. 27, pps. 526-527)

and to:

> "....you weren't in the Order then, you don't understand, last
> time we were outnumbered twenty to one by the Death Eaters and
> they were picking us off one by one." (Lupin, OOTP, chap. 9,
> p.177)

But why they were? They shouldn't, but there's a big part of WW that 
won't mind if others run rampant on genocide as long as they don't 
notice.

> "The only one against whom I intend to work," said Dumbledore,
> "is Lord Voldemort. If you are against him, then we remain,
> Cornelius, on the same side."  (GOF, chap. 36, p. 709).

I concede defeating LV is a point, but he is not the problem. 
Killing him wouldn't solve a thing if the structure that has raised 
him is available for the next killer to raise.

> Dumbledore's Plan:
>
> Dumbledore employs a three-part plan in the fight against Lord
> Voldemort, intending to first impede LV's progress and bring him
> out in the open (achieved in OOTP) and ultimately, to defeat him
> once and for all.
>
> 1. Creating a strong and unified counterforce--

Not trying to be critic here, but what's the point. Recruiting 
allies is a very basic strategy in a war, isn't it? I mean, it 
would be suicidal not to do it, and Dumbie has survived wars 
before, I'm sure the 'let's unite' parafernalia was for granted. 

After all,  

> "Time is short, and unless the few of us who know the truth stand
> united, there is no hope for any of us." (Dumbledore, GOF, chap.
> 36, p. 712)

... is perfectly ok, what doesn't make sense is a "Time is short, so 
the few of us who know the truth, let's divide and/or kill each 
other"

Is not Voldemort doing the same? 

> 2.  Respect for and use of the Deeper Mysteries of Magic--

> There is a mysterious "ancient magic" that Dumbledore ascribes to
> more fully than to the "Laws of Man" (in this case, the MOM).
> These deep mysteries appear to actualize in the form of binding
> connections between people or between people and magical objects:

Here is where I call it having a cool mind and common sense. 
Dumbledore uses the weapons he has, and follows the rules he knows. 

I mean, he knows they exist, so respecting here for me means not to 
be so dumb as to overlook something he takes as a fact. Borrowing 
Terry Pratchett an example: witches know gods exist in Discworld, 
but believing in them would be like believing in  the postman. 

<<"I am speaking of course of the fact that your mother died to save 
you." (Dumbledore, OOTP, Chap. 37, pps. 835- 836)  

<< "She {Petunia} [... ]  yet she still took you, and in doing so,
 she sealed the charm I placed upon you." (Dumbledore, OOTP, chap.
 37, p. 836) >>

<<  ".....When one wizard saves another wizard's life, it creates a
 certain bond between them....This is magic at its deepest, most
 impenetrable, Harry." (Dumbledore, POA, chap. 22, p. 426)>>

1) Miracles centered around self-sacrificing mothers.
2) The Power of Bloodbonds.
3) Saving a life creates a bond.

All together smells muggle, muggle, muggle to me. It's just my 
Slytherin impression. 

<< The Fidelius Charm is "An immensely complex spell
..involving the
 magical concealment of a secret inside a single, living soul. 
 The information is hidden inside the chosen person, or Secret
 Keeper
." (Prof. Flitwick, POA, chap. 10, p. 205)>>

See, I just thought it was a complex spell, but given each wizard 
should have a soul that was not the difficult part. Maybe I'm 
biased by the, 'hey Wormtail, wannabe Secret Keeper?' last-moment 
change.

> "Once a champion has been selected by the Goblet of Fire, he or
> she is obliged to see the tournament through to the end. The
> placing of your name in the goblet constitutes a binding, magical
> contract." (Dumbledore, GOF, chap. 16, p. 256)

Apart that I suposse the original maker of the goblet intended to 
assasinate someone with it I hope this does not count as ancient 
magic, because is a funny thing you can be arbitrarily be forced to 
adhere to a magical, binding contract. 

Magical contracts are as fun as contracts with demons, but the 
victim should at least do something. If not, we can just call it a 
very good way of forcing someone to suicide. I don't know why 
Voldie should despise it. No. Wait. A DE actually uses it. 

> Now Dumbledore appears to not only have a deep respect for
> this "ancient magic" but he also has been able to use this
> against Voldemort numerous times because LV "despises and
> underestimates it."  

> Others include:

> * Phoenix tail feathers in the brother wands to produce the
> Priori Incantatem (GOF, chap. 36, p. 697)

Wasn't that because he didn't knew Harry's particular core? I count 
this as good misinformation.

> * Hiding the Philosopher's Stone in the Mirror of Erised so only
> one wanting to "find it, but not use it" could retrieve the
> Stone. (Dumbledore, SS, chap. 17, p. 300)

A useful trick yes, but ancient magic?

> 3. Respect for Harry's Freedom of Choice Regarding the Prophecy?

I'm not entering in the prophecy yet, but with respect to the power 
the Dark Lords knows not, it can be very powerful, very simple, and 
very muggle.

Speculation here.

I'm very simple approaching here Harry as Arthur, in the sense that 
the king holds the heart of the land (ancient magic for me). The 
power Voldie has not can be Harry's leathership. If he can unite 
the sides, if he can change society, he certainly has powers beyond 
Tom Riddle's knowledge. Other men have done it. And it would 
vanquish the Dark Lord, but maybe not Tom. 

> Dumbledore, the master, will
> have to step aside now as Harry prepares to face his fate and
> that of the Wizarding World on his own terms.

But I hope he remains as counselor. Harry will be pierced in 
politics without counseling. We don't want Harry starting a civil 
war by accident.

silmariel





From lisaeckleycocchiarale at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 26 12:38:51 2003
From: lisaeckleycocchiarale at yahoo.com (Lisa Cocchiarale)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 12:38:51 -0000
Subject: *ALL THE CLUES LEAD UP TO THE HEART OF IT ALL*/killing Harry
In-Reply-To: <001a01c38429$a0cd23b0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
Message-ID: <bl1c0r+k21j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81620

New here, so please forgive any unwitting errors, but Joj wrote:

<Joj,  who's husband thinks she's crazy for thinking JK might kill 
off Harry.  "They're children's books" , he says.  Well, I can 
forgive him his ignorance, since he's only seen the movies.  :-)>

Killing Harry might well be a possiblity. In same interview, JKR 
(discussing her grief over Sirius' death and her husband's simplistic 
advice to just "not do it) said:

"It doesn't work like that. You are writing children's books. You 
need to be a ruthless killer."

So, killing Harry or one of the trio might not be out of the realm.

-Lisa E-C




From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Fri Sep 26 15:05:11 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:05:11 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Apparating
References: <bl1iet+dnlb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <009701c3843f$9698aca0$828faec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81621


from Jana

> Maybe this has been questioned before, however if you cannot apparate
> or disapparate on Hogwarts, how does Dobby in COS, when Harry is in
> the hospital and hears Dumbledore bringing in Colin Creevey (I think
> it was him, I don't have the books here).  How does Dobby make the
> loud crack, that I assume is associated with apparating.  I say
> assume based on canon when Percy is apparating, and Fred & George
> learn to apparate.
>

This brings me to an interesting thought...

Students have to learn to Apparate and Disapparate... presumably on the
school grounds.

IIRC, Hermione states that you can't Apparate / Disapparate onto or off of
the school grounds... but she never says anything about doing it ON the
school grounds.

Perhaps the border of the grounds acts as a warding circle, preventing
travel across the line, but not on either side of it.

Which explains why Dobby could Disapparate.  He could simply pop from the
room in the hospital wing to the edge of the grounds, cross off the grounds,
and then pop back to the Malfoy's residence.  In doing this, he wouldn't
have actually been (Dis)Apparating onto or off of the school grounds.


Comments?


Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster


... and so the Healer says "If this is the thermometer, where did I leave my
wand??"

-- Iggy McSnurd (The true story of how Mad-Eye Moody lost his leg and is so
cautious about wand placement.)







From annemehr at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 26 15:27:00 2003
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 15:27:00 -0000
Subject: The Death Chamber
In-Reply-To: <bl1a5c+67ha@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl1ls4+l90c@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81622

Ffi wrote:
> I definately think we'll be returing to the MOM to find out mroe 
> about these rooms.
> It was also interesting that Harry, Luna, Ginny and Neville were 
> mesmorised byt the veil (Harry and Luna could also here the voices) 
> but Ron and Hermione didn't seem so srongly affected, though Hermione 
> was scared and dragged Harry back from something that turned out to 
> be extremely dangerous.  Why weren't they affected in the same way?

Annemehr:

Actually, to be quite accurate, Harry, Ginny, and Neville were
mesmerised.  Hermione had to snap Harry out of it by reminding him of
Sirius, and the other two had to be physically dragged away.

As far as I can tell, Luna, who could hear the voices, was certainly
fascinated, but there's no indication she was mesmerised and had to be
"snapped out of it" at all.  No one had to drag her away.

And though Ginny and Neville were mesmerised, there's really no
telling if they heard any voices or not.

I would love to know what all their reactions mean, too.  I wonder if
we have enough clues yet.  Is Hermione the one who is terrified of
death?  Is Ron the "typical" teenage boy who can't concieve of death
happening to him (but wouldn't he know better by now)?  If Luna can
hear the voices but is immune to being mesmerised, could that be
because of her great quality of detachment (the same quality that
allows her to be so unworried about having her possessions taken and
getting them back again)?  I'd hate to think that all those affected
by the veil are the ones who are going to die -- that would be all but
Ron, or he and Hermione, and too obvious, really.  I don't see how it
could mean they'd lost someone close -- if Ginny had lost, say, an
older sibling, then that would mean Ron would have to be affected too.

Now I'll mention a point that may or may not be significant.  The next
room they can get into is the time room, and Ginny says "Oh, look!"
and points at the bell jar.  Then, (quoting from ch. 34):

"'Keep going!' said Harry sharply, because Ginny showed signs of
wanting to stop and watch the egg's progress back into a bird.

'You dawdled enough by that old arch!' she said crossly, but followed
him past the bell jar to the only door behind it."

For Ginny to have known about Harry "dawdling" must mean that the ones
who were entranced by the arch and veil seem to have been *aware* of
what was going on, but yet unable to muster the will to actually *do*
anything but stare or, in Harry's case, approach it.  This is borne
out by Harry having carried on a conversation with Luna and Hermione
even as he was unconsciously stepping up onto the dais.  Then, when
Hermione reminds him of Sirius, something "slid back into place in his
brain" and he remembered he was supposed to be *doing* something. So,
the mesmerisation is very subtile; you don't realise it until you're
pulled out.  I can't even tell that Ginny realised it at all.

Sorry to ramble on so long with no answers, but I am really hoping one
of my thoughts would spark some idea in someone else and we could make
some progress.  I also wanted to see if people read it the same way I
did, becuase I think the tiny details will prove to be important.

Annemehr









From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Fri Sep 26 15:15:07 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:15:07 -0500
Subject: BADD ANGST TBAY, Part II  and  re Astrology and Prophecy
References: <bksq4b+onkl@eGroups.com> <200309261713.44508.silmariel@telefonica.net>
Message-ID: <009f01c38440$fa1a3220$828faec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81623

>Jen Reese wrote:
*snip*
> Dumbledore, the master, will
> have to step aside now as Harry prepares to face his fate and
> that of the Wizarding World on his own terms.

>silmariel
>
>But I hope he remains as counselor. Harry will be pierced in
>politics without counseling. We don't want Harry starting a civil
>war by accident.

Is anyone else seeing that line of thought quickly turning into the "Obi Wan
/ Luke Skywalker" type thing?

(Which brings up the possibility of a "Obi Wan / Annikin Skywalker" thing in
the past being revealed between AD and LV...)

Kinda scary, in its own way...

re Astrology and Prophesy, correcting my own spelling:


>  That boy was able to feel a mother's love again, and that began to wave
him up
> and make him aware of what Voldemort was doing... and that it was wrong."
>

errr... make that "wake" him up... not "wave"...

Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster


"It's not as easy to come up with a new one of these each time as you'd
think."

 






From annemehr at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 26 15:43:32 2003
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 15:43:32 -0000
Subject: The Death Chamber
In-Reply-To: <005201c38433$9b0991c0$828faec7@rick>
Message-ID: <bl1mr4+42hq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81624

Iggy McSnurd wrote:
 
> I think Hermione was scared not because she was particularly
affected by the
> curtain, rather that she understood what the chamber was more than the
> others did.  Also, she saw the effect that the curtain was having on
Harry,
> Neville, Luna, and Ginny, so she did her best to try to protect them
from
> it.

Annemehr:
Yes, but I'm sure she didn't read about anything in the DoM in a book,
so if she "understood" somewhat, could it be because she *sensed*
something?  I would call that being affected, although in a different
way to the other four.  I think she reacted too quickly for it to be
because she saw how it affected the others.


Iggy: 
> As for why those four were affected, It was for the same reason they
could
> see the Thestrals... they has seen death.


Annemehr:
But Ginny was entranced yet could not see the thestrals.


 




From n_longbottom01 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 26 15:59:01 2003
From: n_longbottom01 at yahoo.com (n_longbottom01)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 15:59:01 -0000
Subject: Sirius's good name and Harry's Quibbler interview (was: Sirius's Property) 
In-Reply-To: <bl1fq0+t0u3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl1no5+bj0r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81625

 
>>Sue B:

<snip> 
>Possibly, now, he will be posthumously cleared of all charges and, 
of course, it would be impossible to find the house by anyone not 
authorised anyway. 
<snip>

 
>>KathyK:
<snip> 
That leads to the question of how quickly Sirius' name will be 
cleared.  The general WW may be willing to believe Harry and 
Dumbledore about him now that Voldemort has been proven alive.  Their 
credibility has increased immmensly.  But will the Ministry be so 
easy to persuade?  As long as Fudge remains Minister, I think the 
path to clearing Sirius will be very difficult.  
 
Fudge obviously has been delivered a crippling blow with the 
revelation of LV's return.  Will he continue to eat humble pie and 
publicly announce Harry and Dumbledore were right about Sirius as 
well?  I'm not convinced it will be so easy to persuade the Ministry 
officials to clear Sirius.  Perhaps they will eventually do so and 
perhaps I'm underestimating the weight Harry and Dumbledore will now 
carry with the Ministry.  
<snip>
 
now me, n_longbottom01:

Depending on how detailed Rita Skeeter's exclusive Quibbler interview 
with Harry was, it could be that Sirius's name has already begun to 
be cleared.  Since Wormtail played such a big part in Voldemort's 
return, you would think that Harry might have mentioned a bit of his 
backstory in the Quibbler article.  I don't see how Harry could give 
a detailed account of Voldemort's return without mentioning Peter 
Petigrew, and I don't see how he could mention Peter Petigrew without 
explaining how it is that Peter is still alive and in Voldemort's 
service.

We know, at the end of OoP, that Rita's article was reprinted in the 
Daily Prophet; Harry's account of events is now accepted in the 
mainstream wizarding world.  If the wizarding world accepts the 
article as true, then I think Sirius's name is cleared.




From oppen at mycns.net  Fri Sep 26 16:11:59 2003
From: oppen at mycns.net (Eric Oppen)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 11:11:59 -0500
Subject: The Department of Mysteries
Message-ID: <00c401c38448$f1c16140$aa510043@hppav>

No: HPFGUIDX 81626

So, what does the Department of Mysteries do?  I think that they study the
"mysteries" that have intrigued people since we became people.  (My
girlfriend piped up that she thought they sat around all day reading Agatha
Christie, Erle Stanley Gardner, and other such authors, and I pointed out to
her that she must be thinking of where _she_ worked at the time)

The rooms we've seen are not all the rooms there are there, but I think I
have an idea of what they were studying in each of them.

Room with Time-Turners---Time.
Room with Black Veil---Death
Room with Prophecies---the Future
Room with Planets---Space

So what was in the room they couldn't get into?

I think that it was the room that contained the force that Dumbledore said
was incredibly powerful, and could vanquish Lord Voldemort.  I think that's
the room where they study Love.  (My first thought, when Dumbledore said
that it was incredibly powerful, and thinking of that heavy lock that
defeated Sirius' knife, was that the room contained Money...but I don't
think that would exactly be what Dumbledore was thinking of)

So, I think I've got a handle on what's behind five of the doors at the DoM.
I wonder what the other ones were?  Does anybody have any ideas about the
other ones?  Are there twelve traditional "mysteries of life" that might be
studied at the DoM?




From riberam at glue.umd.edu  Fri Sep 26 16:37:50 2003
From: riberam at glue.umd.edu (Maria Ribera)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 12:37:50 -0400
Subject: Portkey and Floo in Hogwarts. 
In-Reply-To: <1064574415.4089.38389.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <C48E1191-F03F-11D7-9893-000393987376@glue.umd.edu>

No: HPFGUIDX 81627


Another Maria asked:
> Reading OOTP has got me wondering about Hogwart's protection. We have
> seen that Harry and co can Floo out of Hogwarts, and portkeys taking
> Harry out and back to the school. But does this travelling system
> protect the school from Voldemort and his Death Eaters? Or is
> Voldemort simply waiting to become more powerful, not only himself,
> but his army and then attempt to raid Hogwarts? Then again ... the
> Floo network and portkeys, although monitored is still too risky.
>

I am not 100% sure about this, so please someone correct me if i'm 
wrong, but...

Have we seen anyone actually "traveling" by Floo powder outside of 
Hogwarts (except Lupin to Snape's office in PoA, that would be internal 
travel)? Or just "communicating" by Floo? I know, having your head 
there is like traveling, but limited somehow, as you can't go anywhere 
but the fireplace...
I am betting that there is some type of control over that... students 
could come and go as they wished if you could travel using the common 
rooms' fireplaces. Although they may want to phone/floo their parents 
sometimes ....

Maria




From carmenharms at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 26 16:50:40 2003
From: carmenharms at yahoo.com (snazzzybird)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 16:50:40 -0000
Subject: Floo & Fireplace Communication Into/Out of Hogwarts
Message-ID: <bl1qp0+4t0c@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81628

I originally posted this back in July, and got no responses.  But 
recently this topic has come under discussion again, and I thought 
I'd re-post it in hopes of hearing what some of the rest of you think.

I've been wondering about fireplace communications to and from 
Hogwarts, specifically with regard to the incident in OoP when Sirius 
was speaking to Harry in the Gryffindor Common Room fire. An instant 
after he left the fire, Umbridge's hand appeared, clutching at the 
space where his hair had been. Sirius was speaking from #12 Grimmauld 
Place. If Umbridge had gotten hold of his hair -- well, okay, he 
probably would have been able to get free. But what if he hadn't? If 
he had withdrawn his head from the fireplace with her hand still 
entangled in his hair, would she have been able to "trace the call" 
so to speak? Might she have popped out into the kitchen of Order of 
the Phoenix headquarters -- a location which does not exist for her, 
because she has not been told about it by the secret keeper?

If so, the Fidelius Charm might have rendered her confused, groggy; 
Sirius could then have hustled her out to the front door and launched 
her onto the street. Then as she wandered, in a confused state, 
along the streets, the charm might gradually lift, leaving her 
wondering "Where am I? How did I get here? Am I going mad?" 
Perhaps St. Mungo's would have been the next stop for the radiant 
Dolores.

Thoughts, anyone?

--snazzzybird, who is fascinated with Floo transportation and head-in-
the-fireplace communication.





From ambiree at students.bradley.edu  Fri Sep 26 16:57:01 2003
From: ambiree at students.bradley.edu (ambiree at students.bradley.edu)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 11:57:01 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Department of Mysteries
In-Reply-To: <00c401c38448$f1c16140$aa510043@hppav>
References: <00c401c38448$f1c16140$aa510043@hppav>
Message-ID: <1064595421.3f746fdd1bf2b@webmail.bradley.edu>

No: HPFGUIDX 81629

Don't forget the BRAIN room...I would think there that they studied thought. 
And too that was where Ron was attacked and they said that thoughts leave worse 
scars that other injuries....hmmm

amber


Quoting Eric Oppen <oppen at mycns.net>:

> So, what does the Department of Mysteries do?  I think that they study the
> "mysteries" that have intrigued people since we became people.  (My
> girlfriend piped up that she thought they sat around all day reading Agatha
> Christie, Erle Stanley Gardner, and other such authors, and I pointed out to
> her that she must be thinking of where _she_ worked at the time)
> 
> The rooms we've seen are not all the rooms there are there, but I think I
> have an idea of what they were studying in each of them.
> 
> Room with Time-Turners---Time.
> Room with Black Veil---Death
> Room with Prophecies---the Future
> Room with Planets---Space
> 
> So what was in the room they couldn't get into?
> 
> I think that it was the room that contained the force that Dumbledore said
> was incredibly powerful, and could vanquish Lord Voldemort.  I think that's
> the room where they study Love.  (My first thought, when Dumbledore said
> that it was incredibly powerful, and thinking of that heavy lock that
> defeated Sirius' knife, was that the room contained Money...but I don't
> think that would exactly be what Dumbledore was thinking of)
> 
> So, I think I've got a handle on what's behind five of the doors at the DoM.
> I wonder what the other ones were?  Does anybody have any ideas about the
> other ones?  Are there twelve traditional "mysteries of life" that might be
> studied at the DoM?
> 
> 
Amber

***"The GWE has Spoken."--The GWE***



From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Fri Sep 26 17:08:42 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 17:08:42 -0000
Subject: BADD ANGST TBAY, Part II
In-Reply-To: <200309261713.44508.silmariel@telefonica.net>
Message-ID: <bl1rqq+qmua@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81630

Ahoy there from the good ship BADD ANGST, silmariel! If I may respond 
to portions of your response to Jen (and please skip to the last 
paragraph if you'd like my take on ancient magic and BADD ANGST):

> silmariel wrote (speaking of Dumbledore):
> I can't agree respecting free will makes him so limited. He should  
also respect his own free will, and the free will of those unnamed  
creatures.  While I think there is an option for a peaceful ending, 
after all,  Jo is the writer so it's up to her, I also see an 
escenario that  can be developed into an open war. Just there, in the 
second  prophecy, I still have to see The Dark Lord raising more 
powerfull  and blablabla... <

Does respecting others' free will mean that DD must liberate them? I 
argue no. Do the house elves even want to be liberated? Not currently, 
and it should be their choice, yes? I think the right answer is that 
every species must choose for itself, and all Dumbledore should do is 
accept their choice.

As for the big war to come, Jen hasn't said there won't be one. I 
happen to think we will see a big battle, and I can't wait!
 

> silmariel wrote:
> Voldie is still pretty lame compared to:
> Every week, news comes of more deaths, more disappearances, more 
torturing...the Ministry of Magic is in disarray, they don't know what 
to do, they're trying to keep everything hidden from the Muggles, but 
meanwhile, Muggles are dying, too. (Sirius, GOF, > chap. 27, pps. 
526-527)
> and to :
> "....you weren't in the Order then, you don't understand, last time 
we were outnumbered twenty to one by the Death Eaters and they were 
picking us off one by one." (Lupin, OOTP, chap. 9, > p.177) <

Agree. That's why Books 6 and 7 will have some bigger evil events 
happening, IMO.


> silmariel wrote:
> I concede defeating LV is a point, but he is not the problem.  
Killing him wouldn't solve a thing if the structure that has raised  
him is available for the next killer to raise . <

I continue to wait for canon that there has been a long line of evil 
wizards or Dark Lords who tried to take over the WW. We only know that 
Dumbledore killed some evil wizard named Grindelwald. That's it. And 
Binns has not said anything about any other Dark Lords. So while the 
WW may have its prejudices, it is not clear that those will continue 
to spawn more Dark Lords. If you disagree, show me the canon!


>> Jen originally wrote:
>> Dumbledore's Plan :
>> Dumbledore employs a three-part plan in the fight against Lord 
Voldemort, intending to first impede LV's progress and bring him out 
in the open (achieved in OOTP) and ultimately, to defeat him once and 
for all .
>> 1. Creating a strong and unified counterforce <<

> then silmariel responded:
> Not trying to be critic here, but what's the point. Recruiting  
allies is a very basic strategy in a war, isn't it? I mean, it  would 
be suicidal not to do it, and Dumbie has survived wars  before, I'm 
sure the 'let's unite' parafernalia was for granted.  After all,  
"Time is short, and unless the few of us who know the truth stand 
united, there is no hope for any of us." (Dumbledore, GOF, chap. 36, 
p. 712) ... is perfectly ok, what doesn't make sense is a "Time is 
short, so  the few of us who know the truth, let's divide and/or kill 
each  other" Is not Voldemort doing the same?  <

While it may be obvious that you build an army for a war, I'm not sure 
everyone agrees that a genuine war is coming. But I think so, Jen 
thinks so, and you think so, so great! So let's assume DD and LV are 
building armies of a sort. Won't he need more against an opponent who 
can't die? That's where #2 comes from
.


>> Jen originally wrote:
>> 2. Respect for and use of the Deeper Mysteries of Magic-- > There 
is a mysterious "ancient magic" that Dumbledore ascribes to more fully 
than to the "Laws of Man" (in this case, the MOM) .
>> These deep mysteries appear to actualize in the form of binding 
connections between people or between people and magical objects. <<

> then silmariel responded:
> Here is where I call it having a cool mind and common sense.  
Dumbledore uses the weapons he has, and follows the rules he knows.  I 
mean, he knows they exist, so respecting here for me means not to  be 
so dumb as to overlook something he takes as a fact. Borrowing  Terry 
Pratchett an example: witches know gods exist in Discworld,  but 
believing in them would be like believing in the postman. <

Again, it may be obvious to you, but we're simply assuming not 
everyone sees how Dumbledore is using his better understanding of the 
ancient magics as a weapon to defeat LV.


>> Jen originally wrote:
>> The Fidelius Charm is "An immensely complex spell
..involving the 
magical concealment of a secret inside a single, living soul.  The 
information is hidden inside the chosen person, or Secret Keeper
." 
(Prof. Flitwick, POA, chap. 10, p. 205) <<

> then silmariel responded:
>  See, I just thought it was a complex spell, but given each wizard  
should have a soul that was not the difficult part. Maybe I'm  biased 
by the, 'hey Wormtail, wannabe Secret Keeper?' last-moment  change . <

Two thoughts. One: ancient does not have to equal complex. Do we 
really think Harry's Mom had time to perform a complex spell she'd 
never done before LV killed her? Probably not; her love and 
self-sacrifice seem to have generated that magic. Similarly, we don't 
know whether the creation of a Secret Keeper is a long, complex spell 
or as simple as an oath by the secret-keeper not to reveal the secret. 
Two: all we know is that the change of secret-keepers happened after 
DD and Lupin were informed that Sirius would be the secret-keeper. 
There could have been plenty of time for a big, long spell if Secret 
Keeping requires that.


>> Jen originally wrote:
>> "Once a champion has been selected by the Goblet of Fire, he or she 
is obliged to see the tournament through to the end. The placing of 
your name in the goblet constitutes a binding, magical contract." 
(Dumbledore, GOF, chap. 16, p. 256) <<

> then silmariel responded:
Apart that I suposse the original maker of the goblet intended to  
assasinate someone with it I hope this does not count as ancient  
magic, because is a funny thing you can be arbitrarily be forced to  
adhere to a magical, binding contract.  Magical contracts are as fun 
as contracts with demons, but the  victim should at least do 
something. If not, we can just call it a  very good way of forcing 
someone to suicide. I don't know why  Voldie should despise it. No. 
Wait. A DE actually uses it. <

Yes, Harry didn't put his name in the goblet himself, so he would 
apparently not have been bound by that magic. But DD says others would 
be-and that is the ancient magic Jen is talking about.

Because ancient magic appears to be all about choices. Choose to put 
your name in the Goblet, and you must serve if chosen. Choose to give 
your life protecting someone, and your blood will protect them 
forever. Choose to entrust your secret to someone and only they will 
be able to uncover it. The servant must choose to give his flesh to 
return the master to life. Choose not to pass to the afterlife and you 
will remain a ghost. Choices. Boundaries. It all fits, yes?

-Remnant





From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Fri Sep 26 17:18:16 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 17:18:16 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore as Protector ( Re: BADD ANGST TBAY, Part II)
In-Reply-To: <200309261713.44508.silmariel@telefonica.net>
Message-ID: <bl1sco+76oc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81631

> Jen:
> > And just as Dumbledore believes strongly in
> > the freedom of choice, he also respects the limitations this
> > belief places on anyone who wants to foster change: <canon snip>
> 

Carolina:
> Balance gods are often the more cruel. As I agree free will is 
> important for him, I also hope he values all species freedom, not 
> only his. As things are, only humans have a voice and killing 
> Voldie won't change this little fact.
> 
> I can't agree respecting free will makes him so limited. He should 
> also respect his own free will, and the free will of those unnamed 
> creatures. 

> While I think there is an option for a peaceful ending, after all, 
> Jo is the writer so it's up to her, I also see an escenario that 
> can be developed into an open war. 


Jen: You raise a good point and it's one I expand on below in my long 
answer. My short answer is: I don't think a war is out of the 
question, but BADD ANGST was an attempt to address Dumbledore's 
motives.  I don't believe that just because Dumbledore supports all-
species freedom (see long answer) that he is promoting a Wizard World 
War on the scale of almost total annihilation, in an attempt to 
*transform* the WW to his beliefs.


Long Answer:  Actually, I was pondering this issue while writing the 
BADD ANGST theory, and left out a portion that probably should have 
stayed in: Hogwarts as Sanctuary. 

Within this Sanctuary, Dumbledore fosters an attitude of openess 
found nowhere else in the WW. At the core he is Teacher, and I see 
him less as indoctrinating a new generation in his footsteps as he is 
offering them different viewpoints to consider.

Dumbledore appears to believe more strongly in all-species freedom 
than anyone else in the WW, including other members of the Order. We 
see this especially in OOTP, when he tells Harry: "The fountain we 
destroyed tonight told a lie.  We wizards have mistreated and abused 
our fellow for too long and we are now reaping the reward." (OOTP, 
cahp. 37, p. 834).

While he hasn't been able to convince much of the rest of the WW 
about this belief, he has in his own way attempted to at least 
provide safehaven for some of the creatures and "half-breeds" that 
the WW discriminates against.

He provides good working conditions for over 100 house-elves, "The 
largest number in any dwelling in Britain" (GOF-US, chap. 12, p. 182) 
according to Nick. And as evidencd by Dobby, DD would certainly offer 
pay and vacation to any house elves who aren't offended by that 
proposition.

A herd of Centaurs live safely in the Forbidden Forest. We know they 
don't want to have anything to do with humans and would never 
have "asked" DD to live there, but DD is indirectly providing safety 
for them through all the other protections on Hogwarts grounds. (And 
as an aside, I think when DD reminds students every year that the 
Forbidden Forest is "off-limits" I think he is attempting to protect 
the centaurs, unicorns and other animals in the Forest as much as the 
kids!).

DD retained Hagrid as gamekeeper when he was expelled, probably 
sensing a Half-Giant would one day face severe discrimination in the 
WW if his heritage was discovered.  DD made the necessary 
arrangements for Lupin to be admitted as a student, possibly saving 
his life as a young boy and if not, certainly providing a safe place 
for him to be with other kids his age and find friendship.

And that brings me to the biggest population of people DD provides 
sanctuary for--Children. All the children at Hogwarts, not just 
Muggleborns or half-giants or werewolves. He provides a safe place 
for witches and wizards to hone their skills, but also to have 
varying influences from children and teachers representing a cross-
section of the WW.  

So Hermione, the Creevy's and Justin Flint-Flectchley have a 
relatively safe place to learn about the WW for the first time, while 
someone like Draco, whether he capitalizes on the opportunity or not, 
is exposed to a very different viewpoint from the one provided at 
home. 

It just doesn't make sense to me that a person who has lived his life 
trying to protect and educate others will support a War that detroys 
all the people and values he has tried so hard to nuture over the 
years.

Jen




From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 26 17:59:24 2003
From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 17:59:24 -0000
Subject: No Way to Dream (filk)
Message-ID: <bl1ups+7321@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81632

No Way to Dream (OOP)

To the tune of New Ways to Dream, from Lloyd Webber's Sunset Boulevard

Hear a MIDI at:

http://www.hamienet.com/cat1022.html

THE SCENE: HERMIONE is concerned that HARRY is neglecting his 
Occlumency lessons. 

HERMIONE:
Dusk till dawn,
These are the rules,
Your mind must close. 
Embrace the calm, 
Emotion-free
Each time you doze. 
Such evil plans
Of Voldemort - 
Probing your mind
That is his scheme. 
Harry, this is 
No way to dream.

[Segue to HARRY, dreaming, running down the corridor, determined to 
get a few steps closer.]

HARRY:
In the dark
Quicken my pace,
Move it along
As I embark,
Soon I will see
That which I long.
I'll find it soon 
It's within range,
Within my mind
Answers will gleam.
What if this is
No way to dream?

(A sudden noise made by Ron awakens him)

     -	CMC

HARRY POTTER FILKS
http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm 
(updated today with five dozen new filks, two new musicals, and one 
Young Wizards' Songbook!)





From shirley2allie at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 26 18:13:47 2003
From: shirley2allie at hotmail.com (Shirley)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 18:13:47 -0000
Subject: Kreacher
In-Reply-To: <bksvpv+r5qk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl1vkr+3cia@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81633

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Brad" <stratton at a...> wrote:
> With the last of the Blacks now dead, what becomes of Kreacher? Is 
> Sirius' relation to Tonks enough to make her his new master? 
> Otherwise, what stops him from leaving Grimmauld Place and going to 
> the Narcissa or Voldemort and telling her/him everything?

Shirley:

This has been addressed to some extent, but I'll try to sum it up.  
First, we really don't know what becomes of Kreacher (and I 
personally wonder if he would listen to Tonks now if he wouldn't when 
Sirius was alive - OoP, chapter with the family tapestry in it).  
Having said that, we've established that he could tell a lot about 
the Order's activities/plans to whomever he chose (as he did in OoP), 
but he *cannot* tell where the headquarters is because he is not the 
Order's secret-keeper.

There's probably more to discuss, but I think that's the gist of it.

Shirley




From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Fri Sep 26 18:21:40 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 18:21:40 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Philosophy (WAS:  MAGIC DISHWASHER: Spying Game Philosophy
In-Reply-To: <004b01c38432$b5d56c00$828faec7@rick>
Message-ID: <bl203k+j2ho@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81634

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Iggy McSnurd" 
<coyoteschild at p...> wrote:
> In GoF, AD has a look of triumph in his eye and said that one 
hurdle was
> overcome.

Not exactly. He said that "Voldemort has overcome that particular 
hurdle" (paraphrased - don't have the book in front of me). 
The "hurdle" was the protection that Harry's mother left on him.
He did not sound happy about that part.

> Therefore, the love Harry's mother felt for him now also
> courses through LV...

Yes, to a point. She never felt love towards Voldemort. I find it 
hard to believe that the protection will work the same way there.

> I think that something Harry does in their final confrontation 
will "unlock"
> that dormant love that lies in LV's body, and it will purge Tom 
Riddle of
> the evil and hatred within himself that forms the Dark Lord.

This would be too sappy of an ending to my mind. I think that 
Voldemort/Tom Riddle is an inherently evil person (just see how he 
behaved when he was only 16). He cannot be transformed into a good 
person, regardless of his blood. But it is possible that just like he 
could not bear continuing to possess Harry at the end of OoP, because 
of Harry's emotions, likewise, having Harry's blood will somehow 
weaken him due to the inherent contradiction between his evil soul 
and the blood he took from Harry.

> I also think that if Harry shows mercy to LV, and that's the 
turning point,

I can't see Harry showing mercy to Voldemort. But obviously LV can't 
be killed in the normal fashion, as he is immune to death. So he will 
die in some unexpected way - akin to how Harry destroyed Tom Riddle 
in CoS by destroying the diary.

> "Because..." Harry said, wiping a trickle of blood from his 
forehead, "I
> couldn't.  I knew Tom Riddle was in there somewhere... before you 
became
> him... you had to be..."

Oh please. He has met Tom Riddle. He was that kid who set the 
basilisk on muggle-borns, who framed Hagrid, who possessed Ginny, who 
so enjoyed seeing Harry bitten by the basilisk that he was going to 
sit and watch him die slowly and painfully, who killed his family 
just for the heck of it.

Tom Riddle *is* Voldemort. They are one and the same. It is not a 
Star Wars like story where the evil guy has a good past. Tom Riddle 
is inherently evil and therefore will have to be destroyed.

Salit





From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 26 18:29:09 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 18:29:09 -0000
Subject: Portkey and Floo in Hogwarts.
In-Reply-To: <bl0dbp+6lvh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl20hl+5nb7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81635

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Maria" <queen_amidalachic at y...>
wrote:
> Hello there. 
> Reading OOTP has got me wondering about Hogwart's protection. We
> have seen that Harry and co can Floo out of Hogwarts, and portkeys 
> taking Harry out and back to the school. ...edited...
> 
> Maria 


bboy_mn:

We have seen 'fire talking', but we have never seen anyone use the
Floo Network to get into or out of Hogwarts. Although, we have seen
the fireplaces used to transport a person from one room in the castle
to another room in the castle. Just because the castle protections
allow 'fire talking' does not mean the fireplaces do not have
additional charms to prevent the transport of whole bodies.

The Portkeys matter is a little more tricky. To explain it, we have to
make some assumptions. First I start by not saying, 'it can't work',
but by asking myself, 'how could I make it work?'.

In the latest book, OoP, we see Harry Portkey into the castle, but
that Portkey was created by Dumbledore, and as headmaster Dumbledore
controls the protections on the castle. So he may be able to create
charms like the Portkey that by-pass these protections.

My personal theory on Portkeys says that they are difficult and
dangerous for all but the most experienced and talented wizard to
create. That's why they aren't in more wide spread use. If Portkeys
were easy, everybody would be using them all the time; and clearly in
the story so far, the are not in common use.

On one hand, we have to assume that Voldemort and at least some of the
DE's must be capable of doing the Portkey charm effectively and
safely, but it seem equally reasonable that if the Hogwarts founders
were going to protect the castle from invasion, they would have
protected against entry by portkey. 

So, given all these assumptions, I'm back to what I originally said,
Dumbledore as headmaster controls the castle's protection and is
therefore able to cast a Portkey charm that gets around them. Others
would most likely not have the knowledge of how to do that. Another
possibility is that Dumbledore removed the Portkey block from his
office in anticipation of the possible need to get people out of the
Minstry very quickly and into a safe environment. Again, since
Dumbledore controls the protections, he also controls the exceptions.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn










From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 26 18:48:00 2003
From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 18:48:00 -0000
Subject: The Death Chamber
In-Reply-To: <3F744198.1030605@ntlworld.com>
Message-ID: <bl21l0+5115@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81636

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, digger <altered.earth at n...> 
wrote:
> entropymail wrote:
> 
> > Nick told Harry  "I believe learned wizards study the
> > matter in the Department of Mysteries--". 
> > 
> > This is probably what Nick is talking about; a place which has 
been
> > devised to study death. Perhaps even speak to the dead. Because 
of the
> > amphitheater-like setup of the room, it may be some sort of study 
hall
> > or, perhaps, an observation room like those you might see in a
> > teaching hospital. 
> > 
> > Just my thoughts!
> > 
> > :: Entropy ::
> > 
> 
> digger:
> 
> yes, my reading of it exactly. See my post 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/66829.
> 
> Following on from myself again (shame-faced)
> The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of Harry 
dragging 
> Voldy through the veil. Because if Harry is willing to sacrifice 
> himself, he could be returned to the land of the living, as a 
> 'bodhisattva', so he can finish his 'work' on earth. It would have 
to be 
> a purely selfless sacrifice though, and not because he wants to see 
all 
> his loved ones again. So I stay steadfast to my DeadLand!Harry 
theory, 
> that Harry will make contact with the dead, and yet not die.  That 
would 
> make sense of JKR mentioning the possibility of Harry dying at the 
end, 
> and yet leave him around for a sequel. Quite apart from all the 
> religious parallels ;-)


to which I (Richard) reply:

Sorry, but I would find it hard to agree LESS.  JKR has repeatedly 
said that "dead is dead" ... and might as well have added "... and 
gone forever," given the firmness of her attitude on the subject.  I 
would be shocked and appalled by such a turn, as it would run counter 
to so much of what JKR has said, and the general, persistent thread 
of "life lessons" contained in the Potter series.  If Harry or anyone 
else dies, they will be well and truly dead, unless they so fear 
death or love this World that they choose to become ghosts ... and I 
can't see Harry choosing to become a ghost, either.

While unspeakables may well study one facet of death in this room, 
attempting to communicate with the dead here, and the room itself did 
play such a prominent role in OotP, I can't see it as a recurring 
locale for the series, even for a final battle between Harry and 
Voldemort.  Rather, I think the key to the final battle lies in 
Harry's hands.

Think about how many people have noted the reference to and use of 
hands throughout the series, and the fact that it was with his bare 
hands that Harry defended himself against Quirrel (sp?).  Further, 
the prophecy in OotP specifically says that either must die at the 
other's hands, as neither can live while the other survives.  I don't 
see Harry's dragging Voldemort through the arch and veil as being a 
fruition of the hands theme.  Sure, it would be done with Harry's 
hands, but Harry's hands would not be the CAUSE of Voldemort's death, 
the arch performing the deed instead.  Even if Harry were to PUSH 
Voldemort through the arch, we still have the problem that Harry is 
consistently described as small and thin, making it unlikely that he 
would be able to manhandle Voldemort to and through the arch.

And when you think about it, Harry is a good person (despite certain 
adolescent features that alarm some readers), but I would hardly 
consider him a candidate for being returned to the World of the 
living to become a "bodhisattva," especially when such a return from 
death would so completely violate the stated position of JKR and the 
life-lessons substrate of the series.

So, much though I may respect you as a person, and your right to have 
your own opinions, I still think you've headed down a very blind 
alley with this theory of yours.


Richard, who thinks JKR should be taken seriously when she 
says, "Dead is dead."





From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 26 18:52:22 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 18:52:22 -0000
Subject: Buckbeak
In-Reply-To: <bl0b6a+aibk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl21t6+bniu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81637

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kim" <kimberley42 at y...> wrote:
> Does each hippogriff have such a unique appearance that it is easy
> to distinguish each indivual hippogriff?
> 
> If, instead, they all look alike, why not turn Buckbeak loose with 
> the rest of his herd?   ...edited...
> 
> ---Kimberley

bboy_mn:

The hippogriffs that Hagrid brought to his class were discribed as
stormy grey (Buckbeak), bronze, pinkish roan, gleaming chestnut, and
inky black. All common and reasonable horse descriptions, and just as
with horses, there are thousands of roans, greys, chestnuts, etc...

So, Hippogriffs are like people and horses, no two are alike; on the
otherhand, many of them do have similar appearances. And like people
and  horses, unless you know them personally, you would have a hard
time picking them out of a crowd. 

It is possible that at this point in time with the Ministry distracted
by more important matters than missing hypogriffs, the Order could
just send Buckbeak back to the rest of the hypogriffs, and feel
assured that he would be reasonably safe.

But I and others think that Buckbeak has not completely played out his
role in the story yet, so JKR is keeping him around.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn







From kkearney at students.miami.edu  Fri Sep 26 19:11:03 2003
From: kkearney at students.miami.edu (corinthum)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 19:11:03 -0000
Subject: Floo & Fireplace Communication Into/Out of Hogwarts
In-Reply-To: <bl1qp0+4t0c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl2307+bcsn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81638

Snazzzybird wrote:

> I've been wondering about fireplace communications to and from 
> Hogwarts, specifically with regard to the incident in OoP when 
Sirius 
> was speaking to Harry in the Gryffindor Common Room fire. An 
instant 
> after he left the fire, Umbridge's hand appeared, clutching at the 
> space where his hair had been. Sirius was speaking from #12 
Grimmauld 
> Place. If Umbridge had gotten hold of his hair -- well, okay, he 
> probably would have been able to get free. But what if he hadn't? 
If 
> he had withdrawn his head from the fireplace with her hand still 
> entangled in his hair, would she have been able to "trace the call" 
> so to speak? Might she have popped out into the kitchen of Order of 
> the Phoenix headquarters -- a location which does not exist for 
her, 
> because she has not been told about it by the secret keeper?

An interesting question.  On the surface, I would say no.  Let's 
forget the Fidelius Charm for a second.  So far, we've seen that 
enunciation of your destination is necessary when traveling by floo 
powder.  Harry ending up in Knockturn Alley due to mispronunciation 
is movie contamination, but it is still emphasized in the books that 
each person must clearly state a destination before stepping into the 
flames.  So it would seem to me that Umbridge could not reach a 
partcular place by floo if she couldn't state it's address.

However, what would have happenned in the Umbridge/Sirius situation?  
I don't have my books with me, so I can't check the exact wording of 
the scene.  But were Sirius and Umbridge ever in the fire 
simultaneously?  If I remember correctly, Sirius disappeared and a 
moment later Umbridge's arm appeared.  The question is, is it 
possible for two people to "dial in" to the same fire at the same 
time, or would on receive a busy signal?  Also, the Weasleys always 
travel one at a time, which suggests that each open "line" can only 
transport one person.  Could a floo hitch-hiker travel on someone 
else's open line if he or she managed to find it out in floo space?  
Also, are floo highways two-way streets, or one-way?  We know that 
you can travel backwards if you never fully entered the fire (as 
Diggory, Sirius, and Harry do), but can a person completely in floo-
space travel out of that same path?  

Umbridge's actions seem to imply that she expected to be able to find 
something in the Gryffindor fire.  Was she trying to grab Sirius, or 
simply looking for tangible evidence that he had been there a moment 
earlier?

warning: complete speculation ahead
My theory is that a fire can only be open to one incoming traveler at 
a time.  This explains why the Ministry of Magic would need many 
fireplaces to accomodate all their employees and visitors.  It would 
also solve the problem of collisions, which you would think would be 
pretty common in popular destinations if anyone could floo in at any 
time.  It also explains why the Weasleys don't save money on floo 
powder by joing hands and having the first traveller haul the rest 
through.  I also think that the Floo Network is a one-way system.  If 
(going against my previous theory) Umbridge was able to grab Sirius, 
I think she would have hit a wall when she reached the Grimmauld 
Place fire; in order to open that path to herself, she would have to 
add more floo to her office fire and state the new destination name.
Therefore, I don't think Umbridge was trying to grab Sirius so much 
as she was trying to find some immediate proof as to who was using 
the fire a moment before. 

-Corinth   




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Fri Sep 26 19:31:24 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (B Arrowsmith)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 20:31:24 +0100
Subject: Dumbledores Philosophy (was MAGIC DISHWASHER...)
Message-ID: <042DD70A-F058-11D7-B223-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81639

Salit:

 >snip>
Oh please. He has met Tom Riddle. He was that kid who set the
basilisk on muggle-borns, who framed Hagrid, who possessed Ginny, who
so enjoyed seeing Harry bitten by the basilisk that he was going to
sit and watch him die slowly and painfully, who killed his family
just for the heck of it.

Tom Riddle *is* Voldemort. They are one and the same. It is not a
Star Wars like story where the evil guy has a good past. Tom Riddle
is inherently evil and therefore will have to be destroyed.
 >

Splendid!
Can't have this namby-pamby forgiveness ruining a good story; it'd be 
like Beowulf forgiving Grendel. Not feasible, not *satisfying*. IMO to 
finish a story like this you need retribution. The baddies must come to 
a well deserved and gory end. Lovely! evil punished, the  good  
triumphant; just as it should be. Sending Voldy off
for counseling to learn how to deal with  his aggression is not the 
optimum solution. It would be a version of the modern fashion of not 
requiring that a person be responsible for their actions, even to 
providing them with socially acceptable excuses.

To expand the subject further, I'm very suspicious about this 'love 
conquers all' theory too. Oh, I recognise it is a possibility, I just 
hope it doesn't go that way. It's the creed of  teenage romantics, the 
'happy ever after' brigade. OK, I'm a miserable old cynic, but love is 
not an all-purpose Band-aid, it's more like unstable nitroglycerine. 
Blows up in your  face when you least expect it. Just try wandering 
around telling everyone you love them, see what reaction you get. Last 
person to  try it came to an unfortunate end a couple of millennia 
back. Didn't seem to solve many of the worlds problems either; just 
added a few more.

I expect lots of chiding messages will wing my way saying I don't 
understand, that it solves all problems. Sorry, it doesn't. Loving your 
enemy does not change how he feels about you. He is still  your enemy, 
whether you want him to be or not. He has to *decide* to change, and he 
needs a good reason. Peace and love may  sound good, but a vanquished 
enemy may be even better, so  far as he is concerned. Sometimes  
forgiveness is the most unforgivable insult of all. It can be so 
patronising and demeaning.


Kneasy




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 26 19:44:56 2003
From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (tigerpatronus)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 19:44:56 -0000
Subject: Ron's big moment? (WAS: Why Ron Loves Hermione)
In-Reply-To: <001301c3838c$61084d60$7c95aec7@rick>
Message-ID: <bl24vo+pojs@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81640

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Iggy McSnurd" 
<coyoteschild at p...> wrote: > EXTREME editing of what they have 
there.  If you want to read more in depth,> visit the site.)> > From -
 www.dominantstar.com
> 
> Pluto is considered the Great Transformer of the cosmos and is 
epitomized by > Einstein's idea that energy can neither be created 
nor destroyed. SNIP>  > Pluto also symbolizes the in-depth 
transformation processes that occur > within the human psyche. While 
such processes have an enduring effect on the > personality and the 
structure of consciousness they originate at a level far > removed 
from the ego-complex and its ordinary functions and concerns. Pluto
> thus symbolizes the archetypal world of the collective unconscious 
(a > terrain first brought to the attention of the contemporary world 
through the > research of Carl Jung).
> Iggy McSnurd
> the Prankster
> 

There have been a lot of Jungian references in the canon, esp in 
OotP. Jungian philosophy/symbolism might be a good place to look for 
references in general. For example, Neville's Mimble-plant is nearly 
the name of a real flower, which in Jungian flower essence therapy 
(and I'm not suggesting any validity for Jungian flower essences in 
real life, only as a fiction metaphor-generating device) confers 
bravery, even reckless bravery, by reducing anxiety. Note that the 
folks who got sprayed with stinksap by the mimbulus mimbletonia on 
the train are the ones who rushed into the MoM with reckless abandon, 
while those not in the train car (Hermy and Ron were up with the 
prefects) weren't so reckless in the MoM and weren't fascinated by 
the Veil. 

The other Jungian reference I noticed is the Interpretaion of Dreams, 
and Jung was big into dreams. Also, as I remember, Jung was trying to 
create a theory of psychology that wasn't so Jewish (because Freud 
was the founding father) for the Third Reich during WWII, and there 
are a lot of WWII parallels in the HP saga. 

Other Jungian references, anyone? 

Just a thought, 
TK -- Tigerpatronus







From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Fri Sep 26 19:46:42 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 19:46:42 -0000
Subject: BADD ANGST TBAY, Part II
In-Reply-To: <bl1rqq+qmua@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl2532+udmc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81641

Remnant wrote:
> I continue to wait for canon that there has been a long line of 
> evil wizards or Dark Lords who tried to take over the WW. We only  
> know that Dumbledore killed some evil wizard named Grindelwald. 
> That's it. And Binns has not said anything about any other Dark 
> Lords. 

Pip!Squeak remarks:

Since Professor Binns is so deadly boring that Harry and Ron have to 
rely on Hermione's notes to pass History of Magic, it's a little 
difficult to tell *what* he's said.

Funny, that. ;-)

But the bits of relevant canon which have sneaked in are:

`particularly famous for his defeat of the dark wizard Grindelwald 
in 1945' PS/SS Ch 6 p. 77,  

Everyone knows that one - but note that Dumbledore is *particularly* 
famous for defeating Grindelwald, implying that it was something of 
an event.

`scribbled down names and dates and got Emeric the Evil and Uric the 
Oddball mixed up' PS/SS p. 99 Ch. 8

Emeric, which is often spelt Emerick or Emerich is from Old German; 
it was sometimes used in England. It is a human, not a Goblin name. 
Emeric and Uric were both used around the 12th Century, so we're 
probably talking early Middle Ages.

Whoever Emeric the Evil was, he was a) important enough to be 
included in history lessons and b) a seriously not-nice wizard.

In CoS Voldemort is described as the `greatest dark sorcerer of all 
time' CoS Ch 1. p.9

'Greatest' is a comparitive. It implies others.

And in PoA the implication of other Dark wizards is made clearer: 
Lord Voldemort is `the most feared Dark wizard for a hundred years'. 
Ch. 1 p. 10 ? 11. This is repeated in GoF. `most powerful Dark 
wizard for a century' Ch. 2 p.23.

Grindelwald was around in 1945; the repeated use of 'for a century' 
implies that there were other dark wizards *before* Grindelwald 
(i.e. more than a century before Voldemort came on the scene). 
Either that, or Grindelwald was the most feared and most powerful 
Dark wizard for one heck of a long time ;-)

 
And in OOP we have ? Urquhart Rackharrow 1612 ? 1697, Inventor of 
the Entrail-expelling Curse. He gets a portrait in St Mungo's. He is 
described as looking a bit vicious. The names also bring to 
mind 'being harrowed on the rack' (ie tortured) and Sir Francis 
Urquhart, one of the UK's great fictional villains of recent times 
('you may think so, but I couldn't possibly comment').

So the inventor of a rather nasty sounding curse gets a portrait in 
St Mungo's, hey?

Remnant:
> So while the WW may have its prejudices, it is not clear that  
> those will continueto spawn more Dark Lords. If you disagree,     
> show me the canon!

So canon gives us three named Dark Wizards. One is important enough 
to get his name and dates into a history lesson, and has a name that 
suggests 'Middle Ages'. One is important enough to get a mention on 
Chocolate Frog cards, and his 1945 defeat is what Dumbledore 
is 'particularly' famous for. One is Lord Voldemort.

In addition, another 17th Century magician has his painting in St 
Mungo's for inventing a curse. Meanwhile, Voldemort is described in 
ways that imply other, earlier 'great' Dark wizards. The greatEST. 
Most feared for a hundred years. Most powerful for a century.

So, there is a line. Middle Ages, 17th Century, early 20th Century, 
late 20th Century. Dark wizards who get into history books, or have 
their portraits hanging in hospitals.

And even Ollivander in PS/SS speaks of Voldemort in a way that 
suggests the WW is rather ambiguous in the way it sees Dark wizards.

'He Who Must Not Be Named did great things - terrible, yes, but 
great'. PS/SS Ch. 5, p.65



Pip!Squeak




From elfundeb at comcast.net  Fri Sep 26 20:15:35 2003
From: elfundeb at comcast.net (elfundeb)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 16:15:35 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Death Chamber
References: <bl1ls4+l90c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <002701c3846a$f2e99520$9ddc5644@arlngt01.va.comcast.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 81642

Annemehr wrote, regarding the death chamber:

And though Ginny and Neville were mesmerised, there's really no
telling if they heard any voices or not.

I would love to know what all their reactions mean, too.  

Debbie:

I think it's significant that Ginny and Neville reacted to this scene in a similar manner, just as (long, long ago) I noted the similarity of Ginny's and Neville's responses to the Dementor on the train to Hogwarts in PoA.  Both are mesmerized and have to be dragged away, even though only Neville can see the thestrals, so that can't be the explanation.  

We do know, however, that both Ginny and Harry have had near-death experiences and that they do not have a complete memory of those events (Ginny nearly died in the Chamber and Harry was drawn to the Dementors because their effect was to revive dormant memories of his survival of AK.)  

This leads me to believe that Neville, too, has suffered a near-death experience, and therefore this is a bit of canon that leads me to think he might have witnessed his parents' torture, and possibly even been tortured himself (note how quick Bellatrix, who was convicted of the Longbottoms' torture, later on in this scene attempts the Cruciatus curse on Ginny, the smallest of the six, to get Harry to talk).  But if Harry's and Ginny's experiences are any guide, Neville cannot remember it.

Memory charms, anyone?  But that's another post, for another day.

Annemehr:

For Ginny to have known about Harry "dawdling" must mean that the ones
who were entranced by the arch and veil seem to have been *aware* of
what was going on, but yet unable to muster the will to actually *do*
anything but stare or, in Harry's case, approach it.  

Debbie:

This is a lot like Harry's experiences with the Dementors.  He was drawn to them as well as repelled by them, because they offered him memories of Lily which he had previously been unable to access.

Annemehr (snipping explanations for Hermione's and Luna's reactions, with which I agree):

Is Ron the "typical" teenage boy who can't concieve of death
happening to him (but wouldn't he know better by now)?  

Debbie:

I think Ron is simply not afraid of death.  He has laid his own life on the line at least twice (in the PS/SS chess game and in the Shrieking Shack).  He is, however, afraid of other things, which are evident from his reaction to other rooms, but he is not afraid of sacrifice.

Annemehr:

Now I'll mention a point that may or may not be significant.  The next
room they can get into is the time room, and Ginny says "Oh, look!"
and points at the bell jar.  Then, (quoting from ch. 34):

"'Keep going!' said Harry sharply, because Ginny showed signs of
wanting to stop and watch the egg's progress back into a bird.

Debbie:

I cut off the remainder of the quote, because part of what I think is significant about this is that each of the characters' reactions to the various rooms is essentially a manifestation of their hopes and fears.  Hermione, who has not experienced death, is afraid of it.  OTOH, as someone who relies on logical thinking, she is the first to recognize that the tank is full of brains.  

Ginny, as the youngest child in a family mostly comprised of adults who is still perceived as a child by her family (for example, she was banished on Harry's first night at Grimmauld Place when it was agreed that he needed to know certain things), is fascinated by the phenomenon of growing up.  

Ron, interestingly, reacts the strongest of anyone to the locked room. '"This is it, then, isn't it?" said Ron excitedly, joining Harry in the attempt to force the door open."'  And when Hermione announces that they're  leaving that room, he stares at it "with a mixture of apprehension and longing."  He's right, of course, as Dumbledore later tells Harry that the locked room contains the power that Harry possesses "in such quantities and which Voldemort has not at all."
OTOH, maybe the significance here is that Ron understands himself well enough to know that if it's a mystery to him, then it must be important. <g>

Debbie
who also wants to address the brains, the thoughts and the scars, but it will have to wait for another post 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Fri Sep 26 20:39:59 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 20:39:59 -0000
Subject: Snape's Worst Memory (and the purpose thereof)
In-Reply-To: <bl1jdb+6p16@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl286v+uao1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81643

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "boyd_smythe" 
<boyd.t.smythe at f...> wrote:
> >   Jeff:
> > 
> >     Indeed! I won't guess what, but I'm sure it'll be something 
very 
> > bad. :) Who knows, maybe Snape gets disabled, and Harry has to 
bathe 
> > him!! EEK!!!! I think I'd rather die. :)
> > 
> >    Jeff
> 
> 
> I do think Harry and Snape will be forced to reconcile by a 
> catastrophe: Dumledore's death (or dissappearance, if you prefer). 
End 
> of Book 6, DD is betrayed by his confidence in someone and 
vanquished, 
> leaving Harry vulnerable. Snape whisks him away somewhere, where 
Harry 
> finally realizes that Snape really is a good guy. Then Snape tells 
> Harry more of the backstory with his parents, the prophecy, et al.
> 
> What do you think?
> 

  Jeff:

   I agree. JKR already stated that as long as DD is alive, Harry is 
safe at Hogwarts, (and I presume with the Dursleys as well), so his 
death will cause much chaos, in more ways than one.
   I *try* to imagine Snape and Harry making amends, but I really 
can't see how. Harry didn't dislike Snape until he was mistreated by 
him. Snape only tolerates Harry due to his loyalty to DD. As I 
stated, Snape sees his mortal enemy James Potter everytime he looks 
at Harry. To be reminded of some 20 years of ill feelings is 
something difficult to overcome. Is it possible? Sure. With lots of 
therapy, but I can't imagine Snape talking to a therapist. :) God 
knows he needs one!! I mean, what is it with this lack of 
cleanliness? :P I admit that I'd love to read more of a backstory 
about the old days. If JKR doesn't do so in the next 2 books, then 
maybe she plans to do a second set of stores about those days?


> -Remnant
> Forced to imagine the bathing of Snape: "Um, Harry, I've dropped 
the 
> soap--can you help me find it?" :{ Darn you, Jeff!


   Sorry!! It squicked me too, which is why I mentioned it!! :) 


  Jeff




From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Fri Sep 26 20:45:00 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 20:45:00 -0000
Subject: BADD ANGST TBAY, Part II
In-Reply-To: <bl2532+udmc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl28gc+rcko@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81644

>>Remnant wrote:
>> I continue to wait for canon that there has been a long line of 
evil wizards or Dark Lords who tried to take over the WW. (snip)<<

> Pip!Squeak remarked:
> Since Professor Binns is so deadly boring that Harry and Ron have to 
rely on Hermione's notes to pass History of Magic, it's a little 
difficult to tell *what* he's said.
> Funny, that. ;-)
> But the bits of relevant canon which have sneaked in are:
> `particularly famous for his defeat of the dark wizard Grindelwald 
in 1945' PS/SS Ch 6 p. 77,  
> Everyone knows that one - but note that Dumbledore is *particularly* 
famous for defeating Grindelwald, implying that it was something of an 
event.
> `scribbled down names and dates and got Emeric the Evil and Uric the 
Oddball mixed up' PS/SS p. 99 Ch. 8
> Emeric, which is often spelt Emerick or Emerich is from Old German; 
it was sometimes used in England. It is a human, not a Goblin name. 
Emeric and Uric were both used around the 12th Century, so we're 
probably talking early Middle Ages. Whoever Emeric the Evil was, he 
was a) important enough to be included in history lessons and b) a 
seriously not-nice wizard.
> In CoS Voldemort is described as the `greatest dark sorcerer of all 
time' CoS Ch 1. p.9. 'Greatest' is a comparitive. It implies others.
> And in PoA the implication of other Dark wizards is made clearer: 
Lord Voldemort is `the most feared Dark wizard for a hundred years'. 
Ch. 1 p. 10 ? 11. This is repeated in GoF. `most powerful Dark wizard 
for a century' Ch. 2 p.23.
> Grindelwald was around in 1945; the repeated use of 'for a century' 
implies that there were other dark wizards *before* Grindelwald (i.e. 
more than a century before Voldemort came on the scene). Either that, 
or Grindelwald was the most feared and most powerful Dark wizard for 
one heck of a long time ;-)
> And in OOP we have ? Urquhart Rackharrow 1612 ? 1697, Inventor of 
the Entrail-expelling Curse. He gets a portrait in St Mungo's. He is 
described as looking a bit vicious. The names also bring to mind 
'being harrowed on the rack' (ie tortured) and Sir Francis Urquhart, 
one of the UK's great fictional villains of recent times ('you may 
think so, but I couldn't possibly comment').
> So the inventor of a rather nasty sounding curse gets a portrait in 
St Mungo's, hey?
> (snip)
> So canon gives us three named Dark Wizards. One is important 
enough to get his name and dates into a history lesson, and has a name 
that suggests 'Middle Ages'. One is important enough to get a mention 
on Chocolate Frog cards, and his 1945 defeat is what Dumbledore is 
'particularly' famous for. One is Lord Voldemort.
> In addition, another 17th Century magician has his painting in St 
Mungo's for inventing a curse. Meanwhile, Voldemort is described in 
ways that imply other, earlier 'great' Dark wizards. The greatEST. 
Most feared for a hundred years. Most powerful for a century.
> So, there is a line. Middle Ages, 17th Century, early 20th Century, 
late 20th Century. Dark wizards who get into history books, or have 
their portraits hanging in hospitals.
> And even Ollivander in PS/SS speaks of Voldemort in a way that 
suggests the WW is rather ambiguous in the way it sees Dark wizards. 
'He Who Must Not Be Named did great things - terrible, yes, but 
great'. PS/SS Ch. 5, p.65
> Pip!Squeak <


P!S, thanks for the bits of canon.

Now let me get this straight. JKR's been building us up for 5 books 
now to the *great* revelation that Dumbledore's *great* goal, and 
Harry's super-terrific *singular* power, is to stop the parade of 
evil, dictatorial wizards. And how has she done this?

By mentioning LV about a thousand times. By mentioning other evil 
wizards at best 3 times??? Huh? Let's list your baddies again.

1. Grindelwald, check.
2. Emeric the evil, maybe (one passing reference and we have no idea 
whether he was human or in what way he was evil).
3. Rackharrow, maybe (a reference to his portrait and that he created 
an evil curse).
And we don't know whether any of these were racist. Or pure-blood 
prejudiced. Or tried to take over the WW. Or anything.

And as for the references to LV being the strongest in a century, 
isn't it more likely that there's just no one around who could tell 
whether he was the strongest *ever*? Almost no one has lived long 
enough to say more than that he is the strongest in their 
lifetime of about a century.

And yes, there have been other evil wizards. Just as there are evil 
people in the real world. So the fact that there were others is just a 
reflection of the real world. But did they do what LV is trying to do? 
Never mentioned. IMO, he is unique, the perfect storm of unparallelled 
evil, power, and intelligence. Or does prejudice in the WW somehow 
breed super-powers and genius into its evil wizards? No, as far as we 
know, LV is just a superfreak. (Eeew, no, not that way, slashers!)

And if the whole point of the books is to get Harry to break the 
cycle, then would JKR really have left us so in the dark about this 
cycle for so long? Doubtful. She could have had Binns mention it. She 
could have had Hermione mention it (from all her reading). She could 
have had Dumbledore or another teacher mention it. Or perhaps there 
would have been some discussion via Arthur or Percy of a time when the 
MoM was destroyed in the dark ages by the evil wizard Bandicoot or 
something. Or that attack in 1573 on Hogwarts. But nothing like that 
has happened in canon. So it seems unlikely.

Instead, we have been led to believe that the WW is an imperfect 
society with an imperfect government in much the same way that modern 
society and government are imperfect. Some wizards are bad just as 
some people are bad. Sometimes unfair things happen in the WW as in 
our world. And how we handle these real-world failings is our choice, 
just as they are Harry's choice in the WW. JKR is just teaching life 
lessons drawn from the real world, IMHO. Since the real world will 
likely always have prejudice and evil, why suddenly in two books tell 
the reader that it's possible for Harry to set everything right in the 
WW?

Nope, there will always be bad guys (this one is Voldemort), and 
sometimes it's up to you to stop them.

-Remnant




From mom31 at rochester.rr.com  Fri Sep 26 20:51:22 2003
From: mom31 at rochester.rr.com (mom31)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 16:51:22 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Death Chamber
References: <bl1a5c+67ha@eGroups.com> <3F743893.1030401@ntlworld.com>
Message-ID: <007301c3846f$f1d043a0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>

No: HPFGUIDX 81645




  digger:


  I also think we are going to see more of the death chamber. I hope Harry 
  drags Voldemort through it towards the end of book 7. But Harry being 
  our hero, and brim full of love, he will get spat out again, thus 
  'dying' and yet living on.



  now Joj:

  This is how I always picture it ending too! Harry sacrifices himself by pulling V through the veil, with all his loved ones screaming and mourning, thinking he died.  After a battle of some sort, Harry is spat back through the veil after defeating V. Lots of hugging ensues. 

  I'm sure it will be something else though, because I'm always surprised by JK!

  Joj 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From entropymail at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 26 20:56:17 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 20:56:17 -0000
Subject: The Death Chamber
In-Reply-To: <bl21l0+5115@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl295h+3nq3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81646

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Richard" <darkmatter30 at y...> wrote:
> > The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of Harry 
> dragging 
> > Voldy through the veil. Because if Harry is willing to sacrifice 
> > himself, he could be returned to the land of the living, as a 
> > 'bodhisattva', so he can finish his 'work' on earth. It would have 
> to be 
> > a purely selfless sacrifice though, and not because he wants to see 
> all 
> > his loved ones again. So I stay steadfast to my DeadLand!Harry 
> theory, 
> > that Harry will make contact with the dead, and yet not die.  That 
> would 
> > make sense of JKR mentioning the possibility of Harry dying at the 
> end, 
> > and yet leave him around for a sequel. Quite apart from all the 
> > religious parallels ;-)
> 
> 
> to which I (Richard) reply:
> 
> Sorry, but I would find it hard to agree LESS.  JKR has repeatedly 
> said that "dead is dead" ... and might as well have added "... and 
> gone forever," given the firmness of her attitude on the subject.  I 
> would be shocked and appalled by such a turn, as it would run counter 
> to so much of what JKR has said, and the general, persistent thread 
> of "life lessons" contained in the Potter series.  If Harry or anyone 
> else dies, they will be well and truly dead, unless they so fear 
> death or love this World that they choose to become ghosts ... and I 
> can't see Harry choosing to become a ghost, either.
> 
> Richard, who thinks JKR should be taken seriously when she 
> says, "Dead is dead."

Yes, surely "dead is dead." But you must admit that there are myriad
examples of JKR's "cheating" a bit on the dead stuff. From the house
ghosts, to the figures dripping from Voldemort's wand in the
graveyard, to the listening/sleeping/gossiping portraits in
Dumbledore's office, the WW is certainly a place where the dead are
never quite completely gone.

And, as a side note: although I wouldn't be particularly happy to see
Harry fall through the veil in a firestorm of curses and kadavras,
only to be reborn by coming back through at a later time (it seems so
"Dallas"/it-was-all-just-a-dream), it would tie up the whole "phoenix"
imagery rather well, don't you think? 

:: Entropy ::




From jakejensen at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 26 21:05:31 2003
From: jakejensen at hotmail.com (jakedjensen)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 21:05:31 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Spies
In-Reply-To: <bl0cap+7cdl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl29mr+58sp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81647

Narie wrote:
 > 
> The only problem with this theory is that then the spy would have 
> known who the secret keeper was, as the secret can only be revealed 
> by that specific person. If that was the case, you would have hoped 
> *someone* would have informed Dumbledore or the Ministry of the 
fact 
> that Pettigrew was the Potter's secret keeper, and not Black.
> 
> Also, a question that has been nagging me - would the Fidelius 
charm 
> still work once the Potters had died, or does their death mean the 
> end of the charm? 
> 
> I can't really think of any other way Hagrid and Sirius would have 
> been able to find them if the secret was still, well, secret. For 
> that matter, if the secret was still secret, and from my 
> understanding of the spell (which is rather sketchy, granted), how 
> did anyone manage to find the bodies of Lily and James to confirm 
> their deaths?
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> narie. 

Narie,
Nice post.  I guess a central question is, when Sirius and Wormtail 
switched places, did they have to retell everyone (i.e., DD and the 
alleged spy network)the secret?  Personally, I don't think so.  
Sirius could have told DD and all the spies where the Potters were 
before switching places with Wormtail.  In fact, this seems logical, 
because DD and co all seem to know that Sirius is the secret keeper 
(which would make sense if he told them the secret).  It would also 
explain why Sirius gets worried (I've been telling all these people, 
VD may find out that I am the secret keeper and come after me) and 
passes secret keeping duties to Wormtail.  

Your question about how death impacts the charm is a good one.  I am 
not sure if cannon provides any answers to it.  I guess if DD dies 
and Grimauld Place pops back on the map we would know, but apart from 
that I don't think we can know either way.  We do have reason to 
believe that magic can last after death, however, based on Lily's 
protection of Harry. 

Jake




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Fri Sep 26 21:09:23 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 21:09:23 -0000
Subject: Apparating
In-Reply-To: <bl1iet+dnlb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl29u3+tpre@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81648

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jana Fisher" <lawtrainer at y...> 
wrote:
> > Potterfanme (if I am reading the nested quotes correctly):
> > > > > > I am curious why there is such a point made about not 
being 
> > > able 
> > > > > > to apparate or disapparate on the Hogwarts grounds.  
> 


Jana:> Maybe this has been questioned before, however if you cannot 
apparate 
> or disapparate on Hogwarts, how does Dobby in COS, when Harry is in 
> the hospital and hears Dumbledore bringing in Colin Creevey (I 
think 
> it was him, I don't have the books here).  How does Dobby make the 
> loud crack, that I assume is associated with apparating.  I say 
> assume based on canon when Percy is apparating, and Fred & George 
> learn to apparate.
> 

Geoff:
When I read this, I thought to myself that there is somewhere in the 
books where it says that house elves have a magic of their own. Not 
recalling where it occurs - which is quite unusual for me - I 
consulted the Lexicon which tells me that the elves have their own 
brand of magic which does not require words or wands and also are 
able to Apparate withing Hogwarts unlike normal wizards.




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Fri Sep 26 21:21:30 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 21:21:30 -0000
Subject: Floo & Fireplace Communication Into/Out of Hogwarts
In-Reply-To: <bl2307+bcsn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl2akq+3p9r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81649

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "corinthum" <kkearney at s...> 
wrote:
> Snazzzybird wrote:
> 
> > I've been wondering about fireplace communications to and from 
> > Hogwarts, specifically with regard to the incident in OoP when 
> Sirius 
> > was speaking to Harry in the Gryffindor Common Room fire. An 
> instant 
> > after he left the fire, Umbridge's hand appeared, clutching at 
the 
> > space where his hair had been. Sirius was speaking from #12 
> Grimmauld 
> > Place. If Umbridge had gotten hold of his hair -- well, okay, he 
> > probably would have been able to get free. But what if he hadn't? 
> If 
> > he had withdrawn his head from the fireplace with her hand still 
> > entangled in his hair, would she have been able to "trace the 
call" 
> > so to speak? Might she have popped out into the kitchen of Order 
of 
> > the Phoenix headquarters -- a location which does not exist for 
> her, 
> > because she has not been told about it by the secret keeper?
> 

Corinth:
> An interesting question.  On the surface, I would say no.  Let's 
> forget the Fidelius Charm for a second.  So far, we've seen that 
> enunciation of your destination is necessary when traveling by floo 
> powder.  Harry ending up in Knockturn Alley due to mispronunciation 
> is movie contamination, 


Geoff:

Not entirely. He finished up in Borgin and Burkes because he got a 
mouthful of hot ash and coughed and spluttered as he spoke:

"D-Dia-gon Alley", he coughed.

That is tantamount to mispronunication, because it is not what it was 
supposed to be.....




From constancevigilance at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 26 22:04:10 2003
From: constancevigilance at yahoo.com (Susan Miller)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 22:04:10 -0000
Subject: The Death Chamber, and others
In-Reply-To: <3F743893.1030401@ntlworld.com>
Message-ID: <bl2d4q+b7bl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81650

digger wrote:

> I also think we are going to see more of the death chamber. 

Constance Vigilance:
I think so too. But I also think that the Planet Chamber will become 
important in a future book. Our trio has just spent 5 years learning 
astronomy with Professor Sinestra. We have been kept completely in 
the dark (no pun intended) about both the curriculum and the 
instructor. Why, unless Prof S has more to do than just dance with 
Fake!Moody. I think that Ron's injury in the planet room is somehow 
related to Professor Sinestra and the Astronomy Tower. I'm just not 
sure how.

Constance Vigilance




From sydenmill at msn.com  Fri Sep 26 22:07:45 2003
From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 22:07:45 -0000
Subject: An intro, and a long letter...
In-Reply-To: <bl0qms+rnrc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl2dbh+gduf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81651

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:



bboy_mn, in post #81599, wrote:

>People (Lupin for example) have used the fireplaces to travel within
>the boundaries of the castle, but we have never seen anyone enter or
>exit the castle by floo network.

>You are right, we have seen 'fire talking' occur between someone
>inside and someone outside the castle, but the ability to 'fire talk'
>does not guarantee the ability to transport whole bodies.

>It would seem a reasonable and moderately safe concession to allow
>communication by Floo Network, but also seems very likely that there
>would be enchantments limiting the Floo capability, and thereby
>preventing the tranport of persons.


Bohcoo responds:

OOP, ch. 37, pg. 822, American Edition:
"The empty fireplace burst into emerald-green flame, making Harry 
leap away from the door, staring at the man spinning inside the 
grate. As Dumbledore's tall form unfolded itself from the fire, the 
wizards and witches on the surrounding walls jerked awake. Many of 
them gave cries of welcome."

This is the description of Dumbledore returning to his office from 
the MOM after his chat with Fudge of that night's events. It could be 
that he is powerful in ways other wizards aren't and therefore only 
he can transport via Floo Network into Hogwarts.

Regards,
Bohcoo







From silmariel at telefonica.net  Fri Sep 26 22:35:45 2003
From: silmariel at telefonica.net (Carolina)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 00:35:45 +0200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: BADD ANGST TBAY, Part II
In-Reply-To: <bl1rqq+qmua@eGroups.com>
References: <bl1rqq+qmua@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <200309270035.45182.silmariel@telefonica.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 81652

boyd_smythe:
> Ahoy there from the good ship BADD ANGST, silmariel! If I may
> respond to portions of your response to Jen:

silmariel, me, said:
>I can't agree respecting free will makes him so limited. He should  
>also respect his own free will, and the free will of those unnamed  
>creatures.

 And boyd replied:  
<<Does respecting others' free will mean that DD must liberate them? 
I argue no. Do the house elves even want to be liberated? Not 
currently, and it should be their choice, yes? I think the right 
answer is that every species must choose for itself, and all 
Dumbledore should do is accept their choice.>>

I never implied none of what you say. If you choose to atribute me 
that he should liberate creatures, I didn't. 

Jen:
>> 2. Respect for and use of the Deeper Mysteries of Magic-- > There 
is a mysterious "ancient magic" that Dumbledore ascribes to more 
fully than to the "Laws of Man" (in this case, the MOM) .
>> These deep mysteries appear to actualize in the form of binding 
connections between people or between people and magical objects. <<

> then silmariel responded:
> Here is where I call it having a cool mind and common sense.  
Dumbledore uses the weapons he has, and follows the rules he knows. 
 I mean, he knows they exist, so respecting here for me means not 
to  be so dumb as to overlook something he takes as a fact. 
Borrowing  Terry Pratchett an example: witches know gods exist in 
Discworld,  but believing in them would be like believing in the 
postman. <

boyd:
<<Again, it may be obvious to you, but we're simply assuming not 
everyone sees how Dumbledore is using his better understanding of 
the ancient magics as a weapon to defeat LV.>>

I didn't like the way Jen described ancient magic so I used a humor 
example. So what. I just called it another way. I didn't say he 
wasn't using it, I only said all examples of ancient magic being 
used by DD can be explained with a cool mind.

(Jen)>> These deep mysteries appear to actualize in the form of 
binding connections between people or between people and magical 
objects. <<

It sounded as someone trying to explain gravity to a medieval 
public, to me, so I used other words. Hope it's clear.

boyd:
<<Two thoughts. 
<<One: ancient does not have to equal complex. Do we 
really think Harry's Mom had time to perform a complex spell she'd 
never done before LV killed her? Probably not; her love and 
self-sacrifice seem to have generated that magic. Similarly, we 
don't know whether the creation of a Secret Keeper is a long, 
complex spell or as simple as an oath by the secret-keeper not to 
reveal the secret.>>

I tought Jen's quote from Flitwick said so, I couldn't care less if 
Secret Keeper is a complex or not spell, really. And as I said, 
Lily's self sacrifice smells muggle, so a 
you-have-to-do-nothing-except-being-a-self-sacrificing-mother 
applies perfectly, if you chose. I don't mind, also.

>> The Fidelius Charm is "An immensely complex spell?..involving the 
magical concealment of a secret inside a single, living soul.  The 
information is hidden inside the chosen person, or Secret Keeper?." 
(Prof. Flitwick, POA, chap. 10, p. 205) <<
  
<<Two: all we know is that the change of secret-keepers happened 
after DD and Lupin were informed that Sirius would be the 
secret-keeper. There could have been plenty of time for a big, long 
spell if Secret Keeping requires that. >>

quoting myself again:
>  See, I just thought it was a complex spell, but given each wizard  
should have a soul that was not the difficult part. Maybe I'm 
 biased by the, 'hey Wormtail, wannabe Secret Keeper?' last-moment  
change . <

Ok. I don't mind if this is difficult or not, what I say is that it 
doesn't matter that it is tied to a soul. They are plenty around. 
Half the amount of wizards hands, aproximately.

boyd:
<<Yes, Harry didn't put his name in the goblet himself, so he would 
apparently not have been bound by that magic. But DD says others 
would be-and that is the ancient magic Jen is talking about.>>

And all this time I was thinking that Harry was forced to compete, 
so I pitied him. So he could have just quit? He went trough all 
that risk on purpose?  

Jen defended Voldie despised ancient magic. Then he uses an example 
in wich a DE actually is making nice use of ancient magic. It 
seemed incoherent. But then I see you have used Wormtail's hand as 
example, so I must suppose Voldie doesn't despise it, after all.

<<Because ancient magic appears to be all about choices. Choose to 
put your name in the Goblet, and you must serve if chosen. 
Choose to give your life protecting someone, and your blood will 
protect them forever. Choose to entrust your secret to someone and 
only they will be able to uncover it. The servant must choose to 
give his flesh to return the master to life. Choose not to pass to 
the afterlife and you will remain a ghost. Choices. Boundaries. It 
all fits, yes?>>

No, but as I wasn't exposing my view on ancient magic, just replying 
to Jen's post because I liked it and what doesn't kill us make us 
strong, I'll stop here. 

Now on Iggy's post, this same thread:

I (silmariel) wrote:
 >But I hope he remains as counselor. Harry will be pierced in
 >politics without counseling. We don't want Harry starting a
 > civil war by accident.

Iggy McSnurd replied:
> Is anyone else seeing that line of thought quickly turning into
> the "Obi Wan / Luke Skywalker" type thing?

No no no. I turned it into the Young King with Wise Counselor 
stereotipe, not the Apprentice&Master one. I don't want DD dead as 
a lamb, as a 'necesary' sacrifice for Harry to be alone and grow to 
what he can be. It would be so starwars-ish I'd vomit. I don't want 
him retired or cornered, also. Why should he? In a war, even a 
hidden low-scale one, every individual is needed, I see no reason 
not to use DD's experience and professional skills. 

Now thank you, Pip!Squeak, for your excelent post on Lord After Lord 
canon.

boyd:
<By mentioning LV about a thousand times. By mentioning other evil 
wizards at best 3 times??? Huh?>

Yes. I visited rumania a few years after Ceaucescu's demise, and his 
name was mentioned a million times, but not hitler's or stalin's. 
So it is perfectly right, and a matter of opinion that you choose 
to read it as proof of a not-cycle scenario.

<And if the whole point of the books is to get Harry to break the 
cycle, then would JKR really have left us so in the dark about this 
cycle for so long?>

I don't think we are in the dark. My friends are not Harry fans, but 
they have read the novels, and they have not a problem buying there 
is a cycle. They are medium readers and they don't seem to find 
anything contradictory, just that it would be a nice bang. 

silmariel









From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 26 22:42:47 2003
From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 22:42:47 -0000
Subject: The Death Chamber
In-Reply-To: <bl295h+3nq3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl2fd7+o95b@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81653

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "entropymail" 
<entropymail at y...> wrote:
<snipping my (Richard's) prior comments>
> Yes, surely "dead is dead." But you must admit that there are myriad
> examples of JKR's "cheating" a bit on the dead stuff. From the house
> ghosts, to the figures dripping from Voldemort's wand in the
> graveyard, to the listening/sleeping/gossiping portraits in
> Dumbledore's office, the WW is certainly a place where the dead are
> never quite completely gone.


also sprach Richard ... ("thus spoke Richard" for the non-German 
speakers and those who haven't read Friedrich N.)

I think there is both more and less to the "undead" in the series.  
Harry's parents and the other murder victims expelled via the priori 
incantatum effect aren't those individuals, merely magical "echoes" 
of them.  As echoes, they bear some of the character, love and 
behavior, but they are fleeting wisps that will disappear more 
quickly than they appeared, once the connection between the wands is 
broken.  Similarly, Nick says that he is neither here nor there, and 
something along the lines of that ghosts are just pale echoes of 
those who have passed on.  (Sorry ... I don't have the text here to 
quote exactly.)

As for portraits, these are the dead they represent.  Sure, they bear 
the character and attitudes of the departed, but I see it more like a 
portrait by a great painter who captures the character of his subject 
than that of a means of restoring (or retaining) the dead to this 
World.  The physical, sensual, dynamic person dies, and the painting 
just provides a very, VERY good similitude of that person, devoid of 
the one characteristic that makes the living truly alive -- the 
ability to change, to develop and to grow.


entropy continues:

> And, as a side note: although I wouldn't be particularly happy to 
see
> Harry fall through the veil in a firestorm of curses and kadavras,
> only to be reborn by coming back through at a later time (it seems 
so
> "Dallas"/it-was-all-just-a-dream), it would tie up the 
whole "phoenix"
> imagery rather well, don't you think? 


I, Richard (though not a caesarian emperor) say:

I don't believe the phoenix imagery really applies to Harry.  He 
doesn't die and miraculously arise from his own ashes.  He simply 
survives, sometimes by the skin of his teeth, sometimes by the 
intervention of others.  True, he did "arise" from the wreckage at 
Godric's Hollow, but he wasn't "reborn" in any sense that I am aware 
of.  Still, there are some interesting points to ponder relating to 
Harry's life and possible death, though.

I'm not sure that anyone other than Voldemort can kill Harry, or that 
Voldemort can kill him with a Avada Kedavra.  The prophecy in OotP 
says that either must die at the other's hands as neither can live 
with the other survives.  The AK is performed with hand on wand, but 
isn't truly "death at the hands of" in the sense that I suspect to be 
hinted at.  It is rather attenuated, and more so than would be the 
case if one were to use a knife to stab another to death, rather than 
using a spell.

We've been living with the fact of Harry's survival of the first AK 
fired at him since early in PS/SS ... which obviously failed, but for 
which we still have no complete explanation other than that it was 
PROBABLY his mother's love and sacrifice that protected him.  This 
protection might well be more durable than even Dumbledore suspects, 
at least with regard to the AK.  Harry has also survived other AK 
attempts, such as Lucius Malfoy's interupted AK from the CoS movie, 
and another AK fired at him at the MoM and blocked by the statue.  
But would any of these really have killed him?  Is it perhaps 
REQUIRED that either Harry or Voldemort LITERALLY kill the other with 
his hands for the prophecy to be fulfilled?  Remember what happened 
to Professor Quirrel (sp?) in the PS/SS?  Harry's hands burned 
Quirrel, but Quirrel was also bearing Voldemort and sustaining him.

It may well be that Lucius should be very glad that his AK was 
interupted by Dobby, else it might have recoiled upon him much as 
Voldemort's had ... but Lucius likely hasn't gone to the lengths 
Voldemort had in seeking immortality.  Might Bellatrix be unaware of 
how close she came to death in attacking Harry and friends?  For the 
prophecy to hold in detail, something must ALWAYS save Harry from any 
lethal attack by any other than Voldemort himself.  For it to hold in 
literal detail, only Voldermort's hands can kill Harry, and vice 
versa.  So, apart from Voldemort's first AK, was it really necessary 
that such attacks be blocked, interupted or such?  Or does the 
prophecy simply mean that something will ALWAYS go awry with any 
attempt to kill Harry by any but Voldemort?

Eventually, JKR will enlighten us all, but until then, canon provides 
some intriguing clues and blind alleys ... which is just SOOO much 
fun!


Richard, who is curious what would have happened had Dobby not 
intervened in CoS.





From sydenmill at msn.com  Fri Sep 26 23:10:16 2003
From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 23:10:16 -0000
Subject: Do You Peek?
Message-ID: <bl2h0o+rkhn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81654

When I got OOP home, I settled in to read it from front to back, just 
like I had with the other books, "dying" to know who was going to 
die.  However, after the chapter about Mrs. Weasley's Woes where we 
were teased with Dead! Everyone Weasley, that did it for me -- I 
thumbed through the book until I found out who really did bite the 
dust. I peeked.

So, am I the only one? Did anyone else get their book out of the 
wrapper and immediately look for the death scene? 

So, then -- how are you going to be reading the last two books in the 
series? Are you going to Peek? Look at the last page or two, just to 
see who is still there, saying goodbye on the Platform as they part 
for the summer?


I feel sorry for JKR, in a way. We have postulated the plot 
possibilities so thoroughly, with speculations so spectacularly 
intellectual, that I wonder if Rowling sits at home reading some of 
them and saying to herself, "Oh no, what am I going to do NOW? I 
wasn't going to get THAT sophisticated with it. . ."

She has commented that the Harry Potter story jumped into her mind, 
fully formed. She knew how it was going to end before she set the 
first word on paper. Do you think she has changed any of it in light 
of these worldwide expectations?

Just wondering,
Bohcoo




From shirley2allie at hotmail.com  Fri Sep 26 23:15:29 2003
From: shirley2allie at hotmail.com (Shirley)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 23:15:29 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Spies
In-Reply-To: <bl29mr+58sp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl2hah+p5ja@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81655

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jakedjensen" <jakejensen at h...> 
wrote:
I guess a central question is, when Sirius and Wormtail 
> switched places, did they have to retell everyone (i.e., DD and the 
> alleged spy network)the secret?  Personally, I don't think so.  
> Sirius could have told DD and all the spies where the Potters were 
> before switching places with Wormtail.  In fact, this seems 
logical, 
> because DD and co all seem to know that Sirius is the secret keeper 
> (which would make sense if he told them the secret).  It would also 
> explain why Sirius gets worried (I've been telling all these 
people, 
> VD may find out that I am the secret keeper and come after me) and 
> passes secret keeping duties to Wormtail.  
> 
<<snip>>
> 
> Jake

Shirley:
Well, that's an interesting take on the secret-keeper that I hadn't 
thought of....  The way that I interpreted it, the Potters were 
considering who to make their secret-keeper, and everyone assumed 
that it would be Sirius, including Sirius.  Then, attempting to fool 
LV and his spies (evidently, they thought that *maybe* Lupin was a 
spy), Sirius suggested that Peter be their secret-keeper, and that's 
what they did (hence, the "switch").  In other words, I thought that 
Peter was the *only* secret-keeper they ever had; that they didn't 
cast the Fidelius Charm until they chose Peter.

Thoughts?
Shirley




From siskiou at earthlink.net  Fri Sep 26 23:18:44 2003
From: siskiou at earthlink.net (Susanne)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 16:18:44 -0700
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Do You Peek?
In-Reply-To: <bl2h0o+rkhn@eGroups.com>
References: <bl2h0o+rkhn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <90112159177.20030926161844@earthlink.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 81656



Hi,

Friday, September 26, 2003, 4:10:16 PM, bohcoo wrote:

> Are you going to Peek? Look at the last page or two, just to 
> see who is still there, saying goodbye on the Platform as they part 
> for the summer?

Yes, I did peek and I will in the future books.

I didn't look for the "death scene", but did what you said
above: look at the last page to see if the characters I
definitely wouldn't want the story to be without, were still
all alive.

They were, for now...

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at earthlink.net

Visit our two pet bunnies: http://home.earthlink.net/~siskiou/





From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Fri Sep 26 23:45:14 2003
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 23:45:14 -0000
Subject: Do You Peek?
In-Reply-To: <bl2h0o+rkhn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl2j2a+2h5r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81657

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bohcoo" <sydenmill at m...> wrote:
> When I got OOP home, I settled in to read it from front to back, 
just 
> like I had with the other books, "dying" to know who was going to 
> die.  However, after the chapter about Mrs. Weasley's Woes where we 
> were teased with Dead! Everyone Weasley, that did it for me -- I 
> thumbed through the book until I found out who really did bite the 
> dust. I peeked.
 
I didn't peek, because I didn't need to. Our sunday newspaper (I got 
the book on monday) was "friendly" enough, to announce it as their 
headline. >:-(

That said, I probably would have peeked. I mostly do so in books, 
because I am curious about the ending, so I doubt I would have been 
able to resist the temptation.

Hickengruendler




From andie at knownet.net  Sat Sep 27 00:00:31 2003
From: andie at knownet.net (grindieloe)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 00:00:31 -0000
Subject: Harry Promos
Message-ID: <bl2juv+6mko@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81658

After reading the various Harry Potter promotional ads that 
Scholastic is putting out to gather more adult readers, I got to 
thinking...

In each ad, the person/persons list 3 things that pretty much defines 
why they read Harry Potter.

If you had to narrow to three basic reasons why you love Harry, what 
three things would you choose?

grindieloe :)




From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Sat Sep 27 00:37:21 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 00:37:21 -0000
Subject: BADD ANGST TBAY, Part II
In-Reply-To: <bl28gc+rcko@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl2m41+pcc2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81659

Remnant:
> Now let me get this straight. JKR's been building us up for 5 
> books now to the *great* revelation that Dumbledore's *great*  
> goal, and Harry's super-terrific *singular* power, is to stop the 
> parade of evil, dictatorial wizards. And how has she done this?
> 
> By mentioning LV about a thousand times. By mentioning other evil 
> wizards at best 3 times??? Huh? 

Pip!Squeak:
I take it you don't read Agatha Christie [grin]. JKR does, 
incidentally. Interestingly, the UK adult cover of OOP has a photo 
of JKR in front of a bookcase containing several Christie mysteries.

She does a pretty Christie-ish trick in PS/SS, where the villain, 
Quirrel, is mentioned on a total of 18 pages before he is revealed 
as the villain. That's 18 pages out of 153 (his first appearance is 
on page 55 UK paperback). And in over half of those 18 pages, 
Quirrel only gets a one-line mention. 

Snape, who is the misdirection in PS/SS, appears 39 pages later than 
Quirrel but still manages to clock up mentions on 38 pages, with at 
least 5 scenes longer than one page (including the first potions 
lesson, which is four pages long).

So it's not wise to go by 'screen time'. Quirrel gets about one-
third the attention Snape gets. Nonetheless, Snape in PS/SS is the 
distraction, Quirrel the real villain. If LV is mentioned about 1000 
times, then it is in fact a reasonable supposition that he may not 
be the real problem.

Because JKR has shown she *uses* that trick. She puts the 
distraction in plain sight, and mentions him a lot. [Sirius and 
Peter Pettigrew, anyone?]

Remnant:
> Let's list your baddies again.
> 
> 1. Grindelwald, check.
> 2. Emeric the evil, maybe (one passing reference and we have no 
idea whether he was human or in what way he was evil).

Pip!Squeak:
Uh, well, he has a human name. Harry remembers Goblin wars and Giant 
wars as just that - Goblin and Giant wars. 

As for one passing reference - do you have any idea how important 
you have to be to get mentioned in a European school history lesson? 
[grin]

English history in English schools is a gallop through about 1000 
years, using a maximum of 3 hours a week, over 5 years. Wizarding 
history also seems to cover around a thousand years (judging by the 
founding of Hogwarts). Generally, in order to get a mention, you 
have to have either been a monarch, won or lost major wars, led 
major rebellions, written major literary works, or imported strange 
overseas vegetables that completely changed the UK diet. 

[There's a well known English book called '1066 And All That: A 
Memorable History of England, comprising all the parts you can 
remember' by W.C. Sellar and R.J. Yeatman. It satirises school 
history, and the little of it most people can remember.  ]

So Emeric the Evil was almost certainly a major historical 
character. To get a mention in a school history lesson, he *has* to 
be a major historical character.

Remnant:
> 3. Rackharrow, maybe (a reference to his portrait and that he 
> created an evil curse).
> And we don't know whether any of these were racist. Or pure-blood 
> prejudiced. Or tried to take over the WW. Or anything.

Pip!Squeak:
Salazar Slytherin only wanted students brought up by 
wizards/witches, preferably pure blood (CoS and OOP)If you read the 
few references to history, you will find Harry skipping the 
question 'did wand legislation contribute to, or lead to better 
control of, goblin riots of the 18th Century?' In the formation of 
the International Confederation of Wizards (Question 10) we find 
that the Goblins tried to attend and were chucked out. The wizards 
of Liechtenstein didn't want to stop troll-hunting and were opposed 
to giving trolls rights. [OOP Ch. 31, pp639 -640).

Earlier in OOP Professor Binns lectures on Giant Wars. In PoA 
Hermione excitedly remarks that Hogsmeade was the headquarters of 
the Goblin rebellion - in the 17th Century. (1612, to be exact. PoA 
Ch. 5,p. 61). In GoF Ron remarks that his exam mentioned Goblin 
rebellions (he couldn't remember all the names and had to make up a 
few) [Ch. 31, p. 537]

So we do know that Goblins felt oppressed in both the 17th and 18th 
Century. We do know that Liechtenstein wizards didn't want to give 
trolls any rights, but thought they should be allowed to hunt them.

So, no, I suppose our evil wizards might not have been racist, or 
pure bloodist, but it seems that they would have stood out a bit if 
they weren't. Because from the history we are given, the WW itself 
is largely racist. Other races feel extremely oppressed - so much so 
that they revolt more than once over a period of centuries. And note 
that when Binns explains about Salazar Slytherin's pure-bloodist 
views, he does not condemn them [CoS Ch. 9 p.114 ]. 

Besides, if our evil wizards are *not* racist, and *not* pure-
bloodist, and *don't* seek power - well, what sort of WW is it that 
calls them evil ? [grin] 

> Remnant:
> And as for the references to LV being the strongest in a century, 
> isn't it more likely that there's just no one around who could 
> tell whether he was the strongest *ever*? Almost no one has lived 
> long enough to say more than that he is the strongest in their 
> lifetime of about a century.

Pip!Squeak:
Dumbledore is 150. [Interview with JKR for Comic Relief 
http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/2001/0301-
comicrelief-staff.htm]. Professor Marchbanks in OOP is old enough to 
have examined Dumbledore for his OWLs.  Wizards live longer than a 
century.

And no, it's not likely that there's no way of telling that 
Voldemort is the strongest in a century. Cricketing batsmen are 
regularly judged against the great W.G. Grace - even though there is 
probably no one alive today who saw Grace in his heyday (he died in 
1915). Historical records. 

> Remnant:
> And yes, there have been other evil wizards. Just as there are 
> evil people in the real world. So the fact that there were others 
> is just a reflection of the real world. But did they do what LV 
> is  trying to do? Never mentioned. IMO, he is unique, the perfect 
> storm of unparallelled evil, power, and intelligence. 

Pip!Squeak:
There is no canon (as far as I recall - I could be wrong) that says 
Voldemort is 'unique'. Far from it. 'Greatest', most powerful, 
strongest - all the terms applied to Voldemort suggest that he is 
far from unique. The terms used suggest that he is the worst of a 
bad lot. No one ever says 'it had never happened before'. Instead 
they talk about 'times like that' [Sirius in GoF Ch. 27]. In 
Hagrid's explanation to Harry in Chapter 4 of PS/SS, in Mr Weasley's 
explanation of the Dark Mark in GoF Ch. 9, neither of them sound 
*surprised* about this history. 

<Snip>

Remnant:
> And if the whole point of the books is to get Harry to break the 
> cycle, then would JKR really have left us so in the dark about 
> this cycle for so long? Doubtful. She could have had Binns mention 
> it. She could have had Hermione mention it (from all her reading). 
> She could have had Dumbledore or another teacher mention it. Or 
> perhaps there would have been some discussion via Arthur or Percy 
> of a time when the MoM was destroyed in the dark ages by the evil 
> wizard Bandicoot or something. Or that attack in 1573 on 
> Hogwarts.  But nothing like that has happened in canon. So it     
> seems unlikely.

Pip!Squeak:
Except that JKR has already left important facts to later books. We 
first find out about the Death Eaters (which are slightly important 
to the plot of the series, wouldn't you say?) in GoF. Snape as a 
former DE is also revealed in that book. The fact that there are 
genuine prophecies is left until PoA. The fact that Trelawney's 
first prophecy *was* about Harry was only revealed in OOP. Harry 
doesn't discover that his parents were betrayed to their deaths 
until PoA. Hagrid's half-giant background is kept secret to GoF. 
That Sirius Black was from a family of Black magicians is not 
mentioned throughout PoA, despite the fact that it would have added 
immensely to his character status as 'official misdirection'. JKR 
wanted to save that one until OOP :-) 

I will pass over Scabbers the perfectly innocent rat, and James the 
bully - except to mention that the clues *were* there. They were 
just very few and far between.

Further, Harry's awareness of prejudice and racism is increasing. In 
PS/SS he's hardly aware of it. In CoS he doesn't understand why 
Hagrid is the perfect scapegoat for Tom Riddle, or why Fudge is so 
quick to imprison Hagrid in Azkaban. He thinks that Dobby is badly 
treated because he is owned by the Malfoys. By PoA we are introduced 
to the idea that a werewolf finds it hard to get a job, and that 
there was a very real doubt that he would be able to attend school. 
By GoF we see that Rita Skeeter is delighted to 'out' Hagrid the 
half-giant, and that Madame Maxine is scared to even admit her 
parentage to another half-giant. We also see that another House elf 
is badly treated by more than one wizard.

In OOP the theme is becoming full blown. There is another badly 
treated House-elf, the Goblin riots of history are becoming present-
day goblins who feel 'pretty anti-wizard'. The centaurs are so 
annoyed at humans they consider killing two children who they think 
are 'using' them. The giants are having genocide practiced on them.


> Remnant:
> Instead, we have been led to believe that the WW is an imperfect 
> society with an imperfect government in much the same way that 
> modern society and government are imperfect. 

Imperfect? 'muggles' have their memories altered routinely? [GoF]. 
Giants are driven into mountain areas when 'they're not made ter 
live bunched up together like that'. [OOP ch.20 p.378]. House elves 
are shouted at, beaten, told to acquiesce in illegal activities? 
[CoS and GoF - as well as OOP]. Hagrid is taken to prison without 
even appearing in front of the WW's equivalent of a magistrate, and 
with no chance to apply for bail? Sirius spends twelve years in 
Azkaban without a trial? Harry is reprimanded for illegal magic in 
CoS without anyone bothering to hear his side of the story ?[the 
floating cake]. Then in OOP he is nearly expelled without a hearing? 
When he does get a hearing, the time is changed so he almost doesn't 
attend.

This is *not* imperfect. Societies which brainwash, enslave, 
discriminate against, and commit genocide against 'lesser' races are 
not *imperfect*. Societies who think that prison guards who *enjoy* 
sending inmates into a suicidal depression help them sleep 'safe in 
our beds at night' are not *imperfect*. [Fudge's words in GoF]

Yes, the WW has many problems which could be defined as *imperfect* -
 but no. You are deceived, as Harry is, by the undeniable fact that 
the WW is 'cute'. It's funny. It's full of eccentric wizards, in odd 
costumes. It looks harmless. It's comic-opera.

And Harry has found that it is a dangerous place, full of dangerous 
people, some of whom are trying to kill him, and others, 
theoretically on the good side, who are prepared to discredit him, 
expel him, torture him and abuse him.

Remnant:

> Some wizards are bad just as some people are bad. Sometimes unfair 
> things happen in the WW as in our world. And how we handle these  
> real-world failings is our choice, just as they are Harry's choice 
> in the WW. JKR is just teaching life lessons drawn from the real 
> world, IMHO. 

Because sometimes it is the society that is evil, not just the 
people. In fact,in a bad society, you will find that many, many of 
the people are perfectly nice, kind people. If JKR is teaching life 
lessons drawn from the real world, why do you think her lessons have 
to be about the difference between good and evil people? Why not 
have a lesson about the difference between the sort of world you 
want, and the world you've currently got? A lesson about what you 
should do when you find the society you love has turned to evil?

Remnant:
> Since the real world will likely always have  
> prejudice and evil, why suddenly in two books tell the reader that 
> it's possible for Harry to set everything right in the WW?

Pip!Squeak [on her soapbox]:

Why must the real world always have prejudice and evil?

Who told you that?

What are you supporting when you say that?

What 'side' do you help when you say 'it's never possible to set 
everything right'.

Why must JKR accept that view in her books? 

> -Remnant
> Nope, there will always be bad guys (this one is Voldemort), and 
> sometimes it's up to you to stop them.
> 

It's up to you to stop evil. Full stop. Whether it's a bad guy, 
singular, bad guys, plural, or bad guys as in an entire society. And 
in fact, in history, you will find examples of people trying to stop 
all three.

Real life. Real worlds. Real societies. 

Pip!Squeak





From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Sat Sep 27 00:38:00 2003
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 00:38:00 -0000
Subject: Hermione's growth (was Why Ron Loves Hermione)
In-Reply-To: <bko3g0+nn8i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl2m58+cus9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81660

Jim Ferer wrote:

(Challenge)
> And that is exactly what Hermione is all about.  She came to 
Hogwarts
> for purely intellectual challenges and found much more. Her mind 
has
> grown (!), but so has her courage, heart, sense of purpose, 
physical
> bravery and people sense.  She is, and ever will be, always 
looking to
> test herself and the world around her.  

I think that is broadly true of the Hermione of PS through to GOF.

However, I feel she has gone badly adrift in OOP.  She has IMO 
become overconfident.

She presumes to direct Harry's love life without checking whether he 
wants her to.  She confidently explicates Cho's feelings without any 
sense that it might be good for Harry to verify her opinions by 
seeking Cho's own view.  She dismisses Firenze.  She rewrites the 
rules of her bargain with Rita Skeeter, just because it suits her.  
She decides what Sirius thinks of Harry, and has the cheek to assume 
that Sirius' support of an idea is a counter-recommendation.

Most tellingly to my mind, she makes no effort whatsoever to check 
whether her elf clothes are having the desired effect.  This is a 
cause that is supposedly dear to her heart, into which she puts a 
great deal of effort.  Yet she simply does not test herself and the 
world around her.  She has lost interest in rigorously finding out 
and discerning what the evidence is really telling her.

Her easy assumption that Harry would be prefect contasts visibly 
with Ron's maturity in not being offended by her presumption.

Much has been made of Harry being the typical teenager in his 
anger.  But Hermione has become a typical teenager of a different 
kind.

The word that comes to mind is 'arrogant'.

David




From entropymail at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 00:42:07 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 00:42:07 -0000
Subject: The Death Chamber
In-Reply-To: <bl2fd7+o95b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl2mcv+bote@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81661

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Richard" <darkmatter30 at y...> wrote:
> entropy continues: And, as a side note: although I wouldn't be
particularly happy to see
> > Harry fall through the veil in a firestorm of curses and kadavras,
> > only to be reborn by coming back through at a later time (it seems 
> so
> > "Dallas"/it-was-all-just-a-dream), it would tie up the 
> whole "phoenix"
> > imagery rather well, don't you think? 
> 
> 
> I, Richard (though not a caesarian emperor) say:
><snip>
> I'm not sure that anyone other than Voldemort can kill Harry, or that 
> Voldemort can kill him with a Avada Kedavra.  The prophecy in OotP 
> says that either must die at the other's hands as neither can live 
> with the other survives.  <snip>
> We've been living with the fact of Harry's survival of the first AK 
> fired at him since early in PS/SS ... which obviously failed, but for 
> which we still have no complete explanation other than that it was 
> PROBABLY his mother's love and sacrifice that protected him.  This 
> protection might well be more durable than even Dumbledore suspects, 
> at least with regard to the AK.  Harry has also survived other AK 
> attempts, such as Lucius Malfoy's interupted AK from the CoS movie, 
> and another AK fired at him at the MoM and blocked by the statue.  
> But would any of these really have killed him?  Is it perhaps 
> REQUIRED that either Harry or Voldemort LITERALLY kill the other with 
> his hands for the prophecy to be fulfilled? 

> It may well be that Lucius should be very glad that his AK was 
> interupted by Dobby, else it might have recoiled upon him much as 
> Voldemort's had ... but Lucius likely hasn't gone to the lengths 
> Voldemort had in seeking immortality.  Might Bellatrix be unaware of 
> how close she came to death in attacking Harry and friends?  For the 
> prophecy to hold in detail, something must ALWAYS save Harry from any 
> lethal attack by any other than Voldemort himself. 
 
Interesting to think that Harry is, in fact, immortal (to some
extent).  That is, he cannot be killed by anyone other than Voldemort.

To take it a step further, perhaps therein lies the reason that Harry
was not killed by Voldemort in the first go round. Even Voldemort
himself couldn't kill Harry until the rest of the prophecy had been
fulfilled. Assuming that the prophecy is correct, it's steps may have
to be taken in the proper order:

1. First, Harry is born: "...born to those who have thrice defied him,
born as the seventh month dies..."

2. Then, he is endowed with certain powers by Voldemort's AK curse:
"...and the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have
power the Dark Lord knows not..."

3. And only after these other two requirements have been filled, can
the battle between Harry and Voldemort occur: "...and either must die
at the hand of the other..."

:: Entropy :: (who is beginning to think that Richard must be wearing
smarty pants)






From entropymail at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 00:56:25 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 00:56:25 -0000
Subject: Floo & Fireplace Communication Into/Out of Hogwarts
In-Reply-To: <bl2307+bcsn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl2n7p+vbaf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81662

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "corinthum" <kkearney at s...> wrote:
> warning: complete speculation ahead
> My theory is that a fire can only be open to one incoming traveler at 
> a time.  This explains why the Ministry of Magic would need many 
> fireplaces to accomodate all their employees and visitors.  It would 
> also solve the problem of collisions, which you would think would be 
> pretty common in popular destinations if anyone could floo in at any 
> time.  It also explains why the Weasleys don't save money on floo 
> powder by joing hands and having the first traveller haul the rest 
> through.  I also think that the Floo Network is a one-way system.  If 
> (going against my previous theory) Umbridge was able to grab Sirius, 
> I think she would have hit a wall when she reached the Grimmauld 
> Place fire; in order to open that path to herself, she would have to 
> add more floo to her office fire and state the new destination name.
> Therefore, I don't think Umbridge was trying to grab Sirius so much 
> as she was trying to find some immediate proof as to who was using 
> the fire a moment before. 

Don't forget about the GoF scene at the Dursley's. Arthur, Ron, Fred,
and George all managed to get stuck in the Dursley's blocked-off
fireplace at once. It seems you must travel one at a time, but once
you're there, you'd better scooch out of the way quick! 

But, does this only apply to traveling by Floo powder, or to the
communicating-with-your-head variety as well? Don't know. I'll have to
run out to the Floo store and pinch a bit of powder to find out. Be
right back...

:: Entropy ::




From ratalman at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 01:20:41 2003
From: ratalman at yahoo.com (ratalman)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 01:20:41 -0000
Subject: Portkey and Floo in Hogwarts.
In-Reply-To: <bl20hl+5nb7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl2ol9+96vi@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81663

bboy_mn:

We have seen 'fire talking', but we have never seen anyone use 
the Floo Network to get into or out of Hogwarts. Although, we 
have seen the fireplaces used to transport a person from one 
room in the castle to another room in the castle. Just because 
the castle protections allow 'fire talking' does not mean the 
fireplaces do not have additional charms to prevent the transport 
of whole bodies.

Robyn:

But don't forget that Dumbledore arrives at his office via fireplace 
after the showdown at the Ministry of Magic:

"The empty fireplace burst into emerald-green flame, making 
Harry leap away from the door, staring at the man spinning 
inside the grate.  As Dumbledore's tall form unfolded itself from 
the fire, the wizards and witches on the surrounding walls jerked 
awake."  (OoP, p. 822, US ed.)

This is the only instance of floo travel to Hogwarts from outside 
the castle that I can think of.  Maybe Dumbledore, as 
headmaster, is the only wizard who can do so, and maybe 
because his office, and therefore, fireplace, is a specially 
protected space (Umbridge could not gain access to the 
headmaster's office whilst Dumbledore was away), but, then 
again, maybe not....

Robyn




From eowynn_24 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 01:45:32 2003
From: eowynn_24 at yahoo.com (eowynn_24)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 18:45:32 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Do You Peek?
In-Reply-To: <bl2h0o+rkhn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030927014532.60559.qmail@web60205.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81664



bohcoo <sydenmill at msn.com> wrote:
      <snip>
>So, am I the only one? Did anyone else get their book out of the 
>wrapper and immediately look for the death scene? 

       <snip>

>I feel sorry for JKR, in a way. We have postulated the plot 
>possibilities so thoroughly, with speculations so spectacularly 
>intellectual, that I wonder if Rowling sits at home reading some of 
>them and saying to herself, "Oh no, what am I going to do NOW? I 
>wasn't going to get THAT sophisticated with it. . ."

>She has commented that the Harry Potter story jumped into her mind, 
>fully formed. She knew how it was going to end before she set the 
>first word on paper. Do you think she has changed any of it in light 
>of these worldwide expectations?

>Just wondering,
Bohcoo

 

now me Eowynn:

No I did not peek but I had narrowed it down and as I read the book the clues jumped out at me and I new who it would be that died. As for JKR changing anything, I don't think she would do that. While we as adults can get really intellectual with the books, she did write these for children. I don't believe she will change any of her story due to the younger fans, but also because while we may get deep and almost hit the mark, we never really do. I believe that because we can't quite figure it out she will keep it the same and watch the reactions when those that were oh so close, find out how close they really were.

Eowynn ( very tempted to peek, but will try and continue to restrain herself.)









---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From RSFJenny19 at aol.com  Sat Sep 27 02:13:22 2003
From: RSFJenny19 at aol.com (RSFJenny19 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 22:13:22 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Portkey and Floo in Hogwarts.
Message-ID: <8f.326bae3a.2ca64c42@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81665

bboy_mn wrote:

<We have seen 'fire talking', but we have never seen anyone use the
Floo Network to get into or out of Hogwarts. 
<major snip>
So, given all these assumptions, I'm back to what I originally said,
Dumbledore as headmaster controls the castle's protection and is
therefore able to cast a Portkey charm that gets around them. >


Now RSFJenny here:

I just wanted to point out that DD did use the Floo Network to get back to 
Hogwarts at the end of OOP. But your theory of DD being able to circumvent 
castle protection would obviously cover this as well :)

Having the Hogwarts fires connected to the Floo Network seems awfully shaky 
writing to me, even if people couldn't actually travel in them but could only 
communicate.  This seems like one of the things JKR didn't really think through 
(kind of like the toothbrush/portkey thing), it just looked good plotwise but 
doesn't fit properly into the WW scenario she's already set up - if Sirius 
could talk to Harry in the fire, why aren't parents pestering their kids in the 
Gryffindor fire on a regulat basis - can't we all see Molly spying on her kids 
(for their own good of course, in her opinion) if she could?  Why isn't it 
used more? Harry first learns of this in GoF, so it's not common in the fires of 
Hogwarts. Not to mention the possibility of traveling between house common 
rooms via fire...

ugh, I can't go on, it's too depressing to see such a major (IMO) oversight, 
I hate realizing all the unutilized (is that a word?) possibilites...


~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


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From RSFJenny19 at aol.com  Sat Sep 27 02:28:25 2003
From: RSFJenny19 at aol.com (RSFJenny19 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 22:28:25 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Do You Peek?
Message-ID: <bb.364c9d05.2ca64fc9@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81666

Bohcoo wrote:

<So, am I the only one? Did anyone else get their book out of the 
wrapper and immediately look for the death scene? >

::sigh::  I did something really stupid to find out.  I was one of the people 
who read every spoiler that was printed and loved reading them, and Friday 
night (I live on the East Coast, US) I went on to a UK site (some newspaper, I 
think) and clicked on a link to a message board discussing the book, kind of 
accidentally.  I saw someone had asked "who dies?" and, *positive* that it had 
to be Hagrid or Lupin, I unconsciously scrolled and saw the one word answer, 
"Sirius." ::tries to hold back a tragic sob::

I only wanted to know if it had been *Someone Else, Anyone Else* dammit.  I 
practically went into shock, I refused to believe it, but didn't dare look more 
on the site just in case it really was true and read the whole book feeling 
sick to my stomach becasue I was so upset ::sigh::

Maybe next time I'll go the "no spoilers" route. With only two books to go, 
I'm starting to drift from "rip" into "savor" mode; I want to enjoy every page 
of the last 2 books, because once it's over, it'll never be the same again.



~RSFJenny~

"Listening to the news! Again?" 
"Well, it changes every day, you see." - Vernon Dursley and Harry Potter

http://www.geocities.com/rsfjenny/HP


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From kellybroughton at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 02:55:05 2003
From: kellybroughton at yahoo.com (kelly broughton)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 19:55:05 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Do You Peek?
In-Reply-To: <bl2j2a+2h5r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030927025505.87315.qmail@web21103.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81667


No, I didn't look for who died in the fifth book. Honest.

But I can tell you right now that when Book 7 comes out, I WILL flip to
the last page to see if the last word is 'scar'!

-kel

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com



From sydenmill at msn.com  Sat Sep 27 03:38:28 2003
From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 03:38:28 -0000
Subject: Do You Peek?
In-Reply-To: <20030927025505.87315.qmail@web21103.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bl30nk+2s7q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81668

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, RSFJenny19 at a... wrote in post 
81666:

(snip)
> Maybe next time I'll go the "no spoilers" route. With only two 
books to go, I'm starting to drift from "rip" into "savor" mode; I 
want to enjoy every page of the last 2 books, because once it's over, 
it'll never be the same again.
> 
> 
> 
> ~RSFJenny~



Bohcoo remarks:

What a lovely way you put it. Yes, once it is over it will really be 
kind of weird, won't it? 

[By the way, notice the (random) post number you got. Creepy, huh?]

Bohcoo

P.S. And Kelly -- I'm with you. I'll look for the last word and am 
sure it will be "scar" but I have a feeling it will not refer to 
Harry's lightning bolt. 

What else could "scar" mean?





From jakejensen at hotmail.com  Sat Sep 27 03:59:59 2003
From: jakejensen at hotmail.com (jakedjensen)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 03:59:59 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Spies
In-Reply-To: <bl2hah+p5ja@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl31vv+c5hl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81669


> Shirley:
> Well, that's an interesting take on the secret-keeper that I hadn't 
> thought of....  The way that I interpreted it, the Potters were 
> considering who to make their secret-keeper, and everyone assumed 
> that it would be Sirius, including Sirius.  Then, attempting to 
fool 
> LV and his spies (evidently, they thought that *maybe* Lupin was a 
> spy), Sirius suggested that Peter be their secret-keeper, and 
that's 
> what they did (hence, the "switch").  In other words, I thought 
that 
> Peter was the *only* secret-keeper they ever had; that they didn't 
> cast the Fidelius Charm until they chose Peter.
> 
> Thoughts?
> Shirley

Hmmm..interesting, I guess I had never thought of it like that.  In 
the canon (p.365, PoA) Sirius says,

"I persuaded Lily and James to change to Peter at the last moment, 
persuaded them to use him as  Secret-Keeper instead of me."

What does Sirius mean by change?  Furthermore, what does he mean by 
last moment.  I think it is implied that James and Lily are in hiding 
(which means they are already using the charm) and Sirius convinces 
them shortly before they are attacked by LV to "change" to Peter.  
But I see your interp as well.  Interesting, interesting, interesting.

Further evidence in support of my particular interp is provided later 
on in that paragraphy.  Sirius describes how he went looking for 
Peter, sensed trouble, and then "set out for (James and Lily Potters) 
house straight away."  It would make sense if he had been the secret 
keeper.  But then again, Peter could have told him where they were 
too (as the secret keeper).  Hmmmm...

Jake  




From editor at texas.net  Sat Sep 27 04:07:25 2003
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 23:07:25 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] They are children's books (Was: the heart of it all)
References: <bl1gqc+ad64@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001801c384ac$dd36bfe0$b559aacf@texas.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 81670

> Golly: They are children's books.  And children's books have beloved
> characters that die all the time.

They were and are not written for children. They were written to express
someone's vision, to tell a story.

It was the marketing department of the publisher that chose to market to
children, and who made the (to me, ridiculous) decision to have "adult" and
"child" versions of the *exact same story* with different covers.

In fact, I will be interested to see how the releases of Books 6 and 7 are
handled; to me, at least, the frantic child-focused activity seemed on the
edge of inappropriate for Book 5. I think subsequent books will take the
story out of the realm where stuffed owls, paper wizard hats, getting
"sorted," and making wands are appropriate marketing tools. I think that the
ads with the biker and the businesswoman are far more appropos, at this
point.

It is a fact that the earlier books appealed to children. But to classify
the entire sequence--with two unread, even--as "children's books" is to
place artificial measures on a continuum.

I have chosen to be guided by the author, who has said no; she didn't write
them for children (although she is delighted at their response). She wrote
them to tell a story.

~Amanda






From zanelupin at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 05:33:47 2003
From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 05:33:47 -0000
Subject: Sirius Secret Keeper? (was: Re: Dumbledore's Spies)
In-Reply-To: <bl31vv+c5hl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl37fr+spkj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81671

Jake:

>Hmmm..interesting, I guess I had never thought of it like that.  In 
the canon (p.365, PoA) Sirius says,

"I persuaded Lily and James to change to Peter at the last moment, 
persuaded them to use him as  Secret-Keeper instead of me."
 
What does Sirius mean by change?  Furthermore, what does he mean by 
last moment.  I think it is implied that James and Lily are in 
hiding (which means they are already using the charm) and Sirius 
convinces them shortly before they are attacked by LV to "change" to 
Peter.  But I see your interp as well.  Interesting, interesting, 
interesting.

Further evidence in support of my particular interp is provided 
later on in that paragraphy.  Sirius describes how he went looking 
for Peter, sensed trouble, and then "set out for (James and Lily 
Potters) house straight away."  It would make sense if he had been 
the secret keeper.  But then again, Peter could have told him where 
they were too (as the secret keeper).  Hmmmm...<
 



I believe that Pettigrew was the first and only Secret Keeper the 
Potters had.  Partly because of the quote Jake mentioned above on  
p. 365 of the US edition of PoA.  But also because of the way that 
Fudge, Flitwick, and McGonagall describe how Lily and James came to 
use the Fidelius Charm in Chapter Ten (The Marauder's Map).  

Firstly, Flitwick describes the Fidelius Charm as 'involving the 
magical concealment of a secret inside a single, living soul.  The 
information is hidden inside the chosen person'  Even if Sirius were 
Secret Keeper first, he wouldn't know after Peter had been made 
Secret Keeper because then really, what would be the purpose of the 
spell if Sirius knew without Pettigrew telling him?  The secret 
cannot be hidden inside both their souls at once.  Flitwick 
says, 'Chosen Person' not 'Chosen People.'  So Peter had to have 
told Sirius where the Potters were if Sirius knew.  

Also, the way in which the group describes the series of events 
leading up to the use of the Fidelius Charm makes it sound like the 
decision happened very quickly.  I don't want to quote the entire 
passsage so I will briefly summarize.

1. Fudge says one of Dumbledore's spies told the Potters Voldemort 
was after them.
2. Dumbledore advises them to go into hiding and that the best way 
to hide is to use the Fidelius Charm.  
3. Flitwick describes the "immensely complex spell." 
4. McGonagall relates James telling Dumbledore that Sirius would 
rather die than reveal their location and that Sirius was going to 
go into hiding as well.  
5. Dumbledore offers to be the Potter's Secret Keeper because he 
knew someone was leaking information to Voldemort.  
6. James insists on Sirius.
7. Flitwick: 'And then, barely a week after the Fidelius Charm had 
been performed-'

Now, obviously this story is pretty much hearsay, and they didn't 
even know the whole story.  But still, I think combined with what 
Sirius says, it makes a pretty strong case for Pettigrew being the 
only Secret Keeper.  I would hope not much time had passed between 
Dumbledore's warning and suggestion of the Charm and the actual 
performing of the charm because that would just be stupid of Harry's 
dearly deceased parents.  

The best time for Sirius to persuade the Potters to change their 
minds and where it would make the most sense would be after James 
refuses Dumbledore but before they actually go through with the 
spell.  Why would Sirius decide less than a week into being Secret 
Keeper that they would be better off using Peter?  What would have 
changed so quickly.  And if Sirius wasn't in the same place as James 
and Lily, imagine the time communicating the idea and then actually 
changing the secret keeper would consume.  Could it really have been 
done so seamlessly in less than a week?  Without anyone else knowing 
or suspecting?  

So I believe they made the change in Secret Keeper before the 
Fidelius Charm was cast for the first and only time.

And now that I'm on the subject, can any old person perform the 
Fidelius charm?  Flitwick says it's "immensely complex."  As the 
expert in Charms that he is, he is likely able to perform the 
spell.  I assume Lily with her "Nice wand for Charm work" was 
capable of performing the spell as well.  

Now does the person performing the charm have to be a party to the 
secret, meaning in the case of the Potters and Pettigrew that Lily 
was the one who did it?  In the case of Dumbledore and Grimmauld 
Place, can he perform the Fidelius Charm himself?  Is a third person 
able to do it if one of the people actually involved (the secret 
keeper or the secret) is not capable of performing the spell?  Must 
one of the people directly involved cast it?  Is a third party able 
to do it?  And in the case of one person hiding the whereabouts of 
another person, would the hidden people just disappear before the 
eyes of a third party performing the charm for them?  

If the Fidelius Charm can only be done by one of the people involved 
in the spell, does that mean that someone not so great in charm work 
cannot use the charm ever if they cannot find someone good enough to 
do it to share in the secret?  Okay with that last question I stop 
because I'm confusing myself now.  That's never a good thing.

KathyK




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sat Sep 27 06:31:51 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 06:31:51 -0000
Subject: The Death Chamber
In-Reply-To: <bl2fd7+o95b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl3asn+jknj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81672

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Richard" <darkmatter30 at y...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "entropymail" 
> <entropymail at y...> wrote:
> <snipping my (Richard's) prior comments>
> > Yes, surely "dead is dead." But you must admit that there are 
myriad
> > examples of JKR's "cheating" a bit on the dead stuff. From the 
house
> > ghosts, to the figures dripping from Voldemort's wand in the
> > graveyard, to the listening/sleeping/gossiping portraits in
> > Dumbledore's office, the WW is certainly a place where the dead 
are
> > never quite completely gone.
> 
> 
> also sprach Richard ... ("thus spoke Richard" for the non-German 
> speakers and those who haven't read Friedrich N.)
>

<snip>

 
> Harry has also survived other AK 
> attempts, such as Lucius Malfoy's interupted AK from the CoS movie, 
> and another AK fired at him at the MoM and blocked by the statue.  
> But would any of these really have killed him?  > Eventually, JKR 
will enlighten us all, but until then, canon provides 
> some intriguing clues and blind alleys ... which is just SOOO much 
> fun!
>

<snip>
 
> 
> Richard, who is curious what would have happened had Dobby not 
> intervened in CoS.

Geoff:
Auch sprach Geoff, in Anwort nach Richard.... (Geoff spoke also, in 
reply to Richard)

Here we have got movie "contamination", though I don't like the use 
of the word - I like the films as well as the book (cries 
of "heretic" from off-stage)

There is no reference to a spell in the book -

"Lucius Malfoy stood frozen, staring at the elf. Then he lunged at 
Harry.
'You've lost me my servant, boy!'
But Dobby shouted, 'You shall not harm Harry Potter!'"

Dobby intervened because Harry intervened because Dobby was there. 
Nice circular argument. :-)




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sat Sep 27 06:39:39 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 06:39:39 -0000
Subject: Do You Peek?
In-Reply-To: <bl2h0o+rkhn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl3bbb+jfto@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81673

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bohcoo" <sydenmill at m...> wrote:
> When I got OOP home, I settled in to read it from front to back, 
just 
> like I had with the other books, "dying" to know who was going to 
> die.  However, after the chapter about Mrs. Weasley's Woes where we 
> were teased with Dead! Everyone Weasley, that did it for me -- I 
> thumbed through the book until I found out who really did bite the 
> dust. I peeked.
>

<snip>

Geoff:
I confess that I am an addicted peeker. My family are highly amused 
that, with any book or film, I need to know what goes on at the end.

Deep psychological thing here I fear.




From june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk  Sat Sep 27 07:21:26 2003
From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 07:21:26 -0000
Subject: Do You Peek?
In-Reply-To: <bl2h0o+rkhn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl3dpm+39qr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81674

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bohcoo" <sydenmill at m...> 
wrote:
> When I got OOP home, I settled in to read it from front to back, 
just 
> like I had with the other books, "dying" to know who was going to 
> die.  However, after the chapter about Mrs. Weasley's Woes where 
we 
> were teased with Dead! Everyone Weasley, that did it for me -- I 
> thumbed through the book until I found out who really did bite the 
> dust. I peeked.
> 
> So, am I the only one? Did anyone else get their book out of the 
> wrapper and immediately look for the death scene? 
> 
> So, then -- how are you going to be reading the last two books in 
the 
> series? Are you going to Peek? Look at the last page or two, just 
to 
> see who is still there, saying goodbye on the Platform as they 
part 
> for the summer?
> 
> 
> 
I am ashamed to admit that I am a lifelong peeker.  

Actually, in some ways the best kind of book is one that defies 
this.  There are many where a look at the last few pages will give 
no real indication because the "catastrophe" occurs a good many 
pages before the actual end - LOTR is a good example of this.

Sneaking to the back is only successful if you just want to know who 
lives - it is not so good if you want to know who dies - because 
that rarely happens at the very end.

June




From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Fri Sep 26 15:52:40 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:52:40 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Death Chamber
References: <bl1mr4+42hq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003401c38446$3b472000$8ce979a5@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81675

.
>
> Annemehr:
> Yes, but I'm sure she didn't read about anything in the DoM in a book,
> so if she "understood" somewhat, could it be because she *sensed*
> something?  I would call that being affected, although in a different
> way to the other four.  I think she reacted too quickly for it to be
> because she saw how it affected the others.

Hermione has, IMHO, an analytical enough mind to figgure out what the room
is probably for... or at least get some inkling.  Not all of her
understanding and such comes solely from books and teachers.  (That would be
discrediting her mind...)

There's also a diference between having an insight / sensing what the
purpose of a room or item is, and actually being affected by a particular
item in the room.

In addition, Hermione and Ron could have been affected by it, but to such a
small degree as to shrug it off.  (Much like the difference between putting
the tip of your tongue briefly to the contacts of a 9v battery, and hooking
your tonghue up to your car battery with jumper cables.)

>
>
> Iggy:
> > As for why those four were affected, It was for the same reason they
> could
> > see the Thestrals... they has seen death.
>
>
> Annemehr:
> But Ginny was entranced yet could not see the thestrals.
>

Good point, and my goof.

The only other thing I can think of is that Ginny had been posessed by the
spirit of Tom Riddle in Cos, and that posession had probably left some long
lasting marks.  (Tom Riddle had seen deaths even before he imprinted himself
on the diary.  As a residue of that, Ginny may have the sense of having seen
death, but since it was a posession memory, she won't understand it tnough
to actually see the Thestrals.  At least... not yet.)

Just a thought.

Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster

"If you combine pasta and anti-pasta, will they destroy eachother?"

--  Iggy McSnurd








From isto at lycos.de  Fri Sep 26 16:55:58 2003
From: isto at lycos.de (toxic20032002)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 16:55:58 -0000
Subject: Snapes Dark Mark (was: Jewish Goblins?)
In-Reply-To: <bks6u8+hide@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl1r2u+6eab@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81676

Entropy wrote:

"Of course, the DE don't correlate with those in the concentration 
camps. If anything, the DE would correlate more closely with the 
Nazis and Hitler Youth. But I still think it's an interesting bit of 
imagery." I realize that the DE's marking was most likely done 
willingly; the concentration camp prisoners' was not.  But the 
imagery is still strikingly similar (to me, anyway! <g>)."



Now my opinion:

I think that Snape is ashamed of his mark that binds him to 
Voldemort.

I think the first time a DE gets his mark he/she is proud of it, 
because it symbolizes the membership to a group which is in his/her 
opinion a group consisting of people who are better than the rest of 
the WW and whole world ("pureblood"). They think about themselves as 
an elite.

In german history during the Third Reich there was a group created 
by Hitler named the SS (stands for "Schutzstaffel"). This group 
consisted of people who were labelled with "Arier" = Aryan 
(="pureblood"). Hitler and his people's ideology said that only 
purebloods were "good people". People who made a good achievement 
and fits in his ideology and made some tests very good could become 
member of the SS. Every member of the SS got a mark on one of their 
upper arms. The mark shows the bloodgroup you belong to. No other 
people in the german army or the other nazi-troops got such a 
tattoo. As most of the people in germany during this time thought 
that the SS was something special because of their selection (it was 
not only the blood which was the entry-card to become a member of 
the SS). The SS was known as an elite organisation in hitler's third 
reich. After WW II all people who had this mark on them were marked 
forever as supporter of the bad nazi-system. Most of them tried to 
hide the mark and not to show it their captors.


I think that the dark mark is a comparison for Hitler's SS. There 
are other similarities with Hitler's Third Reich and the WW II in 
Harry Potter (for example "DD defeats Grindelwald in 1945").
The whole pureblood-thing is based on racism, which is unfortunately 
a certain part of german history shown especially in the time of the 
Third Reich. 

Racism is unfortunately a problem in some european countries and in 
other world countries today, too.

Sorry for my bad english, it is not my mother tongue.

Isto







From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Fri Sep 26 17:12:58 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 12:12:58 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Department of Mysteries
References: <00c401c38448$f1c16140$aa510043@hppav>
Message-ID: <000801c38451$7109f040$a495aec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81677

>From Eric Oppen

> Room with Time-Turners---Time.
> Room with Black Veil---Death
> Room with Prophecies---the Future
> Room with Planets---Space

> So, I think I've got a handle on what's behind five of the doors at the
DoM.
> I wonder what the other ones were?  Does anybody have any ideas about the
> other ones?  Are there twelve traditional "mysteries of life" that might
be
> studied at the DoM?


Well, here's the great mysteries that I can think of:

Time, Fate / Prophecy, Death, Space, the Soul, Love, Dreams, the Spirit
World, Faith / "God", Life, Consciousness / Mind, the Natural World / Mother
Nature, Aggression / War...

and, the greatest mystery that so few adults can comprehend:  The innocence
and wonder of the world through a child's eyes.


'Nuff said.

Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster

"If the rainbow is a natural phenomenon, and covers the entire light
spectrum,
  then how can a color be said to 'not be found in nature'?"

-- Iggy McSnurd, replying to a comment on the unnatural colors in his
outfit.







From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Fri Sep 26 17:28:08 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 12:28:08 -0500
Subject: Astronomy and Prophecy  (some FF)
Message-ID: <002301c38453$93260400$a495aec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81678

>From Gorda:

> Marie's suggestion that Harry's mercy will vanquish LV is brilliant. But in order
> to do it, Harry would have to *know* that it would vanquish him, otherwise
> he'd be handing LV the WW in a silver platter. Quite a little cunundrum.
>
> Of course, how JKR is going to bring Harry out of the whole ordeal without
> some blood in his hands (which IMHO is the only way to bring Harry out,
> otherwise the point of the story --about the power of love-- would be lost) is
> the crux of the question, isn't it?

And now, to quote myself here:

>Now, assuming that astrology plays as much of a role in things as this group
>feels it does, then Harry (ultimately) CANNOT kill LV, only change him.
>
>The prophecy states that the Dark Lord must die... It doesn't say that Tom
>Riddle must be slain, or even LV himself... The Dark Lord is an ASPECT of
>who LV is.
>
>It might be possible for Harry to "kill" the Dark Lord by making him cease
>to exist... doing this not through destroying LV's body, mind, or spirit,
>but by "redeeming" him and teaching him those things... somehow... that LV
>does not understand:  Love, Compassion, Empathy, and the ability to look
>beyond your own desires to the greater good.
>
>In essence, he "kills" the Dark Lord, but not Tom Riddle.
>

Modifying the end of my theory... the Dark Lord simply ceases to exist and
die on his own if Harry manages to make Tom Riddle understand, and possibly
even feel, love.


I woke up this morning with an insight that takes this a step further and
supports this theory even more:

In GoF, AD has a look of triumph in his eye and said that one hurdle was
overcome.

What if he's figured out the same conclusion I have, and realized that LV
gaining the source of Harry's protection will actually be a key to the Dark
Lord's downfall?  The protection is based on the love of his mother... a
love which infuses every cell of Harry's being.  Harry's blood is now part
of LV's body... as is the protection.  You can't have the protection without
having its source.  Therefore, the love Harry's mother felt for him now also
courses through LV...

Even though he doesn't realize it, and the essence of that love is not
"unlocked" yet, it still lies dormant in his system.

I think that something Harry does in their final confrontation will "unlock"
that dormant love that lies in LV's body, and it will purge Tom Riddle of
the evil and hatred within himself that forms the Dark Lord.

I also think that if Harry shows mercy to LV, and that's the turning point,
it will have to be despite himself.  If he KNOWS that it will defeat LV,
then he's not doing it out of true mercy or love, he's doing it in an effort
to destroy a foe... which (ultimately) is not mercy.  On the other hand,
doing it DESPITE everyone's advice to the contrary, doing it because his
heart tells him he MUST... now that's love and mercy.  It's also what's most
likely to make LV feel that remorse and guilt that will aid in purging the
Dark Lord.

I can see it now... The final conflict has passed... Tom Riddle is still
alive... both are weakened and lying near the Black Veil after another fight
in the Dept of Mysteries.

(Please note that the scene below is NOT cannon, does not exist, and was
written by myself to solely illustrate the point I'm making...)

*****

Tom raised his head wearily, meeting Harry's gaze.  "W... Why did you save
me?  You could have let me fall through the veil and be rid of me
forever..."

"Because..." Harry said, wiping a trickle of blood from his forehead, "I
couldn't.  I knew Tom Riddle was in there somewhere... before you became
him... you had to be..."

A bewildered look crossed Tom's face as he thought for a moment.  "But, if
you had been wrong, you would have died yourself."

"It was a chance I knew I had to take."  Harry shrugged, grimacing slightly
at the flash of pain that shot through his bruised shoulder.  "I could see
it in your eyes.. somehow... when you tried to kill me earlier.  Like
something in you was fighting against it..."


A rustle of robes sounded from above, accompanied by the sound of footsteps
coming down the auditorium stairs.

"You are quite right, Harry."  Dumbledore said, looking at the both of them.
"The boy Tom was when he was sent to the orphanage, the one who still knew a
mother's love, was still buried deep in Lord Voldemort.  It was your blood,
the blood that contained a mother's love, that made the difference.  That
boy was able to feel a mother's love again, and that began to wake him up
and make him aware of what Voldemort was doing... and that it was wrong."


*****


(*yeesh*  If JKR ever reads that, and I'm right.. I think I'll be getting
one HECK of an angry letter... *laugh*)

Comments?

Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster


"They have Lion Fish, and Tiger Sharks, but do they have Bear Eels?  (Oh
my!)"

-- Iggy McSnurd







From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Fri Sep 26 19:09:37 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 14:09:37 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:Dumbledore's Philosophy (WAS:  MAGIC DISHWASHER: Spying Game Philosophy
References: <bl203k+j2ho@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000f01c38461$bbfb2b40$3b92aec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81679


From: Salit

> "Iggy McSnurd" wrote:
> > In GoF, AD has a look of triumph in his eye and said that one
> hurdle was
> > overcome.
>
> Not exactly. He said that "Voldemort has overcome that particular
> hurdle" (paraphrased - don't have the book in front of me).
> The "hurdle" was the protection that Harry's mother left on him.
> He did not sound happy about that part.

Oops.  Looking back (finally found my copy of the book) it appears I did
make a goof there.

(Still don't understand, then, where the look of triumph in AD's eye was
from ...)

>
> > Therefore, the love Harry's mother felt for him now also
> > courses through LV...
>
> Yes, to a point. She never felt love towards Voldemort. I find it
> hard to believe that the protection will work the same way there.

But the love itself courses through Harry... It's a part of him through his
entire being.  You wouldn't be able to separate that from the blood in a
ritual like that, simply by removing it from his body.  That's my opinion,
anyhow.

And I'm not saying that the love would protect LV, I'm simply stating that
the love is there since it came with the part of Harry that he took.

>
> > I think that something Harry does in their final confrontation
> will "unlock"
> > that dormant love that lies in LV's body, and it will purge Tom
> Riddle of
> > the evil and hatred within himself that forms the Dark Lord.
>
> This would be too sappy of an ending to my mind. I think that
> Voldemort/Tom Riddle is an inherently evil person (just see how he
> behaved when he was only 16). He cannot be transformed into a good
> person, regardless of his blood. But it is possible that just like he
> could not bear continuing to possess Harry at the end of OoP, because
> of Harry's emotions, likewise, having Harry's blood will somehow
> weaken him due to the inherent contradiction between his evil soul
> and the blood he took from Harry.

I don't agree there.  From what we're told, I get more of an impression that
he became what he is because he feels he was greatly betrayed by the world
at large.  (Or else, why would he specifically seek out his parents and
grandparents to kill them.  If he was simply evil, he wouldn't have cared
enough about them.  He killed them in revenge for what they did to him and
his mother.)

The greatest evil is love turned to hatred.  I feel that Tom was loved by
his mother and loved her back, yet she was taken from him at a very early
age, which turned him bitter.  That bitterness about his lot in life
festered, and he saw his father and grandparents as the first cause of his
life being so terrible.  He no longer had anyone in his life, as a young
boy, who cared about him... much less loved him.  By the time he got to
Hogwart's, he had pretty much made up his mind about the kind of person he
was to bevome.

>
> > I also think that if Harry shows mercy to LV, and that's the
> turning point,
>
> I can't see Harry showing mercy to Voldemort. But obviously LV can't
> be killed in the normal fashion, as he is immune to death. So he will
> die in some unexpected way - akin to how Harry destroyed Tom Riddle
> in CoS by destroying the diary.

Hence my theory that Riddle will be, ultimately, the one who destroys
Voldemort due to Harry's influence.

He had no reason whatsoever to spare Wormtail, and had every reason in the
world to kill him.  Yet he spared WT because it's who he is.

>
> > "Because..." Harry said, wiping a trickle of blood from his
> forehead, "I
> > couldn't.  I knew Tom Riddle was in there somewhere... before you
> became
> > him... you had to be..."
>
> Oh please. He has met Tom Riddle. He was that kid who set the
> basilisk on muggle-borns, who framed Hagrid, who possessed Ginny, who
> so enjoyed seeing Harry bitten by the basilisk that he was going to
> sit and watch him die slowly and painfully, who killed his family
> just for the heck of it.

Like I said, that was after Riddle had made his decision to become LV.  As I
also said, it's entirely possible that the boy who was Tom when he was still
with (and loved by) his mother can very well be buried deep inside LV.

Harry met the memory of Riddle, not the real Tom... Even Tom himself admits
that.  What was infused into the book was what LV WANTED to be infused into
the book, not necessarilly every part of himself.

Also, he met the memory of Tom before the ritual that brought LV back...
before his blood, and the mother's love, was used to help create his own
body.

Add to that the other ingredients, and you have an interesting mix.

Harry:  Blood which contains a mother's love...

Peter:  The hand of a wizard who owes a life debt to Harry.  A debd which,
as AD says, creates a very powerful bond between them. (paraphrasing, of
course.)

Tom Riddle Sr.:  The bones of a man who cast out his son and hated him for
what he was.

(Lessee... 1/3 love, 1/3 debt to Harry, and 1/3 hatred of wizards, and LV in
particular.  Should be interesting to see if this is significant at all.)

>
> Tom Riddle *is* Voldemort. They are one and the same. It is not a
> Star Wars like story where the evil guy has a good past. Tom Riddle
> is inherently evil and therefore will have to be destroyed.
>
> Salit
>

*chuckle* Looks like a Star Wars reference I made is coming back to haunt
me...

I am a strong believer that NOBODY is inherently evil.  If someone becomes
evil to that degree, there was a reason for it.

(I'll keep the statement simple right there, before we go off into long
discussions about comparative theology...)



Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster

"Even the darkest of nights have stars that twinkle in the sky... even if
you cannot see them."

-- Iggy McSnurd








From wgouine1 at mac.com  Fri Sep 26 19:24:53 2003
From: wgouine1 at mac.com (wendy)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 19:24:53 -0000
Subject: where does mad eye live?
Message-ID: <bl23q5+8v5c@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81680

In GoF when Arthur has to rush off to save MadEye from his dustbins, what is the 
name of the muggle village? Can we assume it is Little Whinging?  In OoP when Harry 
is fussing about Dung and Arbella "spying" on him does he also mention that Mad Eye 
is there? 

"Wendy"





From autumeda at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 26 20:12:45 2003
From: autumeda at yahoo.com (autumeda)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 20:12:45 -0000
Subject: Apparating
In-Reply-To: <009701c3843f$9698aca0$828faec7@rick>
Message-ID: <bl26jt+u9vd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81681

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Iggy McSnurd" 
<coyoteschild at p...> wrote:
 
> Students have to learn to Apparate and Disapparate... presumably on the
> school grounds.

> Perhaps the border of the grounds acts as a warding circle, preventing
> travel across the line, but not on either side of it.

That's an interesting idea.  But if Apparating were POSSIBLE within 
Hogwarts, I'd think Fred and George would have been doing it all the 
time, once they learned how.

Poor Filch.

"Autumeda"





From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Fri Sep 26 20:23:27 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 15:23:27 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Dumbledores Philosophy (was MAGIC DISHWASHER...)
References: <042DD70A-F058-11D7-B223-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <002a01c3846c$0d101cc0$3b92aec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81682

 From Kneasy
>
> I expect lots of chiding messages will wing my way saying I don't
> understand, that it solves all problems. Sorry, it doesn't. Loving your
> enemy does not change how he feels about you. He is still  your enemy,
> whether you want him to be or not. He has to *decide* to change, and he
> needs a good reason. Peace and love may  sound good, but a vanquished
> enemy may be even better, so  far as he is concerned. Sometimes
> forgiveness is the most unforgivable insult of all. It can be so
> patronising and demeaning.
>

Coming from the person who originated this aspect of the thread, I'll be the
first... well... lessee.. third, apparently... to agree that love DOESN'T
solve all problems.  There are a number of people out there that have
comittes atrocities where I feel that the only real justice would be a slow
and painful death for them... (You know... the "Death of 1000 Knives" type
thing for people who commit truly heinous acts of evil...)

The basis for the theory, however, stems from a few things:

1 - Love as a solution and salvation seems to play an important part in
JKR's world.

2 - There's been an issue made of the nature of Harry's protection, and why
Quirrel was destroyed by it because LV could not bear the touch of love.

3 - There is a philosophy that, to sum up, states that what a thing does not
posess in the slightest is that thing's bane.  LV posesses no love, and he
doesn't understand it, therefore it's his bane.  (It's like water having no
fire in it, yet fire can evaporate water.  Fire has no water in it, yet
water can douse a fire.)


As for forgiveness being the most demeaning of insults... Yes, it is to
those who do not wish to, or care to, be forgiven.  But if one has the
smallest spark of remorse within them, the tiniest bit of true regret or
love for themselves, then I don't think it's an insult.


I agree that some things need to be destroyed or eliminated... but only
after other options have been looked into.

Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster








From minaclare at sympatico.ca  Fri Sep 26 22:04:21 2003
From: minaclare at sympatico.ca (Mina-Clare Moseley)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 18:04:21 -0400
Subject: A Number of Questions
In-Reply-To: <1064592451.15665.71508.m3@yahoogroups.com>
References: <1064592451.15665.71508.m3@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <p05001901bb9a5e480c6f@[65.95.84.185]>

No: HPFGUIDX 81683

Hello all. Longtime lurker, and I believe first time poster.

I've got a bunch of questions, mostly relating to OotP. Check out 
what I'm pondering and answer if you can:

1) A question posed by my mother. Is Sirius' mother still believing 
he is a traitor flinty or not? Sirius' brother was considered a 
golden boy and he served Voldemort. Mrs. Black died believe Sirius 
had gone to prison for being Voldemort's right-hand man. Is it flinty 
that Mrs. Black still called him traitor, or did she just know her 
no-good son could never be Voldemort's second-in-command?

2) Is Dumbledore a good general? He is the unequivocal leader of the 
Order of the Phoenix. Everyone goes to him for instructions on what 
to do.

Yet I see no evidence that Dumbledore truly knows what he is doing. 
He seems to want to have a "clean war". Meaning, he doesn't want his 
side to dirty their hands killing.

This is, first of all, a security risk. Kretcher was anything but 
loyal to the Order of the Phoenix. We already have evidence from 
Dobby in CoS that a House Elf, with enough will, can defy their 
Master. Kretcher's death would have prevented the death of Sirius.

A good general has to decide what is the acceptable loss in a battle. 
By this virtue, Ron strikes me as a good general. In PS, he knew he 
had to sacrifice himself (as far as he knew, he would die). What Ron 
knew is that it was most important for Harry to reach the end. He was 
superfluous. Dumbledore doesn't seem to realize that some sacrifice 
has to happen. A loyal member of the Order is a lot more useful than 
an addled, disloyal House Elf.

Also, when there was rumours of a spy within the Order, back during 
the first war. It seems to me Dumbledore never addressed this. 
Sirius, and no doubt James and Lily, suspected Remus. A dose of 
Veritas Serum to every member of the Order would have cleared this 
up. Of course, this is all conjecture. We only have vague account of 
what happened back then. It is also possible there is some block for 
Veritas Serum.

3) This last one is just a random wondering, not related to the books really...

Why are we so quick to pull out JKR's interviews in our musings? 
Considering JKR's wish to keep the plots of the books a secret until 
release, I would believe her to be misleading in everything she says. 
While their is a tiny grain of truth, I think JKR interviews should 
be very low on the canon totem (except for things such as "Lily Evans 
was in Gryffindor", a fact she had very little reason to lie about). 
I would say anything related to the next two books should be taken 
with not just a grain, but a whole shaker of salt.

That's about it. I'm sure I have some more musings, I just can't 
think of them at the moment.

~Mina

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Fri Sep 26 22:04:21 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 17:04:21 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Death Chamber, and others
References: <bl2d4q+b7bl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <004801c3847a$25b066a0$3b92aec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81684

> Constance Vigilance:
> I think so too. But I also think that the Planet Chamber will become
> important in a future book. Our trio has just spent 5 years learning
> astronomy with Professor Sinestra. We have been kept completely in
> the dark (no pun intended) about both the curriculum and the
> instructor. Why, unless Prof S has more to do than just dance with
> Fake!Moody. I think that Ron's injury in the planet room is somehow
> related to Professor Sinestra and the Astronomy Tower. I'm just not
> sure how.

>From Iggy McSnurd

Well, maybe in the next book, they'll realize some significance of Ron
examining Uranus... (maybe he'll become a specialist healer rather than an
Auror?)  And Luna having blown up Pluto and consult with Sinistra about what
it means.

I think we're also overlooking that they can consult with Firenze as well as
Sinistra.  (Technically, they can actually consult with Trelawny as well...
It would be interesting to see if this happens... and what three differing
interpretations they might give.)

Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster


"Yeah... here... keep the change..."

-- Uranus, after influencing an overhaul of the MoM







From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Fri Sep 26 22:39:13 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 17:39:13 -0500
Subject: FILK - Neville's Song
Message-ID: <005001c3847f$038a1580$3b92aec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81685

Ok all... Here's my first attempt at a Harry Potter based Filk.  (I've done
a few for the SCA, but other than that...)

Please forgive if it's not that good.  *grin*  I'll get better with
practice.

Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster


"Neville's Song"

sung to the tune of "The Boxer"
by Simon and Garfunkel


I am just a student
At Hogwarts, yes it's true;
I am learning my defenses
For a war that's coming due,
Such are prophecies;
OWLs and the rest
Still we practice with the DA
And hope we pass the tests.

When I left my home and my family,
I was no more than a boy
in the company of strangers
in the quiet of the railway station,
Young and scared.
Ducking low
Lugging my trunk without a porter
Wondering where my stuff would go
Looking in the rooms, for people I might know.

Lie la lie
Lie la lie lie, lie la lie,
Lie la lie.
Lie la lie lie, lie la lie,
La la la la lie.

Wielding only wits and a wand
I try perfecting my spells
But I need more practice
Bless the cushions that coat the floor
In the Room of Requirement.
I do declare
There were times when I was so banged up
I was brused even under my hair.

Now the spells are flying by me,
Students shouting earnestly.
I am better than I once was
But worse off than I'll be
That's not unusual.
It feels a bit strange
I am growing, ever growing
I don't feel so much shame
I have more confidence, and a lot less shame.

Lie la lie.
Lie la lie lie, lie la lie,
Lie la lie.
Lie la lie lie, lie la lie,
La la la la lie.

Now I'm practicing my disarming jinx
And wishing I could aim
"Expelliarmas"
there goes Ron, but I was aiming
at Lee Jordan
drat my aim.

Teaching us is Harry Potter
He's fought hard to reach this age
And he carries the memories
Of every threat You Know Who
Has made to end his life
In his hatred and with pain.
"He is plotting, he is plotting."
And yet Harry still remains.

Lie la lie.
Lie la lie lie, lie la lie,
Lie la lie.
Lie la lie lie, lie la lie,
La la la la lie.
Lie la lie lie, lie la lie









From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Fri Sep 26 23:14:07 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 18:14:07 -0500
Subject: Filk - Flitwick Is Just Four Feet Tall
Message-ID: <005d01c38483$e3848180$3b92aec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81686

Ok... Here's my second attempt at a filk.  (This one seemed to flow out a
little better.  Of course, the base song was a lot more simple.  *grin*)

Iggt McSnurd
the Prankster



Flitwick Is Just Four Feet Tall

(to the tune of "I Got My Mind Set On You!"
  by George Harrison)


Flitwick is just four feet tall!
Flitwick is just four feet tall!
Flitwick is just four feet tall!
Flitwick is just four feet tall!

But he's a good teacher,
He's such a good charms teacher.
I haven't seen a better teacher
For teaching charms, child.
He spends a lot of time
A whole lot of quality time
He gives a whole lot of patience and time
To do it, to do it, to do it, to do it, to do it,
To teach it right!

Flitwick is just four feet tall!
Flitwick is just four feet tall!
Flitwick is just four feet tall!
Flitwick is just four feet tall!

And his height doesn't matter
When he teaches a spell
I know if I put my mind to it
I can learn any of his spells.

Flitwick is just four feet tall!
Flitwick is just four feet tall!
Flitwick is just four feet tall!
Flitwick is just four feet tall!

But he's a good teacher,
He's such a good charms teacher.
I haven't seen a better teacher
For teaching charms, child.
He spends a lot of time
A whole lot of quality time
He gives a whole lot of patience and time
To do it, to do it, to do it, to do it, to do it,
To teach it right!








From marydianne3123 at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 26 23:39:34 2003
From: marydianne3123 at yahoo.com (marydianne3123)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 23:39:34 -0000
Subject: floo powder
Message-ID: <bl2inm+ufic@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81687

There is one instance of someone using floo powder to get into 
Hogwarts. It was done by DD after harry had used the potkey to arrive 
in DD's office. MaryDianne





From karenmarieb2002 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 00:42:57 2003
From: karenmarieb2002 at yahoo.com (karenmarieb2002)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 00:42:57 -0000
Subject: Do You Peek?
In-Reply-To: <bl2h0o+rkhn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl2meh+4309@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81688

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bohcoo" <sydenmill at m...> wrote:

> So, am I the only one? Did anyone else get their book out of the 
> wrapper and immediately look for the death scene? 
> 
> So, then -- how are you going to be reading the last two books in the 
> series? Are you going to Peek? Look at the last page or two, just to 
> see who is still there, saying goodbye on the Platform as they part 
> for the summer?
> 
> 

There was no peeking what-so-ever in this house, but I do admit to 
reading it as fast as I could, for as long as I could to see what the 
ending was.  And will read the next two books the same way.  Peeking 
to the end ruins it for me on that first read.  

But what was even harder was not telling my husband when he read it.  
And I had to censor the discussions at my school so the students who 
had read it would not spoil it for those who had not. (One teacher 
had it for assigned reading over the summer term.) 



> I feel sorry for JKR, in a way. We have postulated the plot 
> possibilities so thoroughly, with speculations so spectacularly 
> intellectual, that I wonder if Rowling sits at home reading some of 
> them and saying to herself, "Oh no, what am I going to do NOW? I 
> wasn't going to get THAT sophisticated with it. . ."
> 
> She has commented that the Harry Potter story jumped into her mind, 
> fully formed. She knew how it was going to end before she set the 
> first word on paper. Do you think she has changed any of it in light 
> of these worldwide expectations?
> 


My ponderings have took me along the lines of JKR saying something 
like, "Oh, no, they predicted the real outcome again.  How on earth 
can I change it this time!"  I think she must have changed some of 
the things that were predicted, just to keep us off track.  The 
ending is there, but all the stuff between now and then is still 
fuzzy.  (IMHO of course.)  

> Just wondering,
> Bohcoo


Me too!
KarenMarie





From hedwigstalons at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 01:25:51 2003
From: hedwigstalons at yahoo.com (hedwigstalons)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 01:25:51 -0000
Subject: Harry Promos
In-Reply-To: <bl2juv+6mko@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl2ouv+9t3d@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81689

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "grindieloe" <andie at k...> wrote:
> After reading the various Harry Potter promotional ads that 
> Scholastic is putting out to gather more adult readers, I got to 
> thinking... 
> In each ad, the person/persons list 3 things that pretty much 
defines why they read Harry Potter.
> If you had to narrow to three basic reasons why you love Harry, 
what three things would you choose? 
> grindieloe :)

Only 3???? :-)

Hmm. . . 

#1 Interesting Characters. The heroes are the kids who in normal life 
might be "outcasts". A skinny kid with glasses and fame, a redhead 
with popular older brothers, and a brainy girl who doesn't care about 
fashion. Plus, this world is populated with a great variety of other 
people and creatures. Strict teachers, adults who really care about 
their students (yeah!) and several people who are great to hate!!

#2 An Alternate Reality. Life with magic!! How cool would that be! 
What a great escape when normal life gets me down!

#3 That I can read them over and over, and learn something new each 
time, since JKR has written such an amazingly complex, connected 
plot. I love that each book teaches us new things, expands on things 
in earlier books and hints at things to come.

HedwigsTalons





From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Sat Sep 27 02:15:41 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 21:15:41 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: BADD ANGST TBAY, Part II
References: <bl2m41+pcc2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00c201c3849d$496084e0$db97aec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81690


Remnant
> > 2. Emeric the evil, maybe (one passing reference and we have no
> idea whether he was human or in what way he was evil).

I was playing around with the phonetics and spelling of this one... (Since
JKR seems to at times..)

Emeric

America

Hmmm... interesting.  *grin*

Would this mean "America the Evil"?... After all, we DID have a little spat
with England a couple hundred years ago...

Just a silly little thought...



from Pip!squeak
> So, no, I suppose our evil wizards might not have been racist, or
> pure bloodist, but it seems that they would have stood out a bit if
> they weren't. Because from the history we are given, the WW itself
> is largely racist. Other races feel extremely oppressed - so much so
> that they revolt more than once over a period of centuries. And note
> that when Binns explains about Salazar Slytherin's pure-bloodist
> views, he does not condemn them [CoS Ch. 9 p.114 ].

Well, if you look at it, every civilization in history has been prejudiced
to one degree or another.  This has been against races, nationalities,
religeons, political outlooks... a wide variety of things.

When you get down to it, virtually every person out there can easily find at
least five groups, either as another entire counrty/religeon/etc... or as a
group within their own culture.

To give examples, I'll list a few prejudices people have that apply to me...
(Note:  Some things stated might be slightly offensive, but I am stating
them as objectively as possible...)

I am a Neo Pagan who lives in Alabama... we're talking the Bible Belt here.
(One of my managers at a place I worked at thought I was a Satanist because
I asked for Oct 31 and Nov 1 as holiday's of faith...   I got fired later on
a trumped up charge... I wonder why...)

I am a large man who grew up in a city in California with a strong feminist
(and we're talking bulldog feminist...) faction.  When I mentioned in a
college class (in a supposedly liberal city) where we were discussing sexual
assault, that men can be sexually assaulted by women, I was accused of
trying to undermine women's issues.

I am also a definite meat eater... and growing up in Santa Cruz, California
(a heavily "health conscious and vegetarian" city just south of San
Francisco...) I got a LOT of flack from vegetarians when I simply wanted to
eat what I enjoy eating.

I am a westerner down here in the south.  While I am not a Yankee (there's a
big difference between Yankees and Westerners...), I still get treated like
one by a lot of people down here.  (Derogatory comments and general lack of
respect a lot of times down here.)


Those are just a few examples...

I state these things to illustrate that, since every culture on earth has
its opinions of other cultures and such... why should the WW be any
different?  It's a collection of humans, and human nature (sadly) includes
the basic need to feel that you're better than SOMEONE.

>
> > Remnant:
> > And as for the references to LV being the strongest in a century,
> > isn't it more likely that there's just no one around who could
> > tell whether he was the strongest *ever*? Almost no one has lived
> > long enough to say more than that he is the strongest in their
> > lifetime of about a century.

Well... aside from Nicholas Flamel and his wife.

Also, the ghosts would probably know, since most of them seem to have been
witches and wizards before they died.

Then there's the portraits, which seem to still be able to learn and such,
just as though they were alive.

Ok... who else...

Ah, the Sorting Hat might know...  Since it lives in the Headmaster's
office, it would pretty much know about anything that's discussed there.

History books / Historians (and, therefore, Professor Binns) would probably
be able to keep accurate enough records so as to be able to provide a
relative measure... if not an "on the dot" one.

> > Remnant:
> > And yes, there have been other evil wizards. Just as there are
> > evil people in the real world. So the fact that there were others
> > is just a reflection of the real world. But did they do what LV
> > is  trying to do? Never mentioned. IMO, he is unique, the perfect
> > storm of unparallelled evil, power, and intelligence.

Well, who would you say was the worst?  Adolph Hitler, Attila the Hun,
Torquemada, Vlad Tsepesh, Ghengis Khan, Pol Pot, or Joseph Stalin?

All of them killed (or ordered the killings) mass numbers of people, often
in horrific ways and for differing reasons.  While Torquemada might not have
been responsible for as many deaths as Hitler, there were fewer people in
the area he oversaw and therefore caused at least as strong an impact.

It's hard to compare the level of effect and "evil" between different
people, because the circumstances are often different for each area, time,
or even accordign to the motivations behind the atrocities.


I'd comment more on the rest of this letter, but my wife needs the
computer... *chuckle*


Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster









From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net  Sat Sep 27 02:24:18 2003
From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 02:24:18 -0000
Subject: Do You Peek? and Harry promos
In-Reply-To: <bl2h0o+rkhn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl2sci+u6b4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81691

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bohcoo" <sydenmill at m...> 
wrote:
>I 
>thumbed through the book until I found out who really did bite the 
> dust. I peeked.
> 
> So, am I the only one? Did anyone else get their book out of the 
> wrapper and immediately look for the death scene? 
>
 
Absolutely NOT!  I wanted to come upon it fully in context and was 
horrified that I might hear before I could get there.  I went into 
it believing the death would happen to DD, Hagrid or Arthur 
Weasley.  I got a sick feeling in my stomach as I progressed further 
& further into the book and it became a bit clearer that it was 
likely to be Sirius.

Anyhoo...I do not anticipate peeking in books 6 or 7, BUT 
particularly if book 7 ends up being 700+ pages again, I just don't 
think I'll be able to wait for the grand finale.  If it's only 400-
500 pages, I think I can handle the wait.

NEXT UP--
grindieloe asked:
>If you had to narrow to three basic reasons why you love Harry, 
>what three things would you choose?

Interesting question!  Let's see.  What could it be?  The humor?  
The excitement?  The anticipation over what will happen next?  

I think for me it would be these:
1)  Harry's feelings ring TRUE to me, for each age that he has been 
so far.  JKR has always been able to convey to the reader what it 
really feels like to be 11 or 13 or 15, what MATTERS to a person 
that age, as well as to the specific person of Harry, whose life has 
been what it's been.  [Ex.:  The *need* that Harry had for that to 
have been his father he saw across the lake in PoA--it felt so 
accurate for a 13-year-old to me.]
2)  I cannot WAIT to find out what really makes SNAPE tick!
3)  I love the Weasleys

Siriusly Snapey Susan






From bakanarie at hotmail.com  Sat Sep 27 02:56:48 2003
From: bakanarie at hotmail.com (narie)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 02:56:48 -0000
Subject: Peter, Sirius and Secret Keeping (was: Re: Dumbledore's Spies)
In-Reply-To: <bl29mr+58sp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl2u9g+4kfc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81692

narie (me):
> > The only problem with this theory is that then the spy would have 
> > known who the secret keeper was, as the secret can only be revealed 
> > by that specific person. If that was the case, you would have hoped 
> > *someone* would have informed Dumbledore or the Ministry of the fact 
> > that Pettigrew was the Potter's secret keeper, and not Black.
> > 
> > Also, a question that has been nagging me - would the Fidelius charm 
> > still work once the Potters had died, or does their death mean the 
> > end of the charm? 
> > 
> > I can't really think of any other way Hagrid and Sirius would have 
> > been able to find them if the secret was still, well, secret. For 
> > that matter, if the secret was still secret, and from my 
> > understanding of the spell (which is rather sketchy, granted), how 
> > did anyone manage to find the bodies of Lily and James to confirm 
> > their deaths?

Jake: 
> Narie,
> Nice post.  I guess a central question is, when Sirius and Wormtail 
> switched places, did they have to retell everyone (i.e., DD and the 
> alleged spy network)the secret?  Personally, I don't think so.  
> Sirius could have told DD and all the spies where the Potters were 
> before switching places with Wormtail.  In fact, this seems logical, 
> because DD and co all seem to know that Sirius is the secret keeper 
> (which would make sense if he told them the secret).  It would also 
> explain why Sirius gets worried (I've been telling all these people, 
> VD may find out that I am the secret keeper and come after me) and 
> passes secret keeping duties to Wormtail.  
>
> Your question about how death impacts the charm is a good one.  I am 
> not sure if cannon provides any answers to it.  I guess if DD dies 
> and Grimauld Place pops back on the map we would know, but apart from 
> that I don't think we can know either way.  We do have reason to 
> believe that magic can last after death, however, based on Lily's 
> protection of Harry. 



now me again:
Hm... interesting way of looking at it, certainly. I don't have my 
English canon with me, but my understanding of the scene has always 
been that Sirius was never the secret keeper, but switched to Peter 
at the last possible moment before the charm was preformed. Indeed, 
my understanding is that this was done because Sirius was the 
obvious choice, hence V. would go after him, and leave Peter alone, 
meaning that the secret would never be revealed, because no one 
would ever think of Peter as the SK. 

At the same time, from a logistical point of view, it makes very 
little sense to have a SK who goes babbling the secret to people, 
especially if there is a spy in your midst and you're not quite sure 
who it is.

PoA, ch 19, pg 304, Spanish edition (translated on the fly. I'd much 
appreciate it if someone could provide me with the correct 
quote) "`The truth is, Harry, that I as good as killed them' [Black] 
growled. `I convinced Lily and James to use Peter at the last 
minute. I convinced them to use Peter as their secret keeper instead 
of me. I'm to blame, I know.'"

Later on: "[Sirius said] `I thought it was the perfect idea. A trap. 
Voldemort would go after me, he'd never think that the Potters would 
use someone weak and mediocre like you.'" PoA, ch 19, pg 308, 
Spanish edition. 

Clearly, those aware of the fact that the Potters were performing 
the Fidelius charm were under the impression that Sirius would be 
their SK (see Dumbledore's statement to H&H in the infirmary: "I 
personally testified at the Ministry that Sirius was the Potter's 
secret keeper." PoA, ch 21, pg 326, Spanish edition), but the way 
the text is written seems to hint that he never was ? so he never 
could have told anyone where the Potters were. 

Now, as far as the charm itself is concerned, if Sirius had been the 
SK and told someone where the Potters were, and then Peter had 
become SK, would those who had been told by Sirius still know where 
to find the Potters? 

This goes back to my other question ? how does death affect the 
Fidelius charm? To me, the whole `concealment inside a living soul' 
bit that makes up the charm suggests that it will be secret until 
the soul inside which the secret is concealed is no longer living... 
I'm wondering if once Lily and James were dead their whereabouts 
were no longer important, and thus the charm no longer held, but by 
that logic, and assuming that Harry was protected by the charm, how 
did Hagrid find him? He was, after all, rather alive.

<silly speculation. all long posts need some of this.>
As for finding the Potters so quickly, could Dumbledore have had a 
list or something along those lines of possible hideouts for them, 
and placed, erm, surveillance teams at those locations? Technically 
he never would have known which one the correct hiding spot was, 
unless something went wrong with the charm. But it seems a waste of 
manpower to have, say, ten wizards at different places all over the 
country waiting to see if the Dark Lord shows up to annihilate the 
Potters... And they would have only known it was the right place 
when they either a) heard Voldemort cackle evilly or, b) saw the 
dead bodies of James and Lily.

In any case, it seems rather far fetched and pointless, but I can't 
think of any better excuses. Not at this time of night, anyhow.
</silly>

And now, to bed, to bed!

Cheers,
narie ? who'll be on a plane tomorrow afternoon and won't manage too 
many replies before Sunday afternoon, when her computer is all set 
up...






From strikethepose_vouge at yahoo.co.uk  Sat Sep 27 03:30:20 2003
From: strikethepose_vouge at yahoo.co.uk (laura)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 03:30:20 -0000
Subject: At the End( Was...Do You Peek?)
In-Reply-To: <bb.364c9d05.2ca64fc9@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bl308c+94m7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81693

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, RSFJenny19 at a... wrote:
> Bohcoo wrote:

> 
> Maybe next time I'll go the "no spoilers" route. With only two books to go, 
> I'm starting to drift from "rip" into "savor" mode; I want to enjoy every page 
> of the last 2 books, because once it's over, it'll never be the same again.

> 
Now me...
It actually only occured to me recently that there was only two books 
to go, and how odd and , for the want of a better word, difficult the 
end would be.  Looking back at the time I have loved the books, I can 
now see that I didnt savour them as I should have, much prefering to 
dash through them at lightning pace just to see what happens because 
I literally cant wait to know.  I need that 'fix', that satisfaction 
of seeing it ended.

I do think that plotting and narritive are the key elements in any 
fictional work and that they superceed any additional artistry,but in 
HP, while JKR's artistry abounds, the particular genius is in the 
plotting, as it is in most 'childrens'books. So, while we may all 
revel in the artistry , wit, and just plain awsomeness of JKR's work, 
we all are all primarily consumed by the desire to know 'what happens 
next'...we all grew up with the plot being central to our reading
But after book seven, there is no 'next'. It is finished.  There is 
not going to be those feverish months of anticipation before 
publication, those heady hours of reading, and eventually, HP will 
become a classic, and discussion will be relegated to few expert 
professors of literature, and popular culture.

After book 7, there will be a few brief moments (at least) of 
satisfaction at finally understanding the path that JKR led us all ( 
and there better be at least a few tears-I fully expect to have my 
heart wrung a la Lord Of The Rings), but then it will dawn on me that 
IT. IS. OVER.

And it is slightly freaky, that the only way I'll meet the characters 
again is in my own imagination.

Hmmmm...quite a ramble.Anyway, back to lurking...

Laura





From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Sat Sep 27 03:29:38 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 22:29:38 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Do You Peek?
References: <bb.364c9d05.2ca64fc9@aol.com>
Message-ID: <002301c384a7$9624b9e0$0b8baec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81694

For me?  No, I didn't read any spoilers, didn't want to know anything about
it, and didn't peek at the back of the book.

Personally, I LIKE to be surprised.  I also enjoy reading the book, and
trying to assemble my own conclusions from the clues I see.  That way, I can
be amazed if I get hit with a surprise, and happy when something I figured
out comes to pass.  (Like that Trelawny had made the original prediction
about Harry.  Kinda funny that the only two predictions she's ever made in
"oracle mode" have been about Harry... I wonder if she'll be dropping
anything else on us about him through Trelawny.)



>From ~RSFJenny~

> I saw someone had asked "who dies?" and, *positive* that it had
> to be Hagrid or Lupin, I unconsciously scrolled and saw the one word answer,
> "Sirius." ::tries to hold back a tragic sob::
>
> I only wanted to know if it had been *Someone Else, Anyone Else* dammit.I
> practically went into shock, I refused to believe it, but didn't dare look more
> on the site just in case it really was true and read the whole book feeling
> sick to my stomach becasue I was so upset ::sigh::
>

Ya know... a thought just occurred to me.

People are upset about Sirius dying, and bemoaning his fate... wondering why
he had to be the one who died.

Has anyone else considered that this is one of the MAIN reasons he was the
one to die?  Not only for the impact it has on Harry, but also for the
impact it would have on the readers?


Comments?

Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster


"Beware, for I am the dreaded harbinger of IRONY!"

-- Iggy McSnurd







From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 07:45:30 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 07:45:30 -0000
Subject: The Death Chamber -How dead is Dead?
In-Reply-To: <007301c3846f$f1d043a0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
Message-ID: <bl3f6q+jolo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81695

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mom31" <mom31 at r...> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>   digger:
> 
>  ...I hope Harry drags Voldemort through it towards the end of book 
> 7. But Harry being  our hero, and brim full of love, he will get
> spat out again, thus 'dying' and yet living on.
> 
> 
> 
>   now Joj:
> 
> ... Harry sacrifices himself by pulling V through the veil,...  
> After a battle of some sort, Harry is spat back through the veil 
> after defeating V. Lots of hugging ensues. 
> 
> ...
> 
>   Joj 

bboy_mn:

In a similar discussion running in parallel to this one, someone
pointed out that JKR has made a point of saying that once you are dead
you are dead, and there is no return.

But as I have pointed out before, there is death then there is death,
the two not necessarily being the same.

Even in our muggle world there is a very large precident of people
returning from the dead. The way it often occurs is that a person, by
some standard, dies on the operating table or in a car accident, and
goes 'beyond the veil', which is a common expression for death.
Typically, they feel an over powering serenity and peace, then travel
through a tunnel toward a bright white light. When they reach the
light, they frequently meet their deceased loved one, or a benevolent
spirit guide, angel, etc.... Those who return from the dead are
frequently told, after a heartfelt greeting, that it is not their time
and they need to return.  As much as they do not want to leave the
serenity of this place or leave their loved ones, they find themselves
falling back through the tunnel away from the light. Then they feel
themselves re-enter their bodies, and life goes on.

I can see the same thing happening to Harry in one of two ways. 

My most current thought is consistent with this post. Short version,
Harry and Voldemort go through the veil. On the other side, Voldemort
is sent to eternal damnation or is confronted by all the people he has
killed, while Harry is re-united with his parents, family, and with
Sirius. 

He is at peace, he finally has the family he has always wanted, he is
with the people he loves and who love him. He could be content to
remain there in eternal peace and love, but his mother tells him it is
not his time, and that he must go back. After a heartfelt farewell and
upon hearing the sobbing and wailing of those on the living side of
the veil who love him, Harry returns. Fade to black, close the
curtains, bring up the lights.

The alternate return from the dead scenerio, is that with or without
Harry knowledge, Dumbledore has given Harry a daft or potion that will
simulate death as well as protect Harry; Phoenix tears mixed with
Unicorn blood (the unicorn wouldn't be killed for his blood though),
or perhaps, the Draught of the Living Dead that was mentioned in the
first Potions class. 

This is based on the idea that at the moment of Harry's death,
Voldemort become vulnerable to attack. So the sequence of events is
Voldemort attacks Harry, and Harry is sent into a state that
represents death by some definition. At that moment Voldemort is
attacked and killed by someone else, after which Harry is revived.

Since we are dealing with potions perhaps it will be Snape who devised
the plan, ultimately defeats Voldemort and saves Harry.

So it's true dead is dead even in our every day mortal muggle world,
but in that same world, people do return from the dead as I have
described.

It could happen. Then again....?

bboy_mn









From gwyneth521 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 07:28:11 2003
From: gwyneth521 at yahoo.com (gwyneth521)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 07:28:11 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore as Secret Keeper
Message-ID: <bl3e6b+69le@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81696

All the recent discussion about Secret Keepers has brought a 
question to mind.  We are told that Dumbledore himself offered to be 
the Secret Keeper.  According to Professor McGonagall in PoA "I 
remember him (Dumbledore) offering to be the Potters' Secret-Keeper 
himself." (p.205 US).  The question then is why the Potters decided 
against Dumbledore as their Secret-Keeper.  Some quick late night 
ideas of why:

-Afraid that Dumbledore would be come even more of a target and 
didn't want to put him at risk.

-Thought that Dumbledore would be too obvious of a choice.

-Simply had too much trust in their friends and their loyalty as 
well as abilities.

Any other suggestions?

Gwyneth,

A lurker since July





From hedwigstalons at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 01:02:24 2003
From: hedwigstalons at yahoo.com (hedwigstalons)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 01:02:24 -0000
Subject: Do You Peek?
In-Reply-To: <bl2h0o+rkhn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl2nj0+jaf0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81697

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bohcoo" <sydenmill at m...> wrote:

> So, am I the only one? Did anyone else get their book out of the 
> wrapper and immediately look for the death scene? 

I didn't peek, but I didn't want to hear ANYTHING!! from newspaper, 
TV or radio news, or the kids I work with, so I read it all in one 
stretch on the first day it came out. (Yeah for home delivery on the 
release date!) I watched the Charlie Rose show that came out at 
Midnight the day OOTP was released, and when he read a portion of the 
book I muted it!! :0)

I like to be surprised, and have some theoriesof my own(who doesn't :-
)!), so want to see if they pan out or what JKR's great plot does.

No peeking for me!
HedwigsTalons





From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Fri Sep 26 17:18:43 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 12:18:43 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Portkey and Floo in Hogwarts.
References: <C48E1191-F03F-11D7-9893-000393987376@glue.umd.edu>
Message-ID: <000d01c38452$3eb463e0$a495aec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81698


From: "Maria Ribera"

> I am betting that there is some type of control over that... students
> could come and go as they wished if you could travel using the common
> rooms' fireplaces. Although they may want to phone/floo their parents
> sometimes ....
>

Now for the big questions:

Do long distance Floo charges apply?

If so, how much does MCI  (the Magical Communications Industry) charge per
minute?

Which brick do you press to switch over on "floo waiting?"

How big of a fireplace do you need for a conference floo?

and for the big one...

Does a deaf / mute person stick their hands into the fire instead of their
head if they want to use the floo equivalent of TTD?



Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster.

"I don't think I need a tagline here.  I've said enough here already."

-- Iggy McSnurd








From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sat Sep 27 07:47:44 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 07:47:44 -0000
Subject: where does mad eye live?
In-Reply-To: <bl23q5+8v5c@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl3fb0+45gb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81699

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "wendy" <wgouine1 at m...> wrote:
> In GoF when Arthur has to rush off to save MadEye from his 
dustbins, what is the 
> name of the muggle village? Can we assume it is Little Whinging?  
In OoP when Harry 
> is fussing about Dung and Arbella "spying" on him does he also 
mention that Mad Eye 
> is there? 
> 
> "Wendy"

Geoff:
We are told that there are no wizards in the Little Whinging area - 
Madame Bones makes this point at the hearing in OOTP when querying 
Arabella Figg's credentials as a witness.




From christin.gahnstrom at telia.com  Fri Sep 26 19:36:56 2003
From: christin.gahnstrom at telia.com (cgahnstrm)
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 19:36:56 -0000
Subject: They are children's books (Was: the heart of it all)
In-Reply-To: <bl1gqc+ad64@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl24go+ldje@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81700

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "feetmadeofclay" 
<feetmadeofclay at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mom31" 
<mom31 at r...> wrote:

> >   Joj says:
> 
> >   Joj,  who's husband thinks she's crazy for thinking JK might kill 
> off Harry.  "They're children's books" , he says.  Well, I can 
> forgive him his ignorance, since he's only seen the movies.  :-)
> 
> Golly: They are children's books.  And children's books have beloved 
> characters that die all the time.  
> 
> Charlotte's web for instance...    
> 
> Children often deal with death.  So their stories do as well.  It is 
> a depressing way to end a series.  But if you are a Christ figure, 
> you have to die. 


Now, I really don't want Harry to die, (not only sentimental 
reasons, it just seems like the easy way out) but the best novel I 
ever read is written for children and it has its heroes (two young 
boys) die.

Christin




From hp42187gs at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 00:05:36 2003
From: hp42187gs at yahoo.com (hp42187gs)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 00:05:36 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore is not Voldemort's grandfather!
Message-ID: <bl2k8g+j6oj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81701

Many people have been asking if Dumbledore is possibly related to Tom 
Riddle. He is not! (It is not proven, at least.) One person said 
that "Dumbledore could be (Voldemort's grandad) if his middle name 
was Marvolo. What is his middle name?" Dumbledore's full name is 
Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore--- end of discussion....

"hp42187gs"





From oppen at mycns.net  Sat Sep 27 08:02:10 2003
From: oppen at mycns.net (Eric Oppen)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 03:02:10 -0500
Subject: Horrid thought...
Message-ID: <002b01c384cd$a80703e0$b4570043@hppav>

No: HPFGUIDX 81702

I got to thinking about the room I forgot at the DoM, the Brain Room, and it
struck me....


_Whose brains ARE those,_ and how did the DoM get them?

Are they aware?  If so, how is the Department of Mysteries any better than
the Death Eaters?




From valkyrievixen at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 08:12:31 2003
From: valkyrievixen at yahoo.com (M.Clifford)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 08:12:31 -0000
Subject: The magic power of love. Was: BANG! You're dead!
In-Reply-To: <bjnhls+phoo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl3gpf+dm1r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81703

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Doriane" <delwynmarch at y...> 
wrote:
To Hans re Harry:
> And how does that make him any more special that a 13-year-old 
girl 
> who's completely lost any hope in life, who doesn't think things 
will 
> ever get better, who suffers horribly every single day of her 
life, 
> but who won't commit suicide only because she doesn't want to "do 
> that" to her mom and sister ? Maybe I didn't save the world, but I 
> think I displayed pretty much all the qualities you quoted above. 
But 
> I don't think you'd me consider a hero, would you ? 


As a matter of sincere fact Del, I do.
And in this statement you have made the true heroics of the human 
soul more plain than in all the argument (sorry Hans) Hans gave.
The very same courage compassion loyalty selflessness and love shown 
by this 13 year old girl is exactly the possession of a hero who 
would save the world.
Wish there was more to say. Bless You
 Valky




From catlady at wicca.net  Sat Sep 27 08:29:01 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 08:29:01 -0000
Subject: werewolf / inheritance /  Fidelius /  Emeric
Message-ID: <bl3hod+bfno@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81704

Alshain wrote of werewolves in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/81426 :

<< we can't even be quite sure about the silver issue in JKR's
universe until she chooses to tell us >>

I'm pretty sure she DID tell us, in the scene of Harry's first 
dinner at 12 Grimmauld Place, that silver doesn't harm Potterverse
werewolves (at least not when in human form). First, we had Mundungus
asking Sirius if the goblets were solid silver, and Sirius saying 
they were. Then, when it comes time to give Harry some information,
she specifically states: Lupin, who was drinking wine, put his goblet
down. There was no reason for her to include that conversation of
Mundungus except to make sure that us readers knew that the goblets
were silver (it was not needed as characterization for Mundungus, who
had already been characterized) and there was no reason for the
readers to need to know that the goblets were silver, except that
Lupin was holding one.

moviebec wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/81439 :

<< do wizards have wills? >>

Wizards must be able to bequeath property to people of their own
choosing (as Muggle do by writing a will), because Sirius's Uncle
Alphard left him enough money to leave his parents and live on his own.

<< If Sirius did have a will, who do you think he would have left his
house to? >>

Sirius doesn't strike me as the will-making type. If he had been
required to make a will as one of the rules of joining the Order of
the Phoenix the first time (I believe that will would still be in
effect, as he wouldn't have made another since), I suppose he would
have left everything to Remus. Even if one is not a Sirius/Remus
shipper, as I am, who else did he have to leave it to? No wife, no
children, he hated his relatives, Harry (his godson) wasn't born yet
(probably not even conceived yet), Remus was the one of his friends
who really needed some money and a roof over his head. In fact, I
fantasize that when Sirius was sentenced to life in Azkaban, Remus 
did inherit the 'place of [his] own' that he had bought at age 17 
with Uncle Alphard's bequest, and that was the 'Lupin's place'
mentioned at the end of GoF.

<< I'm leaning towards wizards not having will's after Molly's
reaction to the boggart/dead family members scene. "And what's going
to happen if Arthur and I get killed, who's g-g-going to look after
Ron and Ginny?"Page 161 OoP Australian edition. Lupin reassures her
that the order would look after the kids, but wouldn't that
responsibility fall to Bill as the oldest brother? >>

Responsibilities and property falling to people because of their
position on the family tree is what happens when people didn't bother
to make a will. People who make a will can name someone else to be
guardian of their orphaned children.

Narie wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/81596 :

<< The only problem with this theory is that then the spy would have
known who the secret keeper was, as the secret can only be revealed
by that specific person. If that was the case, you would have hoped
*someone* would have informed Dumbledore or the Ministry of the fact
that Pettigrew was the Potter's secret keeper, and not Black. >>

Two things we learned about the Fidelius Charm in OoP: 1) if the
Secret Keeper tells one person the secret, it is still hidden from 
all the people who haven't been told. 2) the Secret Keeper can tell
the secret in writing (as Dumbledore "told" Harry that the
headquarters of the Order of the Phoenix is at 12 Grimmauld Place and
the house suddenly became visible to Harry). 

Therefore, Pettigrew as Secret Keeper could have written "James and
Lily are hiding in their house in Godric's Hollow" on several notes,
and the people who read those notes would know. I suppose James
instructed him to write one note to Sirius, one to Dumbledore, and 
one to Hagrid. Peter could have written the ones for Dumbledore and
Hagrid in an imitation of Sirius's handwriting, so they wouldn't 
known that Peter was the Secret Keeper. 

That would explain how, when Sirius got suspicious, he went straight
to Godric's Hollow, and Dumbledore was able to send Hagrid to Godric's
Hollow, but McGonagall didn't know where they were hiding, or she
would have gone there to check out the rumors instead of waiting in
front of 4 Privet Drive for Dumbledore to arrive.

Iggy MacSnurd wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/81690 :

<< Emeric [...] America [...] Hmmm... interesting. *grin* Would this
mean "America the Evil"?... >>

Probably not, but there is a theory that America was named after
someone named Emeric (or E. Merrick, the article is audio): "Robert
Siegel talks with Rodney Broome about his book Terra Incognita, about
the origins of the word America. Broome challenges the idea that the
name came from the Italian explorer Amerigo Vespucci. He suggests
instead that the name "America" can be traced back to fishermen from
Bristol, England, who saw what is now Newfoundland as they sailed the
North Atlantic."
http://discover.npr.org/features/feature.jhtml?wfId=1131065




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sat Sep 27 10:40:09 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 10:40:09 -0000
Subject: Do You Peek?
In-Reply-To: <bl2h0o+rkhn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl3pe9+l82a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81705

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bohcoo" <sydenmill at m...> wrote:
> When I got OOP home, I settled in to read it from front to back, 
just 
> like I had with the other books, "dying" to know who was going to 
> die.  However, after the chapter about Mrs. Weasley's Woes where we 
> were teased with Dead! Everyone Weasley, that did it for me -- I 
> thumbed through the book until I found out who really did bite the 
> dust. I peeked.
> 
> So, am I the only one? Did anyone else get their book out of the 
> wrapper and immediately look for the death scene? 
> 
> So, then -- how are you going to be reading the last two books in 
the 
> series? Are you going to Peek? Look at the last page or two, just 
to 
> see who is still there, saying goodbye on the Platform as they part 
> for the summer?
> 
> 


Geoff:
As I said in an earlier posting, I have to know the end of any book I 
read...

I did go through OOTP at a fair pace, reading about 200 pages a day. 
But since then (and this is true of the earlier books), I have read 
and re-read them all about another five times at a gentler pace 
taking in more of the landscape.

At one time, I used to read LOTR every year and have certainly now 
read it about 25+ times. Each time I read it, I find a new little 
nugget, something I haven't noticed before. And that is also true of 
the HP books. Mark you, with x million people on hpfgu, so many 
little nuances are revealed here that the plot analysis must be 
reaching the level of the significance of the number of full stops 
per square metre!

:-)






From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Sat Sep 27 10:50:03 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 10:50:03 -0000
Subject: Dumbledores Philosophy (was MAGIC DISHWASHER...)
In-Reply-To: <002a01c3846c$0d101cc0$3b92aec7@rick>
Message-ID: <bl3q0r+jr7n@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81706

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Iggy McSnurd" <coyoteschild at p...> 
wrote:
> 
> The basis for the theory, however, stems from a few things:
> 
> 1 - Love as a solution and salvation seems to play an important part in
> JKR's world.
> 

Kneasy:
I'll  contend this point. Yes, we have seen love, as manifested by Lily, DD
and Sirius mainly. As a solution? Probably Lily  *only* and then in 
desperation and panic. Sirius  tries to  use it as an emotional lever to try
to get Harry to match his expectations of what James' son should be and
DD uses it as an all-purpose excuse for actions that  cause distress.
Salvation? There's a large consensus that  this  was the cause of Voldemort's 
retreat from possession in the Ministry, *but* why didn't the same expulsion
of Voldy from Harry's mind also  take place when he was given the vision of
Sirius in peril? Wasn't  it love of Sirius that sent Harry on his mission? 


Iggy:
> 2 - There's been an issue made of the nature of Harry's protection, and why
> Quirrel was destroyed by it because LV could not bear the touch of love.


Kneasy:
Yes, Harry has protection. But the theory that it is 'love' is purely the
invention of listees. I've no doubt the protection was placed 'through' or
'because'  of love, but that is  not  the same thing.


Iggy: 
> 3 - There is a philosophy that, to sum up, states that what a thing does not
> posess in the slightest is that thing's bane.  LV posesses no love, and he
> doesn't understand it, therefore it's his bane.  (It's like water having no
> fire in it, yet fire can evaporate water.  Fire has no water in it, yet
> water can douse a fire.)


Kneasy:
Specious argument. By flipping that reasoning and looking at it from
the other  direction, Harry  cannot  defeat  Voldy because he also  has 
feelings of anger and hate. Because he has them, he cannot be their bane.
Where is this all-embracing love that Harry is supposed to have?
Who does Harry love? Anyone, now  that  Sirius  has gone? There's no
evidence of  any. Harry  is  fighting to stay alive, to do so it seems that
he must defeat V. The defeat of V will save the world, but to Harry that
is a bonus, not the  main objective of his fight. 
The only viable 'love' interpretation, IMO, is love of life, which is a class
apart from the  kind of love that  most posters seem to embrace.
It's the personal as opposed to the general that Harry is concerned with. 


Iggy:
> As for forgiveness being the most demeaning of insults... Yes, it is to
> those who do not wish to, or care to, be forgiven.  But if one has the
> smallest spark of remorse within them, the tiniest bit of true regret or
> love for themselves, then I don't think it's an insult.
 
Kneasy:
The insult is to those who  feel their hatred or emnity is justified.
Suppose Voldy turns up at a meeting of the Order one day and says
"You  hate me, but I forgive you." What would be the response? A mad
rush to  get their wands out, I expect. With strong feelings of outrage
and "How dare  he!" 
It would not change  the situation one iota, the war would go on. 

Every fight has at least two sides but few look at the others viewpoint. 
I always like to encourage the baddies in their depravity. 
A 'good' baddy  is  hard  to find. 
  





From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz  Sat Sep 27 08:54:53 2003
From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 20:54:53 +1200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Death Chamber
In-Reply-To: <007301c3846f$f1d043a0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
References: <bl1a5c+67ha@eGroups.com>
 <3F743893.1030401@ntlworld.com>
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20030927205017.00a27250@pop3.xtra.co.nz>

No: HPFGUIDX 81707

Joj:
>
>This is how I always picture it ending too! Harry sacrifices himself by 
>pulling V through the veil, with all his loved ones screaming and 
>mourning, thinking he died.  After a battle of some sort, Harry is spat 
>back through the veil after defeating V. Lots of hugging ensues.
>I'm sure it will be something else though, because I'm always surprised by JK!



I have heard this theory in other groups, the first time I struck it, I 
could really see it happening.  It has been suggested also that both could 
die.  I'm not sure there, going back to the prophecy, I cannot see where it 
fits that either or both have to die, one or the other, yes.  I hope that 
Harry lives, but it would be an easy end to have him die unfortunately.

Tanya





From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz  Sat Sep 27 09:00:07 2003
From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 21:00:07 +1200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Death Chamber
In-Reply-To: <bl295h+3nq3@eGroups.com>
References: <bl21l0+5115@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20030927205650.00a844c0@pop3.xtra.co.nz>

No: HPFGUIDX 81708

Entropy wrote:
>Yes, surely "dead is dead." But you must admit that there are myriad
>examples of JKR's "cheating" a bit on the dead stuff. From the house
>ghosts, to the figures dripping from Voldemort's wand in the
>graveyard, to the listening/sleeping/gossiping portraits in
>Dumbledore's office, the WW is certainly a place where the dead are
>never quite completely gone.
>And, as a side note: although I wouldn't be particularly happy to see
>Harry fall through the veil in a firestorm of curses and kadavras,
>only to be reborn by coming back through at a later time (it seems so
>"Dallas"/it-was-all-just-a-dream), it would tie up the whole "phoenix"
>imagery rather well, don't you think?



I wondered about that too, death in these books is not absolute.  This
might be a way out idea, but the thought just struck me reading this post.
What if this does happen and Harry re emerges from the veil.  It might be
possible that he gets back everything he has lost, family etc, and is able
to lead them all back.

Tanya





From ghilliefeet at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 09:05:49 2003
From: ghilliefeet at yahoo.com (Melissa)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 02:05:49 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Do You Peek?
In-Reply-To: <1064649030.4293.89580.m1@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030927090549.72330.qmail@web14910.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81709

You know, I didn't peek and I don't think I ever would...although I do agree with the notion of reading through so fast that savouring the book is lost for the sake of getting to the end (guilty as charged). I'm currently reading a very long series that I thought would easily hold me over until book 6 or at least until near that time, but after only three weeks I'm already near the end of book 5 of this 12-book series....
 
However, I can't say I was surprised at Sirius's death. In a way I already knew who it would be. I heard an interview with JKR (I can't remember which one or when) where she said something like "what I consider a major character will die" (not exact quote, just the gist of it). Somehow that totally gave it away for me and I knew immediately that it was Sirius. It kind of makes me nervous to listen or read her interviews before the next books coming out, afraid of what she might unwittingly give away this time.
 
Melissa (back to reading, and realizing how fast she reads and needs to find another long series or two after this one to hold her over for however long is needed....)
 


 


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Sat Sep 27 11:05:05 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 11:05:05 -0000
Subject: The Death Chamber, and others
In-Reply-To: <004801c3847a$25b066a0$3b92aec7@rick>
Message-ID: <bl3qt1+oh4o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81710

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Iggy McSnurd" <coyoteschild at p...> 
wrote:
> 
> Well, maybe in the next book, they'll realize some significance of Ron
> examining Uranus... (maybe he'll become a specialist healer rather than an
> Auror?)  And Luna having blown up Pluto and consult with Sinistra about what
> it means.
> 
> I think we're also overlooking that they can consult with Firenze as well as
> Sinistra.  (Technically, they can actually consult with Trelawny as well...
> It would be interesting to see if this happens... and what three differing
> interpretations they might give.)


Me again! This is getting to be a habit.

I think you're making the mistake of confusing Astronomy (Sinistra) with
Astrology (all the other frauds).. Throughout  the series there has been
a repeated rubbishing and mistrust of divination in all it's forms, especially
Astrology. Time  and again we are told not to trust it, that faking it in
homework is a reasonable action to  take, that when this is marked, the
ethereal  Sybill obviously can't determine the accuracy of the work done. 
Otherwise Harry and Ron would score zero. She marks for effect only.

By the way, alluding to an earlier post, Pluto is no longer regarded as
a planet by astronomers. 

Kneasy




From drednort at alphalink.com.au  Sat Sep 27 11:36:33 2003
From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 21:36:33 +1000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Death Chamber, and others
In-Reply-To: <bl3qt1+oh4o@eGroups.com>
References: <004801c3847a$25b066a0$3b92aec7@rick>
Message-ID: <3F7602E1.1601.3097AF@localhost>

No: HPFGUIDX 81711

On 27 Sep 2003 at 11:05, arrowsmithbt wrote:

> I think you're making the mistake of confusing Astronomy (Sinistra) with
> Astrology (all the other frauds).. Throughout  the series there has been
> a repeated rubbishing and mistrust of divination in all it's forms, especially
> Astrology. Time  and again we are told not to trust it, that faking it in
> homework is a reasonable action to  take, that when this is marked, the
> ethereal  Sybill obviously can't determine the accuracy of the work done. 
> Otherwise Harry and Ron would score zero. She marks for effect only.

The thing is, while there is a clear difference between astronomy and astrology in 
the Muggle world, it may not be as clear in the Wizarding world - the true 
existence of magic can change things - and while Trelawney may be mostly a 
fraud, it does appear that prophecy is still considered valid in the Wizarding world 
and if that is so, prediction using the planets (some form of astrology) may still be 
valid even if Trelawney knows nothging about it.
 
> By the way, alluding to an earlier post, Pluto is no longer regarded as
> a planet by astronomers. 

Most astronomers still consider Pluto to be a planet - it's true that there is a 
sizeable minority who want to describe it as something else, but the consensus at 
the moment is still to count it as a major planet (the present of Charon makes it 
problematic to classify it differently). Currently the International Astronomical 
Union still considers it to be a planet and that's as close to an official decision as 
you'll find (http://www.iau.org/PlutoPR.html)




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 RACH911 at aol.com  Sat Sep 27 11:07:21 2003
From: RACH911 at aol.com (rach9112000)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 11:07:21 -0000
Subject: James Potter Still Alive?
Message-ID: <bl3r19+3hpf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81712

I recently bought a book called "The Ultimate Unofficial Guide to 
Harry Potter" and there is a theory in the book that James Potter 
may still be alive and that Lupin is dead. The name Remus Lupin is 
believed to stem from the legend of Romulus and Remus, where Remus 
was killed by his brother or followers. So the theory goes that 
Lupin is probably James Potter switched into Lupins body with a 
switching spell and that Lupin therefore is dead, not James.

   We know that Lupin is one of JKR's favourite characters and she 
specifically mentioned in a BBC interview that he made book 3 
extremely important for her to write. 

  Just to put forward a bit of the evidence for this theory 
mentioned in the book from book 3:
    1) Unlike everyone else, Lupin on first seeing Harry never 
stared at his scar or mentioned his resemblance to James. (ch 5)
    2)Harry tells Lupin that when a dementor gets near him, he hears 
his mum being murdered by voldemort. On hearing this, Lupin had 
made "a sudden motion with his arm, as though to grip Harry's 
shoulder, but thought better of it". (ch 10)
    3) Trelawny said that Lupin "positively fled when I offered to 
crystal gaze for him-"(ch11)
    4) When Harry tells lupin he hears his mums voice louder, Lupin 
looks "paler than usual" and when he says he heard his dad, lupin 
says "you heard James?" in a strange voice.(ch12)
    5) "I certainly don't want Harry dead...""An odd shiver passed 
over his face". (ch 17)
    6) lupin has "no hesitation" about what harry's father would 
think (ch 18).

  These are just a few of the things mentioned in the book which 
suggest James has switched with Lupin. I know it's a slightly far 
fetched theory but I definately wouldn't rule out that JKR could 
pull it off. 

  What does anyone else think about this theory?

      Rachel





From constancevigilance at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 12:26:01 2003
From: constancevigilance at yahoo.com (Susan Miller)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 12:26:01 -0000
Subject: Crap, Crabbe (filk)
In-Reply-To: <bjdq6c+7id7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl3vkp+bqss@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81713

Caius Marcius wrote:
> Vincent Crabbe in his first solo! 
> 
> He's My Goyle
> 

THE SCENE: Slytherin Commons. Vincent Crabbe has just finished 
singing his tribute to his buddy Gregory Goyle (He's My Goyle, post 
#80050)

Gregory Goyle, overwhelmed with emotion, begins a return tribute, and 
the two finish as a sappy duet.

Crap, Crabbe

To the tune of Dammit, Janet from Rocky Horror

Hear a MIDI at:

http://www.hamienet.com/11995.mid

Goyle: 
Hey, Crabbe 

Crabbe: 
Yes, Goyle? 

Goyle: 
I've got something to say 

Crabbe: 
Uh huh? 

Goyle: 
I really love the...skillful way 
You beat the other boys 
To pound Potter today 

Crabbe 
Oh...oh, Goyle 

Goyle:
Instead of an ear, you've a flap, Crabbe
When you sit down, you can't see your lap, Crabbe
You can't find your butt with a map, Crabbe
I've one thing to say, and that's 

Crap, Crabbe, I love you ...

They should auction your body for scrap, Crabbe
Where your brain should be there's just a gap, Crabbe
You're as fun as an outbreak of clap, Crabbe
I've one thing to say, and that's 

Crap, Crabbe, I love you ...

The late bludger hit you gave Potter 
Was a sneaky but beautiful low blow 
We used Longbottom's head for a blotter 
Oh G-R-E-G-G, I love you so 

Crabbe: 
In the Umbridge Squad Inquisitorial, oh, Goyle
I'm certain that you and Malfoy'll, oh, Goyle 
Not play according to Hoyle, oh, Goyle 
I've one thing to say, and that's 
Goyle, I'm roiled for you too 
Oh, Goyle 

Goyle: 
Oh ... crap! 

Crabbe: 
I'm roiled 

Goyle: 
Oh, Crabbe!

Crabbe: 
For you 

Goyle: 
I love you too 

Both: 
There's one thing left to do, ah-hoo 

Goyle: 
On the seventh floor, set up a trap, Crabbe
And see if Potter will land in our lap, Crabbe
And then smash a skull or kneecap, Crabbe
Now I've one thing to say, and that's 

Crap, Crabbe, I love you ...

Crap, Crabbe 

Crabbe: 
Oh Goyle, I'm roiled 

Goyle: 
Crap, Crabbe 

Both: 
I love you 


~ Constance Vigilance




From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 12:49:46 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 12:49:46 -0000
Subject: Hermione's growth (was Why Ron Loves Hermione)
In-Reply-To: <bl2m58+cus9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl411a+v8l7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81714


David wrote regarding Hermione:

She presumes to direct Harry's love life without checking whether he 
wants her to.  She confidently explicates Cho's feelings without any 
sense that it might be good for Harry to verify her opinions by 
seeking Cho's own view.  She dismisses Firenze.  She rewrites the 
rules of her bargain with Rita Skeeter, just because it suits her.  
She decides what Sirius thinks of Harry, and has the cheek to assume 
that Sirius' support of an idea is a counter-recommendation.
 
Kneazle responds:

Hermione does not direct Harry's love life. I thought she was rather 
neutral about the whole thing. She does not comment on who Harry 
should be dating, only explains the situation to an extremely 
flummoxed Harry.

She dismisses Firenze in response to Lavender and Parvati's girlish 
squealing over the centaur. She is dismissive of Lavender and 
Parvati, not Firenze.

She rewrites her agreement with Rita to aid in a WAR. And incidently 
helps Rita as well get back into journalism, forcing her into writing 
the most important article of her career.   

Finally, Sirius is generally wrong about everything in this book. It 
is a counter-recommendation.  Sirius does appear to see Harry as the 
second coming of James and actaully gets angry at Harry for not being 
James at one point.  She has every reason to be suspicous of Sirius. 
He's a bit mad in OoTP.

David wrote regarding Hermione:

Most tellingly to my mind, she makes no effort whatsoever to check 
whether her elf clothes are having the desired effect.  This is a 
cause that is supposedly dear to her heart, into which she puts a 
great deal of effort.  Yet she simply does not test herself and the 
world around her.  She has lost interest in rigorously finding out 
and discerning what the evidence is really telling her.

Kneazle responds:

This is an expression of Hermione's weakness that she has had all 
along. She can be insensitive other people's feelings when they 
contradict her logic. I don't think this is arrogance. More like 
blindness. It reminds me of the scene in GoF where she tears apart 
Lavender over the dead bunny and Trelawney's prediction. She simply 
doesn't see that Lavender is upset of the death of a pet.

David wrote regarding Hermione:

Much has been made of Harry being the typical teenager in his 
anger.  But Hermione has become a typical teenager of a different 
kind. The word that comes to mind is 'arrogant'.

Kneazle responds:

She needs practice with empathy and that is common enough with 
teenagers. That does not make her arrogant. 








From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Sat Sep 27 12:57:29 2003
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 12:57:29 -0000
Subject: The Death Chamber
In-Reply-To: <bl1mr4+42hq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl41fp+a8g1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81715

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" <annemehr at y...> 
wrote:
>Regarding why Ginny was entranced by the Chamber Iggy wrote:

> Iggy: 
> > As for why those four were affected, It was for the same reason 
they
> could
> > see the Thestrals... they has seen death.
> 
> 
> Annemehr:
> But Ginny was entranced yet could not see the thestrals.

Now I interject:
I believe the Death Chamber affected the four people it did because 
of the things that have happened to them in their lives. No, Ginny 
has not "seen death" but her possession by Lord Voldemort qualifies 
her as a player. Someone who's been to the dark side and back, 
someone who's physically be very close to death. Remember how 
bloodless she looked when Harry finally found her on the floor of the 
Chamber of Secrets? Remember how Tom Riddle said she wasn't dead yet 
but soon would be? So I think that's the reason she was drawn to the 
curtain. I just listened to that section yesterday afternoon and was 
yet again knocked off my feet by the multi-layered subtleties of the 
MOM events. I know so many moaned that it was just a sell-out action-
packed movie-style bit of writing but no. It goes beyond that. All 
kinds of things are going on but so quickly that your first 
impression may come out a bit askew.
Jennifer




From zanelupin at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 13:18:12 2003
From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 13:18:12 -0000
Subject: Riddle, Voldemort, and Harry (was: Re:Dumbledore's Philosophy)
In-Reply-To: <000f01c38461$bbfb2b40$3b92aec7@rick>
Message-ID: <bl42mk+6073@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81716

Iggy McSnurd:
 
>The greatest evil is love turned to hatred.  I feel that Tom was 
loved by his mother and loved her back, yet she was taken from him 
at a very early age, which turned him bitter.  That bitterness about 
his lot in life festered, and he saw his father and grandparents as 
the first cause of his life being so terrible.  He no longer had 
anyone in his life, as a young boy, who cared about him... much less 
loved him.  By the time he got to Hogwart's, he had pretty much made 
up his mind about the kind of person he was to bevome.<
 
KathyK:

I don't mean to get all nitpicky here...Oh who am I kidding?  Yes I 
do.  

GoF US Paperback p 646:

Voldemort:

'He left her and returned to his Muggle parents before I was even 
born, Potter, and she died giving birth to me, leaving me to be 
raised in a Muggle orphanage...but I vowed to find him...I revenged 
myself upon him, that fool who gave me his name...*Tom Riddle*...'

CoS US Paperback p 244:

Riddle:

'They told me at the orphanage she lived just long enough to name me'

I don't know how much of his own mother's love Riddle experienced or 
remembered in those few moments before she died.  But Riddle grew up 
in that orphanage.  I also think he just grew up bitter and angry at 
his father and at Muggles in general and this led him to become Lord 
Voldemort.  But I don't think the intense desire for vengeance came 
from experiencing his mother's love and then being deprived of that 
love.  

Rather the bitterness more likely comes from finding out his wealthy 
Muggle father rejected his witch mother and their unborn child, 
abandoning him to the awful fate of being raised in an orphanage.  
He became hateful of all things Muggle because of his father's 
rejecting him rather than because he blames his father for taking 
away his mother's love.

I don't think Riddle had the chance to experience love.  He's all 
hate and has been since he was a child.  A bleak outlook, I know, 
but that's the way it appears.  And I don't think that Lily's love 
for Harry and Harry's love for people and life will spark any sappy 
emotions from a dormant Tom Riddle craving love and affection.  

Salit:

>>I can't see Harry showing mercy to Voldemort. But obviously LV 
can't be killed in the normal fashion, as he is immune to death. So 
he will die in some unexpected way - akin to how Harry destroyed Tom 
Riddle in CoS by destroying the diary.<<

Iggy McSnurd:

>Hence my theory that Riddle will be, ultimately, the one who 
destroys Voldemort due to Harry's influence.
 
He had no reason whatsoever to spare Wormtail, and had every reason 
in the world to kill him.  Yet he spared WT because it's who he is.<

KathyK:

He spared Wormtail because he cared about what would happen to Lupin 
and Sirius, not because he had any love for the nasty little rat who 
helped kill his parents.  Harry was perfectly content to send him 
off to the dementors.  I agree with Salit here that Harry will not 
be showing Voldemort any mercy.  That's not to say Harry's going to 
relish destroying him because he isn't like that, but if it comes 
down to that, he won't be worrying about the little boy Tom Riddle 
once might have been if he even existed.

Salit:

>>Oh please. He has met Tom Riddle. He was that kid who set the
basilisk on muggle-borns, who framed Hagrid, who possessed Ginny, who
so enjoyed seeing Harry bitten by the basilisk that he was going to
sit and watch him die slowly and painfully, who killed his family
just for the heck of it.<<

Iggy McSnurd:

>Like I said, that was after Riddle had made his decision to become 
LV.  As I also said, it's entirely possible that the boy who was Tom 
when he was still with (and loved by) his mother can very well be 
buried deep inside LV.
 
Harry met the memory of Riddle, not the real Tom... Even Tom himself 
admits that.  What was infused into the book was what LV WANTED to 
be infused into the book, not necessarilly every part of himself.<

KathyK:

Even if deep down Voldemort's got some spark of a pre-racist 
innocent, loving Tom Riddle, that doesn't change who Voldemort is 
and what he has done since *making the choice* to become that power-
hungry mass murderer we all know and love.

KathyK (who should go get her drivers license renewed as it expired 
last week)




From zanelupin at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 13:30:50 2003
From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 13:30:50 -0000
Subject: A Number of Questions
In-Reply-To: <p05001901bb9a5e480c6f@[65.95.84.185]>
Message-ID: <bl43ea+b00l@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81717

Mina-Clare Moseley wrote:

>Hello all. Longtime lurker, and I believe first time poster.
 
1) A question posed by my mother. Is Sirius' mother still believing 
he is a traitor flinty or not? Sirius' brother was considered a 
golden boy and he served Voldemort. Mrs. Black died believe Sirius 
had gone to prison for being Voldemort's right-hand man. Is it 
flinty that Mrs. Black still called him traitor, or did she just 
know her no-good son could never be Voldemort's second-in-command?<


Hi!

I don't believe it's a flint at all.  Even if she believed Sirius 
went to Azkaban a loyal Voldemort supporter, there's no way her 
portrait would believe that now.  He showed up at Grimmauld Place 
with Dumbledore the lover of all beings, Lupin the werewolf, Tonks 
whose mother betrayed the Black family by marrying a muggle born, 
Hermione the muggleborn, and the muggle-loving Weasleys, not to 
mention hosting Harry Potter who brought down Voldemort all those 
years ago.  The portrait of Mrs. Black would have to be completely 
blind not to notice this out of place group in her home, hosted by 
her own son.  So Sirius was obviously the traitor he always was.  It 
makes sense to me, at any rate.

KathyK




From zanelupin at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 13:55:50 2003
From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 13:55:50 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore as Secret Keeper
In-Reply-To: <bl3e6b+69le@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl44t6+7nlv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81718

<snip>
>The question then is why the Potters decided 
against Dumbledore as their Secret-Keeper.  Some quick late night 
ideas of why:
 
>-Afraid that Dumbledore would be come even more of a target and 
didn't want to put him at risk.<


Hmm...maybe.  Or perhaps Dumbledore was already such a target, they 
didn't want to take the chance that something might happen to him 
and their whereabouts would be made known if he died (if that indeed 
does happen if the secret keeper dies)
 
>-Thought that Dumbledore would be too obvious of a choice.<

But then again, Sirius thought he was too obvious a choice as well 
and convinced them to go with Pettigrew.  
 
>-Simply had too much trust in their friends and their loyalty as 
well as abilities.<
 
This one I think is most likely.  Sirius was James' best friend, 
just like a brother to him.

>Any other suggestions?<
 

Here's a not serious one from me:

Pettigrew had James, Lily, and Sirius under the Imperius Curse and 
he made them refuse Dumbledore and pick him as Secret Keeper.


> Gwyneth,
 
A lurker since July<

KathyK (who may have been joking about Peter above but really thinks 
there's a lot more to Pettigrew than the way he's been described 
thus far in the books)




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sat Sep 27 14:15:48 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 14:15:48 -0000
Subject: Dumbledores Philosophy (was MAGIC DISHWASHER...)
In-Reply-To: <bl3q0r+jr7n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl462k+d0bm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81719

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Iggy McSnurd" 
<coyoteschild at p...> 
> wrote:
> > 
> > The basis for the theory, however, stems from a few things:
> > 
> 

<snip>
 
> 
> 
> Iggy:
> > 2 - There's been an issue made of the nature of Harry's 
protection, and why
> > Quirrel was destroyed by it because LV could not bear the touch 
of love.
> 
> 
> Kneasy:
> Yes, Harry has protection. But the theory that it is 'love' is 
purely the
> invention of listees. I've no doubt the protection was 
placed 'through' or
> 'because'  of love, but that is  not  the same thing.
> 

Geoff:
Hold on just a moment. How do you square that with - 

"'But why couldn't Quirrell touch me?'
'Your mother died to save you. If there is one thing Voldemort cannot 
understand, it is love. He didn't realise that love as powerful as 
your mother's for you leaves its own mark. Not a scar, no visible 
sign.... to have been loved so deeply, even though the person who 
loved us is gone, will give us some protection for ever. It is in 
your very skin. Quirrell, full of hatred, greed and ambition, sharing 
his soul with Voldemort, could not touch you for this reason. It was 
agony to touch a person marked by something so good.'"

(PS UK edition p.216)




From jsmgleaner at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 14:16:26 2003
From: jsmgleaner at yahoo.com (jsmgleaner)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 14:16:26 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore as Secret Keeper
In-Reply-To: <bl44t6+7nlv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl463q+cipu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81720

Gwyneth said 
> ><snip> The question then is why the Potters decided 
> against Dumbledore as their Secret-Keeper.  
<snip>
> >-Simply had too much trust in their friends and their loyalty as 
> well as abilities.<

KathyK said:
> This one I think is most likely.  Sirius was James' best friend, 
> just like a brother to him.
> 

Now Hayes:

Good question and one I think might have to be part of the books as Pettigrew 
returns as a character.

Maybe it has something to do with Sirius's suspicion of Lupin as the spy in the 
order (this from Shrieking Shack scene in POA).  Maybe they knew Lupin was 
doing something with/for Dumbledore secretly (as yet unknown to us, as 
many other Lupin things are), and thought it was too risky to tell Dumbledore, 
whose mind might be read by Lupin.

So, the first part canon, the second pure speculation (mmm . . . delicious 
speculation).

Hayes, who thinks it might be too early in the morning to attempt a written 
imitation of Homer Simpson.






From greatelderone at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 14:34:04 2003
From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 14:34:04 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore is not Voldemort's grandfather!
In-Reply-To: <bl2k8g+j6oj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl474s+61s3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81721

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hp42187gs" <hp42187gs at y...> 
wrote:
> Many people have been asking if Dumbledore is possibly related to 
Tom 
> Riddle. He is not! (It is not proven, at least.) One person said 
> that "Dumbledore could be (Voldemort's grandad) if his middle name 
> was Marvolo. What is his middle name?" Dumbledore's full name is 
> Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore--- end of discussion....
> 
> "hp42187gs"

Maybe Dumbledore is really Riddle's father.




From sydenmill at msn.com  Sat Sep 27 14:50:10 2003
From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 14:50:10 -0000
Subject: No subject
Message-ID: <bl4832+724h@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81722

Kneazle wrote, in post #81714:

She dismisses Firenze in response to Lavender and Parvati's girlish 
squealing over the centaur. She is dismissive of Lavender and 
Parvati, not Firenze.


Bohcoo responds:

OOP, ch. 27, pg. 599, American Edition:
"'Not really,' said Hermoine indifferently, who was reading the 
Daily Prophet. 'I've never really liked horses.'"

Can't get much more dismissive of Firenze than that, can she?

She even carries this dismissive attitude towards the centaurs with 
her into the forest when she and Harry are getting rid of Umbridge:

OOP, ch. 33, pg. 756, American Edition
(Gray centaur speaking) "' ... We were to act as your servants, drive 
away your enemies like obedient hounds?'"

'No!' said Hermoine in a horrorstruck squeak. 'Please -- I didn't 
mean that! I just hoped you'd be able to -- to help us --'"

She still couldn't see beyond her own point of view. She is 
only "horrorstruck" that her plea isn't working -- that they are 
offended by her attitude. She does not give them any validity.

In my opinion,
Bohcoo




From sydenmill at msn.com  Sat Sep 27 14:52:48 2003
From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 14:52:48 -0000
Subject: Post #81722 Subject:  Hermoine's Arrogance
Message-ID: <bl4880+an6f@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81723






From elizabeth1603 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 14:59:49 2003
From: elizabeth1603 at yahoo.com (elizabeth1603)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 14:59:49 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore is not Voldemort's grandfather!
In-Reply-To: <bl474s+61s3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl48l5+rcgr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81724

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "greatelderone" 
<greatelderone at y...> wrote:
>snip< One person said 
> > that "Dumbledore could be (Voldemort's grandad) if his middle 
name 
> > was Marvolo. What is his middle name?" Dumbledore's full name is 
> > Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore--- end of discussion....
> > 
> > "hp42187gs"
> 
> Maybe Dumbledore is really Riddle's father.

Can't be. Tom Riddle's father was a muggle. He could be a great 
grandfather, though. DD is at least 70 years older than VD.

Elli




From andie at knownet.net  Sat Sep 27 15:12:57 2003
From: andie at knownet.net (grindieloe)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 15:12:57 -0000
Subject: Peter, Sirius and Secret Keeping (was: Re: Dumbledore's Spies)
In-Reply-To: <bl2u9g+4kfc@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl49dp+64b8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81725

I've also always wondered regarding this topic why Dumbledore doesn't 
have some reaction when Hagrid brings Harry to Privet Drive on 
Sirius' motorcycle.  Didn't Dumbledore believe at that time that 
Sirius was the Secret Keeper?  Because if he had known that they 
changed secret keepers, he would have known all along that Sirius was 
innocent and PoA would have been a whole different story.

I apologize ahead of time, as I know I might have asked this before 
and can't remember the answers I received... yet I can't find it in 
the archives.  Thus, I ask yet again.

grindieloe




From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Sat Sep 27 12:01:53 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 07:01:53 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snapes Dark Mark (was: Jewish Goblins?)
References: <bl1r2u+6eab@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001b01c384ef$25754b40$1a3094ce@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81726


Isto:

> I think the first time a DE gets his mark he/she is proud of it,
> because it symbolizes the membership to a group which is in his/her
> opinion a group consisting of people who are better than the rest of
> the WW and whole world ("pureblood"). They think about themselves as
> an elite.

Taking some of this a bit further we see an additional interesting
comparison: (That is, if one of my history teachers wasn't just blowing
smoke up our kilts when she taught us about this.)

A big part of the Aryan ideal was of the physically fit, blond-haired,
blue-eyed "pure breeds."

A number of the upper echelons of the Nazi regime didn't fit this ideal,
Hitler included.

The DE were constructed of those from pureblood families of the WW, who also
felt that there was a natual superiority in the "purity of their breeding."

LV is a "half-breed" and doesn't fit in with his own policies of "racial
purity..."


*snip*

> I think that the dark mark is a comparison for Hitler's SS. There
> are other similarities with Hitler's Third Reich and the WW II in
> Harry Potter (for example "DD defeats Grindelwald in 1945").
> The whole pureblood-thing is based on racism, which is unfortunately
> a certain part of german history shown especially in the time of the
> Third Reich.

I rented a room from the mom of one of my friends a number of years back and
lived with them for two years.

She was of full German ancestry, with blond hair and blue eyes.  She also
lived as a little girl, in Berlin during the height of WWII.  I thought it
interesting to note that, while she didn't support the Nazi ideal or
anything, you could see how the environment of her youth affected her
outlook on people who were different than her.  While she didn't ridicule
them, or take the attitude that they were infirior, she often laughed at
people who acted different and thought they were strange... either that or
she was confused and didn't really understand them.

Kinda made life interesting when you take into account that I'm a Neo
Pagan... and my best friend aside from my wife, is a gay black man....


>
> Racism is unfortunately a problem in some european countries and in
> other world countries today, too.

I don't think there's a country in the world that doesn't have SOME group
that they are prejudiced against.

(As I tend to state, when someone says that there's no government supported
religion in the US... "Have you looked at our money lately?  And do you
really think a non-Christian has ANY chance of getting elected as president
within the next century?")


>
> Sorry for my bad english, it is not my mother tongue.

Aside from a spelling mistake or two, which most native speakers would
probably make, you do a very good job with it.

(As I once told a German pen-pal of mine in high school... when I called
Germany once for an hour and a half... summer... day rates... $104 for the
call... where was I??   Oh yeah... I told her that she spoke better English
than at least half of the Americans I knew...)

What is your native language?


Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster

"Did the Iron Chefs have to work their way up from being Copper and Bronze
Chefs first?"

-- Iggy McSnurd







From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Sat Sep 27 12:58:51 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 07:58:51 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The magic power of love. 
References: <bl3gpf+dm1r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <005401c384f7$205a8e60$1a3094ce@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81727

>From Valky

> "Doriane" > wrote:
> To Hans re Harry:
> > And how does that make him any more special that a 13-year-old girl
> > who's completely lost any hope in life, who doesn't think things will
> > ever get better, who suffers horribly every single day of her life,
> > but who won't commit suicide only because she doesn't want to "do
> > that" to her mom and sister ? Maybe I didn't save the world, but I
> > think I displayed pretty much all the qualities you quoted above. But
> > I don't think you'd me consider a hero, would you ?

from Valky

>
> As a matter of sincere fact Del, I do.
> And in this statement you have made the true heroics of the human
> soul more plain than in all the argument (sorry Hans) Hans gave.
> The very same courage compassion loyalty selflessness and love shown
> by this 13 year old girl is exactly the possession of a hero who
> would save the world.
> Wish there was more to say. Bless You


I have two things to say...

The first is a quote from the Disney version of Hercules...

"A true hero isn't measured by the size of his strength, but by the strength
of his heart."


The second is that there are those of us out there for whom suicide is
simply not an option.  No matter how bad things get, even if it slits
through our minds, it is quickly dismissed because we will not do it.

I have had many people state that you don't need to worry about someone who
refuses to kill themselves, since the depression or pain can't be that bad.
They say that if it's not an option for them, then they must not feel that
bad or have hit rock bottom.

Wrong...

For someone who refuses to take a permanent solution to a temporary problem
like that, the pain and depths to which they descend can be worse at times.
Someone who is willing to kill themselves sees that there's a way out...
they feel that they have an ejector seat from life.  Someone for whom this
is not an option knows that the only way out is to endure through it all and
come out the other end, hoping for the best.

Think of it like a Christian Scientist with a kidney stone... you just have
to have faith, deal with it, and hope that everything turns out all right,
despite the pain.  "Though you are in pain, this too shall pass."  (And this
is coming from a guy who's had 2 kidney stones at the same time that were as
big as they could get and still be passed... so they wouldn't use the
ultrasound option.  I had to grit my teeth and deal with it...)

You state that someone won't kill themselves, yet they've lost all hope.  I
speak from more experience with this than you can imagine when I say that
it's the people who kill themselves that have truly lost all hope.  For
those of us who cling to life no matter how lost we may feel, how much pain
we are in, how much sorrow at the seeming futility of it all... the one
thing we haven't lost is hope.  Because it's the hope that things will
eventually get better, no matter how deep that hope seems to be buried, that
keeps us clinging to life with all our strength when things get their
blackest.


Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster


"Your problems will always get worse... but after that, they'll get better."

-- Iggy McSnurd (A lesson I learned from a very wise girl I dated in
college.)

ADMIN: Folks, this thread is headed off-topic.  If you'd like to continue talking about pain, futility, suicide, etc., in terms of one's real-life experiences, please take the conversation to HPfGU-OT Chatter.  Otherwise, please steer the conversation back to the way this relates to the books.  Thanks!

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hpfgu-otchatter/





From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Sat Sep 27 13:19:15 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 08:19:15 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Death Chamber, and others
References: <bl3qt1+oh4o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <006e01c384f9$f43a7220$1a3094ce@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81728


>
> Kneasy
>
> Me again! This is getting to be a habit.

*grin* I think I have found my adversary on this list.  (Everyone needs a
person to debate point and counterpoint with to have a truly good time on a
list, IMHO.)

>
> I think you're making the mistake of confusing Astronomy (Sinistra) with
> Astrology (all the other frauds)..

Nope... *grin*  I'm fully aware of this fact.  No confusion here

> Throughout  the series there has been
> a repeated rubbishing and mistrust of divination in all it's forms, especially
> Astrology. Time  and again we are told not to trust it, that faking it in
> homework is a reasonable action to  take, that when this is marked, the
> ethereal  Sybill obviously can't determine the accuracy of the work done.
> Otherwise Harry and Ron would score zero. She marks for effect only.

On the other side of that, anyone who cares to be a proper investigator will
gather all possible interpretations of a situation or event.  From that,
they will base their conclusions.

Despite everything else, you never know if there's a possibility of Trelawny
and Firenze reading them similarly enough to have some validity.  Trelawny
IS the one who made the two major... and accurate.. predictions about Harry
and LV, so she's not completely without talent.

Remember that JKR is also famous for misleading people in her own way.

> By the way, alluding to an earlier post, Pluto is no longer regarded as
> a planet by astronomers.

Hmmm... What is it then?

Also, are these the same astronomers who, with a reliable mathematical
formula (that Pluto does fit into) said that the asteroid belt is where a
planet should be... but it can't possibly have been a planet because the
collected mass of the asteroids wouldn't even make a planet the size of
Mercury?   (To which my reply is:  Well, couldn't there be large amounts of
mass lost due to asteroids escaping that orbit and becoming meteors that
strike other planets?  If not, where did all the meteors come from that have
struck the moon, Earth, and the other planets?)


'Nuff said

Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster


"It's times like this I look at the cameras and say 'That's my family,
y'all.'"

-- Iggy McSnurd  (How I respond when one of my family does something
strange.)







From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Sat Sep 27 13:35:32 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 08:35:32 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] James Potter Still Alive?
References: <bl3r19+3hpf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <007901c384fc$3aa32020$1a3094ce@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81729

>   What does anyone else think about this theory?
>
>       Rachel
>


Actually, it sounds fairly plausible to me.

Taking it one interesting step further, perhaps the switching spell
(possibly gone wrong) was the actual cause of the personality change that
eventually caused Lilly to fall in love with James.

This brings up the thought that Remus was in love with Lilly, while James
was simply attracted to her because she was cute... and having her on his
arm would suit his ego.  (Remus does seem to be the more loyal and devoted
of the two, while James seems to be more of a loner, despite being the
leader of the Marauders.)

Let's play with this a little more, shall we?  *grin*

Remus is secretly in love with Lilly, but he's a werewolf and it wouldn't be
safe for him to pursue that love.

Remus and James are doing spells (or possibly having a practice duel) and
one of them does a switching spell that goes slightly wrong, causing them to
not be able to reverse it.

James and Remus discuss it, and decide not to seek AD or McGonagall's help
switching back because it allows Remus to pursue Lilly, and James can be his
loner self.

James does realize that to keep suspicion away from the switch, he needs to
"tone his attitude down a bit."  And in doing so for so long, learns to
mellow down naturally.


Thus, we have Remus and James switching identities, with Remus being able to
pursue Lilly and have the life that was denied him.  On the other hand,
James is allowed to be "more interesting" and give his dear friend a great
gift.



(I love playing with concepts like this... Not only does it exercise your
imagination, but it's fun as well.  *grin*)

Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster


"Matchmaker, matchmaker, make me a match... (because my lighter is out of
fuel and I need to light my pipe...)"

-- Iggy McSnurd







From Yahtzee63 at aol.com  Sat Sep 27 13:57:07 2003
From: Yahtzee63 at aol.com (Yahtzee63 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 09:57:07 EDT
Subject: Harry Promos
Message-ID: <103.36be2dc2.2ca6f133@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81730


In a message dated 9/27/03 3:28:20 AM, HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com writes:


> In each ad, the person/persons list 3 things that pretty much defines
> why they read Harry Potter.
> 
> If you had to narrow to three basic reasons why you love Harry, what
> three things would you choose?
> 

Gosh, three things. Well, here goes --

1) I love the pure imagination of it all. Whether it's the wizard paintings 
or the brilliant character names or the intricacies of Quidditch, the books are 
always full of dazzling invention.
2) The way the characters are developing and gaining three-dimensionality. I 
would never have said that after PS/SS or CoS, but from the third book in, 
this series has been growing more complex and intriguing.
3) This is harder to put into words, but I'll say that I love the books' 
sense of balance. What I mean by that is that you get both the huge, apocalyptical 
battle against primal evil AND the everyday humor of kids in school. You get 
the hard-edged, difficult relationships, like Harry's with Snape's and Sirius' 
with, well, the rest of the world, and you also get the gentle, funny ones, 
like Molly's adoptive-mothering of Harry and Dumbledore's comradeship with the 
weirder members of the Hogwarts staff. I like the way the books move through 
so many different concepts and tones so easily; it really maks the world that 
much more enjoyable and real.



Yahtzee


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From Yahtzee63 at aol.com  Sat Sep 27 14:02:19 2003
From: Yahtzee63 at aol.com (Yahtzee63 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 10:02:19 EDT
Subject: Please, no Voldemort redemption!
Message-ID: <132.250ec32d.2ca6f26b@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81731


In a message dated 9/27/03 4:22:31 AM, HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com writes:


> the Dark Lord simply ceases to exist and
> die on his own if Harry manages to make Tom Riddle understand, and possibly
> even feel, love.
> 
> 
I definitely see the storytelling merit of what you're talking about here, 
but I have to say, I hope like crazy that the end of Voldemort doesn't involve 
Voldemort understanding love, feeling love, anything like that. Sometimes 
there's a place for the mellowing and deepening of the villain, but sometimes 
there's not: "Lord of the Rings" would be awful if, at the end, Frodo and Sam 
figured out that Saruman really had a terrible childhood. And I think in some ways 
Voldemort fulfills that kind of role in the HP books -- he's there as a force, 
more than as a character, and the redemptions or damnations that matter are 
those of the characters affected by this pure evil.

I think the idea of Harry showing Voldemort mercy has a little more merit -- 
it would be about Harry, not about Voldemort, and it would be something 
profoundly unexpected. But I am really hoping we don't learn a lot about Tom 
Riddle's pain. I am heartless and wicked, and I don't care about Tom Riddle's pain. I 
want the books really invested in the changes within Harry and Snape and 
Lupin and Hermione, not Lord Voldemort.



Yahtzee


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From greatelderone at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 15:29:52 2003
From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 15:29:52 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore is not Voldemort's grandfather!
In-Reply-To: <bl48l5+rcgr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl4adg+at7o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81732

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "elizabeth1603" 
<elizabeth1603 at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "greatelderone" 
> <greatelderone at y...> wrote:
> >snip< One person said 
> > > that "Dumbledore could be (Voldemort's grandad) if his middle 
> name 
> > > was Marvolo. What is his middle name?" Dumbledore's full name 
is 
> > > Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore--- end of 
discussion....
> > > 
> > > "hp42187gs"
> > 
> > Maybe Dumbledore is really Riddle's father.
> 
> Can't be. Tom Riddle's father was a muggle. He could be a great 
> grandfather, though. DD is at least 70 years older than VD.
> 
> Elli

I'm talking about Tom Riddle Jr/Lord Voldemort.




From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Sat Sep 27 15:23:06 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 10:23:06 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Peter, Sirius and Secret Keeping (was: Re: Dumbledore's Spies)
References: <bl49dp+64b8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <00a701c3850b$4177a380$1a3094ce@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81733

I think everyone's missing a few important facts about why Hagrid, Sirius,
McGonagall, and Dumbledore knew where the Potter's lived, and why there was
no dager of people finding the information out from them:

1 - Only the person who is the secret keeper can reveal the information.
Even the people the keeper tells can't pass the information on at all.

2 - Hagrid, Sirius, McGonagall, and Dumbledore were all members of the Order
of the Phoenix.

3 - It's logical that Peter would have told a few members of the OotP, even
despite his alleigence to LV.  As crafty as he is, Peter would have realized
that by telling a few others "just in case" would have drawn even more
suspicion away from him when things did go down.  When all is said and done,
one of Peter's first goals is to avoid blame and suspicion.

4 - I would also assume that, while the keeper of the secret keeps it safe
so long as they are alive, if the people who's location is protected are
killed, then the spell would break as well.  (The spell would need both the
keeper and the kept to be alive, wouldn't it?  That is, if the kept is a
person rather than a place.)


Comments?  Dissentions?

Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster


"What would happen if Wormtail ever met Willard?"

--  Iggy McSnurd







From Yahtzee63 at aol.com  Sat Sep 27 14:10:32 2003
From: Yahtzee63 at aol.com (Yahtzee63 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 10:10:32 EDT
Subject: Apparating
Message-ID: <1a3.1a922d1e.2ca6f458@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81734


In a message dated 9/27/03 4:22:31 AM, HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com writes:


> 
> > Students have to learn to Apparate and Disapparate... presumably on the
> > school grounds.
> 
> > Perhaps the border of the grounds acts as a warding circle, preventing
> > travel across the line, but not on either side of it.
> 

OTOH, it might be taught a lot like Driver's Ed -- where students are taken 
off-campus by an instructor (Madame Hooch, perhaps?) for the purposes of 
practicing. The teacher looks after the students' safety and directs them where to 
go, then gets them safely back in time for their next class. 

Given that Harry's safety can't be ensured in all settings, this setup might 
allow for him, perhaps, not to learn how to Apparate along with the others, 
and thus be in the same position as the last kid in class to get his driver's 
licence. :)




Yahtzee


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From greatelderone at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 15:28:19 2003
From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 15:28:19 -0000
Subject: They are children's books (Was: the heart of it all)
In-Reply-To: <bl1gqc+ad64@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl4aaj+31aq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81735

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "feetmadeofclay" 
<feetmadeofclay at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mom31" <mom31 at r...> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > 
> >   Joj says:
> 
> >   Joj,  who's husband thinks she's crazy for thinking JK might 
kill 
> off Harry.  "They're children's books" , he says.  Well, I can 
> forgive him his ignorance, since he's only seen the movies.  :-)
> 
> Golly: They are children's books.  And children's books have 
beloved 
> characters that die all the time.  
> 
> Charlotte's web for instance...    
> 
> Children often deal with death.  So their stories do as well.  It 
is 
> a depressing way to end a series.  But if you are a christ figure, 
> you have to die. 
> 
> Golly

Well that pretty much rules out Harry.




From melindaleo at msn.com  Sat Sep 27 17:12:10 2003
From: melindaleo at msn.com (Melinda Leydon)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 12:12:10 -0500
Subject: Do You Peek?
Message-ID: <BB9B2F1A.1891%melindaleo@msn.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81736

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bohcoo" <sydenmill at m...> wrote:
> When I got OOP home, I settled in to read it from front to back,
just 
> like I had with the other books, "dying" to know who was going to
> die.  However, after the chapter about Mrs. Weasley's Woes where we
> were teased with Dead! Everyone Weasley, that did it for me -- I
> thumbed through the book until I found out who really did bite the
> dust. I peeked.
> 
> So, am I the only one? Did anyone else get their book out of the
> wrapper and immediately look for the death scene?
> 
> So, then -- how are you going to be reading the last two books in
the 
> series? Are you going to Peek? Look at the last page or two, just
to 
> see who is still there, saying goodbye on the Platform as they part
> for the summer?

I'm a notorious peeker, I ALWAYS peek.  Always, that is, until Harry Potter.
I haven't peeked at any of these books, that would ruin it for me so I go
thru at a ridiculous pace, then re-read more slowly.l

Book 6 will be the same - hopefully next summer I'll get it and sit on the
couch for about 24 hours and let my kids wreak all the havoc they want
unsupervised until I'm finished!  Then I'll rehash it all here for days on
end!

Book 7, however, will be different.  I'm going to peek.  If Harry dies, I'm
not reading it at all and just leaving it at chapter 6 and letting fan
fiction continue the story of me.  May be childish, but that's how I feel
and plan on doing it!

Melinda






From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au  Sat Sep 27 16:21:18 2003
From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 16:21:18 -0000
Subject: No subject
Message-ID: <bl4ddu+71m5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81737

JKR's books are full of scenes and events that we would all like to 
have been able to play around with as kids.

My kids' Girl Guide group is planning a Harry Potter day. Can anyone 
come up with other ideas from the books to translate into games? 

We want to set up tables or booths with different activities. 

PS - no Blast Ended Skrewts please
(Appologies if this is the wrong group to post this. I was trying 
the "off-topic chatter" but this group seems better suited for things 
from all 5 books.)
**************************
Suggestions: 
"Beating the Bludger". 
We can do it shooting gallery style, but using a small club to hit a 
ball at targets. More points for hitting Chasers with quaffles, 
seekers, or keepers from the other team. 

"Hippogriff Rides"
Similar to barrel on ropes ride, landing on high jump cushions when 
you fall. 

"Rememberball"
Have ten items appear for 10 secs, cover them up, then name them to 
stop the Rememberball from being red.

"Hermione Escaping the Basalisk"
Hermione tried running from the library using a mirror so she 
wouldn't be killed by the Basalisk. Competitors can either run 
through a maze where everything is reversed (like in a mirror). Try 
filling in a maze with a pencil while looking only in a mirror.

Quidditch match ???
we have basketball and football playing fields nearby. Any ideas on 
how to do it though?

~aussie_lol~
to send directly, Aust e-mails ends with "yahoo.com.au"




From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au  Sat Sep 27 16:32:38 2003
From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 16:32:38 -0000
Subject: Apparating
In-Reply-To: <1a3.1a922d1e.2ca6f458@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bl4e36+vjh4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81738

--- Yahtzee63 wrote:
> > > > Students have to learn to Apparate and Disapparate... 
> > > presumably on the school grounds.
> > 
> > > Perhaps the border of the grounds acts as a warding circle, 
> > > preventing travel across the line, but not on either side of it.
> > > 
> OTOH, it might be taught a lot like Driver's Ed -- where students 
> are taken off-campus by an instructor (Madame Hooch, perhaps?) for 
> the purposes of practicing. > Yahtzee
 
OotP is set in the year Harry is ment to apparate afterwards. So I 
agree about the "driving instruction" idea ... but not that it is 
part of school curriculum (subject taught at school).

It may be closer to "Sky Diving classes". Not all wizards know how 
to, nor want to bother about apparating. For some, it is an un-
necessary risk. 

from GOF 6:
"You have to pass a test to Apparate?"  Harry asked.
"Oh yes," said Mr. Weasley, ... "The Department of Magical 
Transportation had to fine a couple of people the other day for 
Apparating without a license.  It's not easy, Apparition, and when 
it's not done property it can lead to nasty complications.  This pair 
I'm talking about went and splinched themselves."
Everyone around the table except Harry winced.
"Er - splinched?" said Harry.
"They left half of themselves behind," said Mr. Weasley, ...  "So, of 
course, they were stuck.  Couldn't move either way.  Had to wait for 
the Accidental Magic Reversal Squad to sort them out.  ..."
Harry had a sudden vision of ... (ewww).
"Were they okay?" he asked, startled.
"Oh yes," said Mr. Weasley matter-of-factly.  "But they got a heavy 
fine, and I don't think they'll be trying it again in a hurry.  You 
don't mess around with Apparition.  There are plenty of adult wizards 
who don't bother with it.  Prefer brooms - slower, but safer."





From hermionegallo at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 16:38:52 2003
From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 16:38:52 -0000
Subject: Hermione's growth (was Why Ron Loves Hermione)
In-Reply-To: <bl411a+v8l7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl4ees+ih11@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81739



post 81660 David had a number of points to argue that Hermione seems 
to have become arrogant in OOP (snipped):

"She presumes to direct Harry's love life without checking whether he 
wants her to.  
She dismisses Firenze.  
She rewrites the  rules of her bargain with Rita Skeeter, just 
because it suits her.  
She decides what Sirius thinks of Harry, and has the cheek to assume 
that Sirius' support of an idea is a counter-recommendation.
Most tellingly to my mind, she makes no effort whatsoever to check 
whether her elf clothes are having the desired effect."

Kneazle255 posted his responses in 81714... under my name.  Please 
forgive the error.  The replies, snipped, as follows:

"She does not comment on who Harry should be dating, only explains 
the situation to an extremely flummoxed Harry.
She dismisses Firenze in response to Lavender and Parvati's girlish 
squealing over the centaur. She is dismissive of Lavender and 
Parvati, not Firenze. 
She rewrites her agreement with Rita to aid in a WAR. And incidently  
helps Rita as well get back into journalism, forcing her into 
writing  the most important article of her career.    
Finally, Sirius is generally wrong about everything in this book.  
Sirius does appear to see Harry as the second coming of James and 
actaully gets angry at Harry for not being James at one point.  She 
has every reason to be suspicous of Sirius. 
This is an expression of Hermione's weakness that she has had all 
along. She can be insensitive other people's feelings when they 
contradict her logic."

hg:
I myself would like to add that Hermione is possibly my favorite 
character, and David's points were strong enough to lead me to doubt 
her.  Kneazle, however, read the same things as David, but has seen 
them in a different light, one that's IMO more consistent with who 
Hermione has been all along.
hg.






From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk  Sat Sep 27 16:52:40 2003
From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 16:52:40 -0000
Subject: James Potter Still Alive?
In-Reply-To: <bl3r19+3hpf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl4f8p+sim6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81740

William, could I borrow your razor for a moment? Thanks.

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "rach9112000" <RACH911 at a...> wrote:

>     1) Unlike everyone else, Lupin on first seeing Harry never 
> stared at his scar or mentioned his resemblance to James. (ch 5)
>     2)Harry tells Lupin that when a dementor gets near him, he hears 
> his mum being murdered by voldemort. On hearing this, Lupin had 
> made "a sudden motion with his arm, as though to grip Harry's 
> shoulder, but thought better of it". (ch 10)
>     3) Trelawny said that Lupin "positively fled when I offered to 
> crystal gaze for him-"(ch11)
>     4) When Harry tells lupin he hears his mums voice louder, Lupin 
> looks "paler than usual" and when he says he heard his dad, lupin 
> says "you heard James?" in a strange voice.(ch12)
>     5) "I certainly don't want Harry dead...""An odd shiver passed 
> over his face". (ch 17)
>     6) lupin has "no hesitation" about what harry's father would 
> think (ch 18).
> 

The more I hear of Waters' book, the more I want to take a look at it,
for a lesson in constructing arguments if nothing else.

Whether James and Remus have switched bodies keeps coming up from time
to time. Some people seem to like this theory, others don't. I
personally won't believe it until I have JKR's word on it. 

The rule when theories are tested is that if you make an exceptional
claim, you need exceptional proof to support it. If you want to prove
that the Crumple-horned Snorkacks exist, you'd better bring one to the
Department of Regulation of Magical Creatures.

Every piece of evidence that Waters cite in his book is
circumstantial. There are other explanations which are simpler and
less far-fetched, such as: 

Remus Lupin was a close personal friend of Harry's father and knew
that James might have found it exhilarating to see his son follow in
his footsteps, at least prank-wise (#6). It's quite probable that
Remus held Harry in his arms the same day he was born, babysat him,
changed his nappies and so on during the fifteen months Harry lived
with his parents. Thus, he has more of a personal connection with him
than those who know him as "The Boy Who Lived" (#1, #5).

Remus is a rather reserved, lonely, logical person who doesn't seem to
have much patience for Trelawney's mumbo-jumbo ("I daresay you've had
enough of tea-leaves?"*; #3). He was quite likely devastated by three
friends' death by the hands of the fourth, who was sent off to Azkaban
(the closest friends he had, mind you) and still mourns them (#2, #4)

*I'm reserved and logical and I'd definitely have fled if Trelawney
offered me half an hour of her nonsense.

James Potter had a crush on Lily when they were in fifth year, but
Remus on the other hand doesn't seem to notice her. Is the suggestion
that they would have changed bodies prior to "Snape's worst memory"?

That's my take on the "James and Remus changed bodies" theory.
William, you can have your razor back now.

Alshain, who still wants to know Remus's second name. Could be Janus
-- the two-faced god. 




From lbiles at flash.net  Sat Sep 27 17:03:14 2003
From: lbiles at flash.net (leb2323)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 17:03:14 -0000
Subject: Kreacher
In-Reply-To: <bksvpv+r5qk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl4fsi+ju8e@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81741

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Brad" <stratton at a...> wrote:
> With the last of the Blacks now dead, what becomes of Kreacher? Is 
> Sirius' relation to Tonks enough to make her his new master? 
> Otherwise, what stops him from leaving Grimmauld Place and going to 
> the Narcissa or Voldemort and telling her/him everything?

He already went to Narcissa and told the Malfoys all that he could 
within the constraints of him not being the secretkeeper. 
Personally, I believe that he will now go to Bellatrix.  She was
still in Azkaban when he ran off to the Malfoys.  We know that she is 
his favorite from the discussion that occurred when Hermione was 
leaving a Christmas gift in his "den"  (pg 504 ch 23 OoP, US
edition). Besides, her temperament seems very suited to Kreacher and 
she does remind us of dear old Mother Black!

By the way . . . a few paragraphs later Sirius speculates that 
Kreacher may be missing because he might have "crawled into the
airing cupboard and died".  Just what the heck is an airing cupboard?

leb 




From june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk  Sat Sep 27 17:13:55 2003
From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 17:13:55 -0000
Subject: Kreacher
In-Reply-To: <bl4fsi+ju8e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl4ggj+kp4h@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81742

--- > By the way . . . a few paragraphs later Sirius speculates that 
> Kreacher may be missing because he might have "crawled into the
> airing cupboard and died".  Just what the heck is an airing 
cupboard?
> 
> leb

Brit speak.  Airing cupboards are where we keep clothes and stuff 
to "air" after they have been washed and dried.  The "airing 
cupboard" usually houses the water heater and has shelves and such.

Well you asked...

June






From lbiles at flash.net  Sat Sep 27 17:20:39 2003
From: lbiles at flash.net (leb2323)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 17:20:39 -0000
Subject: Ron's experience in MoM
In-Reply-To: <bktciu+hapl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl4gt7+bihj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81743

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dcyasser" <dcyasser at y...> 
wrote:
> Or perhaps, for the Ron-is-an-evil-betrayer theorists, Ron is the 
> one who has physically been scarred by someone else's
> thoughts
 will these unknown thoughts, or his own brooding,
leave 
> him scarred enough to do the unthinkable? 
> dc

I think the big burning question should be WHO's brain was it that
Ron summoned from the tank?  We have to assume that the brains in the
tank were pretty darn special for some reason or another for the DoM 
to have harvested them to study.  For all we know it was the brain of
the evil wizard that DD is credited with defeating on his chocolate 
frog card!  The possibilities (and repercussions) are endless!

leb




From zanelupin at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 18:37:01 2003
From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 18:37:01 -0000
Subject: Peter, Sirius and Secret Keeping (was: Re: Dumbledore's Spies)
In-Reply-To: <00a701c3850b$4177a380$1a3094ce@rick>
Message-ID: <bl4lce+fj52@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81744

Iggy McSnurd:

>I think everyone's missing a few important facts about why Hagrid, 
Sirius, McGonagall, and Dumbledore knew where the Potter's lived, 
and why there was no dager of people finding the information out 
from them:

1 - Only the person who is the secret keeper can reveal the 
information. Even the people the keeper tells can't pass the 
information on at all.

2 - Hagrid, Sirius, McGonagall, and Dumbledore were all members of 
the Order of the Phoenix.<

KathyK:

Sirius knew where the Potters were because Peter told him.  As you 
said later in your post, Peter was trying to avoid suspicion.  If he 
refused to tell even Sirius where James and Lily were, Sirius and 
the Potters would know something was up with Peter.  As for others 
knowing, I believe that only Dumbledore knew besides Pettigrew and 
Sirius.  And Peter didn't tell him to his face.  As Catlady pointed 
out in message 81704:

"2) the Secret Keeper can tell the secret in writing (as 
Dumbledore "told" Harry that the headquarters of the Order of the 
Phoenix is at 12 Grimmauld Place and the house suddenly became 
visible to Harry). 

"Therefore, Pettigrew as Secret Keeper could have written "James and
Lily are hiding in their house in Godric's Hollow" on several notes,
and the people who read those notes would know. I suppose James
instructed him to write one note to Sirius, one to Dumbledore, and 
one to Hagrid. Peter could have written the ones for Dumbledore and
Hagrid in an imitation of Sirius's handwriting, so they wouldn't 
known that Peter was the Secret Keeper."

So the Potters and Sirius were the only ones who knew the truth 
about Pettigrew being Secret Keeper.  I suppose Hagrid could also 
have been informed, but I always assumed once Lily and James died 
that the secret was out and Dumbledore was free to tell Hagrid where 
to find Harry.  
 
 
>3 - It's logical that Peter would have told a few members of the 
OotP, even despite his alleigence to LV.  As crafty as he is, Peter 
would have realized that by telling a few others "just in case" 
would have drawn even more suspicion away from him when things did 
go down.  When all is said and done, one of Peter's first goals is 
to avoid blame and suspicion.<

I assume you mean by writing here or else the others would have 
known about Peter being the traitor rather than Sirius. 

grindieloe in 81725:

>>I've also always wondered regarding this topic why Dumbledore 
doesn't have some reaction when Hagrid brings Harry to Privet Drive 
on Sirius' motorcycle. Didn't Dumbledore believe at that time that 
Sirius was the Secret Keeper? Because if he had known that they 
changed secret keepers, he would have known all along that Sirius 
was innocent and PoA would have been a whole different story.<<

I don't think Dumbledore reacted to Hagrid's showing up on Sirius's 
motorcycle because: 
1) it wasn't important to the readers at the time who Sirius Black 
was and why Hagrid had the bike.  If Dumbledore or McGonagall had 
made a big deal of the fact, it wouldn't have fit at the time 

2) at the time perhaps Dumbledore was still trying to gather 
information on exactly how things played out at Godric's Hollow.  
Maybe he wanted to know why Sirius failed at Secret Keeper before 
condemning him 

3) Dumbledore rarely has great, noticeable reactions to things, as 
far as I recall.  Even that gleam that has been discussed oh so many 
times was just a fleeting reaction.  

4) Dumbledore knew that Pettigrew was the Secret Keeper and let 
Sirius go to Azkaban anyways because Dumbledore suspected Voldemort 
would return one day and Harry needed to be in the protection of his 
Aunt Petunia's house and he knew Sirius wouldn't allow Harry to be 
left in the care of relatives who despised him.  Yeah, that last one 
is really awful, but, who knows?  I know I've read someone saying 
something like this before but I can't remember who or when, so 
apologies to whoever owns the theory. 

KathyK (who could just talk all day long about Pettigrew, Sirius, 
and Secret-Keeping) 










From jakejensen at hotmail.com  Sat Sep 27 18:37:21 2003
From: jakejensen at hotmail.com (jakedjensen)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 18:37:21 -0000
Subject: Peter, Sirius and Secret Keeping (was: Re: Dumbledore's Spies)
In-Reply-To: <00a701c3850b$4177a380$1a3094ce@rick>
Message-ID: <bl4ld1+47vu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81745

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Iggy McSnurd" 
<coyoteschild at p...> wrote:
<SNIP>
 
> 3 - It's logical that Peter would have told a few members of the 
OotP, even
> despite his alleigence to LV.  As crafty as he is, Peter would have 
realized
> that by telling a few others "just in case" would have drawn even 
more
> suspicion away from him when things did go down.  When all is said 
and done,
> one of Peter's first goals is to avoid blame and suspicion.
> > 
> Comments?  Dissentions?
> 
> Iggy McSnurd
>

This does not account for why DD and co think Sirius betrayed the 
Potters.  If Peter told them all (as secret keeper) where the Potters 
were then they would all have known that Peter was the traitor and 
not Sirius.  In PoA, Minerva & Hagrid (see conversation at the Three 
Broomsticks) both clearly think that Sirius was the secret keeper and 
the traitor to boot.

Furthermore, someone besides Peter and Sirius had to know where the 
Potters were in order for that fateful night to make sense.  Even if 
the charm was broken by the slaying of the Potters, Godric's Hollow 
is not a pure wizarding community (in England, only Hogs is).  The 
Potters house exploded (it is described as such by Hagrid in SS/PS) 
drawing the attention of muggles (Hagrid just beat the muggles to the 
house in SS/PS).  So how did Hagrid beat everybody there?  When a 
house explodes, the police/fire dept (even muggles) arrive pretty 
quickly.  

Simple solution: if the secret can be passed from one keeper to 
another (maintaining the network of people who already know the 
secret) than all of the Order could have known where the Potters were 
and still think Sirius was the keeper (because he and Peter switched 
at the last moment).

Jake  




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Sat Sep 27 19:17:59 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 19:17:59 -0000
Subject: Dumbledores Philosophy (was MAGIC DISHWASHER...)
In-Reply-To: <bl462k+d0bm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl4np7+fb5t@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81746

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" <gbannister10 at a...> > 
> 
> Geoff:
> Hold on just a moment. How do you square that with - 
> 
> "'But why couldn't Quirrell touch me?'
> 'Your mother died to save you. If there is one thing Voldemort cannot 
> understand, it is love. He didn't realise that love as powerful as 
> your mother's for you leaves its own mark. Not a scar, no visible 
> sign.... to have been loved so deeply, even though the person who 
> loved us is gone, will give us some protection for ever. It is in 
> your very skin. Quirrell, full of hatred, greed and ambition, sharing 
> his soul with Voldemort, could not touch you for this reason. It was 
> agony to touch a person marked by something so good.'"
> 
> (PS UK edition p.216)

Good heavens!
You don't *still*  believe everything Dumbledore says do you?
Dear, oh dear.
Wouldn't like to  buy a bridge would you?

Kneasy




From zanelupin at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 19:28:36 2003
From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 19:28:36 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore as Secret Keeper
In-Reply-To: <bl463q+cipu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl4od4+7at6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81747

Gwyneth said:

<snip> >>>The question then is why the Potters decided against 
Dumbledore as their Secret-Keeper.  
<snip>
-Simply had too much trust in their friends and their loyalty as 
well as abilities.<<<
 
Now Hayes:
 
>Good question and one I think might have to be part of the books as 
Pettigrew returns as a character.
 
Maybe it has something to do with Sirius's suspicion of Lupin as the 
spy in the order (this from Shrieking Shack scene in POA).  Maybe 
they knew Lupin was doing something with/for Dumbledore secretly (as 
yet unknown to us, as many other Lupin things are), and thought it 
was too risky to tell Dumbledore, whose mind might be read by Lupin.
 
So, the first part canon, the second pure speculation (mmm . . . 
delicious speculation).<

KathyK:

Provided Lupin is capable of reading minds, would Lupin have been 
able to get the whereabouts of the Potters out of Dumbledore's mind 
in the first place?  And if he was capable of doing so, could 
finding the information out in this way "count" as Dumbledore 
telling him?  I don't think so.  Flitwick says in PoA, 'unless, of 
course, the Secret-Keeper chooses to divulge it.  As long as the 
Secret-Keeper refused to speak...' (US paperback 205)  It sounds as 
if the secret must...Oh scratch that!  Darn my stupid, spinning 
mind.  

Let me move on to the Fidelius Charm canon from OoP where Dumbledore 
wrote down the location for Harry on a piece of paper.  Would 
someone else reading the paper know the location of the Order even 
though it was intended for Harry?  I don't see why not.  So even 
though Dumbledore may not intend for Lupin to glean the Potter's 
location from his mind, if Lupin could read minds, he'd then know 
where they were.  Speculation on Speculation give me a headache but 
is so much fun.  

>Hayes, who thinks it might be too early in the morning to attempt a 
written imitation of Homer Simpson.<

KathyK (who thinks Homer Simpson imitations work any time of day in 
any form)




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sat Sep 27 20:04:24 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 20:04:24 -0000
Subject: Dumbledores Philosophy (was MAGIC DISHWASHER...)
In-Reply-To: <bl4np7+fb5t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl4qg8+qg7v@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81748

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" 
<gbannister10 at a...> > 
> > 
> > Geoff:
> > Hold on just a moment. How do you square that with - 
> > 
> > "'But why couldn't Quirrell touch me?'
> > 'Your mother died to save you. If there is one thing Voldemort 
cannot 
> > understand, it is love. He didn't realise that love as powerful 
as 
> > your mother's for you leaves its own mark. Not a scar, no visible 
> > sign.... to have been loved so deeply, even though the person who 
> > loved us is gone, will give us some protection for ever. It is in 
> > your very skin. Quirrell, full of hatred, greed and ambition, 
sharing 
> > his soul with Voldemort, could not touch you for this reason. It 
was 
> > agony to touch a person marked by something so good.'"
> > 
> > (PS UK edition p.216)
> 


Kneasy:
> Good heavens!
> You don't *still*  believe everything Dumbledore says do you?
> Dear, oh dear.
> Wouldn't like to  buy a bridge would you?
> 

Geoff:
You said -  "But the theory that it is 'love' is 
purely the invention of listees. I've no doubt the protection was 
placed 'through' or 'because' of love, but that is not the same 
thing."

I see no reason why it shouldn't be love itself. I may not always 
agree with what DD says, but I can't see any reason for him playing 
with semantics in a way which would be over the head of the 11 year 
old Harry. I'm not even sure that I agree with your conclusion anyway.

Perhaps my brain is in first gear tonight but you will have to 
explain the "bridge" reference to me. I fail to see its relevance.





From catlady at wicca.net  Sat Sep 27 20:15:46 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 20:15:46 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Bridge (was: Dumbledore's Philosophy (was MAGIC DISHWASHER...)
In-Reply-To: <bl4qg8+qg7v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl4r5i+4ir9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81749

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister"
<gbannister10 at a...> wrote:

> Kneasy wrote:
> > Good heavens!
> > You don't *still*  believe everything Dumbledore says do you?
> > Dear, oh dear.
> > Wouldn't like to  buy a bridge would you?
> 
> Perhaps my brain is in first gear tonight but you will have to 
> explain the "bridge" reference to me. I fail to see its relevance.

He's calling you a sucker, by suggesting that you'd buy the Brooklyn
Bridge from someone who doesn't own it. 




From dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu  Sat Sep 27 20:21:57 2003
From: dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu (Arya)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 20:21:57 -0000
Subject: James Potter Still Alive?
In-Reply-To: <bl4f8p+sim6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl4rh5+6gr2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81750

I have read Galadriel Waters' book (in fact brought it out just for this).   I do 
think it is an excellent book in a detailed analysis of books 1-4 makes several 
excellent and accurate observations upon JKR's style, techiniques, and tricks.  
However, the book's theory on the switching of Remus and James falls quite 
short of being a supported postulation on the septology mystery--IMHO.  

Each of the points listed below and in favor of the Remus/James switch can 
be explained away by simply being chalked up to foreshadowing the 
revelation at the close of PoA that Remus was a close friend of James.  
Throughout PoA, this is unknown, really.  Remus never tells Harry about how 
well he knew his father while they were in school together.  At the end of the 
book when Remus and Sirius are reunited and exclaim that they each thought 
the other was the real traitor, I take that to mean that Remus, being the only 
one out of the Mauraduers who never knew the true identity of the Secret 
Keeper (Peter, Sirius and james all obviously did) was the one who 
EVERYONE else thought to be the traitor, and given his personality as a bit of 
a quiet natured, self-effacing kind of guy, probably felt like his being seen as 
the traitor was somehow his fault and he might have carried an awful lot of 
guilt around from that instance-- afterall, until the end of PoA, he believes that 
in the span of 1-3 days, he lost all three of the best friends he ever had 
(James dead, Peter dead and Sirius in Azkaban).  So, I say his guilt makes 
him believe that Harry would want nothing to do with him if he knew of 
Remus's connection to his father.  

As for your point # 3, with trewlawney, I think this one is not explained away 
by my reasons, however, I do think it may be a supporting argument to the 
Lupin's boggart is not a moon but a crystal prophecy sphere of some sort.  It 
may have been that Remus witnessed Trewlawney give a prophecy (they 
always seem to be given to those who are close to the actual ones involved or 
the events prophesized about), and that the prophecy was something Remus 
"feared" and since he knew there wasa  recording about it, he fears anyone 
finding out and therefore, fears the prophecy recording that might allow 
someone to hear it.  He also would flee before the prospect of hearing 
another prophecy.  

Just my two knuts,
Arya
 
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "rach9112000" <
RACH911 at a...> wrote:
> 
> >     1) Unlike everyone else, Lupin on first seeing Harry never 
> > stared at his scar or mentioned his resemblance to James. (ch 5)
> >     2)Harry tells Lupin that when a dementor gets near him, he hears 
> > his mum being murdered by voldemort. On hearing this, Lupin had 
> > made "a sudden motion with his arm, as though to grip Harry's 
> > shoulder, but thought better of it". (ch 10)
> >     3) Trelawny said that Lupin "positively fled when I offered to 
> > crystal gaze for him-"(ch11)
> >     4) When Harry tells lupin he hears his mums voice louder, Lupin 
> > looks "paler than usual" and when he says he heard his dad, lupin 
> > says "you heard James?" in a strange voice.(ch12)
> >     5) "I certainly don't want Harry dead...""An odd shiver passed 
> > over his face". (ch 17)
> >     6) lupin has "no hesitation" about what harry's father would 
> > think (ch 18).
> > 
> 




From mochajava13 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 21:00:48 2003
From: mochajava13 at yahoo.com (mochajava13)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 21:00:48 -0000
Subject: Ron's experience in MoM (WAS Ron's big moment?)
In-Reply-To: <16b.24230204.2ca356e3@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bl4tq0+mdv5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81751

I'm going to jump in with what I thought was going on with Ron in 
the Department of Mysteries.  When Harry met up with Ron, Luna, and 
Ginny in the hallway of the rotating doors, Ron was seriously messed 
up (to use the technical term there).  Ron was bleeding from the 
mouth, could barely stand, and was not making much sense.  Harry had 
to drag Ron (and Harry commented that dragging Ron was like dragging 
Dudley after the dementor attack: neither was moving).  Ron was 
detached from the dangers around him, and mentally not all there.  
He was being giggly and all, but he did not seem to take in where he 
was or the situation that he was in.  When Ron summonsed the brain, 
death eaters were attacking people.  My thoughts were that Ron was 
very seriously physically injured, and his attitude/silliness was a 
manifestation of this.  Bleeding at the mouth can be a sign of a 
very serious injury.  And after a loss of blood, some people can 
get "funny".  That's what I thought happened to Ron.  With the 
brains, I thought that the brain was trying to dig its way into Ron, 
to try and take Ron's body over or something.  Or maybe eat Ron.  I 
didn't think that Ron necessarily understood what the thoughts on 
the brain tentacles were, just that the tentacles caused him pain.  
Very interesting speculations brought up on just what these thoughts 
could do to Ron!
Sarah




From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Sat Sep 27 21:37:36 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 21:37:36 -0000
Subject: They are children's books (Was: the heart of it all)
In-Reply-To: <bl4aaj+31aq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl4vv0+4mei@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81752

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "greatelderone" 
<greatelderone at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "feetmadeofclay" 
> <feetmadeofclay at y...> wrote:
> > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mom31" <mom31 at r...> wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >   Joj says:
> > 
> > >   Joj,  who's husband thinks she's crazy for thinking JK might 
> kill 
> > off Harry.  "They're children's books" , he says.  Well, I can 
> > forgive him his ignorance, since he's only seen the movies.  :-)
> > 
> > Golly: They are children's books.  And children's books have 
> beloved 
> > characters that die all the time.  
> > 
> > Charlotte's web for instance...    
> > 
> > Children often deal with death.  So their stories do as well.  It 
> is 
> > a depressing way to end a series.  But if you are a christ 
figure, 
> > you have to die. 
> > 
> > Golly
> 
> Well that pretty much rules out Harry.


   Jeff:

    *Exactly*! I've been having this discussion on another list with 
a silly fan-girl who's in college. She harps on about how perfect 
Harry is and that he alone will save the world on his own. She also 
talks about Harry's eyes, hair and his voice in most posts. I wonder 
what books she's been reading. It's not the series most of us have 
read. I don't recall any books that a character speaks to you, or 
that you can have him actually appear before you. 
    i've also pointed out numerous times that Harry isn't Christ. 
He's had a miserable life, has few social skills, and can't really 
relate to others that well. He's also showing a dark side. She can't 
comprehend this for some reason.  She also can't seem to understand 
that Harry can't be like his parents since he never really knew them, 
and wasn't raised by them. He didn't even really know what they 
looked like until recently.
    Harry is lots of things, but perfect or Christ-like, no. Not by a 
long shot. I'm very curious about what he'll be like during the final 
battle. Will his link to Voldie take hold so strong that he has the 
same desire to rule and destroy? 


  Jeff




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sat Sep 27 22:20:04 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 22:20:04 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Bridge (was: Dumbledore's Philosophy (was MAGIC DISHWASHER...)
In-Reply-To: <bl4r5i+4ir9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl52ek+aecg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81753

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" 
<catlady at w...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister"
> <gbannister10 at a...> wrote:
> 
> > Kneasy wrote:
> > > Good heavens!
> > > You don't *still*  believe everything Dumbledore says do you?
> > > Dear, oh dear.
> > > Wouldn't like to  buy a bridge would you?
> > 
> > Perhaps my brain is in first gear tonight but you will have to 
> > explain the "bridge" reference to me. I fail to see its relevance.
> 
> He's calling you a sucker, by suggesting that you'd buy the Brooklyn
> Bridge from someone who doesn't own it.

Thanks for enlightening me; very considerate of you. I think that 
both Dumbledore and I would be lost on that one, not being resident 
in the US. If he comes to the UK, perhaps Mundungus could sell him a 
pig in a poke.




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sat Sep 27 22:31:01 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 22:31:01 -0000
Subject: They are children's books (Was: the heart of it all)
In-Reply-To: <bl4vv0+4mei@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl5335+ki1g@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81754

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jeffl1965" <jeffl1965 at h...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "greatelderone" 
> <greatelderone at y...> wrote:
> > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "feetmadeofclay" 
> > <feetmadeofclay at y...> wrote:
> > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mom31" <mom31 at r...> 
wrote:
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >   Joj says:
> > > 
> > > >   Joj,  who's husband thinks she's crazy for thinking JK 
might 
> > kill 
> > > off Harry.  "They're children's books" , he says.  Well, I can 
> > > forgive him his ignorance, since he's only seen the movies.  :-)
> > > 
> > > Golly: They are children's books.  And children's books have 
> > beloved 
> > > characters that die all the time.  
> > > 
> > > Charlotte's web for instance...    
> > > 
> > > Children often deal with death.  So their stories do as well.  
It 
> > is 
> > > a depressing way to end a series.  But if you are a christ 
> figure, 
> > > you have to die. 
> > > 
> > > Golly
> > 
> > Well that pretty much rules out Harry.
> 
> 
>    Jeff:
> 
>     *Exactly*! I've been having this discussion on another list 
with 
> a silly fan-girl who's in college. She harps on about how perfect 
> Harry is and that he alone will save the world on his own. She also 
> talks about Harry's eyes, hair and his voice in most posts. I 
wonder 
> what books she's been reading. It's not the series most of us have 
> read. I don't recall any books that a character speaks to you, or 
> that you can have him actually appear before you. 
>     i've also pointed out numerous times that Harry isn't Christ. 
> He's had a miserable life, has few social skills, and can't really 
> relate to others that well. He's also showing a dark side. She 
can't 
> comprehend this for some reason.  She also can't seem to understand 
> that Harry can't be like his parents since he never really knew 
them, 
> and wasn't raised by them. He didn't even really know what they 
> looked like until recently.
>     Harry is lots of things, but perfect or Christ-like, no. Not by 
a 
> long shot. I'm very curious about what he'll be like during the 
final 
> battle. Will his link to Voldie take hold so strong that he has the 
> same desire to rule and destroy? 
> 

Geoff:
I think we've shared a similar exchange of ideas along this line 
before. I do not see HP as a Christ figure but as a type of a 
Christian figure. Those of us who claim that position try to follow 
in the steps of Christ, accepting him into our lives but realising 
that, although we have the power of the risen Lord on call, we are 
ties up in our own shortcomings and like Harry, often fail to take 
the right advice, make the correct decisions and generally progress 
through life in a series of fits and starts depending on how much 
time we are giving to trying to see our way forward. That's why I can 
identify with Harry, especially when I was his age. He is not a 
plaster saint. Anyone with his background plus the problems of 
getting through adolescence and coming out at the other end as a 
reasonable human being with a modicum of social interaction is doing 
well.  I remember my own son in his mid-teens and when we see him now 
at 30, he's a swan transformed from an ugly duckling.... Go for it 
Harry!




From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 23:17:11 2003
From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 23:17:11 -0000
Subject: The Death Chamber -How dead is Dead?
In-Reply-To: <bl3f6q+jolo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl55pn+r8d0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81755

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
<snip of much material not to the point I'm after here>
> So it's true dead is dead even in our every day mortal muggle world,
> but in that same world, people do return from the dead as I have
> described.

If you talk to doctors who deal with death, when they pronounce 
someone dead they mean something along the lines of "irreversibly non-
responsive, with acute, catastrophic and deepening or terminal 
collapse of essential bodily systems."  Sometimes they even refine it 
down to "irreversible brain damage leaving the body incapable of self 
regulation and the brain incapable of functioning above the medula 
oblongata."  (In other words, higher brain function completely and 
permanently gone and autonomic systems insufficient to sustain 
minimal bodily functions.)  But, the real problem is that "death" is 
still debateable in its definition.  For instance, cardiac surgery 
now routinely involves stopping the heart in a manner that the heart 
and brain are incapable of reversing, yet which can be medically 
restarted.  Surgeons don't see themselves as killing their patients 
when they do this.  Some hypothermia victims have survived and 
recovered from apparently complete cessation of both heart and brain 
function.  Still, when a brain turns to goo, it is definitely dead.

As for the portraits and ghosts, I've said elsewhere that these 
aren't really the people represented.  Even Nick says that he is more 
an image than the original Nick, and truly "neither here nor there."  
Even if you "return" as a ghost, you're still dead.  If there is a 
portrait of you somewhere, the portrait is really just a 
representation of you when you were alive, but not really you, and 
not capable of the things that define life, such as growing, 
developing, reproducing, etc.  As for James, Lily and others killed 
with the AK curse, the priori incantatum also produces an "echo" 
rather than the person.

Again, these echo are not really the people they appear to be.  They 
are just images of verying detail, and in the Wizarding World capable 
of some behavior consistent with the persons represented ... but the 
originals are still just as dead as if none of these things existed.  
They have passed "beyond the veil," at the very least as physical 
beings, and will not return.


Richard, who doesn't see a problem with saying that someone is dead, 
even if there is a ghost of that person still hanging around.





From scootingalong at bellsouth.net  Sat Sep 27 23:21:36 2003
From: scootingalong at bellsouth.net (scooting2win)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 23:21:36 -0000
Subject: Please, no Voldemort redemption!
In-Reply-To: <132.250ec32d.2ca6f26b@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bl5620+l8if@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81756

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Yahtzee63 at a... wrote:
> 
> In a message dated 9/27/03 4:22:31 AM, 
HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com writes:
> 
> 
> > the Dark Lord simply ceases to exist and
> > die on his own if Harry manages to make Tom Riddle understand, 
and possibly
> > even feel, love.
> > 
> > 
> I definitely see the storytelling merit of what you're talking 
about here, 
> but I have to say, I hope like crazy that the end of Voldemort 
doesn't involve 
> Voldemort understanding love, feeling love, anything like that. 
Sometimes 
> there's a place for the mellowing and deepening of the villain, 
but sometimes 
> there's not: "Lord of the Rings" would be awful if, at the end, 
Frodo and Sam 
> figured out that Saruman really had a terrible childhood. And I 
think in some ways 
> Voldemort fulfills that kind of role in the HP books -- he's there 
as a force, 
> more than as a character, and the redemptions or damnations that 
matter are 
> those of the characters affected by this pure evil.
> 
> I think the idea of Harry showing Voldemort mercy has a little 
more merit -- 
> it would be about Harry, not about Voldemort, and it would be 
something 
> profoundly unexpected. But I am really hoping we don't learn a lot 
about Tom 
> Riddle's pain. I am heartless and wicked, and I don't care about 
Tom Riddle's pain. I 
> want the books really invested in the changes within Harry and 
Snape and 
> Lupin and Hermione, not Lord Voldemort.
> 
> 
> 
> Yahtzee
> 
> 
I tend to agree with this, Voldemort feeling love by way of Tom 
Riddle I don't understand. How would we be able to see how Tom 
Riddle life was before or to try to affect how he feels love. That's 
not going to happen, and the books, are written in Harry's POV. so 
how could harry see all of this and experience all of this when it 
would have to be Tom's point of view not harry's. I am not sure that 
I would have read all the books and in the end see how Voldemort 
feels love and how things could have changed if he had love in his 
life before attending Hogwarts. That to me would be wrong. We all 
read the books to see what happens to Harry. How people around Harry 
change and how Harry changes. I do want to add that to some extent 
that Harry's life would have been better if he felt love in his 
childhood. Would harry have been a pampered prince on his first day 
of Hogwarts, if his parents had lived? Even one parent? Someone to 
care for him and love him? I believe he would not only be pampered, 
but down right evil about it. Harry growing up with every one acting 
like he saved the Wizarding World and how good he is. He would have 
walked into Hogwarts acting like he owned the place because he 
defeated the Dark Lord. But given the facts of the matter. Harry is 
not a spoiled child, he is not a Christ figure (to some of us), and 
he is growing up with an evil man attempting to kill him every 
chance he gets. Hell IMO, harry is just about as normal now as he 
was the day he started Hogwarts, more so with the stress of worrying 
whether Voldemort will find and kill him. Lori




From lily_paige_delaney at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 23:27:14 2003
From: lily_paige_delaney at yahoo.com (lily_paige_delaney)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 23:27:14 -0000
Subject: Wizard injuries
Message-ID: <bl56ci+mld6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81757

Hi,

Something that's been bugging me lately is the accidents and 
injuries in HP don't seem to be consistent.  

In PS we hear that Neville fell out of his grandmother's window and 
bounced - causing celebrations all round as this was apparently a 
sign of his magical abilities.  Then he falls twenty feet off his 
broomstick and only breaks his wrist.  However in OoP his nose is 
broken by a kick in the face?

In OoP Ginny is knocked down several flights of stairs by the twins 
flying trunks and yet despite Molly screaming that they could have 
done her a serious injury she seems unscathed.  Yet her ankle is 
broken when Luna uses the Reductor curse to explore a planet 
nearby.  (Unless Luna's aim was off) Also in Oop Harry falls down 
the steps in the death chamber and is shaken but uninjured.  But in 
GoF during the third task Harry falls twelve feet when the Spider 
drops him Harry's leg crumples beneath him (although I concede he 
was already injured by the Spider's pincers.)  

Then there's Ron getting smashed in the chess game and being knocked 
unconcious in PS and likewise Snape being knocked out in the 
Shrieking Shack in PoA.

I haven't included Harry's broomstick fall in PoA because Dumbledore 
seems to have intervened there but it does make me wonder whether 
wizards have some inate survival instinct when it comes to falls.  
They seem much less susceptable to injury from falls than from other 
means.

LPD






From lily_paige_delaney at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 23:27:15 2003
From: lily_paige_delaney at yahoo.com (lily_paige_delaney)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 23:27:15 -0000
Subject: Wizard injuries
Message-ID: <bl56cj+j0q4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81758

Hi,

Something that's been bugging me lately is the accidents and 
injuries in HP don't seem to be consistent.  

In PS we hear that Neville fell out of his grandmother's window and 
bounced - causing celebrations all round as this was apparently a 
sign of his magical abilities.  Then he falls twenty feet off his 
broomstick and only breaks his wrist.  However in OoP his nose is 
broken by a kick in the face?

In OoP Ginny is knocked down several flights of stairs by the twins 
flying trunks and yet despite Molly screaming that they could have 
done her a serious injury she seems unscathed.  Yet her ankle is 
broken when Luna uses the Reductor curse to explore a planet 
nearby.  (Unless Luna's aim was off) Also in Oop Harry falls down 
the steps in the death chamber and is shaken but uninjured.  But in 
GoF during the third task Harry falls twelve feet when the Spider 
drops him Harry's leg crumples beneath him (although I concede he 
was already injured by the Spider's pincers.)  

Then there's Ron getting smashed in the chess game and being knocked 
unconcious in PS and likewise Snape being knocked out in the 
Shrieking Shack in PoA.

I haven't included Harry's broomstick fall in PoA because Dumbledore 
seems to have intervened there but it does make me wonder whether 
wizards have some inate survival instinct when it comes to falls.  
They seem much less susceptable to injury from falls than from other 
means.

LPD






From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 23:30:50 2003
From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 23:30:50 -0000
Subject: The Death Chamber
In-Reply-To: <bl3asn+jknj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl56ja+vdo2@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81759

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" 
<gbannister10 at a...> wrote:
<snipping assorted comments unrelated to the point at hand>
> > Richard, who is curious what would have happened had Dobby not 
> > intervened in CoS.
> 
> Geoff:
> Auch sprach Geoff, in Anwort nach Richard.... (Geoff spoke also, in 
> reply to Richard)
> 
> Here we have got movie "contamination", though I don't like the use 
> of the word - I like the films as well as the book (cries 
> of "heretic" from off-stage)
> 
> There is no reference to a spell in the book -
> 
> "Lucius Malfoy stood frozen, staring at the elf. Then he lunged at 
> Harry.
> 'You've lost me my servant, boy!'
> But Dobby shouted, 'You shall not harm Harry Potter!'"
> 
> Dobby intervened because Harry intervened because Dobby was there. 
> Nice circular argument. :-)


me (Richard) here:

You miss the point.  I referred to the movie when speaking of the AK 
by Lucius, but in my wondering, I am only concerned with the fact 
that Lucius attempted to attack Harry ... which he did in both the 
movie and the book.  The difference between the two scenes lies in 
the method attempted, not in the presence of absence of an attack.

Having reminded you of this, I still wonder what would (or could) 
have happened had Dobby NOT intervened.  In the book's version of the 
attack, would Lucius suffer a similar fate to that of Quirrel, 
finding that Harry's touch burned beyond endurance?  Would some 
other "fated" event intervene, such as Lucius tripping and beaning 
himself in the fall, or a teacher appearing and handling matters?  In 
the movie version of the attack, would the AK have worked?  Would 
Lucius have suffered a similar ricochet as that which stripped 
Voldemort of human form?  Or worse (at least for Lucius and Draco), 
would such a ricochet kill Lucius?  And if not, what would "fate" 
have transpire so that the prophecy in OotP could be properly 
fulfilled, with only one of the Voldemort/Harry pair left living 
after the other dies at his foes hands?  It is a perplexion.

And now that we get to it, "either/or" does explicitly mean "A or B, 
but not both A and B."  Any other interpretation or usage is purely 
linguistic sloppiness.  This is one of the reasons I really wish 
formal logic, and even formal symbolic logic, were taught in 
elementary school, or in middle school at the latest.


Richard, whose degree in philosophy with emphasis on logic makes him 
a little rigid on certain points.





From lily_paige_delaney at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 27 23:38:18 2003
From: lily_paige_delaney at yahoo.com (lily_paige_delaney)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 23:38:18 -0000
Subject: Molly and Arthur in different houses at Hogwarts?
Message-ID: <bl571a+ete6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81760

Another discovery whilst reading GoF to my daughter the other night.

Just prior to the third task Molly and Bill turn up to spend the day 
with Harry as his surrogate family.  Bill says he hasn't seen 
Hogwarts for five years and asks about Sir Cadogan and the Fat Lady.

Molly says about the fat lady:

"She was here in my time...she gave me such a telling off one night 
when I got back to the dormitory at four in the morning-"

"What were you doing out of your dormitory at four in the morining?" 
said Bill, surveying Mrs Weasley with amazement.

Mrs Weasley grinned, her eyes twinkling.

"Your father and I had been for a night-time stroll," she said "He 
got caught by Apollyon Pringle - he was the caretaker in those days -
your father's still got the marks."

It doesn't seem like Molly and Arthur were returning to the same 
dormitory.  Molly returned to the dormitory where the Fat Lady was 
stationed so you'd guess it was Gryffindor but I suppose its not 
definate.

I wonder what house dormitory Arthur was returning to and why they 
really were meeting at 4am!

LPD






From RSFJenny19 at aol.com  Sat Sep 27 23:43:32 2003
From: RSFJenny19 at aol.com (RSFJenny19 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 19:43:32 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: James Potter Still Alive?
Message-ID: <6a.35c85e1a.2ca77aa4@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81761

There was a really great discussion about this topic back in early July.  I 
did a little search and found one part of the discussion at post 70544.  You 
can continue down the thread from there, or even do a search on the exact 
subject heading to pull up all the responses, but it ended up being a very effective 
arguement why the switching places theory just doesn't fly.


~RSFJenny~

"Listening to the news! Again?" 
"Well, it changes every day, you see." - Vernon Dursley and Harry Potter

http://www.geocities.com/rsfjenny/HP


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From tub_of_earwax at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 28 00:13:17 2003
From: tub_of_earwax at yahoo.com (tub_of_earwax)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 00:13:17 -0000
Subject: Molly and Arthur in different houses at Hogwarts?
In-Reply-To: <bl571a+ete6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl592t+4qt4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81762

In PS I think it was, Ron states that both his parents were in 
Gryffindor. For a while I beleived that Arthur was in Ravenclaw, but 
if Ron said it, it's Canon. They were probably going out at the time 
that they were taking a "stroll" at 4 am. Very naughty indeed! Plus, 
maybe Molly could escape Apollyon Pringle, but Arthur couldn't, and 
so Arthur got punished, and Molly returned to her dormitory. It 
would go something like this:

Molly: Oh Look Arthur! There's Pringle! Quick, hide!
Arthur: Curse, he saw me. 
Molly: Arthur, what do we do?
Arthur: I'll take the blame. 
Molly: You certainly will not! I'll take the blame!
Arthur: Molly, I forbid you to do so, now run!
Molly: we'll both take it. *stubournly*
Arthur: Go to your dorm hunny, sorry. *gives her a kiss*. 
*Arthur shoves Molly into the bushes and runs off, so Pringle can 
catch him, letting Molly off the hook. Molly sees it, finds it so 
brave and wonderful of Arthur sighing deeply with love, admiration 
and affection. But she gives up, and returns to Gryff Dorm*
The Portrait: Molly maiden-name, what on earth are you doing out so 
late. How dare you disturb my sleep! And what have you been doing? 
Sounds sinister, if you ask me. Breaking rules are you? 
Molly: Password. Yeah, let me in *still thinking of Arthur eyes 
twinkling* 
The Portrait keeps arguing but finally lets her in. 

The End. 

Ciao, 

*Lara*.





--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lily_paige_delaney" 
<lily_paige_delaney at y...> wrote:
> Another discovery whilst reading GoF to my daughter the other 
night.
> 
> Just prior to the third task Molly and Bill turn up to spend the 
day 
> with Harry as his surrogate family.  Bill says he hasn't seen 
> Hogwarts for five years and asks about Sir Cadogan and the Fat 
Lady.
> 
> Molly says about the fat lady:
> 
> "She was here in my time...she gave me such a telling off one 
night 
> when I got back to the dormitory at four in the morning-"
> 
> "What were you doing out of your dormitory at four in the 
morining?" 
> said Bill, surveying Mrs Weasley with amazement.
> 
> Mrs Weasley grinned, her eyes twinkling.
> 
> "Your father and I had been for a night-time stroll," she said "He 
> got caught by Apollyon Pringle - he was the caretaker in those 
days -
> your father's still got the marks."
> 
> It doesn't seem like Molly and Arthur were returning to the same 
> dormitory.  Molly returned to the dormitory where the Fat Lady was 
> stationed so you'd guess it was Gryffindor but I suppose its not 
> definate.
> 
> I wonder what house dormitory Arthur was returning to and why they 
> really were meeting at 4am!
> 
> LPD




From deemarie1a at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 28 00:13:57 2003
From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 00:13:57 -0000
Subject: Harry Promos
In-Reply-To: <103.36be2dc2.2ca6f133@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bl5945+vgc4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81763

> In a message dated 9/27/03 3:28:20 AM, 
HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com writes:
> 
> 
> > In each ad, the person/persons list 3 things that pretty much 
defines
> > why they read Harry Potter.
> > 
> > If you had to narrow to three basic reasons why you love Harry, 
what
> > three things would you choose?
> > 
> 
There are so many reasons to pick three has been difficult, but here 
goes...

1.  Harry.  One of the best written characters of the latter half of 
the 20th century.  IMO he is written so believably, one would think 
that JKR was Harry's therapist.  For all that Harry has gone through, 
his reactions and behavior are consistent with a teenaged boy.  
Although his experiences are far from typical, his reactions are 
consistent with what teenagers go through.

2.  The villains!  How delicious are they?  Their motives and actions 
are so delighfully despicable.  I so enjoy their evil.  I have said 
before how Dickensian I think these stories are and so many of JKR's 
villains are like those Dickens wrote about.  I find myself so often 
on pins and needles waiting for Harry and Co. to overcome their 
perils even though I have read these stories a number of times.  I 
often think of what actors say, that playing the villain is often the 
best part.  Well, JKR has written some of the best.

3.  Now I could list a multitude of characters or situations for 
this, but since I have to pick just one more...Remus Lupin.  He is 
such a tragic, romantic hero.  I do hope that JKR finds a way 
to "cure" his werewolfism.  I would like for Remus to share in 
the "Happy Ending" bit.  (And yes, I am just sappy enough to wish for 
that "Happy Ending" and not ashamed to admit it.)  Remus captured my 
attention from the moment I met him sleeping on the Hogwarts express, 
to the way he and his comrades defy the Dursley's to treat Harry 
badly.  I hope that we see much more of him in books 6 & 7.  I hope 
that he becomes Harry father figure.  

Well, that's my three...any others?

D




From MadameSSnape at aol.com  Sun Sep 28 00:15:52 2003
From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 20:15:52 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Molly and Arthur in different houses at Hogwarts?
Message-ID: <32.3e71333e.2ca78238@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81764

In a message dated 9/27/2003 7:45:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
lily_paige_delaney at yahoo.com writes:
It doesn't seem like Molly and Arthur were returning to the same 
dormitory.  Molly returned to the dormitory where the Fat Lady was 
stationed so you'd guess it was Gryffindor but I suppose its not 
definate.

I wonder what house dormitory Arthur was returning to and why they 
really were meeting at 4am!

I understood it as "two have a better chance of being caught than one, so 
let's go back separately."

The two go out for a walk - a little "privacy", whether on the grounds or to 
the Astronomy Tower - then, to reduce the possibility of their extracurricular 
activity being discovered, they head back to Gryffindor Tower separately - at 
different times, possibly by different routes.  Arthur is caught by Pringle; 
Molly gets a tongue-lashing by the Fat Lady.  

(I wonder - does the Fat Lady pass information on the Tower comings and 
goings on to McGonagall?)

Sherrie


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 28 00:26:59 2003
From: sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com (sarcasticmuppet)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 00:26:59 -0000
Subject: They are children's books (Was: the heart of it all)
In-Reply-To: <bl5335+ki1g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl59sj+6vqr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81765

> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jeffl1965" <jeffl1965 at h...> 
> wrote:
> > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "greatelderone" 
> > <greatelderone at y...> wrote:
> > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "feetmadeofclay" 
> > > <feetmadeofclay at y...> wrote:
> > > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mom31" <mom31 at r...> 
> wrote:
><snippage>
He {Harry} didn't even really know what they {Harry's parents}
> > looked like until recently.
<more snippage>



*cough* *cough* *1st year* *cough* *photo album* *cough* *cough*

hate to be nitpicky, but heretics are born in the lost details.  :)

--sarcasticmuppet--




From sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 28 01:33:54 2003
From: sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com (sarcasticmuppet)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 01:33:54 -0000
Subject: Harry Promos
In-Reply-To: <bl2juv+6mko@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl5dq2+uiff@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81766

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "grindieloe" <andie at k...> wrote:
> After reading the various Harry Potter promotional ads that 
> Scholastic is putting out to gather more adult readers, I got to 
> thinking...
> 
> In each ad, the person/persons list 3 things that pretty much 
define 
> why they read Harry Potter.
> 
> If you had to narrow to three basic reasons why you love Harry, 
what 
> three things would you choose?
> 
> grindieloe :)

1)  The surprise at the end.  This is what I fell in love with when I 
listened to Book I for the first time.  You and Harry know a certain 
thing to be undeniably true, then BAM! you're both completely wrong.  
It was actually something else which you should have seen coming, you 
silly.  Even reading the next ones for the first time, I *knew* there 
would be that surprise at the end, I expected it, I tried to 
anticipate it, and still, it surprised me beyond belief.  Book I is 
the best when it comes to this.  Book V still had this, but I missed 
the BAM! factor.

2)  The fact that Pat Robertson can't stand him.  :::Evil smilie:::

3)  The fact that noone ever just "says" something.  they say it 
aprehensively, happilly, angrily, etc etc etc.  Some find this 
annoying, but Jo's -ly words just make me want to read more.

--sarcasticmuppet--




From Erthena at aol.com  Sun Sep 28 03:58:11 2003
From: Erthena at aol.com (werebearloony)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 03:58:11 -0000
Subject: FILK: An Unforgivable's not a toy
Message-ID: <bl5m8j+3lfi@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81767

An Unforgivable's Not a Toy
To the tune of A Secretary is Not a Toy from How to Succeed in 
Business Without Really Trying.
I apologize profusely but I cannot find an example of this song 
anywhere.  
The Scene: Harry has just performed the crucatius curse on Bellatrix 
Lestrange and she launches into song to tell him how badly he has 
failed.
BELLATRIX:
Harry Potter, Harry Potter
An Unforgvable's not a toy,
 No my boy not a toy, 
To cast when you feel bad, and are rightfully mad
You need to cause pain for joy
No an unforgivable's not, definitely not
A toy
LUCIUS: 
You're absolutely right Bellatrix
ROOKWOOD:
Wouldn't have it any other way Bellatrix
VOLDEMORT:
It's the Death Eater Rules Bellatrix
DEATH EATERS:
An Unforgivable's not a toy
No my boy, not a toy
BELLATRIX:
You can not cause pain just annoy, boy
An Unforgivable's not

DEATH EATERS:
An Unforgivable's not

An Unforgivable's not, a toy
BELLATRIX:
It's a highly powerful, key component
Of the Death Eater Community
You have to have evil feelings to use it
They're rarely used with impunity!
All fear of us, they support
Being evil is of much great import
DEATH EATERS:
An Unforgivable's not a charm
They're used for causing harm
BELLATRIX:
Just look here at Lucius Malfoy, boy
Whenever he's on the spot
You can bet he's never forgot
An Unforgivable's not, a toy

DEATH EATERS:
An Unforgivable's not a thing
You can do with a wand swing
You must have a foul grin
And really pale skin
Be sure you want to destroy, yo!

<Dance sequence; amuse yourself for a few moments with dancing death 
eaters ect.>

BELLATRIX:
The spells we cast a lot
Are definitely not
Easily forgot
ROOKWOOD:
Unless you're charmed!
BELLATRIX:
Before them you employ
Remember this my boy
An Unforgivable's not
A child's toy!

Enjoy!
~~loony




From annemehr at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 28 04:26:05 2003
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 04:26:05 -0000
Subject: The Death Chamber
In-Reply-To: <003401c38446$3b472000$8ce979a5@rick>
Message-ID: <bl5nst+rndh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81768


> > Annemehr (before):
> > Yes, but I'm sure she didn't read about anything in the DoM in a book,
> > so if she "understood" somewhat, could it be because she *sensed*
> > something?  I would call that being affected, <snip>


Iggy: 
> Hermione has, IMHO, an analytical enough mind to figgure out what
the room
> is probably for... or at least get some inkling.  Not all of her
> understanding and such comes solely from books and teachers.  (That
would be
> discrediting her mind...)
> 
> There's also a diference between having an insight / sensing what the
> purpose of a room or item is, and actually being affected by a
particular
> item in the room.

Annemehr:
Everything you've said is true, however I read Hermione's reaction to
be too visceral to be the response to an intellectually perceived
danger.  She *could* have been sensing basically the same thing as the
others but to be repelled rather than attracted.

Iggy: 
> In addition, Hermione and Ron could have been affected by it, but to
such a
> small degree as to shrug it off.  (Much like the difference between
putting
> the tip of your tongue briefly to the contacts of a 9v battery, and
hooking
> your tonghue up to your car battery with jumper cables.)

Annemehr:
Ow.
But that would work with what I wrote above -- Hermione sensed it to
some extent, but she felt fear rather than attraction.  Okay, so she
didn't shrug it off IMO, but yes she could have gotten the 9v version.

Iggy:

> 
> The only other thing I can think of is that Ginny had been posessed
by the
> spirit of Tom Riddle in Cos, and that posession had probably left
some long
> lasting marks.  (Tom Riddle had seen deaths even before he imprinted
himself
> on the diary.  As a residue of that, Ginny may have the sense of
having seen
> death, but since it was a posession memory, she won't understand it
tnough
> to actually see the Thestrals.  At least... not yet.)
> 
> Just a thought.

Annemehr:

That *is* a thought.  When Ginny was possessed and lying in the
Chamber, she was very near death.  Harry has also been very near death
(not just situationally, as when duelling with Voldemort, but
physically when pierced by the basilisk fang).  Maybe being entranced
by the veil happens if you've nearly "gone through it" so to speak. 
Do you suppose Neville nearly died when his great-uncle Algie dropped
him, or on that night when the Death Eaters came and tortured his
parents?  And Luna we know next to nothing about, for all we know she
once almost died.

If you've "seen" death, you see thestrals.  Maybe if you've nearly
died, you're drawn by the veil.  How could this possibly mesh with
what I just wrote about Hermione?  I don't know -- maybe she came
close enough to death once back in her pre-Hogwarts life and she (or
her parents) were *very* afraid?  Yet I can't see her ever going so
far as to become a ghost...

Annemehr
very nearly demonstrating the ability to hold two opposing opinions at
the same time




From laikokae at hotmail.com  Sun Sep 28 04:42:36 2003
From: laikokae at hotmail.com (Kae *)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 14:42:36 +1000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Molly and Arthur in different houses at Hogwarts?
Message-ID: <Law10-F29bAhKW2LwZl000017e8@hotmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81769



>"Your father and I had been for a night-time stroll," she said "He
>got caught by Apollyon Pringle - he was the caretaker in those days -
>your father's still got the marks."

You inadvertantly answered your own question. Arthur got caught and Molly 
didn't. So Molly says, in not so many words.

Laik

_________________________________________________________________
Get less junk mail with ninemsn Premium. Click here  
http://ninemsn.com.au/premium/landing.asp




From l10r77 at juno.com  Sun Sep 28 04:47:53 2003
From: l10r77 at juno.com (Lisa Romero)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 00:47:53 -0400
Subject: Sirius Secret Keeper? (was: Re: Dumbledore's Spies)
Message-ID: <000a01c3857b$ae5ae550$f36c4b43@Lisa>

No: HPFGUIDX 81770

KathyK writes:
So I believe they made the change in Secret Keeper before the 
Fidelius Charm was cast for the first and only time

Now Me:
It's funny I come home to read this post after reading POA at work. One of the particular chapters I paid attention to this time is in regards to the Fidelus Charm. Anyway, I was unaware there was any debate regarding Sirius knowing or Peter being the only secret keeper. For me there's no question. I always assumed that the decision to have Peter as the Secret Keeper was done prior to the casting of the charm, therefore Sirius never had any knowledge until Peter told him what was going on, as I believe he did in regards to the secret he was keeping.
Just my 2 cents
Lisa

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From jakejensen at hotmail.com  Sun Sep 28 05:10:51 2003
From: jakejensen at hotmail.com (jakedjensen)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 05:10:51 -0000
Subject: Sirius Secret Keeper? (was: Re: Dumbledore's Spies)
In-Reply-To: <000a01c3857b$ae5ae550$f36c4b43@Lisa>
Message-ID: <bl5qgr+8obb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81771


After reading KathyK's second post(and discussing it with her 
offline), I agree that Peter was probably the lone secret keeper.  
So, unless someone else is as dense as me, I don't think there is a 
debate concerning the secret keeper issue anymore.  This side track 
discussion of secret keepers has been very interesting (and for me, 
downright educational), however, my original post (way back when) was 
about DD having a spy at the Potter's house that fateful night which, 
regardless of how the secret keeper worked, is still a definite 
possibility.  

Spying is in DD's nature, the origin of the invis cloak is still a 
mystery, and I am just trying to figure out how to explain the speed 
of Hagrid's response.  I mean, come on, Hagrid was the first one on 
the scene.  Hagrid!  The only way to explain Hagrid being there first 
without a spy network is if (and this is possible) no one (muggle or 
magic) was willing to go near the Potters destroyed house.  Hagrid, 
being the fearless dodger that he is, may have been the first person 
with the guts to wade through the wreckage.      

Still, DD sent Hagrid to go get Harry (see Hagrid's description of 
getting Harry in PS/SS) which suggests he knew Harry was alive.  
How?  Furthermore, given the gravity of the situation, why not go 
yourself?  I mean, what was DD doing at the time that was more 
important?  Ten pin bowling?

Jake




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 28 06:19:43 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 06:19:43 -0000
Subject: Will Success Spoil Harry Potter?  Was: Do You Peek?
In-Reply-To: <bl2h0o+rkhn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl5uhv+nije@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81772

"bohcoo" wrote:
<snip>
> I peeked. So, am I the only one? Did anyone else get their book out 
> of the wrapper and immediately look for the death scene?

Not me. I wasn't on HPfGU yet and was avoiding the hype; I wasn't 
even sure I believed the "somebody's gonna die" PR.
 
> So, then -- how are you going to be reading the last two books in 
> the series? Are you going to Peek? Look at the last page or two, 
> just to see who is still there, saying goodbye on the Platform as 
> they part for the summer?

I don't plan to peek, although if #6 is as bleak as #5, I may read 
the end of #7 right there in the store before I commit to buying or 
reading it at all. (Who am I kidding? Well, I might! Shut up! I'm a 
bit conflicted here, in case you couldn't tell.)

> I feel sorry for JKR, in a way. We have postulated the plot 
> possibilities so thoroughly, with speculations so spectacularly 
> intellectual, that I wonder if Rowling sits at home reading some of 
> them and saying to herself, "Oh no, what am I going to do NOW? I 
> wasn't going to get THAT sophisticated with it. . ."

I feel kinda sorry for JKR, too, but not that way. When I read the 
part of the post-OoP interview she gave where she said she missed 
writing in cafes because it made writing less lonely and that she 
does most of her writing now in front of a computer, I just went, 
Oohhhh! A certain amount of loneliness, of aloneness with your 
eyeballs turned around backwards in your head watching, feeling, 
creation occur between your ears, is necessary. (I hang out with 
writers and scribble stuff occasionally myself; can you tell?) The 
hustle and bustle of cafe customers and staff must have been a 
wonderful anodyne. Now, not only does she not have that, but the 
warm, intimate and joyous space in her head that Harry and the WW 
sprang from has become a commodity in the world arena. Most writers 
want to be read; what has happened to JKR and Harry doesn't even fit 
into "be(ing) read" anymore.

> She has commented that the Harry Potter story jumped into her mind, 
> fully formed. She knew how it was going to end before she set the 
> first word on paper. Do you think she has changed any of it in 
> light of these worldwide expectations?

I hope she avoids all the fan discussion sites, and all our endless 
and lovingly merciless deconstruction and prognostication, like the 
plague. The only voice she should be listening to about Harry is her 
own. The only fingerprints in the story should be the author's. I 
worry that we are getting in the way and that the story is suffering 
for it.

How many of us have lovingly crafted expressions of theories and 
philosphies here and been deflated by having it picked to shreds or 
being told that it's been said a hundred times before? (Go ahead, 
admit it.) Now imagine that you have spent *years* of your life and a 
hundred times as much TLC on something and that thousands of people 
(at least) have focused on it and are doing to it what we do. She's 
an amazing writer, but she's only human. And we don't know yet that 
the whole thing is going to come together in the end, do we? Hmmm?

Sandy, trying to imagine what to include in a "care" package to JKR




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sun Sep 28 06:44:40 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 06:44:40 -0000
Subject: The Death Chamber
In-Reply-To: <bl56ja+vdo2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl600o+6v2q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81773

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Richard" <darkmatter30 at y...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" 
> <gbannister10 at a...> wrote:
> <snipping assorted comments unrelated to the point at hand>
> > > Richard, who is curious what would have happened had Dobby not 
> > > intervened in CoS.
> > 
> > Geoff:
> >

<also snipping extraneous comments>

 
> > Here we have got movie "contamination", though I don't like the 
use 
> > of the word - I like the films as well as the book (cries 
> > of "heretic" from off-stage)
> > 
> > There is no reference to a spell in the book -
> 

<snip>

> 
> me (Richard) here:
> 
> You miss the point.  I referred to the movie when speaking of the 
AK 
> by Lucius, but in my wondering, I am only concerned with the fact 
> that Lucius attempted to attack Harry ... which he did in both the 
> movie and the book.  The difference between the two scenes lies in 
> the method attempted, not in the presence of absence of an attack.
> 
> Having reminded you of this, I still wonder what would (or could) 
> have happened had Dobby NOT intervened.  

Geoff:
I think, in return, that you missed my point. Lucius attempted to 
attack Harry /because/ Dobby was there. If he had not been there, 
then LM would not have launched the attack. 

Since Dobby spends a lot of his time defending Harry (admittedly in 
rather questionable ways), he would not have stood back in the 
situation which did arise.




From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Sun Sep 28 07:19:13 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 07:19:13 -0000
Subject: They are children's books (Was: the heart of it all)
In-Reply-To: <bl59sj+6vqr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl621h+6i6a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81774

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sarcasticmuppet" 
<sarcasticmuppet at y...> wrote:
> ><snippage>
> He {Harry} didn't even really know what they {Harry's parents}
> > > looked like until recently.
> <more snippage>
> 
> 
> 
> *cough* *cough* *1st year* *cough* *photo album* *cough* *cough*
> 
> hate to be nitpicky, but heretics are born in the lost details.  :)
> 
> --sarcasticmuppet--


 LOL!! That's what I meant. I didnt mean OOtP, because if I did, how 
would he have know who was who? :) Just to clarify, I meant that 
prior to the Mirror of Erised, and the photo album from Hagrid, Harry 
had no idea what his parents really looked like, since they were 
*Very* OT at home. ;) Sorry for any confusion I might've caused. :)


   Jeff




From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Sun Sep 28 07:30:01 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 07:30:01 -0000
Subject: They are children's books (Was: the heart of it all)
In-Reply-To: <bl5335+ki1g@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl62lp+gqmu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81775

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" 
<gbannister10 at a...> wrote:
> 
   <Snipped>


> Geoff:
> I think we've shared a similar exchange of ideas along this line 
> before. I do not see HP as a Christ figure but as a type of a 
> Christian figure. Those of us who claim that position try to follow 
> in the steps of Christ, accepting him into our lives but realising 
> that, although we have the power of the risen Lord on call, we are 
> ties up in our own shortcomings and like Harry, often fail to take 
> the right advice, make the correct decisions and generally progress 
> through life in a series of fits and starts depending on how much 
> time we are giving to trying to see our way forward. That's why I 
can 
> identify with Harry, especially when I was his age. He is not a 
> plaster saint. Anyone with his background plus the problems of 
> getting through adolescence and coming out at the other end as a 
> reasonable human being with a modicum of social interaction is 
doing 
> well.  I remember my own son in his mid-teens and when we see him 
now 
> at 30, he's a swan transformed from an ugly duckling.... Go for it 
> Harry!

   Intresting point, but I don't seem to feel that's what the other 
poster meant. I guess I should say that Harry isn't the Second 
Coming, and perhaps that will clear things up. Harry is good, but not 
necessarily a Christian. I've met good people who were agnostic, so 
its not always correct to associate good with The Lord. Even good 
people have dark secrets.  Just like in another book, Sir William 
Golding's Lord of The Flies, many mistake Simon for being Christ. 
Simon has lots of faults, and is even presented as being a bit 
mental. Not a good example. Anyway, to keep this on topic, as Sirius 
said there aren;t clear b&w lines in the HP universe, and the same 
can be said for RL as well.  While I think The Malfoy family are 
snobs and racists, I don't think they're totally evil. Not the kind 
of folk I'd want to have over for dinner, but not the kind I'd want 
to go casting stones at either. ;) Same for Crabbe and Goyle. I think 
they're too ignorant of life to really be evil. They may hang around 
with Draco, but that could be because they were told to, if nothing 
else. Snape is bad, but not totally evil, I guess. If he turns out to 
be a double agent, that would really stun lots of folks, but not 
really me. Same with Percy. He was good, but now it looks like he's 
evil, or is he just ignorant? I think blind ambition doesn't always 
mean a person is evil, but sometimes I've felt that it is the case 
with some people I've met.


  Jeff






From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Sat Sep 27 19:42:20 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 14:42:20 -0500
Subject: FILK - Thestrals
Message-ID: <000801c3852f$78f9cda0$31e379a5@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81776

Hello all...

Constance Vigilance has kinda inspired me with her Rocky Horror based filk
and, being a fellow fan of the cult classic, I decided to try my hand at
this route.  (I hope they are better than my earlier efforts.  This is the
first of three planned RHPS based filks... *grin*)

Ok... Here goes

Iggy McSnurd




Thestrals
(to the tune of "Time Warp" in the Rocky Horror Picture Show)

Harry:  Sirius is captured - time is fleeting
Voldemort's taking his toll
But listen closely

Hermione:  We can't wait much longer

Harry:  We've got to take control.
I think we can do it riding the Thestrals
Splattered with fresh blood
It will summon them

Harry & Hermione: And the beasts will come to us

All: So let's ride the Thestrals then
Let's ride the Thestrals then

Neville: You just jump on their backs

All: If you can see them all right

Neville: You hold onto their manes

All: You bring your knees in tight
But it's the altitude
That really drives you insane
Let's ride the Thestrals then
Let's ride the Thestrals then

Hermione: It's so dreamy - flying so freely
And you can't see them - no not at all
Flying to London - on a rescue mission
Swiftly moving - I hope we don't fall

Harry: With a spring and a wing flip

Hermione: You're into the air slip

Harry: And your stomach will never be the same

Hermione: With a falling sensation

Harry: We'll reach our destination

All: Let's ride those Thestrals again
Let's ride those Thestrals again.
  Luna: Well I'm walking through the woods
Feeling quite good
When a snake of a guy did an evil thing
Harry and us hooked up, it took him by surprise
We hit the Ministry, someone had prophesized
Sirius died, and then Harry changed
We knew that he would never be the same

All: Let's ride the Thestrals again
Let's ride the Thestrals again

Neville: You just jump on their backs

All: If you can see them all right

Neville: You hold onto their manes

All: You bring your knees in tight
But it's the altitude
That really drives you insane
Let's ride the Thestrals then
Let's ride the Thestrals then







From slytherin_jenn at yahoo.co.uk  Sat Sep 27 17:30:32 2003
From: slytherin_jenn at yahoo.co.uk (slytherin_jenn)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 17:30:32 -0000
Subject: International book versions & character names
Message-ID: <bl4hfo+tb1a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81777

I just finished the Philosopher's Stone in Russian and I noticed that 
some of the names were different. For example Snape was Snegg (and 
Rogue in the French version). I wonder what the reason is behind the 
name changes because I know that Rowling puts meanings in the names; 
Snape is a small town in England; Snegg could be roughly translated 
as snow (but not really)?? and rogue is an adjective - proud, 
arrogant, disagreeable or superb and it's an egg dish with fish. :P
I'm getting the Italian version next week and it'll be interesting if 
they change anything.

slytherin jenn

-and you know that notion just crossed my mind.....Jerry Garcia





From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz  Sat Sep 27 18:54:45 2003
From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 06:54:45 +1200
Subject: Dumbledore's Philosophy / flesh, blood & bone
In-Reply-To: <000f01c38461$bbfb2b40$3b92aec7@rick>
References: <bl203k+j2ho@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20030928065336.00a7a1f0@pop3.xtra.co.nz>

No: HPFGUIDX 81778

Iggy McSnurd the Prankster wrote:
>Add to that the other ingredients, and you have an interesting mix.
>Harry:  Blood which contains a mother's love...
>Peter:  The hand of a wizard who owes a life debt to Harry.  A debt which,
>as AD says, creates a very powerful bond between them. (paraphrasing, of
>course.)
>Tom Riddle Sr.:  The bones of a man who cast out his son and hated him for
>what he was.
>(Lessee... 1/3 love, 1/3 debt to Harry, and 1/3 hatred of wizards, and LV in
>particular.  Should be interesting to see if this is significant at all.)


Not much left over for LV's original traits.  I always had an idea the blood
from Harry would have an effect, but had not thought it out as to options.
Other than an internal blood war, Hate and Love fighting for top spot.

But adding Wormtail and Tom Snr really finishes it off.  I wonder if the
debt is now shared by Wormtail and LV in equal amounts, could be for
an interesting battle, them two going at it, equal attack and defence with
Harry in a corner.  What I mean is how can LV attack if the debt has taken
up a fair bit of him.

However, there has been no change right up to the end of book 5, so be
interesting to see what traits win out.

Tanya





From paula.russell at lineone.net  Sun Sep 28 08:01:11 2003
From: paula.russell at lineone.net (paulanurse2003)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 08:01:11 -0000
Subject: Death chamber
Message-ID: <bl64g7+cr94@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81779

Does the presence of the chamber with the Veil inside suggest that 
the wizarding world had the death penalty at some time? This room is 
referred to in OoTP as like the courtroom that Harry was 'tried' in 
with an ampitheatre design which suggests that an execution was 
public. However the stone archway is also 'old and crumbling' which 
could imply that this form of death penalty not used nowadays.

Aurors were (are?) able to use mortal force in the course of their 
work and we know from PoA that dementors are empowered to give 'kiss 
of death' although the subject is renedered soul-less not actually 
dead. Will the defection of the death eaters and the now apparent 
lack of security at Azkaban mean this method of execution is revived?




From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz  Sat Sep 27 19:27:21 2003
From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 07:27:21 +1200
Subject: Mrs. Black, Sirius a traitor, flint? (was Re: A Number of Questions)
In-Reply-To: <bl43ea+b00l@eGroups.com>
References: <p05001901bb9a5e480c6f@[65.95.84.185]>
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20030928072535.00a83560@pop3.xtra.co.nz>

No: HPFGUIDX 81780

KathyK:
>I don't believe it's a flint at all.  Even if she believed Sirius
>went to Azkaban a loyal Voldemort supporter, there's no way her
>portrait would believe that now.  He showed up at Grimmauld Place
>with Dumbledore the lover of all beings, Lupin the werewolf, Tonks
>whose mother betrayed the Black family by marrying a muggle born,
>Hermione the muggleborn, and the muggle-loving Weasleys, not to
>mention hosting Harry Potter who brought down Voldemort all those
>years ago.  The portrait of Mrs. Black would have to be completely
>blind not to notice this out of place group in her home, hosted by
>her own son.  So Sirius was obviously the traitor he always was.  It
>makes sense to me, at any rate.


One thing doesn't quite fit there.  She did blast him off the family tree
when he left home, and if she believed he had changed and been LV's
right hand man, surely would have reinstated him.

Tanya





From RACH911 at aol.com  Sun Sep 28 00:32:09 2003
From: RACH911 at aol.com (rach9112000)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 00:32:09 -0000
Subject: James Potter Still Alive?
In-Reply-To: <bl4rh5+6gr2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl5a69+8nbn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81781

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Arya" 
> >As for your point # 3, with Trewlawney, I think this one is not explained away by my reasons, however, I do think it may be a supporting argument to the 
Lupin's boggart is not a moon but a crystal prophecy sphere of some sort. It 
may have been that Remus witnessed Trewlawney give a prophecy (they 
always seem to be given to those who are close to the actual ones involved or 
the events prophesized about), and that the prophecy was something Remus 
"feared" and since he knew there was a recording about it, he fears anyone 
finding out and therefore, fears the prophecy recording that might allow 
someone to hear it. He also would flee before the prospect of hearing 
another prophecy. >>>


Maybe I'm wrong but I assumed the prophecy that Lupin was scared 
of on seeing the boggart was the one between Harry and Voldemort. 
This makes sense to me because if Harry is ultimately defeated by 
Voldemort then Voldemort will be around forever to attack the 
wizarding world. This seems quite a reasonable thing for Lupin to 
fear.

 Rachel





From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Sun Sep 28 00:41:35 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 19:41:35 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Obsessed with Harry (was - Re: They are children's books)
References: <bl4vv0+4mei@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000c01c38559$46af8f40$dc86aec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81782

Jeff:
>
>     *Exactly*! I've been having this discussion on another list with
> a silly fan-girl who's in college. She harps on about how perfect
> Harry is and that he alone will save the world on his own. She also
> talks about Harry's eyes, hair and his voice in most posts. I wonder
> what books she's been reading. It's not the series most of us have
> read. I don't recall any books that a character speaks to you, or
> that you can have him actually appear before you.

Iggy:

*chuckle* There's a clinical term for this, it's "Obsessive fixation on a
fictional construct."

If it's a phase she's going through, then it'll pass and shouldn't do too
much harm.  After all, a LOT of people have had "crushes" on fictional
characters.  (My personal favorites are Cattie-Brie fromthe "Dark Elf"
series, Danica fromt he "Celric Quintet"... both by R. A. Salvatore... and,
believe it or not, Polgara from the world of the Belgariad.)  It's like
finding someone you think would be an ideal relationship partner, but it's a
description rather than a real person.  It sparks you into a fantasy world,
which is the preferred place for some people who are lonely.

If it's not just a phase and gets more intense over time.. especially as the
books come to their conclusion, then it can do some damage if she doesn't
keep in mind that it's just a story.  But, this is a damage she would
essentially be doing to herself, and would most likely resuly in a deep
depression... almost like the loss of a loved one.  Even if Harry is still
alive at the end of the series, he will have left her life and the books
will be like revisiting memories.


As for where she gets the voice from and such... Logic would dictate that
she probably takes the images and such from the movies, and combines them
with the books themselves.  (I know that, whenever I read the books now, I
picture the characters as looking and sounding like their movie
counterparts.)  Some people, like myself, don't just see and comprehend the
words... We absorb what's written and our imagination constructs a complete
image of what's going on... complete with mannerisms, facial expressions,
and voices.  If she reads like this as well, and it sounds like she does,
it's easy to understand how she's gotten to the point she has... especially
if (as I said before) she's rather lonely in RL.


(Sorry if that seemed a little like a lecture... I spent 3-4 years in school
taking classes to be a "skull jockey.")

>     i've also pointed out numerous times that Harry isn't Christ.
> He's had a miserable life, has few social skills, and can't really
> relate to others that well. He's also showing a dark side. She can't
> comprehend this for some reason.  She also can't seem to understand
> that Harry can't be like his parents since he never really knew them,
> and wasn't raised by them. He didn't even really know what they
> looked like until recently.

Simply put, she's formed him into an ideal and is apparently putting him up
on a pedestal to admire.  When we meet, or even construct for ourselves,
something that we see as perfect, we can't see that the stone in the status
has a crack here or a chip there... all we see is the perfect whole.  To a
certain degree, she may be yearnign for the "Pygmalion Effect."  This is
where she constructs something in her mind that is so perfect, that she
falls in love with it.  Because of that deep love and yearning, the object
of her desire gains a life of its own.  (Based from the Greek myth about the
sculptor, Pygmalion, who carved a statue of a woman so perfect that he fell
in love with it.  His love was so strong that Aphrodite decided to turn the
statue into a real woman to fulfill that love.)

In her case, she may either be foriming that opinion to full a void in her
life, or hoping that her desire and belief in Harry will be so intense that
she will meet him... in the form of a real person... whether she's aware of
it or not.  Woe to the man she meets that is the most similar to Harry,
because he will be in for a lot of trouble, especially in living up to her
ideal.

>     Harry is lots of things, but perfect or Christ-like, no. Not by a
> long shot. I'm very curious about what he'll be like during the final
> battle. Will his link to Voldie take hold so strong that he has the
> same desire to rule and destroy?
>

I don't think that he's Christ-like, by a long shot.  A hero, yes... a
champion, of course... the one who will ultimately decide the outcome of the
war in the WW, indeed... A pure and completely noble savior?  Nope

(Hey, cool... it's a Wizard's War... if this is the second one, would that
make it WWII?  *grin*)

I don't think he will become like LV, but I do feel that he will be forced
to examine himself and be forced to confront the darker side of who he is.
I see it mostly as dealing with the anger, frustration, loneliness, and
growing resentment he's feeling and come to grips with it one way or
another.


'Nuff said

Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster








From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Sun Sep 28 01:29:20 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 20:29:20 -0500
Subject: FILK:  Tommy's Teddy
Message-ID: <000601c3855f$f224ef40$ca96aec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81783

Ok all... here's part 2 in the "Harry Potter Picture Show" filk series...
*grin*  (I think that's a nice enough name... Don't you?)

Hope you like it.

(And yes, I've had too little sleep and WAY too much time on my hands these
past 48 hours or so...)


Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster



Tommy's Teddy
(to the tune of "Eddie's Teddy" from Rocky Horror Picture Show.)


Albus:  From the day he was born
He was evil.
He was the end
Of his mother's life.
She gave him a name

McGonagall: But to his father, he was nothing but shame.

Albus: He was alone from the day  she died.

>From the day he left home
All he wanted
Was to rule the world
And sweet revenge
Slaying his foes

McGonagall: He brings evil wherever he goes!

Albus: Harry caused him to almost die.

All: When Tommy said he didn't like his Teddy
You know he was a no-good kid.
But when he ended your life, with a blast of green light

Lucious: What a guy!

Molly: He has to die.

Albus: He nearly did.

Wormtail:  Everybody fears him.
Death Eaters, they revere him.
I said, hey, listen to me,
Do we really need Harry?
But he reprimanded then he ignored me.

Albus: Then Harry was gone
>From a portkey,
And Cedric was slain
Then Voldemort raved.

All: Wha'd he say? Wha'd he say?

Voldemort:  You're out of your head,
If you think that you won't soon be dead
Then I'll carry out my evil deeds.  (evil laugh)

All: When Tommy said he didn't like his Teddy
You know he was a no-good kid.
But when he ended your life, with a blast of green light

Lucious: What a guy!

Molly: He has to die.

 Albus: He nearly did.

All: When Tommy said he didn't like his Teddy
You know he was a no-good kid.
But when he ended your life, with a blast of green light

Lucious: What a guy!  (Whoa, oh, ho.)

Molly: He has to die.  (Hey, hey, hey)

Albus: He nearly did.  (nearly did.)







From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Sun Sep 28 09:14:51 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 09:14:51 -0000
Subject: Obsessed with Harry (was - Re: They are children's books)
In-Reply-To: <000c01c38559$46af8f40$dc86aec7@rick>
Message-ID: <bl68qb+9pnj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81784

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Iggy McSnurd" 
<coyoteschild at p...> wrote:

 <snipped to prevent thread from going too OT> ;)


   Thanks for the info. I wasn't sure of the term, but I felt she was 
quite a bit like how Draco and Colin Creevy are in the books. ;) 
Sadly, she acts the same about the Babysitter's Club series, and runs 
a group on them. I think she's headed for disaster. 
   I think Ron is very cool, and I like reading about him and all 
that. I like the actor as well, but I tend to picture the book 
characters differently, since even in some fan fiction they stick to 
the canon descriptions. The cast don't really match the books 
totally, so that throws me off a bit. Now as for the voices, I do 
*hear* those when they talk. I have to admit that I *hear* the 
Weasley's all with Cockney accents, simply because they're more 
country, imho. I know that they are supposedly from around Devon, 
iirc, but I'm not that familar with the dialect from that area, and 
JKR makes at least Ron and the Twins sound a bit cockney to me. They 
don't use all the contractions and slang, but I guess its the 
constant use of Oi and bloody hell. ;)
   But again, it's difficult to tell what some characters look like 
in the cases where they aren't described too well. IIRC, Draco wasn't 
even mentioned having blond hair until COS. A few others might be a 
bit vague, but I can't recall who at the moment. 
   Anyway, again thanks for the info. Knowing the exact term helps, 
as I might have to use it at some point in talking to her. :) Take a 
look at Harry Potter Fan Fiction and Hogwarts or Bust if you wanna 
have a good laugh and get creeped out at the same time. :P Her name 
is cory.


  Jeff




From clio44a at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 28 09:29:26 2003
From: clio44a at yahoo.com (clio44a)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 09:29:26 -0000
Subject: International book versions & character names
In-Reply-To: <bl4hfo+tb1a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl69lm+10aro@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81785

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "slytherin_jenn" 
<slytherin_jenn at y...> wrote:
> I just finished the Philosopher's Stone in Russian and I noticed 
that 
> some of the names were different. 



If you look here   http://www.eulenfeder.de/int/gbint.html    
you will find a nice list of HP names and places and their 
translations in many languages.

Have fun,
Clio




From sues0101 at hotmail.com  Sun Sep 28 11:20:35 2003
From: sues0101 at hotmail.com (Sue Porter)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 11:20:35 +0000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] (unknown)
Message-ID: <BAY2-F145a4nYciXlxa000385df@hotmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81786

Well, potions of course - could make a hair removal potion, or a pimple 
cream potion.
Sue


>From: "Hagrid" <aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au>
>Reply-To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com
>To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [HPforGrownups] (unknown)
>Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 16:21:18 -0000
>
>JKR's books are full of scenes and events that we would all like to
>have been able to play around with as kids.
>
>My kids' Girl Guide group is planning a Harry Potter day. Can anyone
>come up with other ideas from the books to translate into games?
>
>We want to set up tables or booths with different activities.
>
>PS - no Blast Ended Skrewts please
>(Appologies if this is the wrong group to post this. I was trying
>the "off-topic chatter" but this group seems better suited for things
>from all 5 books.)
>**************************
>Suggestions:
>"Beating the Bludger".
>We can do it shooting gallery style, but using a small club to hit a
>ball at targets. More points for hitting Chasers with quaffles,
>seekers, or keepers from the other team.
>
>"Hippogriff Rides"
>Similar to barrel on ropes ride, landing on high jump cushions when
>you fall.
>
>"Rememberball"
>Have ten items appear for 10 secs, cover them up, then name them to
>stop the Rememberball from being red.
>
>"Hermione Escaping the Basalisk"
>Hermione tried running from the library using a mirror so she
>wouldn't be killed by the Basalisk. Competitors can either run
>through a maze where everything is reversed (like in a mirror). Try
>filling in a maze with a pencil while looking only in a mirror.
>
>Quidditch match ???
>we have basketball and football playing fields nearby. Any ideas on
>how to do it though?
>
>~aussie_lol~
>to send directly, Aust e-mails ends with "yahoo.com.au"
>

_________________________________________________________________
Chat via SMS. Simply send 'CHAT' to 1889918. More info at  
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilemania/MoChat.asp?blipid=6800




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Sun Sep 28 11:27:23 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 11:27:23 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Bridge (was: Dumbledore's Philosophy (was MAGIC DISHWASHER...)
In-Reply-To: <bl52ek+aecg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl6gir+bt8v@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81787

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" <gbannister10 at a...> 
wrote:
 
> Thanks for enlightening me; very considerate of you. I think that 
> both Dumbledore and I would be lost on that one, not being resident 
> in the US. If he comes to the UK, perhaps Mundungus could sell him a 
> pig in a poke.


Take care, Sir! Or it will be wet towels at dawn! True Brit here!
It's not  just the Brooklyn Bridge, there was that misguided American
who bought London Bridge thinking it was Tower Bridge.  Now
re-erected in Utah, I think.

I don't take any of DD's statements at face  value. This one falls into
the same category as all the rest.

Consider,
The implications of this statement are either:
1. Lily loved Harry more  than any other mother loved her child, *ever*
so providing unique protection,  or

2. Every  child is so protected by mother love.
Which is patently rubbish.

Which one do you choose? 
(Advice: Not the first,  or at least not  publicly because the posters 
who are mothers are liable to rip your head off.)

Also, since that little chat, DD has admitted that  he did not think
Harry  was ready for the truth at that age and so lied or at least
very strongly and deliberately misled him. Are  you now certain
that the whole truth has now  been revealed? I'm not.

Kneasy
 






From elfundeb at comcast.net  Sun Sep 28 11:26:23 2003
From: elfundeb at comcast.net (elfundeb)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 07:26:23 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione's growth 
References: <bl2m58+cus9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000b01c385b3$593b3b00$9ddc5644@aoldsl.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 81788

Two caveats.  First, this got way too long.  I am not blessed with the gift of brevity.  Second, though it may not be apparent from the comments herein, I like Hermione; in fact, I like her better for her faults.

Jim Ferer wrote:

> And that is exactly what Hermione is all about. She came to 
Hogwarts
> for purely intellectual challenges and found much more. Her mind 
has
> grown (!), but so has her courage, heart, sense of purpose, 
physical
> bravery and people sense. She is, and ever will be, always 
looking to
> test herself and the world around her. 

David responded:

<<However, I feel she has gone badly adrift in OOP. She has IMO 
become overconfident. [snip] Much has been made of Harry being the typical teenager in his anger. But Hermione has become a typical teenager of a different kind.

The word that comes to mind is 'arrogant'.>>

And hg added:

<<David's points were strong enough to lead me to doubt 
her. Kneazle, however, read the same things as David, but has seen 
them in a different light, one that's IMO more consistent with who 
Hermione has been all along.>>

Who's right?  I think that David's right (mostly) but that JKR has written Hermione in such a way as to intentionally obscure her faults and focus our attention on her strengths. 

For example, in OOP, Hermione seems to make all the right moves, while Harry lets his anger take control, and Ron struggles with Quidditch and his own self-doubt. She recognizes immediately what the Ministry is doing at Hogwarts, and takes aim against it. Dumbledore's Army is her idea, and she's the engine behind making it a reality. She devises the plan to ensure its secrecy. She engineers the Quibbler article that restores Harry's reputation and simultaneously undermines the Ministry's position on Voldemort's return. She shows increasing bravery (of which saying Voldemort's name is but one example). She brilliantly manipulates Umbridge when she catches them trying to use her fireplace. All this highlights her logical and strategic thinking, as well as her genuine concern for Harry's welfare. She appears to have an excellent grasp of when rules should be broken to further the greater good. 

The spotlight is focused on that because while Hermione does make mistakes - as she did in the Forbidden Forest with the centaurs - she does not experience the consequences of failure, as Harry does. The quick change of scene to the Department of Mysteries refocuses everyone's attention - ours and Hermione's - elsewhere. 

Recalling Dumbledore's philosophy of allowing people to try and fail and learn from their mistakes (witness his patience with Hagrid's poor teaching), though, it seems to me that for Hermione to fully develop as a character, she needs to suffer from her mistakes. If there's always a Grawp to rescue her, this growth will never happen.  She will become more and more convinced that she's right and insistent on doing things her way, and without consulting anyone.  Hermione's combination of overconfidence, secrecy and blindness to other points of view is a dangerous combination, but only the hanging house-elf subplot suggests that there's trouble ahead for her.

David wrote:

<<Yet she simply does not test herself and the 
world around her. She has lost interest in rigorously finding out 
and discerning what the evidence is really telling her.>>

This is where I disagree with David. This is not a new phenomenon in OOP. Well before OOP, Hermione has made mistakes in judgment because she analyzed the situation based on her own preconceived biases. But I think it's harder than with other characters for us to pick up on it, because they've been obscured by other elements in the story. Remember in OOP when the only thing that mattered to her about Crouch Sr. was his treatment of Winky? Some more examples: Snape's a teacher so he can't be trying to get the Philosopher's Stone. (He wasn't, but Quirrell was a teacher, too.) Fred and George wouldn't blackmail anyone. (They did, but because Bagman was scum.) Percy wouldn't throw over his family to the dementors. (Not quite, but Percy *did* throw over his family for the sake of his career and for Dolores Umbridge, who sent dementors to Privet Drive.) Crookshanks is just a cat and didn't have it in for Scabbers. (No, he's more than a cat, and he *did* have it in for Scabbers, but Scabbers turned out to be Wormtail so Hermione's defense of Crookshanks seems to be right.)

She makes another big mistake in OOP (in addition to her miscalculation regarding the centaurs). Hermione casts a spell on the parchment all the DA members sign so they'll be branded if they tattle. But she doesn't tell anyone, and when Marietta does tattle, Harry is nearly expelled and Dumbledore is forced to leave. Had she told them the consequences of tattling this would likely never have happened.  Hermione's secrecy is not always a virtue.

Kneazle255 wrote:

<<She can be insensitive other people's feelings when they 
contradict her logic. I don't think this is arrogance. More like 
blindness. [snip] She needs practice with empathy and that is common enough with 
teenagers.>> 

Hermione's lack of empathy is, like her mistakes, often hidden in OOP, because she *seems* quite adept at gauging others' feelings. David points out:

<<She presumes to direct Harry's love life without checking whether he 
wants her to. She confidently explicates Cho's feelings without any 
sense that it might be good for Harry to verify her opinions by 
seeking Cho's own view.>> 

I believe she gets way too much credit for this. Her assessment of Cho's feelings may be astoundingly insightful to Harry and Ron, who are stymied by the phenomenon of teenage girls, but Hermione's explanation seems to be a fairly standard picture of teenage self-doubt. She's applying her analytical skills to Cho's behavior and filling in the gaps based on her own experience. 

David continues:

<<She decides what Sirius thinks of Harry, and has the cheek to assume 
that Sirius' support of an idea is a counter-recommendation.>>

Hermione receives a lot of credit for her assessment of Sirius, but she's really simply echoing Molly's criticism, which happens to accord with her own biases. 

She doesn't really even understand her two best friends. She gets them homework planners for Christmas whose irritating comments all reinforce *her* organizational skills and study techniques which (as should be obvious by now) are not the same as Harry and Ron's. Harry vows to throw it away at the first opportunity.

It is not accidental, I think, that Luna Lovegood (the anti-Hermione), first appears in this book. Hermione dismisses Luna out of hand and is frequently rude to her. Hermione even has time to murmur a snide remark about her in the Department of Mysteries. Yet she doesn't hesitate to use Luna's connections to the Quibbler when it suits her purposes. 

David continued:

<<She rewrites the 
rules of her bargain with Rita Skeeter, just because it suits her.>>

And Kneazle255 responded:

<<She rewrites her agreement with Rita to aid in a WAR.>>  

This illustrates my point rather well. Because Hermione's ends are good, we don't just excuse, we applaud her manipulative techniques. Same thing with Hermione's treatment of Umbridge, who is as hateful as they come. But doesn't this sound a lot like what a certain hat said about Slytherin? That they'll "use any means to achieve their ends"? 

Hermione reveals in OOP that the Sorting Hat considered her for Ravenclaw. I think the Hat might have done well to consider Slytherin. When something truly threatens Hermione, she is quite willing to use any means to achieve her ends. 

I think Hermione is often viewed through rose-colored lenses because her motives seem very altruistic, as exemplified by her genuine concern for others, in particular Harry and the house-elves. In fact, nearly everything Hermione does is motivated by self-interest. Hermione's brewing of the polyjuice potion in CoS, in order to find out who the Heir of Slytherin really was, has been cited as an example of her willingness to break rules to help her friends. But as a muggleborn, the Heir of Slytherin was a much greater threat to Hermione than Harry at that point. I always found it quite significant that the first time she engineered a major flaunting of the rules, the reason was a personal threat.

The same goes for the DA. The DA was obviously a wonderful idea. But Hermione faced a dual threat. She has chosen to make her mark in the WW and not the muggle one. She knows she won't earn an OWL in DADA without practice. But even more fundamentally, Voldemort is a threat to her as well as to Harry. He's not after her directly, but she is a muggleborn and a friend of Harry's, and a WW with Voldemort in control is not a place where she could live safely, or hope to achieve her goals, whether she chooses to be an Auror or to win freedom for the house-elves. 

Hermione does not help Harry just because he's the key to defeating Voldemort and eliminating a threat to herself; he's one of her best friends and she obviously cares a great deal for him (NOT in a shipping sense). She's made it a personal project to keep him on the path he needs to be on, to encourage or nag him as needed, to the point of running his life without his consent. But it's ignoring facts to suggest she has nothing to gain from it. We just don't notice because Harry needs help.

And while it's true that Hermione doesn't have anything to gain from her campaign to free the house-elves, except the satisfaction of having helped them, house-elves are, like muggleborns, discriminated against in the WW, so drawing attention to their plight raises the consciousness of the WW to their prejudicial attitudes in general. 

However, her misguided campaign merely perpetuates the lie of the statue at the Department of Mysteries. It's not her role to decide what the house-elves need, any more than it is the MoM's job. She needs to recognize their right - and the centaurs' right - to want something different for themselves. 

And it's not her job to manage Harry's life without his consent, either, even though the outcome of OOP make it appear that it was the right thing to do. She needs to work *with* those that she cares about, not *for* them.  This is how I see Hermione's potential tragic flaw playing out. She sums it up herself, in ch. 31 of OOP:

"On Friday, Harry and Ron had a day off while Hermione sat her Ancient 
Runes exam . . . .They stretched and yawned beside the open window - when
the portrait hole opened and Hermione clambered in, looking thoroughly 
bad-tempered.
'How were the Runes?' said Ron, yawning and stretching.
'I mis-translated ehwaz,' said Hermione furiously. 'It means 
partnership, not defence; I mixed it
up with eihwaz.'
'Ah well,' said Ron lazily, 'that's only one mistake, isn't it, you'll 
still get -'
'Oh, shut up!' said Hermione angrily. 'It could be the one mistake that 
makes the difference
between a pass and a fail.'"

To paraphrase only slightly, for Hermione this could be the difference between success and tragic failure. 

Debbie (wondering if anyone made it to the end)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From zanelupin at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 28 12:46:03 2003
From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 12:46:03 -0000
Subject: Mrs. Black, Sirius a traitor, flint? (was Re: A Number of Questions)
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20030928072535.00a83560@pop3.xtra.co.nz>
Message-ID: <bl6l6b+6puk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81789

KathyK:

>>I don't believe it's a flint at all.  Even if she believed Sirius
went to Azkaban a loyal Voldemort supporter, there's no way her
portrait would believe that now.  <snip>  The portrait of Mrs. Black 
would have to be completely blind not to notice this out of place 
group in her home, hosted by her own son.  So Sirius was obviously 
the traitor he always was.  It makes sense to me, at any rate.<<

Tanya:

>One thing doesn't quite fit there.  She did blast him off the 
family tree when he left home, and if she believed he had changed 
and been LV's right hand man, surely would have reinstated him.<

KathyK, this time around:

Oh, I don't think she ever believed he was loyal to LV, personally.  
No evidence, really, as to why.  Just a feeling.  I only put in the 
possibility that Mrs. Black may have thought Sirius did support 
Voldemort to show that the current portrait could still know Sirius 
was the traitor to the family she thought he was before Pettigrew 
betrayed him.  

But now I'm thinking that it still fits.  Mrs. Black blasted Sirius 
off the tree for leaving.  At first, the Blacks thought Voldemort 
and his beliefs were just dandy.  Then they saw what Voldemort was 
really about.  They even lost their loyal child, Regulus, to 
Voldemort.  So even if Mrs. Black believed Sirius was the big bad 
Death Eater the rest of the world thought he was, she may not have 
put him back on the family tree because he supported a crazed mass 
murderer who may hold the same sort of world views, but who took it 
too far and even murdered the good Black son, Regulus. 

KathyK 




From sydenmill at msn.com  Sun Sep 28 13:47:57 2003
From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 13:47:57 -0000
Subject: Wizard injuries
In-Reply-To: <bl56cj+j0q4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl6oqd+b8r9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81790

In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lily_paige_delaney" 
<lily_paige_delaney at y...> wrote in post #81758:

(Big snip of good stuff...)
 
> They seem much less susceptable to injury from falls than from 
other 
> means.
> 
> LPD



Bohcoo responds:

Your excellent post made a couple of things spring to mind:

1. There is obviously something about being magical that not only 
prevents or minimizes serious bodily injury, it also allows for an 
extended lifespan. I guess when you consider the additional threats a 
magical person is exposed to (spells, charms, jinxes and hexes), 
evolution would have kicked in at some point to provide the extra 
immunities and protections.

2.  I can't help but picture Wile E. Coyote, though, when I'm reading 
Harry Potter. That poor creature blows himself to bits in every 
cartoon or falls into a ravine, getting flattened into a disc with 
eyeballs -- but springs whole again by the next frame of the action. 
I'm not saying I see the Potter characters as cartoons -- just the 
same surrealistic quality about them.

With regards,
Bohcoo

 





From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sun Sep 28 13:51:15 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 13:51:15 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Bridge (was: Dumbledore's Philosophy (was MAGIC DISHWASHER...)
In-Reply-To: <bl6gir+bt8v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl6p0j+1vo8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81791

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" 
<gbannister10 at a...> 
> wrote:
>  
> > Thanks for enlightening me; very considerate of you. I think that 
> > both Dumbledore and I would be lost on that one, not being 
resident 
> > in the US. If he comes to the UK, perhaps Mundungus could sell 
him a 
> > pig in a poke.
> 
> 
> Take care, Sir! Or it will be wet towels at dawn! True Brit here!
> It's not  just the Brooklyn Bridge, there was that misguided 
American
> who bought London Bridge thinking it was Tower Bridge.  Now
> re-erected in Utah, I think.


Geoff:
Yes, I know about that one. If I had a pound for every time I crossed 
London Bridge before it was flogged, I wouldn't be badly off.

However, your suggestion of sucker because I didn't buy into your DD 
theory was a bit much!




 Kneasy:
> I don't take any of DD's statements at face  value. This one falls 
into
> the same category as all the rest.
> 

Geoff:
I don't accept that Dumbledore is a total liar. It goes against the 
fact that he is someone who is trusted by a huge number of people. If 
he was so unreliable, why should anyone listen to him?

OK, I agree that he is not 100% truthful. Point me to a human being 
who is......

We all embroider the truth from time to time or are economical with 
the truth; sometimes we perceive it differently to others because of 
our judgements - reminds me of the fact that witnesses to something 
like an accident always produce different accounts. Again, to use 
that marvellous Churchill phrase, we are all at times "guilty of a 
terminological inexactitude" or as I would put it, "You're telling 
porkies"!

Put it another way. Give me a choice between LV and DD and I know 
which way I'd be inclined to go.




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sun Sep 28 14:06:14 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 14:06:14 -0000
Subject: They are children's books (Was: the heart of it all)
In-Reply-To: <bl62lp+gqmu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl6psm+c3vi@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81792

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jeffl1965" <jeffl1965 at h...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" 
> <gbannister10 at a...> wrote:
> > 
>    <Snipped>
> 
> 
> > Geoff:
> > I think we've shared a similar exchange of ideas along this line 
> > before. I do not see HP as a Christ figure but as a type of a 
> > Christian figure. 

<snip>


> Jeff:
>    Intresting point, but I don't seem to feel that's what the other 
> poster meant. I guess I should say that Harry isn't the Second 
> Coming, and perhaps that will clear things up. Harry is good, but 
not 
> necessarily a Christian. I've met good people who were agnostic, so 
> its not always correct to associate good with The Lord. 


Geoff: (it's the double act again!)

Agreed. Good is not the monopoly of Christians, but the ultimate good 
resides with God; we can only aspire to getting there and it is a 
long haul.


Even good 
> people have dark secrets.  Just like in another book, Sir William 
> Golding's Lord of The Flies, many mistake Simon for being Christ. 
> Simon has lots of faults, and is even presented as being a bit 
> mental. Not a good example. Anyway, to keep this on topic, as 
Sirius 
> said there aren;t clear b&w lines in the HP universe, and the same 
> can be said for RL as well.  


Geoff:
Possibly, but many of JKR's throwaway lines about choice and love 
etc. have strong Christian undertones. I use them a lot with a YP 
group in my home church to bring out the central points of belief in 
Christ.



Jeff:
> While I think The Malfoy family are 
> snobs and racists, I don't think they're totally evil. 


Geoff:
'fraid I think Lucius is a singularly nasty, calculating and evil 
man. COS revealed him as a bully (even to Draco) and a hypocrite.




> Not the kind 
> of folk I'd want to have over for dinner, but not the kind I'd want 
> to go casting stones at either. ;) Same for Crabbe and Goyle. I 
think 
> they're too ignorant of life to really be evil. They may hang 
around 
> with Draco, but that could be because they were told to, if nothing 
> else. 


Geoff:
Cut out to be a pair of bouncers in my opinions. Find a decent night 
club for 'em......








From sydpad at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 28 14:09:23 2003
From: sydpad at yahoo.com (Sydney)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 14:09:23 -0000
Subject: Mrs. Black, Sirius a traitor, flint? (was Re: A Number of Questions)
In-Reply-To: <bl6l6b+6puk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl6q2j+kgei@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81793

Kathy K wrote:

 Mrs. Black blasted Sirius 
> off the tree for leaving.  At first, the Blacks thought Voldemort 
> and his beliefs were just dandy.  Then they saw what Voldemort was 
> really about.  They even lost their loyal child, Regulus, to 
> Voldemort.  So even if Mrs. Black believed Sirius was the big bad 
> Death Eater the rest of the world thought he was, she may not have 
> put him back on the family tree because he supported a crazed mass 
> murderer who may hold the same sort of world views, but who took it 
> too far and even murdered the good Black son, Regulus. 
> 


You know, now that you lay out the chronology like that it makes me
think:  was Mrs. Black always as crazy as she is in her portrait, or
was she driven mad by all the contradictions manifested by the death
of Regulus and apparent fate of Sirius?  

The 'good' son goes bad, in a way that used to be 'good', but then
wasn't;  the 'bad' son finally goes 'good', but only after 'good'
actually turned out to be 'bad'.... in the end one ends up dead and
one in prison.  That would be a lot to take!  She might have just
wound up fixating endlessly on the one point around which all of it
revolved, and had always been an obsession, purity of blood.  

If she's always been as out of control as she is in her portrait, I
think she'd probably have been locked up in the attic.  After all, the
Malfoys would have wanted to marry into a lineage that wasn't only
pure, but also free of insanity.  Maybe it just a Mrs. Rochester thing!

Is there any canon for:

-- when, if ever, Mrs. Black went mad,
-- when she died, and,
-- would a portait 'update' a drastic change in personality, or does
it freeze the sitter at whatever point in life it was taken?

Sydney-- a purely academic point, but what the heck




From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Sun Sep 28 14:16:02 2003
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 14:16:02 -0000
Subject: Mrs. Black, Sirius a traitor, flint? (was Re: A Number of Questions)
In-Reply-To: <bl6l6b+6puk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl6qf2+i7fg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81794

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "KathyK" <zanelupin at y...> wrote:
 
> KathyK, this time around:
> 
 
> So even if Mrs. Black believed Sirius was the big bad 
> Death Eater the rest of the world thought he was, she may not have 
> put him back on the family tree because he supported a crazed mass 
> murderer who may hold the same sort of world views, but who took it 
> too far and even murdered the good Black son, Regulus. 
> 
> KathyK

But on the other hand, Bellatrix, who definitely is loyal to Regulus' 
murderer and even admitted it openly, is still on the family tree. 

Hickengruendler 




From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com  Sun Sep 28 15:02:15 2003
From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 28 Sep 2003 15:02:15 -0000
Subject: Reminder - Weekly Chat 
Message-ID: <1064761335.23.79515.m10@yahoogroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81795


We would like to remind you of this upcoming event.

Weekly Chat 

Date: Sunday, September 28, 2003 
Time: 11:00AM - 7:00PM CDT (GMT-05:00) 

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 manawydan at ntlworld.com  Sun Sep 28 17:48:58 2003
From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 18:48:58 +0100
Subject: [HPforGrownups] BADD ANGST part II
References: <1064614075.9734.53216.m1@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <002201c385e8$e90dabc0$cb516751@f3b7j4>

No: HPFGUIDX 81796

Pip!Squeak remarks::

>Whoever Emeric the Evil was, he was a) important enough to be
>included in history lessons and b) a seriously not-nice wizard.

I believe there's a reference to an Edric the Intelligent somewhere, also.
Once again, Edric is a human name, which by the same token implies that he's
another dark wizard.

(All seem to be men, though...)

>So, there is a line. Middle Ages, 17th Century, early 20th Century,
>late 20th Century. Dark wizards who get into history books, or have
>their portraits hanging in hospitals.
>
>And even Ollivander in PS/SS speaks of Voldemort in a way that
>suggests the WW is rather ambiguous in the way it sees Dark wizards.
>
>'He Who Must Not Be Named did great things - terrible, yes, but
>great'. PS/SS Ch. 5, p.65

Which leads me to wonder whether the balance hasn't swung more dramatically
over the centuries than there just having been the occasional black cloak
who's had to be dealt with by the authorities. Possibly there have been
entire periods in which the dark wizards have dominated the WW  - as well as
Rackharrow in St Mungo's, we might well wonder about how Phineas Nigellus
came to be Head of Hogwarts...

Cheers

Ffred

O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon
Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion
Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri




From lhuntley at fandm.edu  Sun Sep 28 19:59:57 2003
From: lhuntley at fandm.edu (Laura Ingalls Huntley)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 15:59:57 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: They are children's books (Was: the heart of
 it all)
In-Reply-To: <bl4vv0+4mei@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <55CB1C06-F1EE-11D7-A21B-000A95E29F3E@fandm.edu>

No: HPFGUIDX 81797

>    Jeff:
>
>     *Exactly*! I've been having this discussion on another list with
> a silly fan-girl who's in college. She harps on about how perfect
> Harry is and that he alone will save the world on his own. She also
> talks about Harry's eyes, hair and his voice in most posts. I wonder
> what books she's been reading. It's not the series most of us have
> read. I don't recall any books that a character speaks to you, or
> that you can have him actually appear before you.
>     i've also pointed out numerous times that Harry isn't Christ.
> He's had a miserable life, has few social skills, and can't really
> relate to others that well. He's also showing a dark side. She can't
> comprehend this for some reason.  She also can't seem to understand
> that Harry can't be like his parents since he never really knew them,
> and wasn't raised by them. He didn't even really know what they
> looked like until recently.
>     Harry is lots of things, but perfect or Christ-like, no. Not by a
> long shot. I'm very curious about what he'll be like during the final
> battle. Will his link to Voldie take hold so strong that he has the
> same desire to rule and destroy?
>

I don't know who this girl is, what she's done to you, or why you 
happen to be obsessed with her.  However, I *have* noticed that this is 
your second message posted *solely* for the purpose of complaining 
about her, and I would ask you to please *stop* using the HPfGU and OTC 
lists as your personal venting grounds.

As for the secondary topic of your post, I would point out that there 
are many people who suspect that HP may be a Christian Allegory, and 
most of them aren't "fan girls."  And while I am not sure that I count 
myself among them, I *can* see where they're coming from.

First of all, for Harry to assume a Christlike role in the 
hypothetically allegorical HP books, he hardly needs to mirror Christ's 
Godlike personality or lack of sin.  Allegory isn't about rewriting 
Scripture.  It's about taking a theme from an epic tale and fleshing it 
out so that it becomes more human (and, incidentally, more accessible 
to the reader).

Furthermore, while I can't quite grasp what this has to do with 
anything, I would like to point out that, not only do plenty of 
children grow up to resemble absent parents, but that JKR has several 
characters (Dumbledore, Hagrid, Sirius, to name a few) throughout the 
books comment explicitly on how much Harry reminds them of James.  In 
OotP, we found out that they were not as similar as we had previously 
assumed, but, still, there must be *something* that causes so many 
adult to comment on Harry's resemblance to James.  Also...what does 
knowing what they looked like have to do with anything?  *puzzled*

Laura




From sgebhardt at t-online.de  Sun Sep 28 12:28:12 2003
From: sgebhardt at t-online.de (kiel2fisch)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 12:28:12 -0000
Subject: Responsiblity for Black's death
In-Reply-To: <bjenhj+ajfj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl6k4s+5cgb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81798

Salit:
> How could he (Sirius) have known in advance what Voldemort was 
> going to do or that Harry would never open the package?


Was there really need to know it in advance?

At the time when Harry used Umbridge's office to speak with Lupin 
and Sirius at Grimmauld Place, they knew already that using the 
Fireplaces was a great risk.

The very appropriate question for Sirius to ask would have been 
something like: "Harry, why don't you use my present instead of the 
fire?"  Then Harry would've known about the mirror and he could've 
checked Sirius' whereabouts later.

So it seems that it was rather his own forgetfulness, that killed 
Sirius, than Harrys.





From kneazle255 at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 28 12:58:46 2003
From: kneazle255 at yahoo.com (kneazle255)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 12:58:46 -0000
Subject: Hermione's growth
In-Reply-To: <000b01c385b3$593b3b00$9ddc5644@aoldsl.net>
Message-ID: <bl6lu6+h51l@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81799


elfundeb writes:

Hermione receives a lot of credit for her assessment of Sirius, but 
she's really simply echoing Molly's criticism, which happens to 
accord with her own biases. 

Kneazle responds:

I do not think Hermione is acting out of bias regarding Sirius. She 
has known Sirius as long as Harry and evidently longer that Molly. 
She is interpreting Sirius' erratic behavior in OoTP correctly. He 
does put himself into danger unnecessarily. He is NOT thinking about 
Harry's safety. Sirius' suggestion that Harry sneak out of Hogwarts 
to meet him is too crazy even for Harry to entertain. Hermione is not 
echoing anyone's biases, as if she ever would anyway.

elfundeb writes:

Hermione's ends are good, we don't just excuse, we applaud her 
manipulative techniques. Same thing with Hermione's treatment of 
Umbridge, who is as hateful as they come. But doesn't this sound a 
lot like what a certain hat said about Slytherin? That they'll "use 
any means to achieve their ends"? Hermione reveals in OOP that the 
Sorting Hat considered her for Ravenclaw. I think the Hat might have 
done well to consider Slytherin. When something truly threatens 
Hermione, she is quite willing to use any means to achieve her ends. 
 
kneazle responds:

Slytherins are Machiavellian. The end they seek is power, and they 
will use any means to get it. Hermione's end is the trio's continued 
survival. That is a key difference. IMO,using an evil person's greed 
and lust for power against them is not morally ambivalent. I just 
don't feel there is anything to excuse.

I think it is an interesting point when elfundeb says that Hermione 
has a higher stake because she is muggleborn. In CoS, that was true, 
at least until Diary!Tom decided to target Harry instead of 
muggleborns.

For me that is a telling point. Hermione has put herself in harm's 
way over and over again not to protect herself, but because Harry is 
in immediate danger. Voldemort has not been obsessing about killing 
mudbloods. He has been and continues to obsess about killing Harry 
Potter. 

I believe Hermione has made more of a target of herself by being so 
closely associated with Harry. That's why she is in Gryffindor. I 
agree with you--she understands the risk. But she sticks with Harry 
anyway. That is true courage.







From Yahtzee63 at aol.com  Sun Sep 28 13:35:27 2003
From: Yahtzee63 at aol.com (Yahtzee63 at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 09:35:27 EDT
Subject: they are children's books
Message-ID: <16b.244d936f.2ca83d9f@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81800

In a message dated 9/28/03 4:02:47 AM, Jeff writes:


> While I think The Malfoy family are
> snobs and racists, I don't think they're totally evil. Not the kind
> of folk I'd want to have over for dinner, but not the kind I'd want
> to go casting stones at either. ;) Same for Crabbe and Goyle. I think
> they're too ignorant of life to really be evil.
> 

I'll back you up on Crabbe and Goyle -- they're kids, and there's no saying 
whether they're just bullies who might eventually grow out of it. But the 
Malfoys? "Totally evil" I couldn't speak to, but I'll go casting stones anytime. 
The snobbery about the Weasleys and purebloods is one thing, but plotting on 
Lord Voldemort's side is another. Lucius Malfoy made a deliberate attempt to 
murder Ginny Weasley in CoS, as a means toward beginning the murders of others, 
starting with children at Hogwarts. Casting stones in his general direction NOW.



Yahtzee


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Sun Sep 28 13:57:40 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 08:57:40 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Death Chamber
References: <bl600o+6v2q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <005c01c385cf$63682540$3992aec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81801



> Geoff:
> I think, in return, that you missed my point. Lucius attempted to
> attack Harry /because/ Dobby was there. If he had not been there,
> then LM would not have launched the attack.
>
> Since Dobby spends a lot of his time defending Harry (admittedly in
> rather questionable ways), he would not have stood back in the
> situation which did arise.

Iggy:

You might also say that Dobby WAS the protection afforded by the spell Harry
has around him.

Dobby wouldn't have come to him had he not heard of what was planned at
Hogwart's during the coming year... plans that would probably have killed or
otherwise threatened Harry to some extreme degree.

Harry would not have been as on the alert as he was had Dobby not visited
him.  This helped to give him some warning before things started to happen.

Indirectly, through the plans LM had, Harry was in danger from LM already...
since we KNOW that Riddle would have gone after Harry and tried to kill him
regardless.

Granted, LM wouldn't have attacked Harry had Harry not freed Dobby, but if
Dobby weren't free, he wouldn't have been able to help protect Harry later.

Dobby, almost as much as anyone else at Hogwarts, acts as a "Guardian Angel"
for Harry... so having the events in PoA work as they did set up the form
Harry's protection would come to him at later times...  (Had Dobby not been
at Hogwarts, he wouldn't have heard of the GillyWeed, he wouldn't have known
about the Room of Requirement... etc...)

It has also been the point of discussion a number of times in the... four?
six?... days I've been on the list that JKR goes to some extreme lengths at
times to set things up for future books.  I think Dobby's importance in
Harry's protection hasn't been fully played out yet...


We have already seen that Harry's protection works in odd and mysterious
ways... Dobby is just one of the odder ones.


Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster


"Dobby works in odd and mysterious ways."

-- Iggy McSnurd






From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Sun Sep 28 15:02:53 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 10:02:53 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Wizard injuries
References: <bl6oqd+b8r9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <007101c385d3$aa1b10c0$3992aec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81802


> Bohcoo responds:
>
> Your excellent post made a couple of things spring to mind:
>
> 1. There is obviously something about being magical that not only
> prevents or minimizes serious bodily injury, it also allows for an
> extended lifespan. I guess when you consider the additional threats a
> magical person is exposed to (spells, charms, jinxes and hexes),
> evolution would have kicked in at some point to provide the extra
> immunities and protections.

Iggy:

Also, if you look at all the listed injuries and avoided ones, the lessened
ones were all where reflex action could take effect.

(Some may argue that Harry being dropped by the giant spider would allow for
reflex, but he also was groggy and battered already... and even Bruce Lee
would have trouble blocking a punch when he's too tired and groggy.)

All of the "reduced damage" incidents involved falls, something which anyone
with gymnastics or martial arts training could conceivably roll with to
minimize damage.  (Yes, this includes dropping Neville out of a window...)

Magic use has often been described as reflexive and uncontrolled in many
cases, just as rolling with a fall.  (I remember once in high school when a
drama class I was in was splaying a game on the auditorium stage.  One of
the football players in the class tagged me with more force than intended,
and accidentally "body checked" me off the stage.  Next thing I know, I'm
tucked up tight and lying on my back about 30 feet from the stage, and I
hadn't felt a thing.  Witnesses told me that they saw me twist in the air
like a cat and tuck in so that I took the landing on my upper back and slid
into it...  Thank god for the falling practice from that 2 years of martial
arts I took.. I didn't even get a slight bruise.)

Now, for the other injuries that weren't prevented, those tended to happen
from magic, in a fight against someone else magical. (much like some of the
Jedi tricks, reflexive defenses of someone in the WW might not work against
the brawling attacks of someone in the WW... the natural powers may cancel
eachother out.)  The only exception being Harry's fall in the fight with the
giant spider... which I've already addressed.


Comments?  Dissentions?

Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster


"Use the FORCE?  I thought you said 'See the FJORDS!'"

-- Iggy McSnurd, trying to explain to the Apparations examiner why his spell
ended him up in Norway.







From jazmyn at pacificpuma.com  Sun Sep 28 18:09:13 2003
From: jazmyn at pacificpuma.com (jazmyn)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 13:09:13 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] James Potter Still Alive?
References: <bl3r19+3hpf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <3F7723C9.1090709@pacificpuma.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81803



rach9112000 wrote:
(snip)
> 
>   Just to put forward a bit of the evidence for this theory
> mentioned in the book from book 3:
>     1) Unlike everyone else, Lupin on first seeing Harry never
> stared at his scar or mentioned his resemblance to James. (ch 5)

Why would he?  He has more class then to embarrass Harry by dwelling on 
his scar.  He certainly knows all that's happened to him, being a close 
friend of the family and sympathizes.

>     2)Harry tells Lupin that when a dementor gets near him, he hears
> his mum being murdered by voldemort. On hearing this, Lupin had
> made "a sudden motion with his arm, as though to grip Harry's
> shoulder, but thought better of it". (ch 10)

Lupin was a close friend of James and Lily...and he is watching Jame's 
son telling about hearing Lily die.  OF COURSE HE IS GOING TO REACT!! 
What? He is going to just take it without so much as a blink?  He is 
sharing Harry's pain, NOT being a long lost father.

>     3) Trelawny said that Lupin "positively fled when I offered to
> crystal gaze for him-"(ch11)

Anyone with any sense would flee from Trelawny's predictions.  Being as 
she mostly wants to predict BAD THINGS.  And its the full moon the 
boggart becomes, NOT a crystal ball. That is made clear when Hermione 
confirms she knew Lupin was a werewolf.  His fear of hurting someone 
when out of control as a werewolf would be greater then fear of a 
prediction 'crystal'.  The prediction itself is not fearsome to anyone 
but Harry and Voldemort really, which is why people were keeping it from 
Harry till he was 'old enough' to deal with it.

>     4) When Harry tells lupin he hears his mums voice louder, Lupin
> looks "paler than usual" and when he says he heard his dad, lupin
> says "you heard James?" in a strange voice.(ch12)

Again, Lupin was a good friend of James. He is certainly going to be 
effected by hearing about his friend's last minutes of life before being 
brutally murdered. The strange voice was likely his trying to control 
his emotions over hearing that Jame's son was hearing the death of his 
parents, who also happen to be FRIENDS of Lupin's!  You think any of you 
  could keep totally in control hearing someone talk about the violent 
death of your best friends?


>     5) "I certainly don't want Harry dead...""An odd shiver passed
> over his face". (ch 17)

Again, reacting to the idea of the some of his close friend being 
harmed.  Also if he knows the prophecy, he would also realize Harry is 
the last hope for the fight against Voldemort and Harry's death would be 
  total catastrophe for the Wizard World..

>     6) lupin has "no hesitation" about what harry's father would
> think (ch 18).

Oh course he doesn't.  He was close friends with James and knew him 
better then anyone alive, perhaps even better then Sirius, as Sirius was 
too 'full of himself' to really see people as they are.  Note that Lupin 
was far more sensitive towards others then the other Marauders, being as 
he didn't join in the 'Snape tormenting' the others did.


> 
>   These are just a few of the things mentioned in the book which
> suggest James has switched with Lupin. I know it's a slightly far
> fetched theory but I definately wouldn't rule out that JKR could
> pull it off.

Being as JKR herself has said in interviews that Harry's parents are 
dead and the dead don't come back to life and all, I would doubt it. Any 
magic that switched minds in people would most likely be of short 
duration, like the Polyjuice potion.  There is no reason for them to 
switch places 'mentally' to begin with and James certainly would not 
have left Lupin to protect his wife and son for him. There is just not 
any valid reason for a switch.  Plus its likely that if their minds had 
been switched, the death of one of them would have caused the magic to 
reverse and minds returned to their proper places.. or possibly the 
death of both individuals from the shock.  And SOMEONE would know 
afterwards!  That's not something you hide that easily from others. 
Dumbledore would certainly know and would have said SOMETHING, knowing 
that Harry wanted more then anything to know his parents..

No, I don't buy the mind switching idea at all.  Theres no reason for it.

James is dead and Lupin is not going to turn out to be James in wolf's 
clothing.


> 
>   What does anyone else think about this theory?
> 
>       Rachel
> 


Sorry for the format, I was trying to answer this in order.

Jazmyn (who would not be related to Lily by being named after a flower.)







From hedwigstalons at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 28 21:02:34 2003
From: hedwigstalons at yahoo.com (hedwigstalons)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 21:02:34 -0000
Subject: Student Names mentioned in Sorting Ceremony No.1
Message-ID: <bl7i9a+sqld@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81804

OK, I couldn't find any posts about this, so sorry if it's a repeat!

I am re-reading the series wth an eye to names and "random" items.

In PS/SS during the sorting ceremony there are 24 names mentioned. 
Most of them turn up again later in other books; AND they are either 
in the DA or Slytherin. But there are several names not mentioned 
again (and the lexicon has nothing but PS/SS on them either).

Names we have seen again: Hannah Abbott, Susan Bones, Terry Boot, 
Millicent Bulstrode, Lavendar Brown, Justin Finch-Fletchley, Seamus 
Finnigan, Hermione Granger, Neville Longbottom. Draco Malfoy, (Crabbe 
and Goyle), Nott, Patil, Patil, Harry Potter, Dean Thomas, Ron 
Weasley.

Who are THESE? Mandy Brocklehurst(Ravenclaw), Moon, Sally-Anne Perks, 
Lisa Turpin (Ravenclaw).

OK, so we have four students in Harry's year who we have not "seen" 
again. Two of these do not have their house named. Might this Moon be 
the unnamed Syltherin boy in OOTP? Will we see these four in the next 
two books?

Any ideas? Or posts that have discussed this that you can direct me 
to? :-)

Thanks!
HedwigsTalons





From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Sun Sep 28 21:22:07 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 21:22:07 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Bridge (was: Dumbledore's Philosophy (was MAGIC DISHWASHER...)
In-Reply-To: <bl6gir+bt8v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl7jdv+jhng@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81805

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> I don't take any of DD's statements at face  value. This one falls 
into
> the same category as all the rest.
> 
> Consider,
> The implications of this statement are either:
> 1. Lily loved Harry more  than any other mother loved her child, 
*ever*
> so providing unique protection,  or
> 
> 2. Every  child is so protected by mother love.
> Which is patently rubbish.
> 
> Which one do you choose? 
> (Advice: Not the first,  or at least not  publicly because the 
posters 
> who are mothers are liable to rip your head off.)
> 
> Also, since that little chat, DD has admitted that  he did not think
> Harry  was ready for the truth at that age and so lied or at least
> very strongly and deliberately misled him. Are  you now certain
> that the whole truth has now  been revealed? I'm not.


Jen:

I'm not certain the whole truth has been revealed, but I'm also not 
convinced DD made a *mistake* waiting to tell Harry about the 
Prophecy until now. Sure in hindsight, after Sirius is dead, DD 
thinks it was a mistake--who wouldn't? But he could just as easily 
have told Harry the Prophecy at age 11, and some other event would 
have made DD think *that* course of action was a mistake. 

Go ahead, call me a DD apologist, but I'm not ready to say Dumbledore 
making difficult choices about how to handle the Prophecy equals 
being a liar. 

And sure, if the books reveal some nefarious plan DD's been hatching 
or a juicy conspiracy theory at work, I'll be disappointed. But I 
won't spend time bashing myself for being a sucker! The beauty of HP 
is we all see what you want to see until proven otherwise (and even 
then some....).

And since I'm defending DD, about the mother's love thing, how about 
option #3? This is the Wizard world and Dumbledore tells us in OOTP 
that Lily dying to save Harry is a form of ancient magic and Petunia 
activates the Charm of blood protection by "sealing the deal" when 
she takes Harry in. So no, presumably a Muggle Mom dying to save her 
child wouldn't inspire the same protection, no matter how ardently 
she loved her child. Just a guess. 

And since the WW has its own rules, maybe every child *is* protected 
when a Mom dies to save him/her.  Why not?  Works for me, and is 
called author's privilege.

Jen




From manawydan at ntlworld.com  Sun Sep 28 21:26:59 2003
From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 22:26:59 +0100
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Emeric
References: <1064659197.2255.11180.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <003401c38607$40cd5f40$cb516751@f3b7j4>

No: HPFGUIDX 81806

Catlady wrote:
>> << Emeric [...] America [...] Hmmm... interesting. *grin* Would this
>> mean "America the Evil"?... >>
>
> Probably not, but there is a theory that America was named after
> someone named Emeric (or E. Merrick, the article is audio): "Robert

Actually it's _ap Meurig_!

The mayor of Bristol, who sponsored the expedition to Newfoundland in 1487
or thereabouts, was one Richard ap Meurig (anglicised to _Ameryk_ when he
went to live in England)

So no connection with Emeric (I think the name would in any case be stressed
differently - I'd be inclined to say EMeric for the wizard but amERyk for
the mayor...)

Cheers

Ffred

O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon
Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion
Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri




From jdr0918 at hotmail.com  Sun Sep 28 21:44:22 2003
From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 21:44:22 -0000
Subject: Emeric
In-Reply-To: <003401c38607$40cd5f40$cb516751@f3b7j4>
Message-ID: <bl7knm+aa1a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81807

<<<In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "manawydan" wrote:...The mayor 
of Bristol, who sponsored the expedition to Newfoundland in 1487 or 
thereabouts, was one Richard ap Meurig (anglicised to _Ameryk_ when 
he went to live in England)...So no connection with Emeric (I think 
the name would in any case be stressed differently - I'd be inclined 
to say EMeric for the wizard but amERyk for the mayor...)>>>

The Sergeant Majorette says

Then of course there's the St. Emeric who was the son of St. Stephen 
of Hungary. He's more likely to have been a wizard.

--JDR




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Sun Sep 28 21:46:09 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 21:46:09 -0000
Subject: Emeric
In-Reply-To: <003401c38607$40cd5f40$cb516751@f3b7j4>
Message-ID: <bl7kr1+4kts@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81808

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "manawydan" <manawydan at n...> 
wrote:
> Catlady wrote:
> >> << Emeric [...] America [...] Hmmm... interesting. *grin* Would 
this
> >> mean "America the Evil"?... >>
> >
> > Probably not, but there is a theory that America was named after
> > someone named Emeric (or E. Merrick, the article is 
audio): "Robert
> 
> Actually it's _ap Meurig_!
> 
> The mayor of Bristol, who sponsored the expedition to Newfoundland 
in 1487
> or thereabouts, was one Richard ap Meurig (anglicised to _Ameryk_ 
when he
> went to live in England)
> 

Geoff:
This is probably seriously OT (looked over shoulder to try to see 
elves) but I always read that America was named after Amerigo 
Vespucci. Who was this Uni Ted States bloke though? I know he has a 
sister Trucial. :-)

Heigh ho, back to Emeric Thingy and Ethelred the Unready.




From sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 28 21:57:47 2003
From: sarcasticmuppet at yahoo.com (sarcasticmuppet)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 21:57:47 -0000
Subject: Mrs. Black, Sirius a traitor, flint? (was Re: A Number of Questions)
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20030928072535.00a83560@pop3.xtra.co.nz>
Message-ID: <bl7lgr+vioj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81809

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Tanya Swaine <swaine.t at x> wrote:
> KathyK:

<snip>

> One thing doesn't quite fit there.  She did blast him off the 
family tree
> when he left home, and if she believed he had changed and been LV's
> right hand man, surely would have reinstated him.
> 
> Tanya

Assuming Sirius even could have been reinstated, I think Sirius 
running away caused enough animosity in the family to rile up their 
pride nomatter what Sirius did later.  Remember what Kreacher said to 
Sirius, something like "You broke your mother's heart" (no book w/me, 
sorry)?  I think dispite it all, Mrs. Black loved her son, and was 
truly hurt to the point of burning him off the family tree.  This is 
what kept her from reinstating him after he went to prison for being 
Voldemort's right hand man.  It's completely a pride issue.

--sarcasticmuppet, who imagines Mrs. Black kept all the prophet 
clippings about Sirius--




From Ali at zymurgy.org  Sun Sep 28 22:02:50 2003
From: Ali at zymurgy.org (Ali)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 22:02:50 -0000
Subject: Death chamber
In-Reply-To: <bl64g7+cr94@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl7lqa+mibb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81810

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "paulanurse2003" 
<paula.russell at l...> wrote:

>>>> Does the presence of the chamber with the Veil inside suggest 
that the wizarding world had the death penalty at some time? This 
room is referred to in OoTP as like the courtroom that Harry 
was 'tried' in with an ampitheatre design which suggests that an 
execution was  public. However the stone archway is also 'old and 
crumbling' which could imply that this form of death penalty not 
used nowadays.<<<<

I certainly don't think that the death penalty has been used in 
current times. I believe that the death penalty has remained taboo 
in the WW. Otherwise, Sirius would probably have been convicted and 
executed after his show-down with Pettigrew, rather than be 
imprisoned in Azkaban. It seems that the WW didn't reinstigate the 
death penalty at the same time as the Ministry allowed the Aurors to 
use unforgiveable curses, which would have been an obvious time as 
fear and need for Ministry action and accountability were high.

As to whether the Death chamber was used as a place of Execution, it 
would certainly seem possible, if not probable. the fact that it is 
within the same building as the courtrooms and the fact that it has 
seating all suggest that crowds were once allowed to watch deaths. I 
cannot think why wizards would have watched people walking over to 
the "Other Side" for events other than executions. Unless, wizards 
once freely went over, when they were ready for their next great 
adventure.

I think that the archway is an ancient link between our life and the 
next. I imagine that it existed before the Ministry, the Courts and 
even the WW. I think that it has been used to kill, but it wasn't 
set up to kill, if that makes sense?
 
Paula again:

>>> Aurors were (are?) able to use mortal force in the course of 
their work and we know from PoA that dementors are empowered to 
give 'kiss of death' although the subject is renedered soul-less not 
actually dead. Will the defection of the death eaters and the now 
apparent  lack of security at Azkaban mean this method of execution 
is revived?>>>

It's interesting isn't it, that the WW appear to view the idea of 
being kissed as worse than death. But, even when public opinion was 
firmly against prisoners, as in the case of Sirius and also the 
convicted Longbottom torturers, the Kiss wasn't initially suggested. 
It was only when Sirius escaped and evaded re-capture that the Kiss 
was permitted. This would suggest to me, that the Kiss was an 
extremely rare penalty, and one that the death penalty couldn't 
readily replace.

I'm convinced that the arch and the death chamber will be important 
later. What I'm not sure about is whether it will become a judicial 
execution, or something that Voldemort manages to take over.

Ali




From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Sun Sep 28 22:05:56 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 22:05:56 -0000
Subject: They are children's books (Was: the heart of it all)
In-Reply-To: <55CB1C06-F1EE-11D7-A21B-000A95E29F3E@fandm.edu>
Message-ID: <bl7m04+117p@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81811

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Laura Ingalls Huntley 
<lhuntley at f...> wrote:
> 
  <snipped>


> I don't know who this girl is, what she's done to you, or why you 
> happen to be obsessed with her.  However, I *have* noticed that 
this is 
> your second message posted *solely* for the purpose of complaining 
> about her, and I would ask you to please *stop* using the HPfGU and 
OTC 
> lists as your personal venting grounds.
> 

   Jeff:

   Sorry, I shall. I was just trying to point out what the post was 
about and how some few seem to get *too* involved in what the stories 
mean. For some it becomes their sole reason for breathing ,and that 
concerns me. Have you seen/read Stephen King's Misery? It's like 
that. Also, FYI: I worked as a radio dj, and have firsthand 
experiences with obsessed people. It's not a very pleasant thing. 


> As for the secondary topic of your post, I would point out that 
there 
> are many people who suspect that HP may be a Christian Allegory, 
and 
> most of them aren't "fan girls."  And while I am not sure that I 
count 
> myself among them, I *can* see where they're coming from.
> 
  Jeff:

    I can't really respond to this without offending you again by 
going OT. Iggy's statement explains it better. This woman isn't a 
christian or even a religious person at all. I'll leave it at that, 
so as to not offend you farther.



> First of all, for Harry to assume a Christlike role in the 
> hypothetically allegorical HP books, he hardly needs to mirror 
Christ's 
> Godlike personality or lack of sin.  Allegory isn't about rewriting 
> Scripture.  It's about taking a theme from an epic tale and 
fleshing it 
> out so that it becomes more human (and, incidentally, more 
accessible 
> to the reader).
> 
  Jeff:

    Again, I wasn't trying to compare the series with Christianity at 
all, I used the term Christ-like since saying God-like means 
different things to different people.  I don't find much religion in 
the series at all. Its mainly about love, friendship and good vs. 
evil, but no real reference to a higher being. I find all the 
characters fascinating, and don't try to equate them to any 
historical figures. Perhaps I didn't clarify myself and you read too 
much into it out of anger? If so, that wasn't my intetion at all.



> Furthermore, while I can't quite grasp what this has to do with 
> anything, I would like to point out that, not only do plenty of 
> children grow up to resemble absent parents, but that JKR has 
several 
> characters (Dumbledore, Hagrid, Sirius, to name a few) throughout 
the 
> books comment explicitly on how much Harry reminds them of James.  
In 
> OotP, we found out that they were not as similar as we had 
previously 
> assumed, but, still, there must be *something* that causes so many 
> adult to comment on Harry's resemblance to James.  Also...what does 
> knowing what they looked like have to do with anything?  *puzzled*
> 
> Laura

  Jeff:

     I guess I wasn't clear. My statement was that I find the 
fangirlish posts of hers to be silly and very innacurate, with no 
basis on fact at all.  
    I have a fairly firm grasp on genetics and mental health, having 
read a few books on the subjects. Personally, I don't look a thing 
like either of my parents, nor do my parents, and several of my 
cousins who have siblings resemble their parents nor each other. In 
some cases they all have different hair colors.
    I accept that Harry resembles James. I never denied this. You did 
read my posts carefully? I merely stated that Harry wasn't aware of 
this fact until around mid-term or so when he saw them in the Mirror 
of Erised. That would explain some of the reasons why he's mistreated 
at home as well. oh, and let's not forget that apparently Lily and 
Petunia don't resemble each other either. 
   As for knowing what his parents look like, well it doesn't really 
mean much to me. To the other person in question, it means the world, 
apparently, as it does to Harry himself, which is understandable, 
since they're very OT at home.


  Jeff





From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Sun Sep 28 22:16:46 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 22:16:46 -0000
Subject: they are children's books
In-Reply-To: <16b.244d936f.2ca83d9f@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bl7mke+3mb6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81812

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Yahtzee63 at a... wrote:
> In a message dated 9/28/03 4:02:47 AM, Jeff writes:
> 
> 
> > While I think The Malfoy family are
> > snobs and racists, I don't think they're totally evil. Not the 
kind
> > of folk I'd want to have over for dinner, but not the kind I'd 
want
> > to go casting stones at either. ;) Same for Crabbe and Goyle. I 
think
> > they're too ignorant of life to really be evil.
> > 
> 
> I'll back you up on Crabbe and Goyle -- they're kids, and there's 
no saying 
> whether they're just bullies who might eventually grow out of it. 
But the 
> Malfoys? "Totally evil" I couldn't speak to, but I'll go casting 
stones anytime. 
> The snobbery about the Weasleys and purebloods is one thing, but 
plotting on 
> Lord Voldemort's side is another. Lucius Malfoy made a deliberate 
attempt to 
> murder Ginny Weasley in CoS, as a means toward beginning the 
murders of others, 
> starting with children at Hogwarts. Casting stones in his general 
direction NOW.
> 
> 
> 
> Yahtzee
> 

   Jeff:

    I agree about Crabbe and Goyle. They're more buffons than evil. 
I'm sure their Daddies are buddies with the Malfoys. 
    Draco's Dad is a evil man, it's just that I don't know much about 
his mum to judge her. She could be a pawn, or a helpless victim as 
many women are who are married to such men, so I was trying to give 
her the benefit of a doubt until proven otherwise. If she's just as 
bad, then I'm for casting stones at them, a nice large boulder sounds 
sufficent. :)
    Draco himself, I think is a pawn, trying to get Daddy's "love" by 
acting as he thinks he should. But it's difficult to say if his 
hatred that he shows is real, or part of his act. He hates Harry, yet 
he still lurks in the shadows stalking him in some of the books, and 
tends to really go after Ron and Hermione more, rather than Harry 
directly. Is it fear, or the fact that he is very intrested in Harry 
in some way?


  Jeff





From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 28 22:39:06 2003
From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 22:39:06 -0000
Subject: The Death Chamber
In-Reply-To: <005c01c385cf$63682540$3992aec7@rick>
Message-ID: <bl7nua+raql@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81813

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Iggy McSnurd" 
<coyoteschild at p...> wrote:
> 
> 
> > Geoff:
> > I think, in return, that you missed my point. Lucius attempted to
> > attack Harry /because/ Dobby was there. If he had not been there,
> > then LM would not have launched the attack.
> >
> > Since Dobby spends a lot of his time defending Harry (admittedly 
in
> > rather questionable ways), he would not have stood back in the
> > situation which did arise.

Richard here:

Geoff has it off-center, here.  Lucius didn't attack Harry BECAUSE 
Dobby was there, but because Harry caused him, Lucius, to FREE 
Dobby ... which required that Dobby be there, but had Harry NOT 
instigated this event, I don't believe Lucius would have attacked 
Harry in any DIRECT way.

> Iggy:
> 
> You might also say that Dobby WAS the protection afforded by the 
spell Harry
> has around him.
> 
> Dobby wouldn't have come to him had he not heard of what was 
planned at
> Hogwart's during the coming year... plans that would probably have 
killed or
> otherwise threatened Harry to some extreme degree.
> 
> Harry would not have been as on the alert as he was had Dobby not 
visited
> him.  This helped to give him some warning before things started to 
happen.
> 
> Indirectly, through the plans LM had, Harry was in danger from LM 
already...
> since we KNOW that Riddle would have gone after Harry and tried to 
kill him
> regardless.
> 
> Granted, LM wouldn't have attacked Harry had Harry not freed Dobby, 
but if
> Dobby weren't free, he wouldn't have been able to help protect 
Harry later.
> 
> Dobby, almost as much as anyone else at Hogwarts, acts as 
a "Guardian Angel"
> for Harry... so having the events in PoA work as they did set up 
the form
> Harry's protection would come to him at later times...  (Had Dobby 
not been
> at Hogwarts, he wouldn't have heard of the GillyWeed, he wouldn't 
have known
> about the Room of Requirement... etc...)
> 
> It has also been the point of discussion a number of times in 
the... four?
> six?... days I've been on the list that JKR goes to some extreme 
lengths at
> times to set things up for future books.  I think Dobby's 
importance in
> Harry's protection hasn't been fully played out yet...
> 
> 
> We have already seen that Harry's protection works in odd and 
mysterious
> ways... Dobby is just one of the odder ones.

Richard here yet again:

This is all related to the point I was driving at.  What precisely is 
the protection afforded Harry against any lethal attack launched by 
anyone other than Voldemort?  The prophecy requires that none can 
kill (or vanquish, or whatever verb seems to you to fit best the 
exact wording of the prophecy) either but the other.

If Voldemort survives, the prophecy implies that he will be 
undefeatable, while there is no indication of any assurance of long 
life or such for Harry should he defeat Voldemort.  But, no hostile 
power, force, being or such can intervene 'ere the defeat of one at 
the hands of the other.

I'm sure that Dobby figures in the "fate" that keeps Harry alive up 
to that climactic confrontation, but not all of it by any stretch.  
This leads me to speculate ... Suppose Dobby had, once he found 
himself free from the Malfoys, delightedly skipped out of sight in 
glee while the event and cause sank into Lucius' consciousness.  If 
this had happened, Dobby would NOT have been their to intervene, and 
we are left to wonder what would have protected Harry so that he can 
reach his final encounter with Voldemort?  Would an AK curse (a la 
movie) work on him if not "tendered" by Voldemort?  Would Lucius have 
found himself suffering the same kinds of burns at Harry's hands upon 
lunging and trying to strangle or otherwise harm Harry (a la the 
original text)?  Can even Voldemort himself harm Harry by means of 
anything other than his own hands?  Or is the prophecy not that 
literal on the point of death by the other's hands?

As I've said before, this is speculative, but it is FUN speculation, 
and derived, more or less, directly from canon.  I look forward to 
some clarification by JKR ... but suspect that we may not have any 
more clarification than with regard to how literal the "by the 
other's hand" part.


Richard, the incurably analytical





From jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 28 23:01:38 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at yahoo.com (Haggridd)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 23:01:38 -0000
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?I=92m_Very_Wealthy_(a_filk))?=
Message-ID: <bl7p8i+os2i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81814

This is a filk of the song "Young and Healthy" from the musical
"Forty-Second Street" titled "I'm Very Wealthy."  It completes the
songs for the OoP filk musical "At 12 Grimmauld Place", which can be
found at CMC's HP filksite:

http://home.att.net/~coriolan/musical/table5.htm

I dedicate this ultimate filk ("Ultimate" in tis case meaning "Last",
not ""Best" or "Highest") to Caius Marcus, without whose perceptive
suggestion tis filk would have been quite different, and probably not
as good.
                                           
                                                                     
                                               
                   I'm Very Wealthy
SCENE:  Lucius Malfoy boasts of his general evilness, his status among
the old wizarding families, and the leverage it gives him on such
needy politicians as Cornelius Fudge.
 
LUCIUS MALFOY:
I hate the masses of humanity,
Wish they all would die;
It offends my sense of pure urbanity,
Whenever they pass by.
I will juggle any Muggle,
Give a Dementor's kiss;
I'll curse and drive them to insanity, 
And then I'll tell them this:

I'm very wealthy,
My family old,
We have servants by the score,
With house-elves and more to scold.
I'm very wealthy,
My status high;
Everybody thinks we're swell,
Can't believe we'll tell a lie.

Oh, how I hate "yuh,"
You are so dumb.
The Muggle lovers
And all the Mudbloods are scum, chum!

[Spoken]
My Lord!  We have done it!

LORD VOLDEMORT: 
Done what!?!

LUCIUS MALFOY: 
The Minister is ours!

I'm very wealthy,
Own lots of land,
And I've got Fudge where I love:
Right in the palm of my hand 
I'm very wealthy,
Have lots of gold;
Gave Fudge some, but not a lot. 
Fudge will do just what he's told.

Oh, how I hate "yuh,"
You are so dumb.
The Muggle lovers
And all the Mudbloods are scum, chum! 

I'm very wealthy,
And full of scorn;
For Weasleys or anyone 
Who's not to the Manor born.

-Haggridd




From ninnamie at yahoo.com  Sun Sep 28 23:05:02 2003
From: ninnamie at yahoo.com (ninnamie)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 23:05:02 -0000
Subject: Ghosts! - kind of long
Message-ID: <bl7peu+6v1i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81815

We've seen how when JKR introduces small details or characters, they 
often become major factors in future books.  I've been thinking a lot 
lately about the Ghosts in the series.

There are a number of ghosts with minor roles: Nearly Headless Nick, 
the Bloody Baron, Myrtle, Professor Binns, and Sir "properly 
decapitated Podmore" to name a few.  I imagine that the ghosts will 
play a major role in the new war, but I'm not quite sure what.

Maybe the ghosts will take sides in fighting the war?  I can see the 
Bloody Baron supporting LV, while Nick, Myrtle, and others support 
the Order.

And there was the whole scene in OOP with Harry asking Nick why some 
people become ghosts when they die.  I'm sure we'll learn more about 
this in Book 6.

And I think this has been mentioned somewhere already, but Podmore is 
probably related to Sturgis Podmore.  JKR wouldn't re-use such an 
unusual name if there wasn't something more behind it.

Any thoughts/theories on what will happen with Ghosts in books 6 and 
7?




From MadameSSnape at aol.com  Sun Sep 28 23:07:31 2003
From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 19:07:31 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Student Names mentioned in Sorting Ceremony No.1
Message-ID: <29.48b3af45.2ca8c3b3@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81816

In a message dated 9/28/2003 5:23:36 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
hedwigstalons at yahoo.com writes:

Who are THESE? Mandy Brocklehurst(Ravenclaw), Moon, Sally-Anne Perks, 
Lisa Turpin (Ravenclaw).

I, Sherrie, add:

Don't forget the elusive Blaise Zabini.  We see him as the last student 
sorted in Harry's year (into Slytherin) - and we've heard nothing more of him 
since.  Some theorize that the "stringy" Slytherin boy in the Care of Magical 
Creatures class is Master Zabini, but as that's the only identification of that 
boy, and we have no description of Zabini, there's no real basis for this 
assumption - no real way to assign probability.

Interestingly, "Sally-Anne" is missing from the OWLs - she should have been 
in the same group as Harry - or possibly pushed him back into the next group.  
Yet her name is never called - did she drop out?  Have to repeat a year?  Or 
is this a FLINT - did JKR just forget about her?

Sherrie


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From editor at texas.net  Sun Sep 28 23:16:49 2003
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 18:16:49 -0500
Subject: It's not about this anymore: was Re: they are children's books
References: <bl7mke+3mb6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <000d01c38616$98f4fa20$c35baacf@texas.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 81817

May I gently remind everyone that of the many threads that have spun from
this original subject head, *none* of them are discussing this particular
aspect anymore? Could we please change subject heads to reflect content?
It's getting confusing, and I have more brain cells dying every day as it
is....

~Amandageist





From sues0101 at hotmail.com  Sun Sep 28 23:24:42 2003
From: sues0101 at hotmail.com (Sue Porter)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 23:24:42 +0000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] House Elfs
Message-ID: <BAY2-F7fCHJr1Wtyi670001f156@hotmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81818

Yes, Dobby and the whole House Elf population has me intrigued. I know there 
has been discussions galore on House Elfs and don't particularly want to 
start another, but one thing does need explaining to me (ok, don't start 
throwing tomatoes and pointing me at the Lexicon or previous posts because 
none have explained it satisfactorily to me), and that is "Why did Dobby go 
against everything his race have adhered to and warn Harry?"

There was a roundabout way Kreacher got out of the house to the Malfoys, but 
I would have thought that the Malfoys had very strict ways of dealing  with 
their HE's considering how pissed off LM was when Harry freed Dobby.

I have my own personal wishes about how Dobby was 'allowed' to warn Harry, 
but I guess we'll never know unless or if JK tells us. (unless I'm being a 
total ignoramus and have missed some emphatic answer from JK in an interview 
or something).

Dobby's protection of Harry seems uncharacterisitc of a house elf and it 
will be interesting to see how he fits into the future books! The Hogwarts 
House Elf Army perhaps?

Sue
>From: "Iggy McSnurd" <coyoteschild at peoplepc.com>
>Reply-To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com
>To: <HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com>
>Subject: Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Death Chamber
>Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 08:57:40 -0500
>
>
>
> > Geoff:
> > I think, in return, that you missed my point. Lucius attempted to
> > attack Harry /because/ Dobby was there. If he had not been there,
> > then LM would not have launched the attack.
> >
> > Since Dobby spends a lot of his time defending Harry (admittedly in
> > rather questionable ways), he would not have stood back in the
> > situation which did arise.
>
>Iggy:
>
>You might also say that Dobby WAS the protection afforded by the spell 
>Harry
>has around him.
>
>Dobby wouldn't have come to him had he not heard of what was planned at
>Hogwart's during the coming year... plans that would probably have killed 
>or
>otherwise threatened Harry to some extreme degree.
>
>Harry would not have been as on the alert as he was had Dobby not visited
>him.  This helped to give him some warning before things started to happen.
>
>Indirectly, through the plans LM had, Harry was in danger from LM 
>already...
>since we KNOW that Riddle would have gone after Harry and tried to kill him
>regardless.
>
>Granted, LM wouldn't have attacked Harry had Harry not freed Dobby, but if
>Dobby weren't free, he wouldn't have been able to help protect Harry later.
>
>Dobby, almost as much as anyone else at Hogwarts, acts as a "Guardian 
>Angel"
>for Harry... so having the events in PoA work as they did set up the form
>Harry's protection would come to him at later times...  (Had Dobby not been
>at Hogwarts, he wouldn't have heard of the GillyWeed, he wouldn't have 
>known
>about the Room of Requirement... etc...)
>
>It has also been the point of discussion a number of times in the... four?
>six?... days I've been on the list that JKR goes to some extreme lengths at
>times to set things up for future books.  I think Dobby's importance in
>Harry's protection hasn't been fully played out yet...
>
>
>We have already seen that Harry's protection works in odd and mysterious
>ways... Dobby is just one of the odder ones.
>
>
>Iggy McSnurd
>the Prankster
>
>
>"Dobby works in odd and mysterious ways."
>
>-- Iggy McSnurd
>
>
>

_________________________________________________________________
ninemsn Premium transforms your e-mail with colours, photos and animated 
text. Click here  http://ninemsn.com.au/premium/landing.asp




From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Sun Sep 28 23:30:11 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 23:30:11 -0000
Subject: They are children's books (Was: the heart of it all)
In-Reply-To: <bl6psm+c3vi@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl7qu3+thbq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81819

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" 
<gbannister10 at a...> wrote:
> <snip>
> 
> 
> > Jeff:
> >    Intresting point, but I don't seem to feel that's what the 
other 
> > poster meant. I guess I should say that Harry isn't the Second 
> > Coming, and perhaps that will clear things up. Harry is good, but 
> not 
> > necessarily a Christian. I've met good people who were agnostic, 
so 
> > its not always correct to associate good with The Lord. 
> 
> 
> Geoff: (it's the double act again!)
> 
> Agreed. Good is not the monopoly of Christians, but the ultimate 
good 
> resides with God; we can only aspire to getting there and it is a 
> long haul.
> 
>
    Jeff:

    Agreed. Many people, both real and ficticious are very good, and 
have a very moral value system. As imperfect as it maybe and as we 
are, it's still good to at least strive for it.
    Many of the HP characters are very moral,imho. They care for each 
other, and other people and don't appear to be corrupt in anyway that 
I can see.  Snape appears to be evil, yet he has good qualities about 
him. Loyalty and dedication are the most visible. Yet his personality 
lacks a lot. :)



 
> Even good 
> > people have dark secrets.  Just like in another book, Sir William 
> > Golding's Lord of The Flies, many mistake Simon for being Christ. 
> > Simon has lots of faults, and is even presented as being a bit 
> > mental. Not a good example. Anyway, to keep this on topic, as 
> Sirius 
> > said there aren;t clear b&w lines in the HP universe, and the 
same 
> > can be said for RL as well.  
> 
> 
> Geoff:
> Possibly, but many of JKR's throwaway lines about choice and love 
> etc. have strong Christian undertones. I use them a lot with a YP 
> group in my home church to bring out the central points of belief 
in 
> Christ.
> 
> 
   Jeff:

    Yes, that is true. She tries to show many good values in the 
books. The fantasy theme that many christians fear as much as Satan 
himself boggles my mind. I know many people that are like that. If 
God isn't involved in it, then its not worth looking at. Which is 
sad. I've read many books, seen many movies that don't mention God at 
all, yet he's in it anyway. I've mentioned that the books, imho, show 
that love, friendship, self-sacrifice and trust are shown a lot in 
them. If that's not worth showing the world, then what is?



> 
> Jeff:
> > While I think The Malfoy family are 
> > snobs and racists, I don't think they're totally evil. 
> 
> 
> Geoff:
> 'fraid I think Lucius is a singularly nasty, calculating and evil 
> man. COS revealed him as a bully (even to Draco) and a hypocrite.
> 
> 
  Jeff:

    Yes, he is. Draco is learning that, but I don't know how much he 
really believes in it. I can't speak about his mother, since I have 
no common frame of reference to base such a statement.


> 
> 
> > Not the kind 
> > of folk I'd want to have over for dinner, but not the kind I'd 
want 
> > to go casting stones at either. ;) Same for Crabbe and Goyle. I 
> think 
> > they're too ignorant of life to really be evil. They may hang 
> around 
> > with Draco, but that could be because they were told to, if 
nothing 
> > else. 
> 
> 
> Geoff:
> Cut out to be a pair of bouncers in my opinions. Find a decent 
night 
> club for 'em......

   Jeff:

     Yes, that would be a good job for them. Give'em an unlimited 
food tab and they won't complain too much about raises. ;) I don't 
think I would either!!! :)


  Jeff






From hickengruendler at yahoo.de  Mon Sep 29 00:29:00 2003
From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 00:29:00 -0000
Subject: Ghosts! - kind of long
In-Reply-To: <bl7peu+6v1i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl7ucc+rg31@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81820

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ninnamie" <ninnamie at y...> 
wrote:
 
> Any thoughts/theories on what will happen with Ghosts in books 6 
and 
> 7?

I am not exactly sure what they can really do in the fight, but I am 
sure they will have sort of a role. The IMO two most interestings 
ghosts are Myrtle and the Bloody Baron. The sorting hat's new song 
made me hope, that in the later books at least some Slytherins will 
team up with Harry. Finding out, that the Bloody Baron isn't really 
that evil would IMO a great way, to make Harry seek contact with some 
Slytherins, or accept the offer, if they seek contact with him. The 
blood on the Baron's robe always seemed, for lack off a better word, 
odd to me. I mean, the guy has blood on his robes and is dead. I 
suppose he wears the robes, in which he died, so the IMO most logical 
conclusion is, that he was the victim of a crime. Yet, everyone is 
afraid of him, as if he were responsible for a crime (maybe he is, 
but currently I don't think so). Nick denied, that he is afraid of 
the Bloody Baron. Well, maybe Nick speaks the truth and the Bloody 
Baron isn't that bad, as he seems. 

Even more important is IMO Myrtle. She was Voldie's first victim, and 
I am sure it is important, that she is still around. Myrtle teased 
Olive Hornby because she laughed about Myrtle's glasses. What do you 
think the ghost would do, if she meets the guy who killed her and, 
for examples, recognizes his voice (according to Myrtle, Riddle spoke 
already in his cold, high voice, when he opened the chamber). Myrtle 
could be a nice distraction for Voldemort, if she decides to hunt him 
down. I mean, what can he do to stop her? Go to the ministry like 
Olive Hornby? I doubt it. This could be really interesting.

Hickengruendler




From yellows at aol.com  Mon Sep 29 00:46:52 2003
From: yellows at aol.com (yellows at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 20:46:52 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Loony Lupin/Luna
Message-ID: <153.249b1e6c.2ca8dafc@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81821

Have we looked into any possible connections between Lupin and Luna? I'm sure 
we have, but I can't find it.  :)  Someone please point me in the right 
direction. 

Of course, the obvious Luna=Moon, 
Lupin=Afraid-of-the-moon-because-he's-a-werewolf issue came to my mind. But when I was listening to PoA the other day, I 
realized that Peeves called Lupin "Loony Lupin." I took this to be something 
Lupin may have been called as a student at Hogwarts that Peeves took pleasure 
in repeating. Do you think it's an accident, then, that the character who is 
named after the moon is also called "Loony" in OoP?

Brief Chronicles


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From fc26det at aol.com  Mon Sep 29 01:22:09 2003
From: fc26det at aol.com (Potterfanme)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 01:22:09 -0000
Subject: Death chamber
In-Reply-To: <bl7lqa+mibb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl81g1+d8ld@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81822

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ali" <Ali at z...> wrote:
> I'm convinced that the arch and the death chamber will be important 
> later. What I'm not sure about is whether it will become a judicial 
> execution, or something that Voldemort manages to take over.
> 
> Ali

I also think that at some time the death chamber was used as some 
sort of execution arena.  I was thinking that maybe the brain room 
was also connected to this some way.  Possibly to study the brains of 
wizards who went bad.  Sounds pretty gruesome but probably not a lot 
different then modern day scientists in the RW studying genes.

Susan




From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Mon Sep 29 01:32:03 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 01:32:03 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Philosophy (WAS:  MAGIC DISHWASHER: Spying Game Philosophy
In-Reply-To: <000f01c38461$bbfb2b40$3b92aec7@rick>
Message-ID: <bl822j+3dnm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81823

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Iggy McSnurd" 
<coyoteschild at p...> wrote:
> (Still don't understand, then, where the look of triumph in AD's 
eye was
> from ...)

We'll have to wait until book 7 to understand that, I am afraid. My 
guess is, as I said, that the essence of the protection (love and 
sacrifice) is so foreign to Voldemort's nature, that he will somehow 
be weakened by it.

> I don't agree there.  From what we're told, I get more of an 
impression that
> he became what he is because he feels he was greatly betrayed by 
the world
> at large.  (Or else, why would he specifically seek out his 
parents and
> grandparents to kill them.  If he was simply evil, he wouldn't 
have cared
> enough about them.  He killed them in revenge for what they did to 
him and
> his mother.)

That was a choice that he did not have to make. The fact that he 
chose to kill them in revenge shows who he truly is. Compare that to 
Harry who, despite having been bullied and mistreated by Dudley, 
still goes out of his way to save his life, or protects the life of 
Wormtail. I think the key to understanding Harry Potter lies in 
Dumbledore's statement in CoS "It is not our abilities that show who 
we truly are, it is our choices" (paraphrased). Riddle has shows who 
he *truly* is by his choices - and he has shown himself to be evil 
to his core.

> The greatest evil is love turned to hatred.  I feel that Tom was 
loved by
> his mother and loved her back, yet she was taken from him at a 
very early
> age, which turned him bitter.  That bitterness about his lot in 
life
> festered, and he saw his father and grandparents as the first 
cause of his
> life being so terrible.  He no longer had anyone in his life, as a 
young
> boy, who cared about him...

Harry grew up in a family that hated him and treated him as a 
worthless burden. He had been told that his parents were useless 
bums who died in a car accident. Yet he chose a completely different 
path than Riddle has. Trying to understand why an evil person made 
the choices he made can be entertaining but they always had other 
options. Hitler had a loving mother and abusive father, yet there 
are many others who've had similar or worse home environment but did 
not turn out into the monster that he became. I think Voldemort is 
modeled in some way after Hitler, and like him, he has gone well 
beyond the point of redemption, thus the only satisfying conclusion 
for him is permanent death.

> Like I said, that was after Riddle had made his decision to become 
LV.

But that is the whole point, isn't it? He *made* the decision, then 
acted on it. He has made his choice.

>  As I
> also said, it's entirely possible that the boy who was Tom when he 
was still
> with (and loved by) his mother can very well be buried deep inside 
LV.

I think that the boy who was Tom is no different than Voldemort.

> Harry met the memory of Riddle, not the real Tom... Even Tom 
himself admits
> that.  What was infused into the book was what LV WANTED to be 
infused into
> the book, not necessarilly every part of himself.

Perhaps, but the only version of Tom Riddle that remains is the 
adult Voldemort.

> Add to that the other ingredients, and you have an interesting mix.
> 
> Harry:  Blood which contains a mother's love...
> 
> Peter:  The hand of a wizard who owes a life debt to Harry.  A 
debd which,
> as AD says, creates a very powerful bond between them. 
(paraphrasing, of
> course.)
> 
> Tom Riddle Sr.:  The bones of a man who cast out his son and hated 
him for
> what he was.
> 
> (Lessee... 1/3 love, 1/3 debt to Harry, and 1/3 hatred of wizards, 
and LV in
> particular.  Should be interesting to see if this is significant 
at all.)

Hard to say, to me it seems that the *soul* is what matters most and 
that one is still 100% Voldemort...

> I am a strong believer that NOBODY is inherently evil.  If someone 
becomes
> evil to that degree, there was a reason for it.

No one is born evil, that is true. But when they have made the 
choice and remorselessly acted on it, they have just that. Hitler 
was inherently evil. Discovering his inner child would not have 
changed that.

In my mind the only satisfying ending to the story of Harry Potter 
is with Voldemort destroyed. Any other ending will be lacking. I 
*hope* that Harry survives, but that is not a requirement. The only 
thing I am certain of in how the series will end is that Voldemort 
will die permanently. Anything else means that evil can win and that 
will not fit in with the story as I see it. Voldemort transformed 
into a good guy just does not cut it.

Of course, that's just my opinion. The only one whose choices matter 
here is JKR. :-)

Salit





From catlady at wicca.net  Mon Sep 29 01:45:55 2003
From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 01:45:55 -0000
Subject: Hermione / Trelawney-Lupin /  Dobby / Students in Harry's year 
Message-ID: <bl82sj+51g7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81824

Elfundeb wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/81788 :

<< Hermione reveals in OOP that the Sorting Hat considered her for
Ravenclaw. I think the Hat might have done well to consider Slytherin.
When something truly threatens Hermione, she is quite willing to use
any means to achieve her ends. >>

This is a forbidden "I agree" post, except I would say "when
somethings truly INTERESTS Hermione" rather than (or as well as)
"threatens".

<< Hermione's brewing of the polyjuice potion in CoS, in order to find
out who the Heir of Slytherin really was, has been cited as an example
of her willingness to break rules to help her friends. But as a
muggleborn, the Heir of Slytherin was a much greater threat to
Hermione than Harry at that point. I always found it quite significant
that the first time she engineered a major flaunting of the rules, the
reason was a personal threat. >>

I always read the CoS Polyjuice incident as motivated by Hermione
having already been curious to make and try Polyjuice, probably ever
since she heard Snape mention it, so she seized upon an excuse to do
so. I don't read it as her attempt to save herself from the danger to
Muggleborn students ... do you think she really believed that wimpy
pathetic canon!Draco really knew anything about it? All the incident
achieved was to make Ron and Harry stop suspecting Draco.  

<< And while it's true that Hermione doesn't have anything to gain
from her campaign to free the house-elves, except the satisfaction of
having helped them, house-elves are, like muggleborns, discriminated
against in the WW, so drawing attention to their plight raises the
consciousness of the WW to their prejudicial attitudes in general. >>

I'm perfectly willing to chalk her Free the House Elves campaign up to
idealism. My memory of my teen years is that teens often get idealism
about everything being wrong with the world, with no self-advantage in
mind except maybe the privilege of thinking oneself a good person.

Jazmyn wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/81803 :

<< Anyone with any sense would flee from Trelawny's predictions. Being
as she mostly wants to predict BAD THINGS. And its the full moon the
boggart becomes, NOT a crystal ball. >>

I always read the Trelawney-Lupin interaction as Trelawney pursuing
Lupin with romantic intentions. She's an egotistic loony at least 4
times his age. No wonder he fled. 

I see that she came to Christmas dinner, a very unusual thing to do,
and her first act was to ask where is Professor Lupin: to me, the only
reason she came to Christmas dinner was to try to hold hands or play
footsie with him under the table (remember in PS/SS, at Christmas
dinner, Hagrid and McGonagall drank enough that McGonagall permitted
Hagrid to give her a good-night kiss on the cheek; that may have given
her the idea).

Or perhaps they are never seen together because they're really the
same person ... 

Sue Porter wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/81818 :

<< Why did Dobby go against everything his race have adhered to and
warn Harry?" >>

Dobby was still bound to obey direct orders from the Malfoys, and to
punish himself when he criticized them and when he left the house.
What he went against that Winky and Kreachur displayed was devoted
love to his owners. He transferred that love to Harry, which made it
worth his while to leave the house and have to punish himself. I read
this as the Malfoys had abused Dobby so much so long that he had
finally fallen out of love with them.

This suggests that the Blacks didn't treat Kreachur as badly as the
Malfoys treated Dobby -- that, despite being racists, the Blacks
didn't indulge their sadism on their House Elves. This causes me to
doubt Dobby's statement that in the Dark Lord's time, *all* House
Elves were treated like vermin. Unless Kreachur was born *after* the
fall of Voldemort and imprisonment of Sirius -- he still would have
had some time to get to know Bellatrix before her attack on the
Longbottoms.

Hedwig's Talons wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/81804 :

<< In PS/SS during the sorting ceremony there are 24 names mentioned.
Most of them turn up again later in other books; AND they are either
in the DA or Slytherin. But there are several names not mentioned
again (and the lexicon has nothing but PS/SS on them either). >>

This is the URL for JKR's handwritten list of students in Harry's
year:
http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/hpforgrownups
/lst?.dir=/Harry+Potter+%26+Me&.src=gr&.order=&.vi
ew=t&.done=http%3a//briefcase.yahoo.com/
but here is an easier way to click on it: http://tinyurl.com/kk8t

Thanks to Muridae
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/32313

Abbott, Hannah (Hufflepuff)
Bones, Susan (Hufflepuff)
Boot, Trevor (Ravenclaw)
Brocklehurst, Mandy (Ravenclaw)
Brown, Lavender (Gryffindor)
Bulstrode, Millicent (Slytherin)
Corner, Michael (Hufflepuff)
Cornfoot, Stephen (Ravenclaw)
Crabbe, Vincent (Slytherin)
Davis, Tracey (Slytherin)
Entwhistle, Kevin (Ravenclaw)
Finch-Fletchley, Justin (Hufflepuff)
Finnigan, Seamus (Gryffindor)
Goldstein, Anthony (Hufflepuff)
Goyle, Gregory (Slytherin)
Granger, Hermione (Gryffindor)
Greengrass, Queenie???? (Slytherin) 
Hopkins, Wayne (Hufflepuff)
Jones, Megan (Hufflepuff)
Li, Su (Ravenclaw)
Longbottom, Neville (Gryffindor)
McDougal, Isabel (Ravenclaw)

Thanks to HOLLYDAZE!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/32345
[My comments in square brackets]

Abbott, Hannah.
Bones, Susan.
Boot, Trevor. (his name seems to have been changed to Terry in the
books)
Brocklehurst, Mandy.
Brown, Lavender.
Bulstrode, Millicent.
Corner, Michael.
Cornfoot, Stephen.
Crabbe, Vincent.
Davis, Tracy.
Entwhistle, Kevin.
Finch-Fletchley, Justin.
Finnigan, Seamus.
Goldstein, Anthony.
Goyle, Gregory.
Granger, Hermione
Greingrass, Queenie [Daphne Greengrass, from OoP, Charms OWL]
Hopkins, Wayne.
Jones, Megan.
Li, Su.
Longbottom, Neville.
MacDougal, Isabel (the original name appears to have been Katrina as
a 
K...A...T and R are visible with what looks very like an "I" next, the
next letter is hidden by JK's finger as is part of the last letter
which appears to  be an A) 

(Thankyou to Muridae for working most of those out) The rest of the
list seems  to be something along the lines of:
Mac(Dougal, Morag)?
Mac(Millan, Ernie)? (this one could be another "Mal" but it is more
likely to be a "Mac" unless JK really didn't remember to change
"Isabel" to "Morag" in which case Morag should be Isabel and the one
above is Ernie, leaving this one unknown) [MacNair?]
Mal(foy, Draco)
Moo(n)
Nott [Theodore, Slytherin, from OoP]
Park(inson)
Patel (Padma)
Patel (Parvati)
Perks (Sally-Ann)
Potter (Harry)
?ran (as far as I can see, this one is illegible due to the three
crossings out below it)
Rive(can just be seen in the 2nd top photo but is not visible on
either of the other two due to a crossing out below it and being cut
off in the 1st top photo)
Rope(something as the E joins on to another letter that is not in the
picture)
Runc (Possible Runcorn)
Smith [Zacharias Smith, Hufflepuff, from OoP]
Spink(s...it is unclear if this is the full name as the S is half off
the page)
Thom(as, Dean)
Turpi(n, Lisa)
Weasl(ey, Ronald/Ron)
Zabini, (Blaise) 

Thanks to Elirtai
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/36359
[My comments in square brackets]

My question is about the 'school list' drawings and how they relate to
the books. We get to see part of the student list. For every name we
see the house they were to be sorted into, and two symbols. The first
symbol is either a black square or a white circle. The second one is a
letter N in a box, a plain Star of David, or a circle-enclosed Star of
David.

I haven't found any relationship between these symbols and the actual
characters. Here's the list; does anyone know what these mean?

Symbols:
O =White circle [girl]
X =Black square [boy]

[N] =letter N in a box 
[Muggle-born? Hermione and Justin have it.] 

D =Star of David
(D) =Same, enclosed in a circle
[probably one means full-blood and one means half-blood, but Finnegan,
Crabbe, and Goyle all have the circle and Bulstrode doesn't. ???? ]

H,G,R,S = Hufflepuff, Gryffindor, Ravenclaw, Slytherin
(Gryffindor usually appears enclosed in a circle)
The question marks mean the original is unreadable.

Name Symbol Symbol House
Abbott, Hannah O [N] H
Bones, Susan O D H
Boot, Trevor X [N] R * In the books he became Terry Boot.
Brocklehurst, Mandy O D R
Brown, Lavender O (D) (G)
Bulstrode, Millicent O D S
Corner?, Michael X D H
Cornfoot?, Stephen X (D) R
Crabbe, Vincent X (D) S
Davis, Tracey O D S [rather than a six pointed star, she has a five
pointed star; maybe she's the predicted "good Slyth"]
Entwhistle, Kevin X [N] R
Finch-Fletchley, Justin X [N] H
Finnigan, Seamus X (D) (G)
Goldstein, Anthony X D H
Goyle, Gregory X (D) S
Granger, Hermione O [N] (G)
Graingrass?, Amelie? O (D) S
Hopkins, Wayne X D H
Jones, Megan O D H
Longbottom, Neville ** Neville's entry is not only hard to read, it
has no symbols or house at all (a last minute character maybe). [last
minute name, maybe, but OoP shows he's an important character]
McDougal, Isabel (***) O (D) R  *** In the books she became Morag
McDougal




From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Mon Sep 29 01:46:25 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 01:46:25 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Bridge (was: Dumbledore's Philosophy (was MAGIC DISHWASHER...)
In-Reply-To: <bl7jdv+jhng@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl82th+6an1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81825

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" <stevejjen at e...> 
wrote:
> And since the WW has its own rules, maybe every child *is* 
protected 
> when a Mom dies to save him/her.  Why not?  Works for me, and is 
> called author's privilege.

I think there were several things at work there that made that 
situation unique:

1. Having the Avada Kedavra curse directed at a baby - not very 
common, I would think.
2. Having said baby's mother right there ready to sacrifice herself 
for him.
3. Mother also happens to be extremely good at charms (we know that 
from SS when Olivander described her wand and later in OoP James and 
Sirius are wary of her wand).
4. Having the killer ruthless enough to kill her then proceed to the 
main target, thus activating the protection.
5. Probably other surprise fact to be revealed in coming books.

In short, one cannot draw any general conclusions from this event.

salit





From artcase at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 29 02:50:41 2003
From: artcase at yahoo.com (artcase)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 02:50:41 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Bridge (was: Dumbledore's Philosophy (was MAGIC DISHWASHER...)
In-Reply-To: <bl82th+6an1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl86m1+379b@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81826

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "slgazit" <slgazit at s...> wrote:
> I think there were several things at work there that made that 
> situation unique:
> 
> 1. Having the Avada Kedavra curse directed at a baby - not very 
> common, I would think.
> 2. Having said baby's mother right there ready to sacrifice herself 
> for him.
> 3. Mother also happens to be extremely good at charms (we know that 
> from SS when Olivander described her wand and later in OoP James 
and 
> Sirius are wary of her wand).
> 4. Having the killer ruthless enough to kill her then proceed to 
the 
> main target, thus activating the protection.
> 5. Probably other surprise fact to be revealed in coming books.
> 
> In short, one cannot draw any general conclusions from this event.
> 
> salit

I often wonder what DD meant by "Old Magic". With wishful thinking, 
(or perhaps limited muggle POV) I would tend to lean toward the magic 
of Druids, or earlier that built Stonehedge, etc. Somewhere, a person 
mentioned that Lily's parents could have been squibs and the prospect 
of having a witch in the family was pleasing, considering their fate. 
Perhaps Squibs are really witches or wizards that are fluent in the 
old magics, but because they were "lost" or "forgotten" it is not 
taught. (?)

Perhaps, Lily found a way to decipher the runes (BTW Hermione is 
taking runes) and applied it to learning ancient magic thereby 
enhancing her own powers.

Opinions?

A.




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Mon Sep 29 03:14:43 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 03:14:43 -0000
Subject: BADD ANGST TBAY, Part II
In-Reply-To: <bl2m41+pcc2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl8833+pp29@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81827

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bluesqueak" <pipdowns at e...> 
wrote:
> I take it you don't read Agatha Christie [grin]. JKR does, 
> incidentally. Interestingly, the UK adult cover of OOP has a photo 
> of JKR in front of a bookcase containing several Christie mysteries.
> 
> She does a pretty Christie-ish trick in PS/SS, where the villain, 
> Quirrel, is mentioned on a total of 18 pages before he is revealed 
> as the villain. That's 18 pages out of 153 (his first appearance is 
> on page 55 UK paperback). And in over half of those 18 pages, 
> Quirrel only gets a one-line mention. 
<snip>
> 
> Because JKR has shown she *uses* that trick. She puts the 
> distraction in plain sight, and mentions him a lot. [Sirius and 
> Peter Pettigrew, anyone?]


Jen: 
"Putting the distraction in plain sight"--interesting point and 
pretty much irrefutable right now. I happen to love Christie (Mirror 
Crack'd is my fav.) and didn't know JKR reads her, but now that I 
do....hmmmm. I've been surprised by every one of JKR's tricks, except 
Draco being Heir of Syltherin. Even Crouch!Moody telling a roomful of 
people exactly how he put Harry's name in the Goblet at the beginning 
of Book 4 didn't tip me off. (I'm curious if the people in this group 
figured that one out before the end?). 

My only thought: is JKR using this as a *major* plot-device again or 
merely making us think about that possibility? I don't have a feel 
either way, it's a circular argument at the moment. It will certainly 
be the Ultimate trick or Ultimate red herring, depending on the 
direction she takes.


Pip!Squeak:
> Further, Harry's awareness of prejudice and racism is increasing. 
In 
> PS/SS he's hardly aware of it. In CoS he doesn't understand why 
> Hagrid is the perfect scapegoat for Tom Riddle, or why Fudge is so 
> quick to imprison Hagrid in Azkaban. He thinks that Dobby is badly 
> treated because he is owned by the Malfoys. By PoA we are 
introduced 
> to the idea that a werewolf finds it hard to get a job, and that 
> there was a very real doubt that he would be able to attend school. 
> By GoF we see that Rita Skeeter is delighted to 'out' Hagrid the 
> half-giant, and that Madame Maxine is scared to even admit her 
> parentage to another half-giant. We also see that another House elf 
> is badly treated by more than one wizard.
> 
> In OOP the theme is becoming full blown. There is another badly 
> treated House-elf, the Goblin riots of history are becoming present-
> day goblins who feel 'pretty anti-wizard'. The centaurs are so 
> annoyed at humans they consider killing two children who they think 
> are 'using' them. The giants are having genocide practiced on them.


Jen: 
This list generates many different templates that can be cast over 
the series to show this or that development over time, and one could 
certainly be the stages of ethical development. Harry has moved 
through the stage of black/white thinking, and is now in 
the "wrestling" phase of development--what *is* right, who do I 
believe, what kind of person will I be? 

Is the WW showing more evidence of prejudice over time, or is Harry 
becoming increasingly aware of and apalled by what he sees? He could 
be seeing another side of the centaurs and goblins or it could be 
they are feeling an increase in prejudice and hatred and are reacting 
more intensely to their situation. Or a little of both, to muddy the 
waters!

Since I fall on the side of believing WW prejudice has always been 
there, perhaps to greater and lesser degrees over time but always 
present, then Harry is becoming increasingly aware of the ethical 
dilemmas inherent in the WW.  

Most new situations, new people, new ideas appear very one-
dimensional when introduced.  In PS/SS, Dumbledore twinkled, Snape 
swooped and glared, Quirrell was bullied, Mcgonagall toed the line 
and Harry was enchanted by his new-found life in the Wizarding world. 
The "good" guys won and Dumbledore explained everything in the end.

By OOTP, Harry discovers Dumbledore is fallible (and some say a 
liar), Snape reveals another side, Fudge is incompetent AND corrupt, 
McGonagall turned subversive (if only for a moment) and Harry is 
disillusioned by the WW and hardly speaking to Dumbledore.  

The WW is decidedly a very ominous shade of gray at the moment for 
Harry. This life he *chose* when he decided to follow Hagrid out the 
door at the Hut is not what it appeared to be in the beginning. He 
sees this very clearly and doesn't know how to handle it. Yet. 

He can revert back to black/white thinking and go on autopilot, he 
can have others decide for him, or he can continue growing in his 
ability to listen to suggestions and make his own decisions. And one 
decision he has a very big stake in is what to do about Voldemort. 
Unlike most of us, Harry has the power to create a *huge* change in 
the society he lives in.


Pip!Squeak:
>Because sometimes it is the society that is evil, not just the 
>people. In fact,in a bad society, you will find that many, many of 
>the people are perfectly nice, kind people. If JKR is teaching life 
>lessons drawn from the real world, why do you think her lessons have 
>to be about the difference between good and evil people? Why not 
>have a lesson about the difference between the sort of world you 
>want, and the world you've currently got? A lesson about what you 
>should do when you find the society you love has turned to evil?


> Remnant:
> > Since the real world will likely always have  
> > prejudice and evil, why suddenly in two books tell the reader 
that 
> > it's possible for Harry to set everything right in the WW?
> 
>
 Pip!Squeak [on her soapbox]:
> 
> Why must the real world always have prejudice and evil?
> 
> Who told you that?
> 
> What are you supporting when you say that?
> 
> What 'side' do you help when you say 'it's never possible to set 
> everything right'.
> 
> Why must JKR accept that view in her books? 
> 
> It's up to you to stop evil. Full stop. Whether it's a bad guy, 
> singular, bad guys, plural, or bad guys as in an entire society. 
And 
> in fact, in history, you will find examples of people trying to 
stop 
> all three.
> 
> Real life. Real worlds. Real societies. 


Jen: 
You said, "In history, you will find examples of people trying to 
stop all three." *Trying*. And the WW is trying, too. We've seen many 
examples of atrocities in the WW and we've seen shining examples of 
overcoming evil as well. The WW shouldn't be condemned b/c they are 
currently failing to achieve a goal no other society in history has 
been able to get close to, let alone meet. 

Maybe JKR *is* envisioning a WW without prejudice and evil, and she 
will give us a roadmap for the journey. We need it. I just happen to 
think a WW wanting to rid itself of an evil Lord is making a little 
more progess in the right direction than a society giving up on 
itself as irreparably evil. 

A society, like a person, will never learn to change if it self-
destructs every time it fails. Maybe this will finally be the time 
the WW learns to identify the conditions that led to Voldemort in the 
first place--wouldn't that be something? It's not the apocalypse, 
but....it's a start.




From oppen at mycns.net  Mon Sep 29 03:20:28 2003
From: oppen at mycns.net (Eric Oppen)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 22:20:28 -0500
Subject: Hermione's idealism
Message-ID: <00a301c38638$a2deb220$97570043@hppav>

No: HPFGUIDX 81828

You know, there's another group of people in the Wizard World that are
looked down on and (apparently) not treated well for something that isn't
their fault---Squibs.

What if Hermione was confronted with this in a way that aroused her
compassion?  Would she throw herself into a project to "cure the Squibs,"
and find some way to unlock the magic that _should_ be in them?

Would this go over better than her house-elf liberation, or would the Wizard
World resent her for it if she managed to succeed?




From jane_starr at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 29 05:17:44 2003
From: jane_starr at yahoo.com (Jane Starr)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 22:17:44 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Emeric
In-Reply-To: <003401c38607$40cd5f40$cb516751@f3b7j4>
Message-ID: <20030929051744.10852.qmail@web13808.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81829


--- manawydan <manawydan at ntlworld.com> aka Ffred
wrote:
 
> So no connection with Emeric (I think the name would
> in any case be stressed
> differently - I'd be inclined to say EMeric for the
> wizard ...

I know someone whose son is named Emeric - your
suggested pronunciation is the same as what she uses.



=====
JES
Canada

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com



From greatraven at hotmail.com  Mon Sep 29 07:00:07 2003
From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 07:00:07 -0000
Subject: Obsessed with Harry (was - Re: They are children's books)
In-Reply-To: <bl68qb+9pnj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl8l9n+282i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81830

 I have to admit that I *hear* the 
> Weasley's all with Cockney accents, simply because they're more 
> country, imho. I know that they are supposedly from around Devon, 
> iirc, but I'm not that familar with the dialect from that area, and 
> JKR makes at least Ron and the Twins sound a bit cockney to me.
They 
> don't use all the contractions and slang, but I guess its the 
> constant use of Oi and bloody hell. ;)

Er - Cockney is London, not country. Devon ... well, I have friends 
from Devon and the accent is - different. Very different. Not sure 
what I can compare it with. Not London, anyway.

Perhaps a Devon person on the list can describe it?

Sue 




From bboy_mn at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 29 07:17:30 2003
From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 07:17:30 -0000
Subject: They are children's books (Was: the heart of it all)
In-Reply-To: <bl24go+ldje@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl8maa+64nv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81831

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cgahnstrm"
<christin.gahnstrom at t...> wrote:
> 
> 
> Now, I really don't want Harry to die, (not only sentimental 
> reasons, it just seems like the easy way out) but the best novel I 
> ever read is written for children and it has its heroes (two young 
> boys) die.
> 
> Christin

bboy_mn:

What! You're not going to give us the name of the best novel you ever
read. That's not fair.

So... the name?

bboy_mn




From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk  Mon Sep 29 07:46:55 2003
From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Ivan=20Vablatsky?=)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 08:46:55 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: They are children's books (Was: the heart of it all)
In-Reply-To: <bl8maa+64nv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030929074655.33756.qmail@web86201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81832

"cgahnstrm" wrote:
 
> Now, I really don't want Harry to die, (not only sentimental 
> reasons, it just seems like the easy way out) but the best novel I 
> ever read is written for children and it has its heroes (two young 
> boys) die.
> 
> Christin

>bboy_mn:

>What! You're not going to give us the name of the best novel you ever
>read. That's not fair.

>So... the name?

Hans: (Just for fun):
Can I have a bet please? Please??

It's "The Brothers Lionheart", by Astrid Lindgren, isn't it?

OK do I win?

Hans

________________________________________________________________________
Want to chat instantly with your online friends?  Get the FREE Yahoo!
Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk



From tim_regan82 at hotmail.com  Mon Sep 29 08:49:21 2003
From: tim_regan82 at hotmail.com (Tim Regan)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 08:49:21 -0000
Subject: How many Rons per Hermione - numerical analysis of Ron's alleged decline
Message-ID: <bl8rmh+mott@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81833

Hi All,

Apologies if this has been done to death already, do send me a link 
to your favourite "What happened to Ron in OotP?" thread if I'm 
repeating posts I haven't read.

I'm just finishing my second reading of OotP. I read it once fairly 
quickly and then again, more slowly, as episodic bedtime reading to 
my kids. One thing that really struck me second time through is the 
absence of Ron. He's in it less and gets fewer good lines than 
normal. Then having Hermione, Hagrid, Harry, and therefore us miss 
Ron's Quidditch success was callous on all three characters part. As 
Bill Shankly, manager of Liverpool Football Club from 1959-1974 once 
said "football isn't a matter of life and death - it's much more 
than that", and I get the impression that Quidditch garners the same 
emotions in the wizarding world. It was important that H & H saw 
Grawp, but not important enough to miss Ron's moment of glory.

My only hope was that JKR was removing Ron from the picture so that 
he could attain a modicum of mystery so that Hermione would fall for 
him later. But, on running that past my wife Kate, I'm told that is 
and emotionally unlikely idea :-(

But I did want to check that my assessment of Ron's dwindling 
importance was accurate, so I've done a little numerical analysis on 
the texts.

I'll cut to the chase, the measure of the number of occurrences of 
the word "Ron" per occurrence of the word "Hermione", which I'll 
write Rons/Hermione. There are:
1) 1.59 Rons/Hermione in PS/SS
2) 2.18 Rons/Hermione in CoS
3) 1.18 Rons/Hermione in PoA
4) 1.20 Rons/Hermione in GoF
5) 1.00 Rons/Hermione in OotP
(all to two decimal places). Although by this measure the relative 
importance of Ron to Hermione is dropping, the change is not 
significant over the last thee books. And Ron is still as important 
as Hermione (i.e. his score isn't below 1.00).

I also looked at name occurrences per page (using the number of 
pages in the USA hardbacks).  Here are the numbers:
1) 4.29 Harrys, 1.39 Rons, 0.87 Hermiones
2) 4.83 Harrys, 2.04 Rons, 0.94 Hermiones
3) 4.61 Harrys, 1.74 Rons, 1.47 Hermiones
4) 4.28 Harrys, 1.42 Rons, 1.18 Hermiones
5) 4.73 Harrys, 1.50 Rons, 1.50 Hermiones
There are a couple of interesting trends in there. Firstly the 
number of occurrences of Ron's and Harry's name steadily decline 
from CoS, through PoA, to GoF. Then all three have their names used 
more per page in OotP. I guess that will be an indication of 
narrative style changes across the books.

It's a shame that Hermione was out of CoS for so long since that 
skews the occurrences of her name in any numerical analysis of CoS.

Obviously these numbers may not be accurate. My counting the 
occurrences of words in a book, or any other process one might use 
to get these figures, would be prone to error. But it does suggest 
that my reading of Ron's drastically reduced importance may be wrong.

Cheers,

Dumbledad.





From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Mon Sep 29 09:36:45 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 09:36:45 -0000
Subject: Obsessed with Harry (was - Re: They are children's books)
In-Reply-To: <bl8l9n+282i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl8ufd+igh4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81834

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sbursztynski" 
<greatraven at h...> wrote:
>  I have to admit that I *hear* the 
> > Weasley's all with Cockney accents, simply because they're more 
> > country, imho. I know that they are supposedly from around Devon, 
> > iirc, but I'm not that familar with the dialect from that area, 
and 
> > JKR makes at least Ron and the Twins sound a bit cockney to me.
> They 
> > don't use all the contractions and slang, but I guess its the 
> > constant use of Oi and bloody hell. ;)
> 
> Er - Cockney is London, not country. Devon ... well, I have friends 
> from Devon and the accent is - different. Very different. Not sure 
> what I can compare it with. Not London, anyway.
> 
> Perhaps a Devon person on the list can describe it?
> 
> Sue




From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Mon Sep 29 09:42:45 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 09:42:45 -0000
Subject: Obsessed with Harry (was - Re: They are children's books)
In-Reply-To: <bl8l9n+282i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl8uql+dobt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81835

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sbursztynski" 
<greatraven at h...> wrote:
>  I have to admit that I *hear* the 
> > Weasley's all with Cockney accents, simply because they're more 
> > country, imho. I know that they are supposedly from around Devon, 
> > iirc, but I'm not that familar with the dialect from that area, 
and 
> > JKR makes at least Ron and the Twins sound a bit cockney to me.
> They 
> > don't use all the contractions and slang, but I guess its the 
> > constant use of Oi and bloody hell. ;)
> 
> Er - Cockney is London, not country. Devon ... well, I have friends 
> from Devon and the accent is - different. Very different. Not sure 
> what I can compare it with. Not London, anyway.
> 
> Perhaps a Devon person on the list can describe it?
> 
> Sue

  Jeff:

    Ok, well, I guess I was meaning rather thicker, more Scouse or 
extreme Eastender type. When I think of Londoners, I think of more 
proper, like what one would hear on BBC news. Many seem to think of 
Cockney as terrible English. Even Richard Burton, who was Welsh, 
spoke more like a BBC reporter than most Londoners. :) Also some 
country folk I've met speak with a cockney accent. I knew some nice 
folk from near Blackpool, and they sounded different as well. 
   Anyway, what I mean is that I think the Weasleys are country 
mentality and have thick accent, be it cockney or scouse. :)


   Jeff





From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Mon Sep 29 09:44:40 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 09:44:40 -0000
Subject: They are children's books (Was: the heart of it all)
In-Reply-To: <20030929074655.33756.qmail@web86201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bl8uu8+uihr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81836

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Ivan Vablatsky 
<ibotsjfvxfst at y...> wrote:
>> 
> Hans: (Just for fun):
> Can I have a bet please? Please??
> 
> It's "The Brothers Lionheart", by Astrid Lindgren, isn't it?
> 
> OK do I win?
> 
> Hans
> 
> 


  Jeff:

    Oi!! I've never read it, but I have the movie on tape. Loved it. 
Is the book still in print?


  Jeff




From chrissilein at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 29 09:49:02 2003
From: chrissilein at yahoo.com (Lady Of The Pensieve)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 09:49:02 -0000
Subject: Dis Perseus Evans become Severus Snape through Voldemort?
Message-ID: <bl8v6e+8nvi@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81837

Hi,

I?ve got a strange theory!

Did Lord Voldemort himself rearranged Severus Snape?s name? Why do
Dumbledore trusts Snape?

Even I?m not concerned of the so called Perseus Evans anagram theory
it?s still possible Snape is indeed Perseus Evans.

If we take a look at his memories from his early childhood (his father
is shouting at a his cowering mother), it seems Severus still had been
a little boy, maybe four or five years old? And at this very time he
had been Perseus Evans. So what could have happened to him?

Let me fantasy a little bit. His parents could have been relatives of
the Evans, who were Lily?s parents. So his parents were Muggles, too.

Maybe his father and his mother argued about young Perseus who
obviously had got magical powers, and maybe his father were shouting
at his mother because he was scared of it. "How is that possible, what
does it mean, the boy is weird!" Perseus didn?t understand the
conflict, so he was crying because he thought mummy and daddy didn?t
like him anymore. Than it could have been possible his parenst died in
a car accident. Not Harrys?s parents, but Perseus parents! He survived
and fleed from the place of horror, and maybe Voldemort somehow
realized that there is a little boy with strange magical powers. So he
captured the boy, rearranged his name into Severus Snape and the Evans
family couldn?t find the boy anymore.

Then Voldemort took the place of his parents, he maybe "helped"
Severus to forget them. Voldemort maybe organized for Severus a place
to live, maybe with the Malfoys? Now the little boy just had got one
identity back; the identity of Severus Snape. Later he wasn?t able
anymore to remember his true Muggle backgrund, he was concerned that
he must be a Pureblood. Maybe Lord Voldemort needed someone he could
play the father for, of which reason ever? That would explain why
Severus Snape had been deep in the Dark Magics before he started at
school.

When he met Lily Evans at school, it?s quite possible he started to
remember the name of Evans, even he never couldn?t find out the truth.
Years later, after school ( already an active Death Eater ) he got
better and better at Occlumency and Legilimency and his true memories
could have been come back into his consciousness? Maybe he started to
realize who he really was? Maybe he understood what Lord Voldemort had
done to him when he was a little boy? Maybe he went to Dumbledore and
let him come into his mind and soul?
Maybe therefore Dumbledore trusts him so much?

I know, I?m speculating too much, but it is a new theory I suppose,
isn`t it?

Chrissi





From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Sun Sep 28 23:08:15 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 18:08:15 -0500
Subject: Comparitive Literature (was - Re: They are children's books)
References: <55CB1C06-F1EE-11D7-A21B-000A95E29F3E@fandm.edu>
Message-ID: <008401c38618$3108c020$e6ea79a5@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81838

From: Laura
> First of all, for Harry to assume a Christlike role in the
> hypothetically allegorical HP books, he hardly needs to mirror Christ's
> Godlike personality or lack of sin.  Allegory isn't about rewriting
> Scripture.  It's about taking a theme from an epic tale and fleshing it
> out so that it becomes more human (and, incidentally, more accessible
> to the reader).
>


Iggy:

*grin* If you want to have a lot of fun, you can also compare him to
Belgarion from the "Belgariad" and "Malloreon" series by David and Leigh
Eddings.

1 - He was a child of prophecy destined to defeat a being of great evil
(Belgarion vs. Torak, Harry vs. Voldemort)

2 - For most of his childhood, he was kept in hiding and made relatively
anonymous.  (Garion on Faldor's farm, Harry at Privett Dr.)

3 - He wields great power, usually with the aid of a magical item.
(Belgarion has the Orb of Aldur and the Sword of the Rivan King, Harry has
his wand.)

4 - When his identity is revealed, he is the most famous mortal of his time.
(Belgarion is the Godslayer come at last... Harry is the Boy Who Lived.)

5 - He often questions why the task must fall on his shoulders.  (Both have
to come to grips with their destiny, despite wanting to be relatively
normal.)

6 - As a child and before knowing who he is, he does things with his powers
without realizing it.  (Garion cured a madman of his insanity and almost
merged his mind with his aunt's.  Harry talked to a snake and jumped to the
roof of his school.)

7 - Both are alone in the task they have to do to achieve their destiny, but
are also surrounded by "helpers" who have their own, more minor but
important tasks.  (Belgarion has Silk, Relg, Barak, Belgarath, Polgara,
CeNedra... and more.  Harry has Ron, Hermione, Dobby, Dumbledore,
McGonagall, and the DA.)


I could go on... But I think I've made my point.  *grin*

(Anyone else see close match-up with other book series'?)


Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster


"I DON'T suffer from insanity.  I enjoy EVERY MINUTE of it."

-- One of Iggy's stickers on his broom.

ADMIN Note:  If you're posting a reply to this list, please make sure to compare the books you discuss to HP.  If you wish to make a comment solely about the Belgariad or Malloreon series, or about other literature in general, please direct your response to our sister list, HPFGU-OTChatter.  Thanks!





From tonifenech at hotmail.com  Mon Sep 29 00:13:37 2003
From: tonifenech at hotmail.com (Toni Fenech)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 00:13:37 +0000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry Promos
Message-ID: <Law11-F124BTNkO3C9v0000b6df@hotmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81839

Grindieloe wrote:

>After reading the various Harry Potter promotional ads that
>Scholastic is putting out to gather more adult readers, I got to
>thinking...
>
>In each ad, the person/persons list 3 things that pretty much defines
>why they read Harry Potter.
>
>If you had to narrow to three basic reasons why you love Harry, what
>three things would you choose?

In answer to your question, I love Harry because of the magic in childhood, 
I had a childhood very similar to Harry's, and you can escape to a wonderful 
world.





From xmezumiiru at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 29 11:31:21 2003
From: xmezumiiru at yahoo.com (An'nai Jiriki)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 04:31:21 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Comparitive Literature (was - Re: They are children's books)
In-Reply-To: <008401c38618$3108c020$e6ea79a5@rick>
Message-ID: <20030929113121.28473.qmail@web12203.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81840


--- Iggy McSnurd <coyoteschild at peoplepc.com> wrote:
> From: Laura
> > First of all, for Harry to assume a Christlike
> role in the
> > hypothetically allegorical HP books, he hardly
> needs to mirror Christ's
> > Godlike personality or lack of sin.  Allegory
> isn't about rewriting
> > Scripture.  It's about taking a theme from an epic
> tale and fleshing it
> > out so that it becomes more human (and,
> incidentally, more accessible
> > to the reader).
> >

*Snip*
Just to back up Iggy, Harry also resembles Horus from
Egyptian Myth.

> 
> Iggy:
> 
> *grin* If you want to have a lot of fun, you can
> also compare him to
> Belgarion from the "Belgariad" and "Malloreon"
> series by David and Leigh
> Eddings.
> 
> 1 - He was a child of prophecy destined to defeat a
> being of great evil
> (Belgarion vs. Torak, Harry vs. Voldemort)
(Horus vs. Set [Good and Evil Kings of Egypt])

> 2 - For most of his childhood, he was kept in hiding
> and made relatively
> anonymous.  (Garion on Faldor's farm, Harry at
> Privett Dr.)
(Isis hid Horus in the reed along the Nile [later
interpreted as they became pesants] to hide from the
hunting Set)


> 3 - He wields great power, usually with the aid of a
> magical item.
> (Belgarion has the Orb of Aldur and the Sword of the
> Rivan King, Harry has
> his wand.)
(Horus was given all the powers of the Gods when Isis
told him the Words of Power [aka, the magic spells of
Egypt] & his eyes were magic gifts from Thoth after
Set ripped them out)


> 4 - When his identity is revealed, he is the most
> famous mortal of his time.
> (Belgarion is the Godslayer come at last... Harry is
> the Boy Who Lived.)
(Horus was the first 'mortal' King of Egypt, the
ancestor of all Kings, and well know due to prophecy
and divination of the preists)


> 5 - He often questions why the task must fall on his
> shoulders.  (Both have
> to come to grips with their destiny, despite wanting
> to be relatively
> normal.)
(Horus was always thought to defend the Holy Lands
[Egypt] from the forces of Evil [Set])


> 6 - As a child and before knowing who he is, he does
> things with his powers
> without realizing it.  (Garion cured a madman of his
> insanity and almost
> merged his mind with his aunt's.  Harry talked to a
> snake and jumped to the
> roof of his school.)
(Horus killed the Snake that was sent to kill him when
he was 3 years old [the origin of the child Hercules
myth])


> 7 - Both are alone in the task they have to do to
> achieve their destiny, but
> are also surrounded by "helpers" who have their own,
> more minor but
> important tasks.  (Belgarion has Silk, Relg, Barak,
> Belgarath, Polgara,
> CeNedra... and more.  Harry has Ron, Hermione,
> Dobby, Dumbledore,
> McGonagall, and the DA.)
(Horus has Isis, Thoth, Osiris[in spirit form],
Sekhmet... and the rest of the Gods and men that wish
Osiris' line continue) 


> 
> I could go on... But I think I've made my point. 
> *grin*
Me too.

So, it's not just the Christian Myths that Harry
Potter relates to, it's all Myths that deal with the
Sacrificial King (Harry). JKR took her insparation
from Christian views, as she has said she is
Christian. One cannot write from veiws they do not
know (that is not to say she did not research other
paths/ways to write the books). If the series was not
infused with Christian themes, I would be surprised.

But looking farther back in history, we can find the
pre-cursors to the Christian themes, and quite often
where Christians plagerized the stories, in the Myths
of Ancient Cultures. 

Chris

=====
"You irritate me. Kill me now." ~Javert, Les Miserables

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com



From Meliss9900 at aol.com  Mon Sep 29 15:07:51 2003
From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 11:07:51 EDT
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Kreacher
Message-ID: <157.254178e2.2ca9a4c7@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81841

In a message dated 9/27/2003 12:10:21 PM Central Standard Time, 
lbiles at flash.net writes:

> With the last of the Blacks now dead, what becomes of Kreacher? Is 
> >Sirius' relation to Tonks enough to make her his new master? 
> >Otherwise, what stops him from leaving Grimmauld Place and going to 
> >the Narcissa or Voldemort and telling her/him everything?
> 

Or perhaps Kreacher is considered nothing more than property in the WW and as 
such can be "willed" to whomever his master wishes.  In fact I think that the 
best person to have willed Kreacher to (if such a thing is possible) would be 
Dumbledore. 

Or perhaps with the "last of the Blacks" as Phineas refers to Sirius, dead 
perhaps Kreacher no longer has a reason to exist and dies as well. (yes, I know 
that Black is Narcissa and Bellatrix's maiden names .. Andromeda's as well)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From Ali at zymurgy.org  Mon Sep 29 15:08:17 2003
From: Ali at zymurgy.org (Ali)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 15:08:17 -0000
Subject: Weasley accents (was Obsessed with Harry )
In-Reply-To: <bl8uql+dobt@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl9ht1+v2km@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81842

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jeffl1965" <jeffl1965 at h...> 
wrote in a discussion about the Weasleys having "Cockney" accents:


>>>  Ok, well, I guess I was meaning rather thicker, more Scouse or 
 extreme Eastender type. When I think of Londoners, I think of more 
 proper, like what one would hear on BBC news. Many seem to think of 
 Cockney as terrible English. Even Richard Burton, who was Welsh, 
 spoke more like a BBC reporter than most Londoners. :) Also some 
 country folk I've met speak with a cockney accent. I knew some nice 
 folk from near Blackpool, and they sounded different as well. 
    Anyway, what I mean is that I think the Weasleys are country 
 mentality and have thick accent, be it cockney or scouse. :)<<<

Erm, I think that you're confusing English accents a little bit. 
Somebody is said to be Cockney if they were born within the sound of 
Bow Bells in East London. Cockney is very much a London accent. 
These days Londoners come in all shapes and sizes, it is a very 
cosmopolitan city. But, if you're talking about a "London accent" it 
is certainly not the "BBC" accent you describe. An archetypical 
London accent is one where "h's" are dropped, and t's not pronounced 
at the end of words.

With the advent of television, accents have changed rather a lot and 
many people across Southern England have what could be (very) 
loosely termed a London accent. 

Devonshire accents are very different to London accents. If the 
Weasleys spoke with strong Devon accents, then they would sound much 
more like Hagrid than Harry. In fact though, there is no evidence 
from the books that the Weasleys come from Devon. We believe that 
Ottery St Catchpole is probably within the vicinty of Ottery St 
Mary's, in Devon, but we don't know. Also, just because they live 
there, it doesn't mean that they come from there. I might soon have 
to move done to Devon, but I stem from London.

Scouse accents are again very different. Scousers come from 
Liverpool, in the "North", it is very much a City accent. There is 
no evidence that the Weasleys speak with a Scouse accent.

My reading of the Potterverse is that Ron has a vaguely Southern 
accent. He seems to speak with *more* of an accent then Harry. The 
movie characters also seem to follow this interpretation.

On a different note, the fact that somebody says "Bloody Hell" does 
not make them a Londoner or Cockney - it is a swear word used 
through the country. Also, IIRC, Ron says it in the film not the 
book.


Ali
 
 
    




From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Mon Sep 29 13:44:40 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 08:44:40 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] How many Rons per Hermione - numerical analysis of Ron's alleged decline
References: <bl8rmh+mott@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <001f01c3868f$d60fa260$9aec79a5@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81843

> Dumbledad.
> Obviously these numbers may not be accurate. My counting the
> occurrences of words in a book, or any other process one might use
> to get these figures, would be prone to error. But it does suggest
> that my reading of Ron's drastically reduced importance may be wrong.
>

Well, when Harry and Hermione missed the Quidditch match in OotP, there WAS
a rather important reason for it... And Hagrid's visible distress would
state that their loyalty to something Hagrid needed to address right then as
an urgent thing would, understandably, take some precedence over Ron's
Quidditch match.  (Much like the difference between helping a friend who's
brother may be in danger, or watching another friend's soccer game.)

As for the change in Ron being in the spotlight as Harry's main "sidekick"
(for lack of a better word here) to Harry being more in the light, it could
also be a few things:

1 - Ron has been so emphasized in the books compared to Hermione that it's
about time we saw more of her as a character.  (You noted the lack of
Hermione's presence yourself in your comments about CoS...)  It helps keep
the friendships balanced.

2 - Hermione was more appropriate to have more active in OotP than Ron was.
Rather than strain to try and make Ron a stronger presence in the books, she
went with the person who was more appropriate... Hermione.

3 - I think, in the next book, Ron and Hermione will probably have roughly
the same level of importance.



Personally, I am VERY happy that Neville is becoming a more important
character and she keeps him progressing in the books.  He was always my
favorite of their non-central fellow students.  (The central ones, IMHO,
being Harry, Hermione, and the Weasleys...)


Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster


"Don't try to out weird me!  I get weirder things than you with my breakfast
cereal."

-- One of the bumper stickers in Iggy's large collection.

(Yes, just as Arthur Weasley collects things like plugs, Iggy collects cool
bumper stickers...)








From csgkll8 at aol.com  Mon Sep 29 13:52:56 2003
From: csgkll8 at aol.com (napnoy2003)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 13:52:56 -0000
Subject: Peter, Sirius and Secret Keeping (was: Re: Dumbledore's Spies)
In-Reply-To: <bl49dp+64b8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl9dfo+glht@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81844

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "grindieloe" <andie at k...> wrote:
> I've also always wondered regarding this topic why Dumbledore 
doesn't 
> have some reaction when Hagrid brings Harry to Privet Drive on 
> Sirius' motorcycle.  Didn't Dumbledore believe at that time that 
> Sirius was the Secret Keeper?  Because if he had known that they 
> changed secret keepers, he would have known all along that Sirius 
was 
> innocent and PoA would have been a whole different story.
> 
> I apologize ahead of time, as I know I might have asked this before 
> and can't remember the answers I received... yet I can't find it in 
> the archives.  Thus, I ask yet again.
> 
> grindieloe


Hello

I've read this discussion in confusion - many valid points are raised 
that make me question a subject I thought was clearcut.  (Although 
not much is that clearcut, apparantly, which means I'll be reaching 
for book 1 and starting all over again!)

Lily and James go into hiding at the suggestion of Dumbledore - I 
thought he also suggested the place.  As he is head of the order, and 
the "only one he (LV) ever feared" I thought he would be trusted by 
all and kept informed, in his capacity as leader of the order. What 
risk would there be in Dumbledore, who knew ALL the orders secrets, 
knowing their location?

I believe Peter was the only secret keeper - Dumbledore and Sirius 
knew about Godrics Hollow because Lily and James chose to tell them. 
Hagrid in turn knew where to get Harry, as he was instructed where to 
go BY Dumbledore.  








From annemehr at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 29 15:34:31 2003
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 15:34:31 -0000
Subject: The Death Chamber
In-Reply-To: <bl41fp+a8g1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl9je7+8ve4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81845


> > Annemehr:
> > But Ginny was entranced yet could not see the thestrals.
> 

Susanbones2003 replied:
> Now I interject:
> I believe the Death Chamber affected the four people it did because 
> of the things that have happened to them in their lives. No, Ginny 
> has not "seen death" but her possession by Lord Voldemort qualifies 
> her as a player. Someone who's been to the dark side and back, 
> someone who's physically be very close to death.

Annemehr:
I think your post must have been what I was thinking of when I replied
to Iggy's post that came after this one.  That's what gave me the idea
that actually nearly dying may be what draws one to the veil; although
what the difference is for Luna, that she could hear the voices and
not be mesmerised by them is uncertain.  And although we know about
Harry and Ginny, we can have no idea whether Luna and Neville both
came close to death.

But I wonder if that's what what you are thinking when you say the
Chamber affected them "because of the things that have happened to
them in their lives?"  Maybe you mean something not so specific as
what I said above?  A more general cause could just be a severe enough
trauma: the same as above for Ginny, a *lot* of things for Harry,
Luna's loss of her mother, and Neville's loss of his parents and the
pain of having to see their state in his visits.  If we look at it
this way, can we say that niether Ron nor Hermione have had a bad
enough experience for them to hear the voices?  Do you have any other
thoughts?

Susanbones2003:
> I just listened to that section yesterday afternoon and was 
> yet again knocked off my feet by the multi-layered subtleties of the 
> MOM events. I know so many moaned that it was just a sell-out action-
> packed movie-style bit of writing but no. It goes beyond that. All 
> kinds of things are going on but so quickly that your first 
> impression may come out a bit askew.
> Jennifer

Annemehr:
Absolutely -- and the first two times I read it, it *was* all an
action scene for me, except the veil and the locked door. I am having
enough trouble with the Death Chamber, let alone analysing all the
other rooms! And it almost seems that Harry is going to have to visit
the DoM again, and probably not without his companions.  I wonder how
that will be brought about?  Will it have to wait until later in book
seven?  

::inserts tongue only partially into cheek::
Maybe the MoM will decide Harry is a mystery in himself and haul him
in for further study.  I wonder what the wizarding equivalent is to a
brightly lit, antisceptic white room containing a gurney complete with
arm and leg restraints, and dangerous looking sharp intruments
bristling from robotic arms alongside?

::shudder::

Annemehr




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Mon Sep 29 14:03:08 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (B Arrowsmith)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 15:03:08 +0100
Subject: Crying wolf?
Message-ID: <A7900C00-F285-11D7-B04E-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81846

What to make of Remus Lupin?

OK, hands up all those that trust him.
Thank you.

Now those that don't  trust him.
Right.

And those that can't  decide?
Hmm. Interesting.

When he first appears, I rubbed my hands with glee. Warning! Warning! 
Werewolf alert! That name!
Such a give away, Remus, co-founder of Rome, suckled by a she-wolf; 
Lupin - add an 'e'  and we have the adjective for wolf-like, lupine. 
What a  give-away.  What were his parents thinking of? Asking for 
trouble giving a boy a name like that. What did they expect?  Be  like 
naming a daughter Sexpot Thunderthighs and hoping she'd be an 
accountant.

So I could see the plot already, Hound of the Baskervilles with spells 
- howls in the night, the footprints of a gigantic hound, a blood trail 
leading to the Forbidden Forest after screams reverberate around 
Hogwarts, Hagrid trying to  defend it ("It's a creature like any other, 
leave it alone!"), Hermione coming up with the answer in the last 
chapter. Yes! Mayhem galore, because werewolves are evil, "as ane fule 
kno."

And what happens? JKR does the dirty on us. He's not evil at all!  
We're supposed to sympathise with him, to empathise with a member of an 
oppressed minority. Boo! Hiss!  Not  fair!

I  revised my predictions. OK, so he's going to be ' the third man 
through the door'. (To non-film buffs, it was the accepted cliche that 
in the showdown in B grade westerns, the third man through the door, 
always a bit part, got shot. Similar thing in Star Trek - the bit 
player who accompanies Kirk, Bones and Scotty to the surface of the 
planet cops it in the neck - always, without fail.) But he survives! 
How can this be? Time for a re-think.

Review the evidence. FBaWTFT tells us that a werewolf can only come 
about by someone being bitten by another werewolf. They are considered 
extremely dangerous when in wolf form, no matter how innocuous their 
human personnae. It also tells us that a Werewolf Register was set up 
in 1947. Lupin was infected as a child, at what age we don't know, but 
certainly after that date, so he should be registered. Werewolf cubs 
exist. In CoS Tom Riddle sneers at Hagrid for trying to raise them 
under his  bed. Odd that. They should be cubs only for one day in every 
28. No indication is given on how to repel or destroy them (note JKR 
adds a twist when Remus drinks from a (presumably) silver goblet  in 
OoP), there is no  permanent cure though a recent development is a 
potion that ameliorates the effects of the full moon.  Interesting, but 
does it help us?

Not a great deal, no.
The most important things  about him are not  the general knowledge 
associated with werewolves, but the facts about Remus Lupin  as an 
individual. For example, he is seemingly unaffected by Dementors. Why? 
It would be understandable if he was in his animal form, but he's not. 
The thrust of JKRs sympathy crusade is that he is still human, just 
suffering from a disease. So why the immunity that only animals seem to 
have? To argue that his mind has been altered by his illness is to 
accept that he may no longer be human.

While a pupil Lupin was supposed to be locked up  in the Shack at full 
moon, but we know he cavorted around the countryside with the boys in 
animal form. This was stupid and fraught with peril, not least to 
Lupin. If something had gone wrong, who would have suffered most? 
Lupin. Yet they all considered it good fun and Lupin never asked the 
others to keep him safe when he was not himself. Surely one of the 
prime concerns of any werewolf. The secret was spreading, too. First 
DD, then Madam Pomfrey, then James, Sirius and Peter, then Snape. How 
long did DD expect the secret to be kept? What was his motive in having 
Lupin at the school anyway? DD attracts misfits like  a magnet attracts 
iron filings,  but to take on a pupil that every month turns into a 
ravening monster, lacking all civilised restraint, responding only to 
it's own murderous instincts is something else. This was a school. The 
repercussions of 'an event' would have been horrendous.

Then he comes back -  as  a teacher. True the potion is now available 
and presumably Lupin promises to take it without fail. Even so, we see 
what happens when Snape blows the gaff; it's only by chance that things 
didn't end up in  a much worse state. And why do I  have the feeling 
that DD *wanted* to get Lupin involved in the Potter events?

Some of his reactions to events are puzzling, too. At the Shrieking 
Shack he seems to know, before being told, what Sirius' story is. How? 
On entering, his first action is to  disarm Harry. Why? Does he really 
believe that at age 13 Harry could perform an AK? It requires no 
persuasion by Sirius before Lupin accepts his story, even though for 
twelve years the entire WW, including Dumbledore, has been confident of 
Sirius' guilt. Add the fact that he 'forgets' to take his medicine and 
we have a very odd episode, much mused over by posters. PoA is the only 
book in the series where Voldy or his henchman has not made an 
appearance to threaten Harry.  Or is it?

Why the constant mention of his worn and aging appearance? Is this a 
normal werewolf effect?
His part in the Ministry dust-up  has caused comment, too. He gets a 
mention when he bursts in with Moddy, Tonks et al, then no more until 
Sirius takes his final curtain. Strange.  Did he fight or was he up to 
something else? Did he throw the fatal spell? Some suspect so.

It's still  that name that bothers me. Unless, of course, his parents 
were also werewolves themselves. Which means that they probably 
infected him - "Ooops-a-daisy, my little poppet! Just a nip! It's for 
your own good; then we'll be able to look after you, even when the moon 
shines brightly!"
Doesn't sound like a JKR thing to me.

Could it be a pseudonym? A name he chose himself, hiding his true 
identity to save the family face? In which case, it could be 
significant. The original Remus was killed by his brother. Just what do 
we know about Lupin's family? Hmm?

Kneasy






From hpfanmatt at gmx.net  Mon Sep 29 16:33:38 2003
From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 16:33:38 -0000
Subject: Jewish Goblins?
In-Reply-To: <bks2ul+6nhr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl9mt2+ub3b@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81847

Goodness.  I don't have time for a lengthy
reply right now, but what I said before
apparently needs some reiterating.

Here's what I said, quoted in Laura's last
message:

> > The point, as I read it, is not that the 
> > Goblins are supposed to *represent* Jews, 
> > but that the *discrimination* against the 
> > Goblins is reminiscent of a certain brand 
> > of anti-Semitism -- demonizing ... an 
> > entire group because some members are 
> > successful in business or, particularly, 
> > in finance.<snip> 
> > In this sense, [Nemi]'s point is similar 
> > to the prior thread discussing how various 
> > brands of "otherness" in the books can be 
> > analogized to the otherness felt by members 
> > of the gay/lesbian community (see post 
> > # 77983 and its progeny).  Neither claim 
> > requires JKR to have intended any precise 
> > symmetry, much less that she have "indulged
> > in" a stereotype.  

Nemi later agreed with this summary.

Laura's reply:

> Sigh.  I must say that the timing on this 
> discussion is most unfortunate, coming 3 days 
> before the celebration of the New Year and 
> the succeeding holidays.  

I don't understand why you say it is unfortunate.  Actually, this week
ought to be a good time for calm reflection.  I really hope this
wasn't some sort of veiled accusation of insensitivity on my part or
Nemi's, which would itself be a bit offensive.

> I agree that JKR is trying to make a point 
> about prejudice in the RW.  She does so most 
> effectively without having to resort to 
> caricatures.  

Again, __no__one__said__there__was__any__caricature.  Except for the
quizzical subject line (go back to the first line of Nemi's first post
for the disclaimer on that), no one has said anything that could be
fairly read as "Goblins represent Jews," or "Goblins = caricature of
Jews."

> Nemi is suggesting (if I'm reading the posts correctly) 
> that the goblins, due to their money-handling ability and the wary 
> distance wizards keep from them, are reminiscent of the Jews in 
> Europe.  Matt suggests that this is part of JKR's anti-prejudice 
> subtext which reminded some readers of anti-gay prejudice in the RW. 

Well, you're not reading my post correctly, that's for sure!  Go back
to the part you quoted above (I've omitted ellipses for clarity):

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The point is not that the Goblins are supposed to *represent* Jews,
but that the *discrimination* against the Goblins is reminiscent of a
certain brand of anti-Semitism -- demonizing an entire group because
some members are successful in business or finance.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

This is how allegory works.  It is, if properly executed, gentler than
symbolism or metaphor.  Rowling's Goblins do not represent Jews any
more than (to pick a relatively well-known example) Melville's Billy
Budd "represents" Jesus.  But I think it is no accident that we can
see echoes of various types of RW discrimination in the Potterverse. 
(Half-breeds, anyone?)

Laura continues:

> The comparison would be correct if JKR had included a 
> character with stereotypical gay or lesbian traits but 
> had not identified that character as such.  

No, not really.  That sort of portrayal (see, for example, prior list
discussions re: Prof. Grubbly-Plank) is just pure representation, not
symbolism and surely not allegory.

> I would respectfully suggest that the reading Nemi 
> and Matt propose is both overly simplistic and overly 
> specific.

Well, there's *something* going on here that's overly simplistic, but
I don't think it's what *I* wrote!  :)

> As for Matt, I think you're doing a disservice to JKR 
> if you think she would try to make a valid point in such 
> an insensitive way.  If she had created a magical race with 
> stereotyped characteristics of African-Americans, Asians, 
> Arabs or gays or lesbians, her readers would have jumped 
> on her, and deservedly so.  She is, I believe, addressing 
> bigotry in general and not any sort in particular.  

Of course she's addressing bigotry in general.  But unless this is
just a continuation of the same line of misunderstanding, I can't see
why you'd accuse Rowling of insensitivity in including parallels or
analogues to real-world discrimination -- especially this particular
one.  "Never forget" is not just a historical slogan.  Discrimination
*exists*, and to pretend it does not is to mask it and thereby to
perpetuate it.  Rowling's treatment plainly acknowledges and plays off
of the bigotry her readers can see in the real world, and not just its
most overt forms.  It's there in the focus on lineage, the mistrust of
foreigners, the isolation of the half-blooded.  

Moreover, does it really matter what Rowling intended?  As I've said,
I think the allegory is there by design, but even if it were not
consciously done, it would still be worthwhile to draw parallels
between characters/situations/relationships in the books and in the
real world.  One of most wonderful things about literature is that, by
exploring such themes and connections, we can learn things that never
entered the author's consciousness.  It wouldn't be much fun reading
Shakespeare, or Aristophanes, if their works spoke only to their
worlds, and not to ours! 
 
> I think that because of the way she portrays 
> prejudice-she shows it from the point of view of the 
> holder of the prejudiced belief rather than the 
> victims of the beliefs.  

Well, actually, we mostly see it from the point of view of a teenager
who is still learning how things work in his strange world, trying to
separate characteristic from stereotype and judgment from prejudice,
and doing a pretty creditable job of it.  Although, like all humans,
an imperfect one.

-- Matt




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Mon Sep 29 16:51:42 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 16:51:42 -0000
Subject: Obsessed with Harry (was - Re: They are children's books)
In-Reply-To: <bl8ufd+igh4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl9nuu+ib7t@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81848

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jeffl1965" <jeffl1965 at h...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sbursztynski" 
> <greatraven at h...> wrote:
> >  I have to admit that I *hear* the 
> > > Weasley's all with Cockney accents, simply because they're more 
> > > country, imho. I know that they are supposedly from around 
Devon, 
> > > iirc, but I'm not that familar with the dialect from that area, 
> and 
> > > JKR makes at least Ron and the Twins sound a bit cockney to me.
> > They 
> > > don't use all the contractions and slang, but I guess its the 
> > > constant use of Oi and bloody hell. ;)
> >


Sue: 
> > Er - Cockney is London, not country. Devon ... well, I have 
friends 
> > from Devon and the accent is - different. Very different. Not 
sure 
> > what I can compare it with. Not London, anyway.
> > 
> > Perhaps a Devon person on the list can describe it?
> 

Geoff:
It may be the movies but I get the feel that Ron is certainly Cockney 
or "Sarf Lunnon" (as my own son always terms his accent). Perhaps 
JKR's use of speech for him suggests that. Strictly, to be a true 
Cockney a person must be born within the sound of Bow Bells. Cockney 
is an urban accent like Brummie (Birmingham), Geordie (Tyneside) 
etc., often developed in times past because of the polluted 
atmosphere and attendant catarrhal problems - Brummies for example 
always sound very nasal. Cockneys also use the glottal stop a lot; 
it's difficult to indicate in ordinary script but "be - ah" 
for "better" as an example.

West Country accents - Devon, Somerset, Dorset to mention but a few 
are very different. in fact, accents are not dissimilar from the 
Southern accents in Susswex or Hampshire but get stronger the further 
west you go. I now live in Somerset and you notice the 
rolled  "r"s, "oi" for "i" etc. To give just a taster, there is an 
old song which parodies this and begins..
"O, vokes cum up fram Zummerzet, where the zoider apples grow.." (In 
translation - Folk come from Somerset where the cider apples grow.." 
In the films (sorry again!), Hagrid has a West Country accent of sorts
(!)





From sylviablundell at aol.com  Mon Sep 29 17:00:05 2003
From: sylviablundell at aol.com (sylviablundell2001)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 17:00:05 -0000
Subject: The Weasley's accents
Message-ID: <bl9oel+lbst@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81849

The Weasleys certainly don't sound Devonian, or indeed West Country.  
As a child, I had a Devon accent you could cut with a knife, so I 
know whereof I speak.  The Weasleys all seem to me to speak what is 
usually referred to as "standard English".  The cockneyfication of 
Ron in the films seems to me entirely wrong and grates on me rather.
I think Hagrid probably speaks with a West Country accent - certainly 
not Scots, whatever Robbie Coltrane's origins.
Sylvia (who lost her accent years ago, alas)




From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk  Mon Sep 29 17:04:01 2003
From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 17:04:01 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: New Elves on the Administration Team
Message-ID: <bl9om1+a03j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81850

Greetings from Hexquarters!

We would like to introduce some new additions to our team:


Kirstini - Teeny Elf
Melody - Aphrael Elf
Abigail - Bookish Elf
Grey Wolf - Fluffy Elf
Wendy - Hebby Elf
Phyllis - Poppy Elf
Petra Pan - Penapart Elf
Jo Serenadust - Dusty Elf
and
Maria Alena - Manya Elf

have all agreed to do long hours for no pay, with no time off, no 
holidays, and an old tea towel as uniform.

::ahem::

I mean that they've agreed to become new list elves. There may be 
other additions to our team in the next few weeks, in the meantime, 
please make our elves in training welcome.

Pippy Elf

For the Administration Team




From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Mon Sep 29 17:18:03 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (Smythe, Boyd T {FLNA})
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 12:18:03 -0500
Subject: BADD ANGST TBAY, Part II
Message-ID: <2D7CA07E071FDE43A5A8EB8D8BBC01833E22AD@pbswmu00024.corp.pep.pvt>

No: HPFGUIDX 81851

P!S, your posts are always a pleasure. :) Keep 'em coming!

BTW, I have never thought that any part of your theory was impossible, only
that I saw it as less likely than other interpretations. I still do. :) You
said:

> Pip!Squeak wrote: <snip>
> So it's not wise to go by 'screen time'. Quirrel gets about one-third the
attention Snape gets. Nonetheless, Snape in PS/SS is the distraction,
Quirrel the real villain. If LV is mentioned about 1000 times, then it is in
fact a reasonable supposition that he may not be the real problem. <snipped
more supporting points>

I agree with your point that JKR likes to use the misdirection ploy-and to
great effect-a number of times in the series. Well documented! But I think
we have different conceptions of the structure of the series.

Individually, each of the books in the series has been structured as a
mystery. But that does not mean that the series as a whole is a mystery. I
see this series as more of an epic.

Why does this matter? Because if the series is a mystery, then JKR will keep
us guessing all the way through to the denoument. And we'll say, "oh, that's
what it was all about!" And I will feel a bit jilted that the whole series
was a mystery and I didn't even know it.

But if the series is an epic, then she will not trick us about what we will
see in the denoument: the defeat of LV. Who does what and how are all
unknowns, of course, but the final outcome is set in stone. That's part of
what makes it an epic. So Harry must overcome incredible obstacles to
accomplish this impossible task. We don't need to know what all of the
obstacles will be or how he will overcome them, but we need to know the
task: rid the WW of LV. (This is quite different from rid the WW of all
future Dark Lords.)

Recall LOTR, where the final outcome is known (from very near the beginning)
to be the destruction of the One Ring and defeat of Sauron. How will Frodo
do it? We don't know. What obstacles will he face? We don't know. So the
how's and why's were mysteries of a sort, but the what was unwavering.
Destroy the Ring and Sauron...destroy LV.

> Pip!Squeak:
> So Emeric the Evil was almost certainly a major historical character. To
get a mention in a school history lesson, he *has* to be a major historical
character. <

I'm sure he was important, but in what way we don't know. Evil, yes.
Maniacal pure-bloodist tyrant? We have no idea (yet). I continue to think he
was just part of the books' atmosphere.

> Pip!Squeak:
> So, no, I suppose our evil wizards might not have been racist, or pure
bloodist, but it seems that they would have stood out a bit if they weren't.
Because from the history we are given, the WW itself is largely racist.
Other races feel extremely oppressed - so much so that they revolt more than
once over a period of centuries. And note that when Binns explains about
Salazar Slytherin's pure-bloodist views, he does not condemn them [CoS Ch. 9
p.114 ]. <

Yep, the WW has always been racist toward non-humans and apparently muggles.
No argument there.

> Pip!Squeak:
> Besides, if our evil wizards are *not* racist, and *not* pure-bloodist,
and *don't* seek power - well, what sort of WW is it that calls them evil ?
[grin] <

How about they've tortured and/or murdered wizards? We'd both agree that
that'd get someone labeled "evil." But those are not the same as trying to
take over the WW with a pure-bloodist theology.

> Pip!Squeak:
> Dumbledore is 150. <snip> Professor Marchbanks in OOP is old enough to
have examined Dumbledore for his OWLs.  Wizards live longer than a century.
> And no, it's not likely that there's no way of telling that Voldemort is
the strongest in a century. Cricketing batsmen are regularly judged against
the great W.G. Grace - even though there is probably no one alive today who
saw Grace in his heyday (he died in 1915). Historical records.
> There is no canon (as far as I recall - I could be wrong) that says
Voldemort is 'unique'. Far from it. 'Greatest', most powerful, strongest -
all the terms applied to Voldemort suggest that he is far from unique. The
terms used suggest that he is the worst of a bad lot. No one ever says 'it
had never happened before'. Instead they talk about 'times like that'
[Sirius in GoF Ch. 27]. In Hagrid's explanation to Harry in Chapter 4 of
PS/SS, in Mr Weasley's explanation of the Dark Mark in GoF Ch. 9, neither of
them sound *surprised* about this history. <

Yes, some (maybe many) wizards live more than a century. Point to P!S.

But you make my argument for me in your 3rd paragraph there. They call him
greatest, most powerful, strongest, but these do not have to mean "most
fascist in a century" or "most pure-bloodist in a century." They could as
easily refer to his power/strength. So the previous centuries may have each
seen a wizard as powerful as LV, but that wizard may have been good, or an
evil murderer, or an evil tyrant-all possibilities. Again, I'm just saying
that this doesn't feel to me like reasonable foreshadowing for many
centuries of Dark Lords. Also, we don't know that any would-be tyrants have
ever succeeded. So the WW may see these types occasionally, but always in
the past has been able to put them down. Not so with the immortal LV.
Perhaps it is there that LV is unique?

> Pip!Squeak: (referring to the late appearance of Harry ridding the WW of
racism)
> Except that JKR has already left important facts to later books. <

True, but if this is an epic, then that would be a moving denoument. Not
classic form. If it's a mystery, then I'm not exactly on pins and needles to
find it out, since I thought we were just headed for LV's defeat.

> Pip!Squeak:
> Further, Harry's awareness of prejudice and racism is increasing. <

Yes, I agree wholeheartedly with this. But I think its value is in giving
Harry a reason beyond himself for vanquishing LV.

> Pip!Squeak:
> Societies which brainwash, enslave, discriminate against, and commit
genocide against 'lesser' races are not *imperfect*. <snip>
> Yes, the WW has many problems which could be defined as *imperfect* - but
no. You are deceived, as Harry is, by the undeniable fact that the WW is
'cute'. It's funny. It's full of eccentric wizards, in odd costumes. It
looks harmless. It's comic-opera. <snip>
> Pip!Squeak [on her soapbox]:
> Why must the real world always have prejudice and evil?
> Who told you that?
> What are you supporting when you say that?
> What 'side' do you help when you say 'it's never possible to set
everything right'.
> Why must JKR accept that view in her books? 
> It's up to you to stop evil. Full stop. Whether it's a bad guy, singular,
bad guys, plural, or bad guys as in an entire society. And in fact, in
history, you will find examples of people trying to stop all three.
> Real life. Real worlds. Real societies. 

(sighs) P!S, please get off your soapbox and stop preaching at me. It's all
very good and well to say, "Why must the real world always have prejudice
and evil?" But it's also pointless. I am an adult and already do my part to
better the world as best I can. But I also know that evils do exist, and
always will, because no one is perfect. But if we all try, the world will be
a better place tomorrow.

And that's what Harry will do when he beats LV in book 7. He will rid the
world of one of the bigger evils of today. And perhaps remind everyone what
it means to stand and fight for good. But he will probably not change
everyone's perception of what "good" means. That's just too tall an order.
(How long have we been fighting against racism now in the RW?)

-Remnant



From jakejensen at hotmail.com  Mon Sep 29 17:20:18 2003
From: jakejensen at hotmail.com (jakedjensen)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 17:20:18 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Bridge (was: Dumbledore's Philosophy (was MAGIC DISHWASHER...)
In-Reply-To: <bl86m1+379b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl9pki+spth@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81852

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "artcase" <artcase at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "slgazit" <slgazit at s...> 
wrote:
 
> I often wonder what DD meant by "Old Magic". 

<SNIP> 

> Opinions?
> 
> A.

I often wonder about this myself.  A question I ponder frequently is 
why would a form of magic die out that enabled users to engage the 
Av. Kad. curse?  It would be like tossing away the cure to polio.  I 
think the old magic may have something to do with muggles (as you 
suggested) or Egypt.  We learn about Egyptian curses (and Egypt in 
general) at the start of PoA.  Now Hermione is taking runes.  Some 
have speculated that WB put a copyright on a Harry Potter book 
entitled something like "Harry Potter and the Pyrmiads of (something 
or other)."  And then you have the sneakescope (bought in Egypt), 
which may still have a secret or two to reveal.  Who knows, maybe 
Harry's scar is really a rune?  Maybe he had it on his head before VD 
attacked and it protected him? (I wish I could attach some canon to 
this post, but, like so many others, I am at the office right now) 

Jake




From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Mon Sep 29 18:49:33 2003
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 18:49:33 -0000
Subject: The Death Chamber
In-Reply-To: <bl9je7+8ve4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl9urt+2r89@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81853

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" <annemehr at y...> 
wrote:
> 
> > > Annemehr:
> > > But Ginny was entranced yet could not see the thestrals.
> > 
> 
> Susanbones2003 replied:
> > Now I interject:
> > I believe the Death Chamber affected the four people it did 
because 
> > of the things that have happened to them in their lives. No, 
Ginny 
> > has not "seen death" but her possession by Lord Voldemort 
qualifies 
> > her as a player. Someone who's been to the dark side and back, 
> > someone who's physically be very close to death.
> 
> Annemehr:
> I think your post must have been what I was thinking of when I 
replied
> to Iggy's post that came after this one.  That's what gave me the 
idea
> that actually nearly dying may be what draws one to the veil; 
although
> what the difference is for Luna, that she could hear the voices and
> not be mesmerised by them is uncertain.  And although we know about
> Harry and Ginny, we can have no idea whether Luna and Neville both
> came close to death.
> 
> But I wonder if that's what what you are thinking when you say the
> Chamber affected them "because of the things that have happened to
> them in their lives?"  Maybe you mean something not so specific as
> what I said above?  A more general cause could just be a severe 
enough
> trauma: the same as above for Ginny, a *lot* of things for Harry,
> Luna's loss of her mother, and Neville's loss of his parents and the
> pain of having to see their state in his visits.  If we look at it
> this way, can we say that niether Ron nor Hermione have had a bad
> enough experience for them to hear the voices?  Do you have any 
other
> thoughts?
> 

Jennifer again:
Logically, I think Luna may not have been mesmerized because she may 
have been the one who was furtherest away from the death she saw. She 
was only a girl of nine, I believe, when she saw her mother's death. 
I do not know exactly when Neville saw his death -- it was not his 
parents but a grandfather, I believe. Don't have my book at the 
ready. Also, in a very peculiar and delightful way, Luna is the one 
most grounded in these matters. The one who's thought about them and 
faced them. She is accustomed, perhaps because of her father's line 
of work (which requires belief in so many improbable and fantastical 
things) to confronting the difficult and hard-to-accept things. And 
happily enough, she's quite comfortable with these ideas. I think the 
some of the fun (hopefully there will be fun) in the next two books 
will be in seeing how many of the nutty things Luna mentioned will 
have a basis in WW fact.

And again logically, it seems that Ron and Hermione were spared 
because they don't have any direct experience with death. I know that 
JKR isn't usually this straightforward so I wouldn't be surprised if 
this explanation is too pat.
> Susanbones2003:

> > I just listened to that section yesterday afternoon and was 
> > yet again knocked off my feet by the multi-layered subtleties of 
the 
> > MOM events. I know so many moaned that it was just a sell-out 
action-
> > packed movie-style bit of writing but no. It goes beyond that. 
All 
> > kinds of things are going on but so quickly that your first 
> > impression may come out a bit askew.
> > Jennifer
> 
> Annemehr:
> Absolutely -- and the first two times I read it, it *was* all an
> action scene for me, except the veil and the locked door. I am 
having enough trouble with the Death Chamber, let alone analysing all 
the> other rooms! And it almost seems that Harry is going to have to 
visit the DoM again, and probably not without his companions.  I 
wonder how that will be brought about?  Will it have to wait until 
later in book
> seven?  
> 
>SNIP
> 
> Annemehr

Jennifer again:
I would like to see Harry get a shot at understanding more about the 
Death Chamber. So many people believe we will hear from or see Sirius 
again in some form. I wonder if it will be at the edge of the 
curtain, now that it's clear he won't be a ghost. Priori Incantatum 
would be handy if we knew for sure just who's wand had done the job 
and if it had a brother....
J 




From gorda_ad at hotmail.com  Mon Sep 29 03:47:36 2003
From: gorda_ad at hotmail.com (adsong16)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 03:47:36 -0000
Subject: Hermione's growth
In-Reply-To: <000b01c385b3$593b3b00$9ddc5644@aoldsl.net>
Message-ID: <bl8a0o+r4s5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81854

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "elfundeb" <elfundeb at c...> wrote:
 [snip]
> 
> The spotlight is focused on that because while Hermione does make 
mistakes - as she did in the Forbidden Forest with the centaurs - she does not 
experience the consequences of failure, as Harry does. The quick change of 
scene to the Department of Mysteries refocuses everyone's attention - ours 
and Hermione's - elsewhere. 
> 
> Recalling Dumbledore's philosophy of allowing people to try and fail and 
learn from their mistakes (witness his patience with Hagrid's poor teaching), 
though, it seems to me that for Hermione to fully develop as a character, she 
needs to suffer from her mistakes. If there's always a Grawp to rescue her, this 
growth will never happen.  She will become more and more convinced that 
she's right and insistent on doing things her way, and without consulting 
anyone.  Hermione's combination of overconfidence, secrecy and blindness 
to other points of view is a dangerous combination, but only the hanging 
house-elf subplot suggests that there's trouble ahead for her.

Me (Gorda):
Firstly I would like to point out/remind everyone that we only see Hermione 
from Harry's POV, which is necessarily limited. I think Hermione probably felt 
very bad about the whole centaur incident and the subsequent harm that 
Grawp and the centaurs may have done to each other. In fact, JKR tells us 
that right off the bat:

p. 757 US edition:
"'You said you didn't hurt the innocent!' shouted Hermione, REAL tears sliding 
down her face now." emphasis mine
and later, p. 759:
"'Oh no,' said Hermione, quaking so badly that her knees gave way. 'Oh, that 
was horrible. And he might kill them all...'"

Clearly, this is not an experience she's going to foget in a hurry. We don't 
know what thoughts went through her head in the hospital wing, and later 
during the summer holidays. I'm going to bet she realizes her mistake pretty 
keenly and that she will learn from it to be more cautious.

elfundeb:
> She makes another big mistake in OOP (in addition to her miscalculation 
regarding the centaurs). Hermione casts a spell on the parchment all the DA 
members sign so they'll be branded if they tattle. But she doesn't tell anyone, 
and when Marietta does tattle, Harry is nearly expelled and Dumbledore is 
forced to leave. Had she told them the consequences of tattling this would 
likely never have happened.  Hermione's secrecy is not always a virtue.

Me:
It's not like they didn't know NOT to tell. P. 346:
"we all ought to agree not to shout about what we're doing. So if you sign, 
you're agreeing not to tell Umbridge --or anybody else-- what we'reup to."

Even if Hermione had told about the curse, Marietta may have decided that 
the pimples still wouldn't be as bad as getting expelled and her mom losing 
her job at the Ministry. The point was that the members needed to keep their 
word, and Hermione was making sure there would be consequences if they 
didn't.

elfundeb:
> 
> It is not accidental, I think, that Luna Lovegood (the anti-Hermione), first 
appears in this book. Hermione dismisses Luna out of hand and is frequently 
rude to her. Hermione even has time to murmur a snide remark about her in 
the Department of Mysteries. Yet she doesn't hesitate to use Luna's 
connections to the Quibbler when it suits her purposes. 
> 
> David continued:
> 
> <<She rewrites the 
> rules of her bargain with Rita Skeeter, just because it suits her.>>
> 
> And Kneazle255 responded:
> 
> <<She rewrites her agreement with Rita to aid in a WAR.>>  
> 
> This illustrates my point rather well. Because Hermione's ends are good, we 
don't just excuse, we applaud her manipulative techniques. Same thing with 
Hermione's treatment of Umbridge, who is as hateful as they come. But 
doesn't this sound a lot like what a certain hat said about Slytherin? That 
they'll "use any means to achieve their ends"? 
> 
> Hermione reveals in OOP that the Sorting Hat considered her for 
Ravenclaw. I think the Hat might have done well to consider Slytherin. When 
something truly threatens Hermione, she is quite willing to use any means to 
achieve her ends. 
> 
> I think Hermione is often viewed through rose-colored lenses because her 
motives seem very altruistic, as exemplified by her genuine concern for 
others, in particular Harry and the house-elves. In fact, nearly everything 
Hermione does is motivated by self-interest. Hermione's brewing of the 
polyjuice potion in CoS, in order to find out who the Heir of Slytherin really 
was, has been cited as an example of her willingness to break rules to help 
her friends. But as a muggleborn, the Heir of Slytherin was a much greater 
threat to Hermione than Harry at that point. I always found it quite significant 
that the first time she engineered a major flaunting of the rules, the reason 
was a personal threat.
> 
> The same goes for the DA. The DA was obviously a wonderful idea. But 
Hermione faced a dual threat. She has chosen to make her mark in the WW 
and not the muggle one. She knows she won't earn an OWL in DADA without 
practice. But even more fundamentally, Voldemort is a threat to her as well as 
to Harry. He's not after her directly, but she is a muggleborn and a friend of 
Harry's, and a WW with Voldemort in control is not a place where she could 
live safely, or hope to achieve her goals, whether she chooses to be an Auror 
or to win freedom for the house-elves. 
> 
> Hermione does not help Harry just because he's the key to defeating 
Voldemort and eliminating a threat to herself; he's one of her best friends and 
she obviously cares a great deal for him (NOT in a shipping sense). She's 
made it a personal project to keep him on the path he needs to be on, to 
encourage or nag him as needed, to the point of running his life without his 
consent. But it's ignoring facts to suggest she has nothing to gain from it. We 
just don't notice because Harry needs help.
> 
> And while it's true that Hermione doesn't have anything to gain from her 
campaign to free the house-elves, except the satisfaction of having helped 
them, house-elves are, like muggleborns, discriminated against in the WW, so 
drawing attention to their plight raises the consciousness of the WW to their 
prejudicial attitudes in general. 
> 

Me:
Well, I suppose Hermione can be seen as quite calculating sometimes. 
However, I see it less as a Machiavellian/Slytherinesque quality and more as 
a result of those keen analytical powers we have discussed. Her brain sees a 
problem (Harry seen as liar and the MoM denying LV's return) and a set of 
tools (Rita, Luna, The Quibbler), and it comes up with a solution (exclusive 
interview).  I also don't see her as motivated by self-interest as much as you 
propose. I think if she had been a pureblood she would still have brewed the 
polyjuice potion in CoS and in general acted in the way she has thus far. She 
genuinely cares for Harry, yes (whether you are a shipper or not), but she also 
has a keen sense of right and wrong (thus her campaign for elf rights). The 
greatest growth she has experienced int he books is that she can now tell the 
difference between a greater Right and Wrong and the smaller right and 
wrong of rules and regulations. She breaks the rules now because/when she 
knows it is for a greater good.

> However, her misguided campaign merely perpetuates the lie of the statue 
at the Department of Mysteries. It's not her role to decide what the house-
elves need, any more than it is the MoM's job. She needs to recognize their 
right - and the centaurs' right - to want something different for themselves. 
> 
The house elf situation shows, to me, a very interesting point. I agree with you 
that Hermione is unwittingly making the same mistake as the majority of hte 
WW, because she doesn't take HE wishes into consideration any more than 
other wizards do. In this she is like many anthropologists, sociologists and 
other Western Europeans who have gone to various areas of the world and 
have been appalled by what they see and moved to change it without 
considering whether the people in question want it changed. int he fictional 
world, the equivalent situation was what gave birth to the Star Trek Prime 
Directive, which states you shouldn't meddle because you'll prob ably cause 
more harm than good.

> And it's not her job to manage Harry's life without his consent, either, even 
though the outcome of OOP make it appear that it was the right thing to do. 
She needs to work *with* those that she cares about, not *for* them.  This is 
how I see Hermione's potential tragic flaw playing out. She sums it up herself, 
in ch. 31 of OOP:
> 
> "On Friday, Harry and Ron had a day off while Hermione sat her Ancient 
> Runes exam . . . .They stretched and yawned beside the open window - 
when
> the portrait hole opened and Hermione clambered in, looking thoroughly 
> bad-tempered.
> 'How were the Runes?' said Ron, yawning and stretching.
> 'I mis-translated ehwaz,' said Hermione furiously. 'It means 
> partnership, not defence; I mixed it
> up with eihwaz.'
> 'Ah well,' said Ron lazily, 'that's only one mistake, isn't it, you'll 
> still get -'
> 'Oh, shut up!' said Hermione angrily. 'It could be the one mistake that 
> makes the difference
> between a pass and a fail.'"
> 
> To paraphrase only slightly, for Hermione this could be the difference 
between success and tragic failure. 
> 
> Debbie (wondering if anyone made it to the end)
> 
Well, if Hermione has a tragic flaw, I don't know that shielding rather than 
partnering with her friends is one. (This may  much more apply to Molly, who 
needs to quit  s/mothering and start treating her kids including Harry more as 
adults). I am more inclined to think that Hermione needs to connect more with 
her emotions than be ruled by logic and ethics, which can only take you so 
far. I think she can be forgiven for bossing her friends around (Goodness 
knows, they need it sometimes!). I also think she should be commended for 
not telling Harry "I told you so" when the DM turned out to be a trap, as she 
had correctly predicted it would be.  

What Hermione needs to learn is that "cool use of intellect" only goes so far in 
taking her where she needs to go, just like Harry needs to learn that playing 
the hero is not always the correct course of action.

Gorda





From meriaugust at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 29 14:34:50 2003
From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 14:34:50 -0000
Subject: Will Draco come back? 
Message-ID: <bl9fua+ggdo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81855

This is my first time asking a question, I have posted once before 
and have been lurking for about six months, so not only do I hope 
that no one has discussed this before, but also I hope I do this 
right. 

Anyway, I was thinking, if Lucius Malfoy is in Azkaban (as stated in 
the end of OotP) will Narcissa, probably knowing full well that it 
was Dumbledore who was responsible for putting him there, along with 
Harry of course, want to send Draco back to Hogwarts for sixth and 
seventh year? Draco allready wanted to go to Durmstrang, so could 
this little incident (ie: the Battle at the Department of Mysteries) 
be the straw that breaks the camels back? Will we lose Draco whom we 
all love to hate? Just a thought. Any ideas? 

Meri 
(who yells at Cedric in PoA to run for his life, but he never, ever  
listens) 





From lawtrainer at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 29 15:35:30 2003
From: lawtrainer at yahoo.com (Jana Fisher)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 15:35:30 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore is not Voldemort's grandfather!
In-Reply-To: <bl2k8g+j6oj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bl9jg2+o8gj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81856

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hp42187gs" <hp42187gs at y...> 
wrote:
> Many people have been asking if Dumbledore is possibly related to 
Tom 
> Riddle. He is not! (It is not proven, at least.) One person said 
> that "Dumbledore could be (Voldemort's grandad) if his middle name 
> was Marvolo. What is his middle name?" Dumbledore's full name is 
> Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore--- end of discussion....
> 
> "hp42187gs"

As an interesting side note to this, I Googled the name Wulfric 
trying to see if I could decipher anything from it, and it came up 
with an odd family tree saying Wulfric is the descendant 
of....Godric!  Coincidence?  Any takers on the theory that Dumbledore 
is Gryffindor's heir?

Also, does anyone else notice the wasp buzzing around the classroom, 
the fly buzzing around, et al references?  Could it be possible that 
as Dumbledore is considered the most powerful wizard in the WW, that 
he could transfigure into multiple forms?  For example, even though 
Dumbledore means bee, Rita Skeeters' name comes from a mosquito and 
she transforms into a beetle.  How ironic that most of us would like 
to be the proverbial fly on the wall, and Dumbledore could be?

Jana





From feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca  Mon Sep 29 17:15:35 2003
From: feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca (feetmadeofclay)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 17:15:35 -0000
Subject: They are children's books (Was: the heart of it all)
In-Reply-To: <001801c384ac$dd36bfe0$b559aacf@texas.net>
Message-ID: <bl9pbn+u1kq@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81857

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Amanda Geist" <editor at t...> 
wrote:
> > Golly: They are children's books.  And children's books have 
beloved
> > characters that die all the time.
> 
> Amanda: They were and are not written for children. They were 
written to express
> someone's vision, to tell a story.


Golly: I'm sorry but I don't believe that one bit.  Every decent 
children's writer aims to tell a good story and express a vision.  
That is what being creative is about. Are children's authors less 
creative or inferior storytellers?   I read a lot of children's 
literature.  I've been around the industry for a long while and HP 
though very good is not highly unusual.  There are many books that 
are very similar and just as good.  It doesn't make them any less 
aimed at children.  

The first book was perfectly suited for children 8-11 (depending on 
reading skill).  I read books for that age group all the time and 
enjoy many of them. HP is hardly unsual in any respect.  It is 
delightful and skillfully achieved. OOTP was probably written for 13-
15 year olds. 

Rowling's recent offering certainly does not have the emotional or 
literary sophistication of Orwell or Kafka or even Atwood, which 
would probably be beyond the reading abilities of many (but not all) 
of that age group.

Plus OOTP combines serious political dystopia themes with the 
everyday lives of children.  A common tac for children's novelists 
with a political bent. Rowling is not the first to bring in issues 
like prejudice and bad adult administration.

Many children's writers write stories that are just as challanging 
and just as dark, if not more so. (Though one is certainly free to 
think Rowling does it better.)

If you don't think so, then you aren't reading the same children's 
books I do.  If all that you see are those books you haven't read 
since you were 11 and Mary Kate and Ashley books or Goosebumps, then 
you don't see the range of children's literature out there.

It is a thriving and vibrant genre. It is a real talent to write for 
children and teenagers specifically.  Sometimes a good story will 
enthrall all.  

But to paraphrase Neil Gaiman - Rowling isn't revolutionizing the 
genre. Perhaps she is changing the way people look at the genre.  But 
apparently not, since many adults still refuse to admit they are 
reading children's novel.  

Too bad you're embarrassed to like a children's/Young Adult book, but 
I'm not.  Nor am I embarrassed to like the others that I do.  

> 
> It was the marketing department of the publisher that chose to 
market to
> children, and who made the (to me, ridiculous) decision to 
have "adult" and
> "child" versions of the *exact same story* with different covers.

Golly: They aren't different versions.  There are different covers.  
The reason they have adult and child covers is no different from the 
reason the covers vary from country to country or decade to decade.  
Different groups like different images.  It is all about marketing.  
The books have not changed.  The only English textual differences are 
between the American and British versions.  The adult covers are for 
image conscious adults who were too embarrassed to read a children's 
book in public. (Or those who just think they are nicer - which I 
won't disagree with.  Had I been sure the adult cover was the British 
version I would probably have bought that.) 

  You're only a reading child for about 15 years.  There are lots of 
books that I never read in that time and lots that were not published 
when I was young.  I would miss out on so many great stories if I was 
too embarrassed to read children's literature.  

But I do admit to liking the paperback adult Potter covers better. 
The photographs are nice. That may only be because I think Grand Pere 
is such a terrible illustrator.  

> In fact, I will be interested to see how the releases of Books 6 
and 7 are
> handled; to me, at least, the frantic child-focused activity seemed 
on the
> edge of inappropriate for Book 5. I think subsequent books will 
take the
> story out of the realm where stuffed owls, paper wizard hats, 
getting
> "sorted," and making wands are appropriate marketing tools. 

Golly: Why do you denegrate that which so many fell in love with the 
first time around.  Rowling put in what you call "marketing tools".  
They were a part of this creation.  They were what readers of all 
ages enjoyed. I enjoyed the jolly sorting and the little details.  I 
enjoyed watching Harry struggle at his lessons and learning what was 
in a wand.   

I feel no need to denegrate what has come before. If you like the 
more serious stuff better, then so be it.  The series is more 
interesting to you as it goes on.  But it isn't any more serious than 
many of Garner, Zindel, or LeGuin's books. 

It is only natural that as Harry grows to know his world that it will 
seem less fantastical to the reader and Harry and that Harry's 
understanding of his surroundings would deepen.  


>I think that the
> ads with the biker and the businesswoman are far more appropos, at 
this
> point.
> 
> It is a fact that the earlier books appealed to children. But to 
classify
> the entire sequence--with two unread, even--as "children's books" 
is to
> place artificial measures on a continuum.


Golly: Now that the publishing company understands adults like HP, of 
course it will be marketed to them.  Adults also love Toy Story, 
Little Nemo.  They are still meant for children.  

Harry is now meant to mirror the supposed angry teen years.  And so 
he is angry.  The book is meant for 15 year olds.  It parallels many 
themes and conventions of the typical Young Adult novel. It is 
darker.  It is more politically involved.  It deals with issues of 
self-doubt and personal success. These are common Young Adult 
themes.  

> 
> I have chosen to be guided by the author, who has said no; she 
didn't write
> them for children (although she is delighted at their response). 
She wrote
> them to tell a story.

GOLLY: Sorry but, BULL!  By saying this you denegrate all the 
wonderful writers who say the exact same thing and are proud to admit 
they are children's authors.  Rowling admits that HP are children's 
books. She simply said she doesn't write from a frame of mind where 
she writes what she thinks kids would like.  She is writing a story 
that excited her.  As do all authors.  

Children's novels are not like the stories found in school 
textbooks. "Jane and spot went for a walk" and such stuff. Many are 
vibrant wonderful stories. If you ask how most children's novelists 
write, most will say they don't aim to write stuff that kids will 
enjoy.  They want to write their own stories, but they add an 
attention to the understanding and abilities of their targeted age 
group. HP has a range of age groups hovering around Potter's age, 
which increases.  

Some writers always write for children while others write for both 
adults and children.  There is nothing weak or less serious or less 
interesting about writing for children. It is a real skill.  

What Rowling has said is no different than what every good children's 
author I have seen says. To write a whole novel, one has to write 
with passion for the story and its characters. Otherwise whatever 
came out wouldn't be worth much.   

The only difference is Rowling's unparalleled success. Explain that 
how you like.  It certainly isn't because she writes for adults.  It 
is simply unsual for books.  This is more common in television and 
movies. 

Her books are for children as each one comes out it is set for the 
age Harry is.  Harry is no longer a little child.  He is older.

They certainly aren't adult novels. Sometimes there are children's 
books that are popular with kids that adults won't ever really like.  
But HP is not Captain Underpants.  I don't enjoy Captain Underpants.  
But I understand why kids do.  HP was always more traditional and 
more accessable.  A good story remains a good story.  

Golly





From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com  Mon Sep 29 19:14:28 2003
From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com)
Date: 29 Sep 2003 19:14:28 -0000
Subject: New poll for HPforGrownups 
Message-ID: <1064862868.474.86135.w47@yahoogroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81858


Enter your vote today!  A new poll has been created for the 
HPforGrownups group:

1. Would you go to a Harry Potter 
conference in the UK? A) never B) In 
2005 C) In 2006 D) In 2007 2. Would 
your decision to go to a UK- based 
conference be based upon the venue? 
Yes/No 3. Where will you be travelling 
from? a) UK b) Europe c) North America 
d) Other 4. Have you been to any other 
conventions A) Nimbus 2003 B) Other 
non-HP conventions 5. Will you be 
travelling A) Alone B) With 
partner/family 6. Should the 
conference be held A) Around Easter B) 
In the Summer (end of July) c) Around 
Halloween d) Other 7. Would you be 
interested in a "bolt- on" Harry 
Potter tour to accompany the 
conference a) Yes, b) No. 8. What 
would you most like 
from a UK Convention? a) Academic 
discussions - inc Ship b) Games c) 
Fanfic debates

Please vote in as many categories as 
you like. 

  o 1a) never 
  o 1b) In 2005 
  o 1c) In 2006 
  o 1d) in 2007 
  o 2a) Yes 
  o 2b) No 
  o 3 a) UK 
  o 3b) Europe 
  o 3c) North America 
  o 3d) Other 
  o 4a) Nimbus 2003 
  o 4b) Other non-HP conventions 
  o 5a) Alone 
  o 5b) With partner/family 
  o 6a) Easter 
  o 6b) Summer 
  o 6c) Halloween 
  o 7a) Yes 
  o 7b) No 
  o 8a) Academic discussions 
  o 8b) Games 
  o 8C) Fanfic debates 


To vote, please visit the following web page:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/surveys?id=1140198  

Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are 
not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups 
web site listed above.

Thanks!

 







From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Mon Sep 29 19:23:51 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 19:23:51 -0000
Subject: Weasley accents (was Obsessed with Harry )
In-Reply-To: <bl9ht1+v2km@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bla0s7+frrr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81859

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ali" <Ali at z...> wrote:
> 
  <snipped since some elves are anal about it. :) )

> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erm, I think that you're confusing English accents a little bit. 
> Somebody is said to be Cockney if they were born within the sound 
of 
> Bow Bells in East London. Cockney is very much a London accent. 
> These days Londoners come in all shapes and sizes, it is a very 
> cosmopolitan city. But, if you're talking about a "London accent" 
it 
> is certainly not the "BBC" accent you describe. An archetypical 
> London accent is one where "h's" are dropped, and t's not 
pronounced 
> at the end of words.
>

    Jeff:
  
   Cor blimey!! Jus 'cuz a bloke what ain't got a bloody degree from 
uni what says 'e's a friggin' genuis in dialects don't mean 'e's a 
blitherin' idiot! Blimey you southerners are a bloody 'orrible smarmy 
lot!!! :)  You mean like that? No, I'm not really confused about the 
accents, just which one they would have. They're working class, no? 




 
> With the advent of television, accents have changed rather a lot 
and 
> many people across Southern England have what could be (very) 
> loosely termed a London accent. 
> 
  Jeff:

   Quite true. Plus many people working in London proper commute, so 
that makes the regional dialects difficult to asertain since they 
all "borrow" from each other working so closely together.  Just like 
Singer Tina Turner spent so much time living in London that she lost 
some of her accent, and sounds nearly English at times. :)


> Devonshire accents are very different to London accents. If the 
> Weasleys spoke with strong Devon accents, then they would sound 
much 
> more like Hagrid than Harry. In fact though, there is no evidence 
> from the books that the Weasleys come from Devon. We believe that 
> Ottery St Catchpole is probably within the vicinty of Ottery St 
> Mary's, in Devon, but we don't know. Also, just because they live 
> there, it doesn't mean that they come from there. I might soon have 
> to move done to Devon, but I stem from London.
> 

  Jeff:

  I know. I was using the fandom as the point of reference since the 
text doesn't really give much clue as to their point of origin nor 
their dialect. I've often argued they were from Ireland originally, 
and stand by that. But again, I picture the thick, working class 
accent on them, be it eastender or liverpudlian in origin is all I 
meant. I'm not really confused, just trying to decide which accent 
JRK intended for them to have. None of the actors really have accents 
that match the characters other than Hagrid, but I suppose that 
Snape's accent matches him the slimy git. ;)


> Scouse accents are again very different. Scousers come from 
> Liverpool, in the "North", it is very much a City accent. There is 
> no evidence that the Weasleys speak with a Scouse accent.
> 

  Jeff:

   Oh, I'm well aware of scouse's scot-irish background. As I stated, 
I envision them as being working class, and cockney and scouse are 
the ones that come to mind, and with their history a mystery, one has 
to grasp at straws, doesn't one? :)


> My reading of the Potterverse is that Ron has a vaguely Southern 
> accent. He seems to speak with *more* of an accent then Harry. The 
> movie characters also seem to follow this interpretation.
> 
  Jeff:

  Indeed. Again, working class, so cockney fits. IIRC, the actor 
playing Ron lives north of London, so that would fit. If its NE, then 
he'd fit right in with the Eastender lot. :)


> On a different note, the fact that somebody says "Bloody Hell" does 
> not make them a Londoner or Cockney - it is a swear word used 
> through the country. Also, IIRC, Ron says it in the film not the 
> book.
>
   Jeff:
 
  Oh, yes, I'm aware of that, it's just that I meant some swears seem 
to be dying out and being more common in some regions, just like git 
seems to be so UN-pc that it's not encouraged anymore according to a 
teacher friend of mine.
  Yes, the film has changed the perception of the characters for 
many. I don't totally accept that version as canon, since it's too 
compact and muddled. And yes, in the books Ron is much more 
colourful, yet I don't know if he says sh*t or sh*te. :) And since 
Seamus doesn't get much dialogue, it's difficult to tell where that 
little sod is from. ;)
  Anyway, I thank you for your concern and for your assistance. I 
just get too carried away and don't always make myself clear when I 
type. It's much easier to be understood when talking in person, isn't 
it? That way people know when you're being cheeky and when you're 
not, and it's much easier to get immediate feedback and not have to 
wait. :)



  Jeff
   

 





From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Mon Sep 29 19:43:35 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 19:43:35 -0000
Subject: Obsessed with Harry (was - Re: They are children's books)
In-Reply-To: <bl9nuu+ib7t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bla217+544k@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81860

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" 
<gbannister10 at a...> wrote:

   <snipped>
> Geoff:
> It may be the movies but I get the feel that Ron is certainly 
Cockney 
> or "Sarf Lunnon" (as my own son always terms his accent). Perhaps 
> JKR's use of speech for him suggests that. Strictly, to be a true 
> Cockney a person must be born within the sound of Bow Bells. 
Cockney 
> is an urban accent like Brummie (Birmingham), Geordie (Tyneside) 
> etc., often developed in times past because of the polluted 
> atmosphere and attendant catarrhal problems - Brummies for example 
> always sound very nasal. Cockneys also use the glottal stop a lot; 
> it's difficult to indicate in ordinary script but "be - ah" 
> for "better" as an example.
> 
   <snipped>

  Jeff:

    Agreed, and thanks for the history as well. ;) Yeah, again, I 
think the Weasley's have that thick cockney accent, except for that 
bugger Percy. I think *he'd* be the one to sound like an announcer on 
Radio One. ;) He's so ashamed of his family that I think he'd change 
his speech patterns on purpose, to try to reflect the fact that he is 
of a good breeding stock and would show it with his nose in the air 
and speaking like a "proper gentleman" would. Doesn't mean that he's 
not a sod, but he's trying to put on airs.
   Also, I wanted to add that even the Liverpudlians are a bit nasal, 
if you listen. Very nasal on some words, but still just as nasal as 
the Westies. ;)


  Jeff
 




From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Mon Sep 29 19:51:21 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 19:51:21 -0000
Subject: The Weasley's accents
In-Reply-To: <bl9oel+lbst@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bla2fp+f1jj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81861

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sylviablundell2001" 
<sylviablundell at a...> wrote:
> The Weasleys certainly don't sound Devonian, or indeed West 
Country.  
> As a child, I had a Devon accent you could cut with a knife, so I 
> know whereof I speak.  The Weasleys all seem to me to speak what is 
> usually referred to as "standard English".  The cockneyfication of 
> Ron in the films seems to me entirely wrong and grates on me rather.
> I think Hagrid probably speaks with a West Country accent - 
certainly 
> not Scots, whatever Robbie Coltrane's origins.
> Sylvia (who lost her accent years ago, alas)


  Jeff:

   Really? I dunno. Like I said, I can picture Percy losing his 
accent on purpose, but I still think the kids, at least Ron and the 
Twins having a cockney accent as being proper. The actor isn't acting 
either, he's got that accent. I've seen a few interviews.
   Why is it bothersome? I know some folk think it barbaric, just 
like they think most Northerners are as well. 


  Jeff




From jdr0918 at hotmail.com  Mon Sep 29 20:06:21 2003
From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 20:06:21 -0000
Subject: The Weasley's accents
In-Reply-To: <bla2fp+f1jj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bla3bt+18jp@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81862

<<<In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jeffl1965" wrote:...Really? I 
dunno...I still think the kids, at least Ron and the Twins having a 
cockney accent as being proper. The actor isn't acting either, he's 
got that accent. I've seen a few interviews. Why is it 
bothersome?...>>>

The Sergeant Majorette says

I would guess it bothers people because it's not accurate. As an 
American, I am not bothered by it at all. I just figure Ron and the 
twins talk like that for the same reason suburban white kids use 
hiphop slang: it's an adolescent affectation. Also it was probably 
easier to get a performance out of those kids by letting them speak 
naturally. Tom Felton (Draco) and Dan Radcliffe (Harry) are the only 
ones with prior acting experience.

--JDR




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Mon Sep 29 20:53:15 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 20:53:15 -0000
Subject: Weasley accents (was Obsessed with Harry )
In-Reply-To: <bla0s7+frrr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bla63r+uj08@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81863

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jeffl1965" <jeffl1965 at h...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ali" <Ali at z...> wrote:
> > 
>   <snipped since some elves are anal about it. :) )
> 

> > Erm, I think that you're confusing English accents a little bit. 
> > Somebody is said to be Cockney if they were born within the sound 
> of 
> > Bow Bells in East London. Cockney is very much a London accent. 
> > These days Londoners come in all shapes and sizes, it is a very 
> > cosmopolitan city. But, if you're talking about a "London accent" 
> it 
> > is certainly not the "BBC" accent you describe. An archetypical 
> > London accent is one where "h's" are dropped, and t's not 
> pronounced 
> > at the end of words.
> >
> 
>     Jeff:
>   
>    Cor blimey!! Jus 'cuz a bloke what ain't got a bloody degree 
from 
> uni what says 'e's a friggin' genuis in dialects don't mean 'e's a 
> blitherin' idiot! Blimey you southerners are a bloody 'orrible 
smarmy 
> lot!!! :)  You mean like that? No, I'm not really confused about 
the 
> accents, just which one they would have. They're working class, no? 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> > With the advent of television, accents have changed rather a lot 
> and 
> > many people across Southern England have what could be (very) 
> > loosely termed a London accent. 
> >

<Snip>

 
>   Jeff:
> 
>   Indeed. Again, working class, so cockney fits. IIRC, the actor 
> playing Ron lives north of London, so that would fit. If its NE, 
then 
> he'd fit right in with the Eastender lot. :)
> 
> 
> > On a different note, the fact that somebody says "Bloody Hell" 
does 
> > not make them a Londoner or Cockney - it is a swear word used 
> > through the country. Also, IIRC, Ron says it in the film not the 
> > book.
> >
>    Jeff:
>  
>   Oh, yes, I'm aware of that, it's just that I meant some swears 
seem 
> to be dying out and being more common in some regions, just like 
git 
> seems to be so UN-pc that it's not encouraged anymore according to 
a 
> teacher friend of mine.
>   Yes, the film has changed the perception of the characters for 
> many. I don't totally accept that version as canon, since it's too 
> compact and muddled. And yes, in the books Ron is much more 
> colourful, yet I don't know if he says sh*t or sh*te. :) And since 
> Seamus doesn't get much dialogue, it's difficult to tell where that 
> little sod is from. ;)
> 

Geoff:
Just picking up on one or two points having had a little more time to 
digest them. One other poster and myself have pointed out that to be 
a true Cockney, you have to have been born within the sound of Bow 
Bells. These are not strictly East London, because they are the bells 
of St.Mary-le-Bow which is in Cheapside, a street running between 
St.Pauls Cathedral and the Bank of England. Postal code wise, they 
are EC (East Central) but I wouldn't consider them East End, speaking 
as a London resident of 45 years. Many people speak with a similar 
accent, as I see Ron doing. As Jeff(?) pointed out there are many 
accents belonging to London residents who have moved in. There is now 
also an accent referred to by scholars as "Estuary English" taking 
its name from the Thames Estuary which is a dialect (of sorts!) 
covering a wide swathe round London.

Some folk don't have a particularly strong regional accent. I don't 
envisage Hermione having one because of her background. I lived in 
the north of England until I was 9 and then moved to London with 
a "Coronation Street" accent. Thanks to mixing with "Sarf Lunneners" 
and the attacks of my grammar school teachers on my diction, I am now 
largely accentless. Moving to Sonerset 9 years ago, I now find that 
the locals consider me to be from somewhere "in the South-East". 
Little Whinging perhaps?




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 29 20:56:01 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 20:56:01 -0000
Subject: International book versions & character names
In-Reply-To: <bl69lm+10aro@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bla691+uqgo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81864

> <slytherin_jenn at y...> wrote:
> > I just finished the Philosopher's Stone in Russian and I noticed 
> that 
> > some of the names were different. 

Clio:

>> If you look here   http://www.eulenfeder.de/int/gbint.html    
> you will find a nice list of HP names and places and their 
> translations in many languages.
> 
Laura:

There's a new collection of essays called "The Ivory Tower and Harry 
Potter", edited by Lana A. Whited which includes a very interesting 
essay on this very point.  The author, whose name I don't recall, 
compares the German, French and Spanish translations of the books and 
looks at the choices the translators made in dealing with JKR's 
coined words, proper names and British slang.  I  highly recommend 
it.  And if you live in the US and your local library is part of the 
interlibrary loan system you may be able to request to have a copy 
sent to your local library for you to borrow-it's the best deal going!

A somewhat piquant side note is that Whited says in her foreward that 
she originally wanted to title the book "Harry Potter and the Ivory 
Tower" but was warned off by one of the gang of thugs masquerading as 
attorneys who are claiming to be protecting JKR's proprietary rights 
in her work-I can't remember if it was Warner, Bloomsbury or 
Scholastic.  Honestly-as if some 12 year old would pick up a book of 
essays and mistake it for canon.  Poor Jo-the escesses that are being 
committed in her name...




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 29 21:16:30 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 21:16:30 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Bridge (was: Dumbledore's Philosophy (was MAGIC DISHWASHER...)
In-Reply-To: <bl6gir+bt8v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bla7fe+7lap@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81865

Kneasy:
<snipping some trash talk, not that it wasn't amusing> 
> I don't take any of DD's statements at face  value. This one falls 
into
> the same category as all the rest.
> 
> Consider,
> The implications of this statement are either:
> 1. Lily loved Harry more  than any other mother loved her child, 
*ever*
> so providing unique protection,  or
> 
> 2. Every  child is so protected by mother love.
> Which is patently rubbish.
> 
> Which one do you choose? 
> (Advice: Not the first,  or at least not  publicly because the 
posters 
> who are mothers are liable to rip your head off.)
> 
> Also, since that little chat, DD has admitted that  he did not think
> Harry  was ready for the truth at that age and so lied or at least
> very strongly and deliberately misled him. Are  you now certain
> that the whole truth has now  been revealed? I'm not.
> 
Laura:

Getting in on the action a little late, but...

I'll agree with you that DD is not to be taken at his word.  What I 
don't understand is why he would tell that particular lie to Harry at 
that point in PS/SS.  Harry knew very little of the WW still at the 
end of his first year at Hogwarts, so DD could have told him anything 
he wanted and Harry would have accepted it.  And why not, since 
Harry's survival was an event unique in wizard history.  

There has to be another explanation than either of the ones you 
propose.  I'd reject the first one because Harry couldn't have been 
the only child who was attacked during LV's first go-round.  It's 
most unlikely that Lily was the only parent to try to protect her 
child with her life.  And as for the second one, all we need say 
is "Mrs Black".  

The thing is, it's not as though this story about Lily (and I think 
Geoff has the reading right-it was her love itself that provided the 
protection according to DD)-has ever worked in Harry's favor again; 
that is, he's never needed to call on that particular power since, 
and now LV seems to have nullified it altogether. So if DD lied, I 
don't know what he hoped to gain by it.  Just a sweet little story 
for a pretty upset kid?  Harry didn't need that story to know his 
parents loved him-the longer he lives in the WW the more he learns 
it, and the photo album Hagrid gives Harry is the first bit of 
evidence.  

We can agree DD lies when he feels it's necessary-but he doesn't lie 
just for the fun of it (as far as we can tell).  So what's the story 
here?




From annemehr at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 29 21:53:10 2003
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 21:53:10 -0000
Subject: Returning to the DoM (Was:Re: The Death Chamber)
In-Reply-To: <bl9urt+2r89@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bla9k6+78r3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81866

 
> > Annemehr:
<snip> And it almost seems that Harry is going to have to 
> visit the DoM again, and probably not without his companions.  I 
> wonder how that will be brought about?  Will it have to wait until 
> later in book
> > seven?  
> > 
> >SNIP
> > 
> 
> Jennifer again:
> I would like to see Harry get a shot at understanding more about the 
> Death Chamber. So many people believe we will hear from or see Sirius 
> again in some form. I wonder if it will be at the edge of the 
> curtain, now that it's clear he won't be a ghost. Priori Incantatum 
> would be handy if we knew for sure just who's wand had done the job 
> and if it had a brother....
> J

Annemehr:

I'm sure Harry will have to learn more about the Death Chamber, and
then revisit it. Even more than the Death Chamber, though, the room
with the locked door cries out for a visit.

I still wonder how he gets back into the DoM -- do you suppose DD will
get him back in?  Do you suppose DD knows all about what goes on in
there, even though the people who work there are called
"Unspeakables?"  And don't forget that the battle there really trashed
some of those rooms.  That's got to have some repercussions, right? 
Not for Harry, maybe, but to put the DoM in disarray.  Maybe the
breach in security will cause them to reorganize.

By the way, nobody's doing priori incantatem on Dumbledore's wand, I'm
sure!  But that's a thought -- they should PI all the wands of the
captured DEs (except that broken one, I guess), just to see what they
turn up.  Would that be like an illegal search and seizure in the U.S.?

Annemehr
who always wanted Harry to go back into the Chamber of Secrets, just
to see what else is down there...







From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Mon Sep 29 22:04:19 2003
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 22:04:19 -0000
Subject: Weasley accents/regional clues
In-Reply-To: <bl9ht1+v2km@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blaa93+tfuv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81867

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ali" <Ali at z...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jeffl1965" <jeffl1965 at h...> 
> wrote in a discussion about the Weasleys having "Cockney" accents:
> (big snip)
>
> My reading of the Potterverse is that Ron has a vaguely Southern 
> accent. He seems to speak with *more* of an accent then Harry. The 
> movie characters also seem to follow this interpretation.
(snip)
> 
> Ali

Comment from CW:

OTH, there is a scene where he is eating at a feast and he is 
described as reaching for some 'black pudding' in preference to some 
other 'foreign' food on offer. I can't quite remember which book this 
is (maybe the feast in GoF when the Beauxbatons delegation first 
arrive). Anyway, the point of mentioning this particular food is that 
it is a highly traditional sausage from Northern England, made mainly 
from fresh blood, fat and spices (I'm told its delicious, but can't 
face trying it myself !). I think the actual origin is Manchester or 
Newcastle (no doubt other listies will swoop in to correct me here !).

In the UK, this sausage is routinely used as a comic cliche to 
identify people from the North. It is supposed to indicate earthy, 
working class, unpretentious tastes, and as such in the books it 
indicates how different Ron is in style and background to eg 
Hermione, who having a typical middle class southern background knows 
and likes French food such as bouillebaisse.

Also, on the Devon location, I've pointed out before (and so have 
others) that it would be difficult for Muggle taxis to drive to Kings 
Cross from Devon in the few hours described in GoF (they leave about 
8.30 am maybe, and get there in time for the 11am train). It would 
take more like 4-5 hours, and that's assuming the London traffic was 
not too bad (and it always is - trust me, I live in London !!).




From nansense at cts.com  Mon Sep 29 22:14:01 2003
From: nansense at cts.com (zesca)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 22:14:01 -0000
Subject: Jewish Goblins?
In-Reply-To: <bl9mt2+ub3b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blaar9+gbtg@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81868


"Matt" <hpfanmatt at g...> wrote:
<huge snip>
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> The point is not that the Goblins are supposed to *represent* Jews,
> but that the *discrimination* against the Goblins is reminiscent of a
> certain brand of anti-Semitism -- demonizing an entire group because
> some members are successful in business or finance.
> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
> 
> This is how allegory works.  It is, if properly executed, gentler than
> symbolism or metaphor.  Rowling's Goblins do not represent Jews any
> more than (to pick a relatively well-known example) Melville's Billy
> Budd "represents" Jesus.  But I think it is no accident that we can
> see echoes of various types of RW discrimination in the Potterverse. 
> (Half-breeds, anyone?)
<snip>
> That sort of portrayal (see, for example, prior list
> discussions re: Prof. Grubbly-Plank) is just pure representation, not
> symbolism and surely not allegory.

madeyemood:
matt, when you get a chance would you mind elaborating on representation v 
symbolism v allegory?

i like all of the distinctions you drew in your post. elegantly done. it's easy to 
confuse an allusion to a certain type of prejudice as buying into that prejudice. 
but, imho, they simply are not the same thing.

there are a couple of other examples that leap to mind.
in star trek: deep space nine there was that culture of short people with big 
ears who were obsessed with money...you know: the Quark character, the 
grand Negus, etc. .

South Park, one of whose writer's is jewish, perpetuates scandalous ideas 
about both the jews and the people dumb enough to judge them for being 
jewish. there was this one recent episode that put forth the theory that Earth 
was a reality show for aliens from other planets. the studio heads were 
somewhat of a parody of the hollywood studio heads,  traditionally a position 
occupied by jews. the coen brothers also did parodies of the jewish studio 
head in Barton Fink.

As most of you know doubt know, there are reasons that the jews became 
moneylenders in medieval europe. the christian royalty would control the 
usury rates, then imply that it was the fault of the jews whose job it was to 
implement their policies. i remember reading about this in Tuchman's history 
of 14th century europe.

anyway, it is a shame that discussing an aspect of the book so easily 
devolves into baseless accusation. alas, that's the way with tribal injury. a lot 
of those wounds are still sore.

best,
m.e.m.






From gbannister10 at aol.com  Mon Sep 29 22:18:34 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 22:18:34 -0000
Subject: Dumbledore's Bridge (was: Dumbledore's Philosophy (was MAGIC DISHWASHER...)
In-Reply-To: <bl9pki+spth@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blab3q+th6q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81869

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jakedjensen" <jakejensen at h...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "artcase" <artcase at y...> 
wrote:
> > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "slgazit" <slgazit at s...> 
> wrote:
>  
> > I often wonder what DD meant by "Old Magic". 
> 
> <SNIP> 
> 
> > Opinions?
> > 
> > A.
> 


Jake:
> I often wonder about this myself.  A question I ponder frequently 
is 
> why would a form of magic die out that enabled users to engage the 
> Av. Kad. curse?  It would be like tossing away the cure to polio.  
I 
> think the old magic may have something to do with muggles (as you 
> suggested) or Egypt.  We learn about Egyptian curses (and Egypt in 
> general) at the start of PoA.  Now Hermione is taking runes.  Some 
> have speculated that WB put a copyright on a Harry Potter book 
> entitled something like "Harry Potter and the Pyrmiads of 
(something 
> or other)."  And then you have the sneakescope (bought in Egypt), 
> which may still have a secret or two to reveal.  Who knows, maybe 
> Harry's scar is really a rune?  Maybe he had it on his head before 
VD 
> attacked and it protected him? (I wish I could attach some canon to 
> this post, but, like so many others, I am at the office right now) 



Geoff:
This post got me thinking about a couple of books I have made passing 
reference to in the past, "The Weirdstone of Brisingamen" and "The 
Moon of Gomrath". These were a couple of children's books written by 
Alan Garner in the early 1960s when I was in my early twenties; so 
much for adults reading children's fiction - I've done it all my 
life. They involved a couple of children and tok place around 
Alderlet Edge which is a large hill (in the UK) in Cheshire not far 
south of Manchester. The author drew on an existing legend 
surrounding the hill and has a Gandalf/Dumbledore figure called 
Cadellin who has to protect a group of magically sleeping knights who 
wait to be awakened in an hour of great need. They are protected by a 
network of spells. In the course of the first book, Susan receives a 
magic bracelet of unknown date which protects her against an attack 
by a troll woman. In the second book, she loans the bracelet to 
Cadellin for his use and is attacked by evil forces while 
unprotected. Her helpers call on what they call "Old Magic" to save 
her. This describes Cadellin's spells in comparison with it as using 
a sword to split a reed and using a butcher's meat axe for a job. It  
postulates an older magic driven out by the "new". Perhaps this is 
the basis of the "Old Magic" we are discussing here. In the same way 
that, say, "old wives' remedies" have been displaced by modern 
medicine but apparently can still be efficacious, perhaps there is an 
old magic deemd to be obsolete by the Wizarding World. BTW, I would 
recommend these books heartily if you can locate copies.




From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Mon Sep 29 22:33:41 2003
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 22:33:41 -0000
Subject: Weasley's accents
In-Reply-To: <bla217+544k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blac05+6rp6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81870

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jeffl1965" <jeffl1965 at h...> 
wrote:
>   Jeff:
> 
>     Agreed, and thanks for the history as well. ;) Yeah, again, I 
> think the Weasley's have that thick cockney accent, except for that 
> bugger Percy. I think *he'd* be the one to sound like an announcer 
on 
> Radio One. ;) He's so ashamed of his family that I think he'd 
change 
> his speech patterns on purpose, to try to reflect the fact that he 
is 
> of a good breeding stock and would show it with his nose in the air 
> and speaking like a "proper gentleman" would. 

Reply from CW:

Erm...You probably mean BBC Radio 3 or 4 ! Radio One (and to some 
extent Radio 2) is the UK pop station ! Channels 3 and 4 are the 
upmarket classical music and 'serious' discussion channels. [Note to 
US readers - you will probably be astonished that these four main 
radio channels dominate UK airwaves to the extent that they do, 
despite all the new competition and an infinite number of local 
stations).




From Zarleycat at aol.com  Mon Sep 29 22:44:50 2003
From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 22:44:50 -0000
Subject: Hermione's idealism
In-Reply-To: <00a301c38638$a2deb220$97570043@hppav>
Message-ID: <blacl2+bg49@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81871

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Eric Oppen" <oppen at m...> wrote:
> You know, there's another group of people in the Wizard World that 
are
> looked down on and (apparently) not treated well for something that 
isn't
> their fault---Squibs.
> 
> What if Hermione was confronted with this in a way that aroused her
> compassion?  Would she throw herself into a project to "cure the 
Squibs,"
> and find some way to unlock the magic that _should_ be in them?
> 
> Would this go over better than her house-elf liberation, or would 
the Wizard
> World resent her for it if she managed to succeed?

I wonder if Hermione sees Squibs in the same light as she sees house 
elves.  Do we have any canon to show her opinion one way or another? 
In the Wizard World, house elves have no choice in what they do or 
how they live, with very few exceptions.  Squibs, while not being 
able to participate in the full panoply of wizardry(!), are still 
free in the sense that they can do other things.  They are not bound 
like slaves to serve Wizard masters.  I tend to think they might slip 
under Hermione's radar because they are not as obviously down-trodden 
as the elves. 

Plus, trying to unlock Squibs' magic is certainly not as easy as 
tossing a piece of clothing to an elf.  You'd think that maybe this 
task would actually appeal to Hermione more, in that she'd have to do 
all sorts of research to try to figure out a cure for squibness.

But, perhaps the idea of freeing the elves is more enticing because 
Hermione can actually envision the end of her task.  All she has to 
do is get those Hogwarts elves to pick up her knitted bits, and, 
voila! She's given them their freedom and made a visible change in 
their status.  

If a way was found to help Squibs become magical, I think that there 
would still be a proportion of people in the Wizard world who would 
look down on them. They'd still consider Squibs second-class wizards 
because they needed extra help to find and use their powers.

Marianne




From sollecks970 at aol.com  Mon Sep 29 22:49:51 2003
From: sollecks970 at aol.com (fawkes970)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 22:49:51 -0000
Subject: Crying wolf?
In-Reply-To: <A7900C00-F285-11D7-B04E-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <blacuf+rmpm@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81872

Kneasy: In CoS Tom Riddle sneers at Hagrid for trying to raise them 
> under his  bed. Odd that. They should be cubs only for one day in 
every 
> 28. No indication is given on how to repel or destroy them (note 
JKR 
Fawkes(me): I would like to see the canon where they say hagrid 
raises werewolf cubs under his bed......

Kneasy: For example, he is seemingly unaffected by Dementors. Why? 
> It would be understandable if he was in his animal form, but he's 
not. > The thrust of JKRs sympathy crusade is that he is still 
human, just > suffering from a disease. So why the immunity that 
only animals seem to > have? To argue that his mind has been altered 
by his illness is to > accept that he may no longer be human.
Fawkes: They never say he isnt effected. Of course he is effected, 
and he is also a fully trained wizard who has already been a member 
of the Order. You think he wouldnt know the Patronus? the patronus 
is why he wasnt effected on the train, and for the scene with all 
the dementors at the end of PoA: he wasnt there- he was in the woods 
as a werewolf.
> 
Kneasy: At the Shrieking 
> Shack he seems to know, before being told, what Sirius' story is. 
How? > On entering, his first action is to  disarm Harry. Why? Does 
he really > believe that at age 13 Harry could perform an AK? It 
requires no > persuasion by Sirius before Lupin accepts his story, 
even though for > twelve years the entire WW, including Dumbledore, 
has been confident of > Sirius' guilt. dd the fact that he 'forgets' 
to take his medicine and > we have a very odd episode, much mused 
over by posters. PoA is the only > book in the series where Voldy or 
his henchman has not made an > appearance to threaten Harry.  Or is 
it?
Fawkes: we have been over this many a time. Lupin is in his office 
while the entire scene with Padfoot on the school grounds takes 
place. He is looking at the map and sees Sirius' name on it. First 
he wants to go and get sirius, however he notices a fifth member 
with them: Peter. Without even thinking he knows what is going on 
and has to get there to find out the entire story w/o peter or 
sirius being hurt to the point where they cannot defend themselves. 
That simple.
> 
Kneasy:It's still  that name that bothers me. Unless, of course, his 
parents > were also werewolves themselves. Which means that they 
probably > infected him - "Ooops-a-daisy, my little poppet! Just a 
nip! It's for > your own good; then we'll be able to look after you, 
even when the moon > shines brightly!"> Doesn't sound like a JKR 
thing to me.
Fawkes: almost every name given represents the character being 
portrayed ast that time. Hence, lupin is given his name for being a 
werewolf in the story. You  are taking it way too far to suspect his 
parents named him when really: JKR did so just cool it with that 
one, thanks. 
> 
-adding my two cents: fawkes-




From deemarie1a at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 29 22:57:32 2003
From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 22:57:32 -0000
Subject: The Weasley's accents
In-Reply-To: <bl9oel+lbst@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bladcs+48pd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81873

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sylviablundell2001" 
<sylviablundell at a...> wrote:
> The Weasleys certainly don't sound Devonian, or indeed West 
Country.  
> As a child, I had a Devon accent you could cut with a knife, so I 
> know whereof I speak.  The Weasleys all seem to me to speak what is 
> usually referred to as "standard English".  The cockneyfication of 
> Ron in the films seems to me entirely wrong and grates on me rather.
> I think Hagrid probably speaks with a West Country accent - 
certainly 
> not Scots, whatever Robbie Coltrane's origins.
> Sylvia (who lost her accent years ago, alas)

As an American whose only exposure to English Accents is from PBS, 
let me say that I don't associate Ron's accent with Cockney.  It is 
not what I would call "King's English" either.  It seems to me a 
working class accent.  Harry and Hermione seem to be more of the 
standard accent.  At least that is how the voices sound in my head as 
I read the stories.  

I do hear Seamus speak with an Irish accent.  Neville has to me a 
more Liverpudlian accent (ala the Beatles.  And I am sorry about the 
spelling.  But could that be contamination from the films?)  When 
Hagrid speaks, I hear a Yorkshire accent.  But you see, I am an 
American.  We don't hear the distinctions our British brothers and 
sisters hear.

It would be like having a British person try to distinguish between a 
southern Texas accent and someone who comes from Mississippi.  To the 
untrained ear, they probably sound the same, but to someone from the 
South, they would know instantly where that person was from.

I have been reading the stories aloud to my son, and trying to give 
distinct accents and voices to the characters.  But I find myself 
being very "Masterpiece Theatre" when I do that.  I would love to 
spend some time learning the differences between the regional accents 
of the British Isles.

D




From Zarleycat at aol.com  Mon Sep 29 22:58:43 2003
From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 22:58:43 -0000
Subject: Will Draco come back?
In-Reply-To: <bl9fua+ggdo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bladf3+b3ah@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81874

Meri wrote:
> This is my first time asking a question, I have posted once before 
> and have been lurking for about six months, so not only do I hope 
> that no one has discussed this before, but also I hope I do this 
> right. 
> 
> Anyway, I was thinking, if Lucius Malfoy is in Azkaban (as stated 
in 
> the end of OotP) will Narcissa, probably knowing full well that it 
> was Dumbledore who was responsible for putting him there, along 
with 
> Harry of course, want to send Draco back to Hogwarts for sixth and 
> seventh year? Draco allready wanted to go to Durmstrang, so could 
> this little incident (ie: the Battle at the Department of 
Mysteries) 
> be the straw that breaks the camels back? Will we lose Draco whom 
we 
> all love to hate? Just a thought. Any ideas? 

Draco has been stuck at the same level of character development for a 
while, IMO.  He snarks at Harry, gloats over any Griffindor problems, 
insults Hermione and or Ron, gets all puffed up with his goons on the 
train ride home, and then loses the skirmish to Harry and friends. 

I'd think he still has a part to play in the upcoming books, unless 
his whole point for being put in at all was to show how unimportant 
his schoolboy grudge/rivalry with Harry really is.  It seemed 
important in the earlier books, but it turns out that Draco is small 
potatoes when you're Harry, the kid who has fairly regular dates with 
Voldemort.  If JKR doesn't have anything new for Draco to do, then 
she might as well send him off to Durmstrang.  I won't miss him.

Marianne




From Malady579 at hotmail.com  Mon Sep 29 23:11:40 2003
From: Malady579 at hotmail.com (Melody)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 23:11:40 -0000
Subject: Crying wolf?
In-Reply-To: <blacuf+rmpm@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blae7c+qkeo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81875

Kneasy: 
>>In CoS Tom Riddle sneers at Hagrid for trying to raise them under
>>his  bed. Odd that.

Fawkes: 
>I would like to see the canon where they say hagrid raises werewolf
>cubs under his bed......


Me:

CoS, Ch 17, Pg 311 (American Hb)

"...on the other hand, big, blundering Hagrid, in trouble every other
week, trying to raise werewolf cubs under his bed..."


So it is there, but it is from the words of Riddle.  Granted, he is
probably telling the truth since this was used against Hagrid to prove
he was the person in charge of the death of Myrtle.  We know he was
indicted, so the cards were stacked against him.  It take more than a
pointing finger to get someone kicked out of Hogwarts and the
WW...er...so far.  It takes a good framer and a bit of dirt on the
hands of the accused to be exploited by the framer.


Melody




From urghiggi at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 29 23:20:15 2003
From: urghiggi at yahoo.com (urghiggi)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 23:20:15 -0000
Subject: Death Chamber/ancient magic
Message-ID: <blaenf+v2ts@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81876

Re the Death Chamber -- when I first read OoP I was so struck by this scene, 
and on my 2d reading it resonated with some strong echos of the Stone Table 
in the Narnia books. The Table's original function was as an execution site for 
"traitors"; it was later venerated as the execution site for the (died & rose 
again) Aslan, who offered himself sacrifically in a traitor's place. So the Table 
became a Golgotha kind of place, I suppose. The Table was described as 
very old, and engraved with ancient runes spelling out the "deep magic" from 
before the Dawn of Time. Over centuries the table was buried in a ritual 
mound (underground, then, like arch in the death chamber). The mound and 
the table were venerated as sacred (and apparently feared by some as 
haunted), though in later centuries apparently most Narnians had forgotten 
why...... 

If the arch in OoP were a mere execution device, I can't see why it would be in 
the Dept. of Mysteries. It ought to be in a place more associated with justice -- 
elsewhere in the MoM -- down there with the big courtroom, maybe -- or over 
in Azkaban. If it's in the Mysteries Dept, there's got to be more to it than that -- 
it has to be there as some kind of object of study. (But then why the spectator 
seating?) And it's repeatedly described as so ancient. I have to wonder if the 
Untouchables themselves are not sure of all the uses/purposes of the object, 
but only know that it is old & important, like the latter-day Narnians' view of the 
Stone Table and its site. Maybe the fact that it's there is just a blatant 
metaphor -- that death and the hereafter are among the most fundamental 
and ancient mysteries...

And the whole "ancient magic" theme in the potterverse has also always 
evoked strong echos for me of that same "deep magic"/"deeper magic" thing 
in the Narnia books, which JKR reportedly has read many, many times. The 
sense in the Narnia books (and I wonder if this is going to be true in the 
Potterverse) is that this kind of "deep" magic is fundamental to the operation of 
the world -- that it is immutable and that it transcends the daily kind of magic 
that you could study or learn to acquire. Almost like the "rules" that underlie 
the foundation of the world in question, crafted by the one who created the 
world (Emperor/God in Narnia... and I guess JKR herself in Potterverse!).

If Harry's mom's sacrifice is an example of the "ancient magic" -- what does 
that say about D'dore's ability to manipulate it in service of his plan? 
Obviously it can be manipulated, or at least taken advantage of somehow.... 
but since we still have SO LITTLE INFO about what really happened with the 
whole "sacrificial death" and "blood relatives" magic, it's hard to figure out 
how. If this brand of magic is so ancient, fundamental, and powerful -- why 
would LV despise it so? He seems to be of the "use any means" type, but the 
nature of ancient magic seems repulsive to him, despite its power. Is it that he 
WON'T use it (presumably because it's somehow love-based, the view that 
seems to be supported by canon) or that he CAN'T use it (again, because it's 
love-based)? And just because the only example given (lily's sacrifice) is 
love-based -- does this necessarily rule out the possibility that there may be 
other aspects of this ancient magic that are morally neutral or even dark? 
Again, we don't have enough info to know ... yet.

tis a puzzlement...

Urghiggi, chgo




From sues0101 at hotmail.com  Mon Sep 29 23:37:03 2003
From: sues0101 at hotmail.com (Sue Porter)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 23:37:03 +0000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: They are children's books (Was: the heart of it all)
Message-ID: <BAY2-F4835BXezZ7SAp000053e6@hotmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81877




>>Golly: >
>The first book was perfectly suited for children 8-11 (depending on
>reading skill).  I read books for that age group all the time and
>enjoy many of them. HP is hardly unsual in any respect.  It is
>delightful and skillfully achieved. OOTP was probably written for 13-
>15 year olds.
>
>Rowling's recent offering certainly does not have the emotional or
>literary sophistication of Orwell or Kafka or even Atwood, which
>would probably be beyond the reading abilities of many (but not all)
>of that age group.
>
>Plus OOTP combines serious political dystopia themes with the
>everyday lives of children.  A common tac for children's novelists
>with a political bent. Rowling is not the first to bring in issues
>like prejudice and bad adult administration.
>
>Many children's writers write stories that are just as challanging
>and just as dark, if not more so. (Though one is certainly free to
>think Rowling does it better.)
>
>If you don't think so, then you aren't reading the same children's
>books I do.  If all that you see are those books you haven't read
>since you were 11 and Mary Kate and Ashley books or Goosebumps, then
>you don't see the range of children's literature out there.
>
>It is a thriving and vibrant genre. It is a real talent to write for
>children and teenagers specifically.  Sometimes a good story will
>enthrall all.
>
>But to paraphrase Neil Gaiman - Rowling isn't revolutionizing the
>genre. Perhaps she is changing the way people look at the genre.  But
>apparently not, since many adults still refuse to admit they are
>reading children's novel.
>
>Too bad you're embarrassed to like a children's/Young Adult book, but
>I'm not.  Nor am I embarrassed to like the others that I do.
>
Sue P:

I totally agree Golly, there are some briliant young adult books about these 
days and I think JKR has headed into that genre. You are right when you say 
that each book is set to Harry's age - really how can it be anything else? 
Can you imagine reading about a 15 year old in the language meant for an 11 
yr old? It would make the characters and situations totally unreal, 
unbelievable and boring. No one wouldbe able to identify with Harry. He 
would become a two dimensional character because he wouldnt be able to 
exhibit the 'real' traits of a teenager  if viewed through a child's eyes.

I personally read everything I can get my hands on of my kids books, and 
they read a lot. One of the most stunning series of books set for teenagers 
I have read was John Marsdens Tomorrow When the War Began series. Story 
about war, youth, danger, death, bravery, survival etc. Quite a dark series, 
and not a happy ending, but perhaps war never has a happy ending. Thats why 
I can see JKR not giving us a happy ending with Harry being the ultimate 
victor. I can see Voldie carking it, but I also can see Harry needing to die 
to enable that to happen.

Another poster, I think it was Remnant talked about the HP books being an 
epic rather than a mystery, and I totally agree, but where he sees the end 
of the books with ultimate battle of good over evil being won and Harry 
being the victor, and only the how of achieving this a mystery, I also see 
that it may not be as straightforward as this, and it scares me.

Must be the mother in me - the nurturing side of me, but I worry for Harry. 
I want him safe. He's clueless enough as it is without him becoming 
ineffectual as well. And the mother in me screams that unless he comes out 
of this alive it's all a bit pointless and all for nothing. A part of me 
would mourn the fact that nothing that he did made a difference, that he may 
as well have died as a baby, what was it all for, what a waste! And again 
that mother in me cannot see that his death can be written in an uplifting 
way. His death could never be justified by saying that what he did was for 
the good of the WW. To save thousands of lives at the cost of one just 
doesn't cut it with mum.

And no, I am never embarassed at reading HP in public, ever. Some peope have 
seen me reading the series over and over again. Now they just ask 'Which one 
this time?' when they see me.

Sue

_________________________________________________________________
Hot chart ringtones and polyphonics. Go to  
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilemania/default.asp




From Yahtzee63 at aol.com  Mon Sep 29 21:35:00 2003
From: Yahtzee63 at aol.com (Yahtzee63 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 17:35:00 -0400
Subject: Crying Wolf?
Message-ID: <523F3A08.30364F52.02A5D73B@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81878

Kneasy wrote:
>>The most important things about him are notthe general knowledge 
associated with werewolves, but the facts about Remus Lupin as an 
individual. For example, he is seemingly unaffected by Dementors. Why? >>

Probably because he's experienced in the field and an expert in DADA, as evidenced by his role as a Professor. Anybody who had only seen Harry face the Dementors after he learned to produce a Patronus Charm might think that Harry was unaffected, but they'd be wrong. Harry simply learns how to cope, though knowledge I'm pretty sure Lupin also has, seeing as how he taught it to Harry. 

>>While a pupil Lupin was supposed to be locked up in the Shack at full 
moon, but we know he cavorted around the countryside with the boys in 
animal form. This was stupid and fraught with peril, not least to 
Lupin. If something had gone wrong, who would have suffered most? 
Lupin. Yet they all considered it good fun and Lupin never asked the 
others to keep him safe when he was not himself. Surely one of the 
prime concerns of any werewolf.<<

Lupin himself mentions how foolish this was, and it seems like general teenage irresponsibility, no more ominious (and no less blameworthy) than James' and Sirius' pranks. 

>>Some of his reactions to events are puzzling, too. At the Shrieking 
Shack he seems to know, before being told, what Sirius' story is. How? <<

Because the Marauder's Map shows Peter Pettigrew in there as well as Sirius Black, which means that the version of events Lupin had long believed had to be wrong, and once he knew that, he was able to draw what were -- for him, knowing what he did about the past -- fairly obvious conclusions.

>>On entering, his first action is to disarm Harry. Why? Does he really 
believe that at age 13 Harry could perform an AK?<<

Who knows? At any rate, even if Harry can't kill Sirius at this point, he might easily be able to hurt him -- and the most important thing at that moment is getting the truth, which he can't get from an unconscious/stunned/injured Sirius, and also can't get from anyone else. 

>>It requires no persuasion by Sirius before Lupin accepts his story, 
even though for twelve years the entire WW, including Dumbledore, has been confident of Sirius' guilt.<<

Once again: Peter Pettigrew is alive. Lupin knows it because of the map he helped make himself; once this is true, the story Lupin believed for 12 years HAS to be false. 

>>Why the constant mention of his worn and aging appearance? Is this a 
normal werewolf effect?<<

Apparently. Certainly we have no evidence to the contrary. 

>>His part in the Ministry dust-uphas caused comment, too. He gets a 
mention when he bursts in with Moody, Tonks et al, then no more until 
Sirius takes his final curtain. Strange. Did he fight or was he up to 
something else? Did he throw the fatal spell? Some suspect so.<<

Some don't. 

>>It's still that name that bothers me. Unless, of course, his parents 
were also werewolves themselves. <<

I bet Dolores Umbridge's parents didn't know that she would turn out to be so misery-causing, and certainly Sirius Black's parents couldn't have predicted he'd turn out to be an animagus who turns into a dog. Names are frequently tinged with a bit of predestination in JKR's world. 



Yahtzee




From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Mon Sep 29 23:51:40 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 23:51:40 -0000
Subject: Crying wolf?
In-Reply-To: <A7900C00-F285-11D7-B04E-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <blagic+1llc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81879

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> What to make of Remus Lupin?

Good question. Certainly one of the more interesting characters in 
the story...

> I  revised my predictions. OK, so he's going to be ' the third man 
> through the door'.

I think there are many hints that he is doomed in one of the two 
coming books. I just don't know if he'll have a raving werewolf 
episode first.

> In CoS Tom Riddle sneers at Hagrid for trying to raise them 
> under his  bed. Odd that. They should be cubs only for one day in 
every 
> 28.

I always figured that they must have been the product of a werewolf 
and a real wolf mating when the werewolf was in his or her animal 
form (ouch can't imagine what it would be like if the werewolf was 
the female - grrrr....). Do products of this cross-breeding ever turn 
human, or maybe only when the moon is completely out? :-)

> For example, he is seemingly unaffected by Dementors. Why?

That was never said. He can overcome them using the Patronus charm, 
but it says nowhere that he is not affected by them.

> What was his motive in having 
> Lupin at the school anyway? DD attracts misfits like  a magnet 
attracts 
> iron filings,  but to take on a pupil that every month turns into a 
> ravening monster, lacking all civilised restraint, responding only 
to 
> it's own murderous instincts is something else. This was a school.

I think it was conpassion and also concern for the future. There are 
very few children with magical abilities. We are talking of at most 
100 in the whole of the British isles. Letting even one go uneducated 
diminishes the entire wizarding community. Not educating Lupin means 
also that you are abandoning a child who was already discriminated 
against to have nothing else in life when he is in human form. The 
only time he can have any meaning is when he is a monster. It could 
make him more dangerous to the community.

> Some of his reactions to events are puzzling, too. At the Shrieking 
> Shack he seems to know, before being told, what Sirius' story is. 
How? 
> On entering, his first action is to  disarm Harry. Why?

I don't think he knew ahead of time, but he knew that Peter Petigrew 
was alive because of the map. So the supposed victim of Sirius' 
attack is alive and well - and in hiding. What else could it have 
been?

> It requires no 
> persuasion by Sirius before Lupin accepts his story, even though 
for 
> twelve years the entire WW, including Dumbledore, has been 
confident of 
> Sirius' guilt.

Because the evidence was right in front of them - namely Scabbers.

> Why the constant mention of his worn and aging appearance? Is this 
a 
> normal werewolf effect?

I am guessing so. Also a foreshadowing of his upcoming death. I also 
believe that he must be older than the rest of the MWPP quartet 
because he had to wait for DD to become headmaster before he was 
allowed into Hogwarts.

> Did he fight or was he up to 
> something else? Did he throw the fatal spell? Some suspect so.

Well, perhaps he was in the other room with the other students? We 
only see the story from Harry's POV after all. There seems to be some 
hints to that effect because he is the only adult who mentions the 
other children (Ron, Luna, Ginny and Hermione) during the DoM battle.

> Could it be a pseudonym? A name he chose himself, hiding his true 
> identity to save the family face?

This is what I suspect or, if he was bitten very young, perhaps his 
parents named him so - if they did not abandon him in some wild wood 
when they found out that is.

Salit





From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Tue Sep 30 00:11:58 2003
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 00:11:58 -0000
Subject: Returning to the DoM (Was:Re: The Death Chamber)
In-Reply-To: <bla9k6+78r3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blahoe+31fr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81880

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" <annemehr at y...> 
wrote:
>  
> > > Annemehr:
> <snip> And it almost seems that Harry is going to have to 
> > visit the DoM again, and probably not without his companions.  I 
> > wonder how that will be brought about?  Will it have to wait 
until 
> > later in book
> > > seven?  
> > > 
> > >SNIP
> > > 
> > 
> > Jennifer again:
> > I would like to see Harry get a shot at understanding more about 
the 
> > Death Chamber. So many people believe we will hear from or see 
Sirius 
> > again in some form. SNIP....
> > J
> > Annemehr:
>  
SNIP
  And don't forget that the battle there really trashed
> some of those rooms.  That's got to have some repercussions, right? 
> Not for Harry, maybe, but to put the DoM in disarray.  Maybe the
> breach in security will cause them to reorganize.
> 
> By the way, nobody's doing priori incantatem on Dumbledore's wand, 
I'm
> sure!  But that's a thought -- they should PI all the wands of the
> captured DEs (except that broken one, I guess), just to see what 
they
> turn up.  Would that be like an illegal search and seizure in the 
U.S.?
> 
> Annemehr
> who always wanted Harry to go back into the Chamber of Secrets, just
> to see what else is down there...

You bring up an excellent point. Harry destroyed countless 
prophecies. How will their rightful owners ever have access to them 
now? And I do not think PI in the hands of the MoM would be legal
(that of course, would not preclude it from happening...) not to 
mention feasible! And no, I don't think anyone's going to get DD to 
agree to a PI with his wand.  But Bellatrix, hum. She's be less 
daunting. I do think I have things mixed up though. You do not need 
the brother wand to do PI. The odd effect of the glowing geodesic dome
(not to mention the "echo effect") comes when you have two wands made 
from the same tree forced to duel each other. PI is totally separate 
from that. My apologies. Still, the results would be similar, it 
seems.
Jennifer




From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Tue Sep 30 00:26:05 2003
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 00:26:05 -0000
Subject: Will Draco come back?
In-Reply-To: <bladf3+b3ah@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blaiit+hfqt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81881

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kiricat2001" <Zarleycat at a...> 
wrote:
> \ 
> Draco has been stuck at the same level of character development for 
a 
> while, IMO.  He snarks at Harry, gloats over any Griffindor 
problems, 
> insults Hermione and or Ron, gets all puffed up with his goons on 
the 
> train ride home, and then loses the skirmish to Harry and friends. 
> 
> I'd think he still has a part to play in the upcoming books, unless 
> his whole point for being put in at all was to show how unimportant 
> his schoolboy grudge/rivalry with Harry really is.  It seemed 
> important in the earlier books, but it turns out that Draco is 
small 
> potatoes when you're Harry, the kid who has fairly regular dates 
with 
> Voldemort.  If JKR doesn't have anything new for Draco to do, then 
> she might as well send him off to Durmstrang.  I won't miss him.
> 
> Marianne

Marianne!! 
I have hope for more developed Draco plotlines. JKR has IMO a history 
of sort of "parking" characters in a comfortable and predictable spot 
while she works on other things and then BAM! They get to come out 
and play! Sometimes it's not a big surprise, sometimes it is. Like 
Neville and Ginny. I knew ole Nev was coming along but I'd lost any 
hope that Ginny would ever do more than be shooed away by Ron when 
big stuff had to be discussed. Okay, Draco isn't a sympathetic 
character and we've not seen much development in the bad guys but I 
can't sell JKR short in that department. Snape's coming along. Don't 
like him yet. Hope I never do, but he intrigues me. I have no doubt 
if she wants/needs Draco to step into 3 dimensions, she can do it. If 
he comes back, the reasons for it are there, to be near DD to see 
what he's up to, Harry as well. Just not sure how the children of 
DE's are going to be viewed by the general Hogwarts population. 
Pretty much discredits the Slytherins, doesn't it. DD will probably 
say something to put oil on the waters at the opening of the next 
year. I think this could work.
Jennifer   




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 00:53:52 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 00:53:52 -0000
Subject: Crying wolf?
In-Reply-To: <A7900C00-F285-11D7-B04E-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <blak70+796j@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81882

<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> What to make of Remus Lupin?
> 
> OK, hands up all those that trust him.
> Thank you.

> Laura:

Me!
<lots of snips> 

Kneasy, have you no shame?  Wasn't it enough that you trashed Sirius 
when his many fans were still mourning his most untimely death?  Now 
you're going after Remus-when will it stop?  <bg>

Most of the points you raise in your post have been addressed ably 
by Yahtzee and Salit, but this last one intrigues me.

Kneasy:
> It's still  that name that bothers me. Unless, of course, his 
parents were also werewolves themselves. Which means that they 
probably infected him <snip> Doesn't sound like a JKR thing to me.
> 
> Could it be a pseudonym? A name he chose himself, hiding his true 
> identity to save the family face? In which case, it could be 
> significant. The original Remus was killed by his brother. Just 
what do we know about Lupin's family? Hmm?
> 
Laura:

I like the idea that "Remus Lupin" is a pseudonym. And there could 
be one of two opposite reasons for it.  It seems very consistent 
with Remus' character (although it's also consistent with JKR's 
naming scheme).  I can see Remus changing his name to protect his 
family from the stigma that would result from being associated with 
a werewolf.  I choose to take him as he appears, and he appears to 
me to be a caring, compassionate, gentle man.  

Or you could read it as Remus acknowledging the estrangement he 
feels from his family.  Whether they rejected him or whether he 
chose to turn his back on the family that negligently allowed him to 
be bitten we don't know.  But changing his name would be a powerful 
way of taking on the identity that has changed his life.  

We know almost nothing about Remus' family.  They are only mentioned 
(as far as I can remember) in PoA (p. 352 US) when Remus explains 
how he became a werewolf.  He says after he was bitten as a very 
young child, his parents "tried everything" to cure him, but nothing 
worked.  (We assume from this that his parents were members of the 
WW-imagine the diplomatic crisis that would result from a muggle 
being turned into a werewolf).  Again, we don't know the backstory-
did they try to cure their son out of love for him or fear of the 
consequences for him and themselves once the word got out?  Or 
both?  

Nor do we know who wanted Remus to come to Hogwarts-Remus, his 
parents or both.  And why-was his family eager to get rid of him?  
Did Remus want to get away from them?  Or did his parents love him 
and want the best for him despite his condition?  

It seems clear that Remus is not receiving significant financial 
support from his family (no werewolf-bite insurance available in the 
WW?), but again, we don't know why.  It could be that his parents 
don't have the means to help him-perhaps they spent it all trying to 
find a cure.  Or maybe Remus and his family (any sibs?) are not on 
speaking terms.  Or maybe they're dead.  Or maybe he won't accept 
it.  

We know that Sirius goes to Lupin's place to hide out at the end of 
BoF, but what and where that place is, we have no way of knowing.  
We might surmise that he's living off his Hogwarts salary, since 
presumably room and board are provided to staff, but this is only a 
surmise.  

Yes, there's quite a lot we don't know about Remus. But I don't 
anticipate any unpleasant surprises...because I don't think I could 
stand it... 




From ratalman at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 00:58:03 2003
From: ratalman at yahoo.com (ratalman)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 00:58:03 -0000
Subject: How many Rons per Hermione - numerical analysis of Ron's alleged decline
In-Reply-To: <bl8rmh+mott@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blaker+6u57@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81883

Dumbledad said:
>I'm just finishing my second reading of OotP. I read it once 
>fairly quickly and then again, more slowly, as episodic bedtime 
>reading to my kids. One thing that really struck me second time 
>through is the absence of Ron.

Robyn:
Yes, I would definitely agree that Ron's importance to Harry 
diminished in OotP, and for many reasons.  One important 
reason, IMO, is that the plot required that Ron give way to Sirius, 
as the most important person in Harry's life.  In GoF, Ron was 
the thing that Harry would most miss, during the second task.  In 
OotP, however, it wasn't Ron that LV tricked Harry into believing 
had been taken captive, and which ultimately lured him to the 
Ministry of Magic, it was Sirius.  I think that Ron will return to a 
more prominent role in the remaining books, unless, gasp, JKR 
is preparing us for Ron's demise.




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 01:27:14 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 01:27:14 -0000
Subject: Jewish Goblins?
In-Reply-To: <bl9mt2+ub3b@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blam5i+6cjb@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81884

Matt, you can reiterate all you want-we don't agree on this and I 
think we'll have to leave it there.  

<snip> 
> Laura's reply:
> 
> > Sigh.  I must say that the timing on this 
> > discussion is most unfortunate, coming 3 days 
> > before the celebration of the New Year and 
> > the succeeding holidays.  
> 

Matt's response: 
> I don't understand why you say it is unfortunate.  Actually, this 
week
> ought to be a good time for calm reflection.  I really hope this
> wasn't some sort of veiled accusation of insensitivity on my part 
or
> Nemi's, which would itself be a bit offensive.

Laura's new reply:

No, no, although I can see how you might have inferred that.  My 
apologies for the misunderstanding.  I meant, unfortunate from my 
point of view, because I had other things I should have been doing 
(which is entirely my responsibility, no one else's).  However, calm 
reflection wasn't going to result from your reply-I found the tone 
unpleasant.

my earlier post:
> > I agree that JKR is trying to make a point 
> > about prejudice in the RW.  She does so most 
> > effectively without having to resort to 
> > caricatures.  
> 
Matt:

> Again, __no__one__said__there__was__any__caricature.  <snip> 

The caricature would be in the nature of the goblins-smart, uniquely 
able to handle money, ugly, not "like us".  I'm glad you find this 
to be an unconvincing portrait of Jews-so do I.  But there are still 
people in the world who see us this way.  So Nemi's suggestion that 
these characters suggest Jews, even if in a historical sense, is 
unworthy of JKR.  


> 
> > The comparison would be correct if JKR had included a 
> > character with stereotypical gay or lesbian traits but 
<snip>   Rowling's treatment plainly acknowledges and plays off
> of the bigotry her readers can see in the real world, and not just 
itsmost overt forms.  It's there in the focus on lineage, the 
mistrust of foreigners, the isolation of the half-blooded.  

> my new post:

You make an interesting point here, and one that I think somewhat 
undermines your argument.  The issues you point out that JKR raises 
are, I think, very live ones in Britain today.  My understanding 
(and please correct me if I'm wrong, Brits) is that the fallout from 
the end of colonialism is still having effects in Britain.  Those 
issues would be the ones JKR would be most familiar with.

> Moreover, does it really matter what Rowling intended?  <snip>   
It wouldn't be much fun reading
> Shakespeare, or Aristophanes, if their works spoke only to their
> worlds, and not to ours! 

Yes, it does.  They're her books.  We're reacting to her world.  And 
I think the writers you mention have survived this long exactly 
because they *intended* to address timeless issues. 

I don't purport to speak for all Jews, just this one.  I hope that 
if this discussion continues, we can do it politely and 
respectfully.  You may be surprised to know that I know what an 
allegory is-thanks, though.




From foxmoth at qnet.com  Tue Sep 30 01:31:42 2003
From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 01:31:42 -0000
Subject: Crying wolf?
In-Reply-To: <blae7c+qkeo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blamdu+bg4a@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81885

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Melody" 
<Malady579 at h...> wrote:
> Kneasy: 
> >>In CoS Tom Riddle sneers at Hagrid for trying to raise them 
under
> >>his  bed. Odd that.
> 
> Fawkes: 
> >I would like to see the canon where they say hagrid raises 
werewolf
> >cubs under his bed......
> 
> 
> Me:
> 
> CoS, Ch 17, Pg 311 (American Hb)
> 
> "...on the other hand, big, blundering Hagrid, in trouble every 
other
> week, trying to raise werewolf cubs under his bed..."
> 
> 
> So it is there, but it is from the words of Riddle.  Granted, he is
> probably telling the truth since this was used against Hagrid to 
prove
> he was the person in charge of the death of Myrtle.  We know 
he was
> indicted, so the cards were stacked against him.  It take more 
than a
> pointing finger to get someone kicked out of Hogwarts and the
> WW...er...so far.  It takes a good framer and a bit of dirt on the
> hands of the accused to be exploited by the framer.

Er, actually, we have JKR's word that this is slander, 

http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/2000/100
0-livechat-barnesnoble.html

backed up  by Fantastic Beasts which also states that the only 
way for someone to become a werewolf is by being bitten.


Pippin 
not trusting Lupin since post 39362






From EnsTren at aol.com  Tue Sep 30 01:51:31 2003
From: EnsTren at aol.com (EnsTren at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 21:51:31 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Jewish Goblins?
Message-ID: <1497F3A1.5D3F3EAE.00170183@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81886

In a message dated 9/29/2003 9:27:14 PM Eastern Daylight Time, jwcpgh at yahoo.com writes:

> > Again, __no__one__said__there__was__any__caricature.  <snip> 
> 
> The caricature would be in the nature of the goblins-smart, uniquely 
> able to handle money, ugly, not "like us".  I'm glad you find this 
> to be an unconvincing portrait of Jews-so do I.  But there are still 
> people in the world who see us this way.  So Nemi's suggestion that 
> these characters suggest Jews, even if in a historical 
> sense, is 
> unworthy of JKR.  

I did not make a sugestion that the Goblins suggest Jews outright.  I recognize the fact that my postulation was badly worded and rambling.

I ment to ponder on the possibility that the Goblin's situation might have something in common with certain historical things the Jews have endured.

I was curious if anyone thought it possible that the Goblins were confined to Gringotts and tha banking system by wizarding law.  And if there was a faint possibily that after all the Goblin rebellions that they might be in dept, lke the weimer administration in Germany.

I ment that perhaps there might be parallels.

And for the record, I am jewish, my mother was jewish, save for one person my entire living family is jewish.  And then their my god mother and her family who are all jewish.  Trust me when I say I don't mean any insult.


--Nemi



From jdr0918 at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 30 01:59:01 2003
From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 01:59:01 -0000
Subject: Weasley accents/regional clues
In-Reply-To: <blaa93+tfuv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blao15+t9mo@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81887

<<<In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003" wrote:...In the 
UK, this sausage is routinely used as a comic cliche to identify 
people from the North. It is supposed to indicate earthy, working 
class, unpretentious tastes, and as such in the books it indicates 
how different Ron is in style and background to eg Hermione, who 
having a typical middle class southern background knows and likes 
French food such as bouillebaisse...>>>

The Sergeant Majorette says

Could we get a British perspective on another accent? I love Tom 
Felton as much as anyone else, don't get me wrong, but for some 
reason his accent bugs me a little, or maybe it's his voice. What 
does he sound like to British ears? I'd expect Draco to have 
an "accentless" accent, like Hermione or Harry, or Mr. Malfoy.

I know this is starting to veer a little off-topic, but I promise to 
drop it right here...

--JDR






From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 02:15:03 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 02:15:03 -0000
Subject: Jewish Goblins?
In-Reply-To: <blaar9+gbtg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blaov7+30mc@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81888

>madeyemood 
> i like all of the distinctions you drew in your post. elegantly 
done. it's easy to 
> confuse an allusion to a certain type of prejudice as buying into 
that prejudice. 
> but, imho, they simply are not the same thing.

Laura, really starting to feel rather annoyed:

Now wait a minute here.  I *never* accused anyone of prejudice-not 
JKR, not Nemi and not Matt.  Nemi said that the whole goblins-are-
good-with-money idea coupled with their separation from the human 
part of the WW made him/her think of the historical position of the 
Jews vis-a-vis the rest of society.  I tried to suggest that Nemi's 
idea was too crude for JKR because IMO she's not trying to draw 
particularistic parallels to any group.   

> madeyemood
> there are a couple of other examples that leap to mind.
> in star trek: deep space nine there was that culture of short 
people with big 
> ears who were obsessed with money...you know: the Quark character, 
the 
> grand Negus, etc. 

Laura:

I'm going to assume that you are not familiar with the history of 
European anti-semitism.  Suffice it to say that if someone had wanted 
to create a very ugly sterotype of a Jew according to the images 
popular in Europe up to the middle of the last century, they couldn't 
have come much closer than the money-handling, ugly but smart, not-
exactly-human goblin.  Which is *exactly* why I don't think JKR 
intended any such thing.

 madeyemood: 
> South Park, one of whose writer's is jewish, perpetuates scandalous 
ideas about both the jews and the people dumb enough to judge them 
for being jewish.  the coen brothers also did parodies of the jewish 
studio  head in Barton Fink.
> 
Laura:

Surely you know that members of a group joking about that group is 
quite a different thing than non-members doing the same thing.  If 
the people from South Park or the Coen brothers choose to take their 
jokes public, that still doesn't make it okay for non-Jews to say or 
do the same things.  You can substitute the name of any other 
minority group for Jews and it would be equally true.
<snip>

> madeyemood
> anyway, it is a shame that discussing an aspect of the book so 
easily devolves into baseless accusation. alas, that's the way with 
tribal injury. a lot of those wounds are still sore.

Laura:

I made no accusation and I'm quite irate that you say I did.  I'd 
suggest you go back and re-read my replies to Nemi and Matt. I don't 
agree with them but I have no reason to think they meant anything 
unkind by their remarks.  They're entitled to their perspectives as I 
am to mine.  

Let me point out to you that Jews are not a tribe.  That's a title 
imposed from outside.  We consider ourselves a people.   And maybe 
you can understand now why  "a lot of those wounds are still sore."  




From editor at texas.net  Tue Sep 30 02:23:48 2003
From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Geist)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 21:23:48 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: They are children's books (Was: the heart of it all)
References: <bl9pbn+u1kq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <003301c386f9$e25c8a00$a658aacf@texas.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 81889

> > Amanda: They were and are not written for children. They were
> written to express
> > someone's vision, to tell a story.
>
> Golly: I'm sorry but I don't believe that one bit.  Every decent
> children's writer aims to tell a good story and express a vision.
> That is what being creative is about. Are children's authors less
> creative or inferior storytellers?

Amanda:
Well, the answer to that would be "No," and I'm really sorry you don't
believe it, but I wasn't stating my opinion. I was stating what the author
herself has said. Doubt her if you will, but I choose to believe the woman
simply wanted to write a story and it was seized by the marketers. I mean,
if they made her invent a middle name so she'd have initials, they could
decide who the "target audience" was. But Jo Rowling herself has said she
did not aim it at any particular age group.

Golly: > Too bad you're embarrassed to like a children's/Young Adult book,
but
> I'm not.  Nor am I embarrassed to like the others that I do.

Amanda: I must say I take offense at this. I'm not embarrassed at all to
like a "young adult" book. I have Lloyd Alexander, Susan Cooper, and C.S.
Lewis on my personal bookshelf as we type.

I fail to see why my crediting what an author believes about her work, makes
me embarrassed about an entire genre.

Amanda:> > It was the marketing department of the publisher that chose to
> market to
> > children, and who made the (to me, ridiculous) decision to
> have "adult" and
> > "child" versions of the *exact same story* with different covers.
>
> Golly: They aren't different versions.  There are different covers.
> The reason they have adult and child covers is no different from the
> reason the covers vary from country to country or decade to decade.
> Different groups like different images.  It is all about marketing.
> The books have not changed.  The only English textual differences are
> between the American and British versions.  The adult covers are for
> image conscious adults who were too embarrassed to read a children's
> book in public. (Or those who just think they are nicer - which I
> won't disagree with.  Had I been sure the adult cover was the British
> version I would probably have bought that.)

Amanda:  ?? Were you *reading* what I said? Didn't I just say they were the
*exact same story* and only the covers were different?

Golly:>   You're only a reading child for about 15 years.  There are lots of
> books that I never read in that time and lots that were not published
> when I was young.  I would miss out on so many great stories if I was
> too embarrassed to read children's literature.

Amanda: I repeat. This offends me mightily, that you have made this
judgement call about me.

Golly:> But I do admit to liking the paperback adult Potter covers better.
> The photographs are nice. That may only be because I think Grand Pere
> is such a terrible illustrator.

Amanda: GrandPre. Grand Pere is a French grandfather.

Amanda: > > In fact, I will be interested to see how the releases of Books 6
> and 7 are
> > handled; to me, at least, the frantic child-focused activity seemed
> on the
> > edge of inappropriate for Book 5. I think subsequent books will
> take the
> > story out of the realm where stuffed owls, paper wizard hats,
> getting
> > "sorted," and making wands are appropriate marketing tools.
>
> Golly: Why do you denegrate that which so many fell in love with the
> first time around.  Rowling put in what you call "marketing tools".
> They were a part of this creation.  They were what readers of all
> ages enjoyed. I enjoyed the jolly sorting and the little details.  I
> enjoyed watching Harry struggle at his lessons and learning what was
> in a wand.

Amanda: I do not denigrate the elements of fantasy in Rowling's world. What
I said was that their use to promote further books to the original age group
they were marketed for is likely to become more and more inappropriate as
the themes in the books mature. I consider it to be a bit misleading.

Golly: > I feel no need to denegrate what has come before. If you like the
> more serious stuff better, then so be it.  The series is more
> interesting to you as it goes on.  But it isn't any more serious than
> many of Garner, Zindel, or LeGuin's books.

Amanda: This has nothing to do with my reading taste. I have been expressing
my belief in what Jo Rowling has said about her work; and I have been
expressing my belief that the marketing strategy has failed to "grow" with
the themes and complexity of the books.

> GOLLY: Sorry but, BULL!  By saying this you denegrate all the
> wonderful writers who say the exact same thing and are proud to admit
> they are children's authors.  Rowling admits that HP are children's
> books. She simply said she doesn't write from a frame of mind where
> she writes what she thinks kids would like.  She is writing a story
> that excited her.  As do all authors.

Amanda: Explain how this differs from what I said. You just said what I did:
she doesn't write for children; she's writing her vision, the story she
wants to write.

If it's not written *for* children, with children's responses in mind, and
it is enjoyed by fully as many adults, I fail to see why they should be
classified as "children's books" when they were not written as such, but
simply as *books,* and when it was only their marketing that labeled them as
such.

That you can dissect and classify them so handily, great. Have a grand time.
But I put authorial intent above your defining.

~Amanda






From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 02:29:09 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 02:29:09 -0000
Subject: Jewish Goblins?
In-Reply-To: <1497F3A1.5D3F3EAE.00170183@aol.com>
Message-ID: <blappl+gbea@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81890

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, EnsTren at a... wrote:
<snip>
> 
> I ment to ponder on the possibility that the Goblin's situation 
might have something in common with certain historical things the 
Jews have endured.
> 
> I was curious if anyone thought it possible that the Goblins were 
confined to Gringotts and tha banking system by wizarding law.  And 
if there was a faint possibily that after all the Goblin rebellions 
that they might be in dept, lke the weimer administration in Germany.
> 
> I ment that perhaps there might be parallels.
> 
> And for the record, I am jewish, my mother was jewish, save for one 
person my entire living family is jewish.  And then their my god 
mother and her family who are all jewish.  Trust me when I say I 
don't mean any insult.
> 

Laura:

Oh, now I understand...

You raise an interesting point.  We imagine the WW to be more or less 
a capitalist society, but if that's the case, why do only goblins do 
the banking?  This is a big money-maker, so where's the competition?  
Which came first, the goblin rebellions or the responsibility for 
Gringotts?  Or is there any connection at all?  

If there's a debt, we haven't seen any textual evidence of it.  It 
would seem counter-intuitive to me to let someone who owes you a 
large sum of money run your bank, though.

No offense taken, Nemi.  I'm glad you posted again and I am sorry if 
I misunderstood what you were getting at.  







From bard7696 at aol.com  Tue Sep 30 02:42:09 2003
From: bard7696 at aol.com (darrin_burnett)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 02:42:09 -0000
Subject: Jewish Goblins?
In-Reply-To: <blappl+gbea@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blaqi1+ercu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81891

It doesn't strike me that the Goblins are meant to parallel the Jews.

Rather, I think they parallel the idea of a Swiss banker, and I use 
canon to back me up.

Sirius Black was on the run and was the most wanted criminal in the 
Wizard World, but was still able to draw on his account to the tune 
of at least a few hundred Galleons to buy a Firebolt.

That indicates the Goblins are completely independent and unregulated 
by the Wizard World, and they are completely neutral in all matters. 

Otherwise, the first thing Fudge would have done is frozen Sirius' 
assets. And if Fudge hadn't done it, the members of the Black family 
who consider Sirius a blood traitor would have looted that account.

Want to hide money? Go to Gringotts. In the real world, put it in a 
Swiss bank account. (Actually, I have no idea how Swiss banks really 
work, but the secretive, we'll-take-anyone nature is common in pop 
fiction and movies.)

As for the Jewish comparison, I'm not sure it works without buying 
into the stereotypes that feed such groups as the KKK, the Skinheads 
and idiots like Louis Farrakhan who see Jewish conspiracies lurking 
around every corner.

Darrin
-- missing my schien froi





From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Tue Sep 30 02:44:56 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 02:44:56 -0000
Subject: The Weasley's accents
In-Reply-To: <bla3bt+18jp@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blaqn8+o8u6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81892

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jdr0918" <jdr0918 at h...> wrote:
> 
<<<"jeffl1965" wrote:

> Really? I 
> dunno...I still think the kids, at least Ron and the Twins having a 
> cockney accent as being proper. The actor isn't acting either, he's 
> got that accent. I've seen a few interviews. Why is it 
> bothersome?...>>>
> 
> The Sergeant Majorette says
> 
> I would guess it bothers people because it's not accurate. As an 
> American, I am not bothered by it at all. I just figure Ron and the 
> twins talk like that for the same reason suburban white kids use 
> hiphop slang: it's an adolescent affectation. Also it was probably 
> easier to get a performance out of those kids by letting them speak 
> naturally. Tom Felton (Draco) and Dan Radcliffe (Harry) are the 
only 
> ones with prior acting experience.
> 
> --JDR


    Jeff:

    Why would it not be accurate? Since it's vague where the Weasleys 
really live, or if they ever lived anywhere else prior to this, why 
wouldn't it expected for them to have working class accents? As for 
the actors, why would experience make any difference? They all speak 
with their normal voices as near as I can tell. Only Robbie effects 
an accent.


  Jeff





From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Tue Sep 30 03:04:09 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 03:04:09 -0000
Subject: Weasley accents (was Obsessed with Harry )
In-Reply-To: <bla63r+uj08@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blarr9+60o7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81893

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" 
<gbannister10 at a...> 

> Geoff:
> Just picking up on one or two points having had a little more time 
to 
> digest them. One other poster and myself have pointed out that to 
be 
> a true Cockney, you have to have been born within the sound of Bow 
> Bells. These are not strictly East London, because they are the 
bells 
> of St.Mary-le-Bow which is in Cheapside, a street running between 
> St.Pauls Cathedral and the Bank of England. Postal code wise, they 
> are EC (East Central) but I wouldn't consider them East End, 
speaking 
> as a London resident of 45 years. Many people speak with a similar 
> accent, as I see Ron doing. As Jeff(?) pointed out there are many 
> accents belonging to London residents who have moved in. There is 
now 
> also an accent referred to by scholars as "Estuary English" taking 
> its name from the Thames Estuary which is a dialect (of sorts!) 
> covering a wide swathe round London.
> 
  Jeff:

    Thanks for more details. My own knowledge of the districts are 
limited to White Chapel, Saville Row and the ST. John's Wood area and 
the NW area around Abbey Road. Lots of different accents in those 
areas alone. Some sound like they belong on Radio One, others on the 
Grange Hill programme or Eastenders. :) Not to mention the Welsh 
walking around in their wellies or a few wallys you run into. ;)



> Some folk don't have a particularly strong regional accent. I don't 
> envisage Hermione having one because of her background. I lived in 
> the north of England until I was 9 and then moved to London with 
> a "Coronation Street" accent. Thanks to mixing with "Sarf 
Lunneners" 
> and the attacks of my grammar school teachers on my diction, I am 
now 
> largely accentless. Moving to Sonerset 9 years ago, I now find that 
> the locals consider me to be from somewhere "in the South-East". 
> Little Whinging perhaps?


   Jeff:

    I can see that. She seems so proper in the books, that I have to 
agree that she'd be in the Radio One crowd, with such perfect diction 
that you'd think she'd choke if she tried a slang. :) It's intresting 
to think about this, since what these movies will do is set the 
character's voices into the minds of children for generations to 
come.  I would hope that the cast they selected is what JKR had in 
mind, and since she didn't state otherwise, then we are to presume 
that they are what she wants. 



  Jeff





From l10r77 at juno.com  Tue Sep 30 03:17:40 2003
From: l10r77 at juno.com (Lisa Romero)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 23:17:40 -0400
Subject: The Weasley's accents
Message-ID: <000a01c38701$691903f0$d6d5d8ce@Lisa>

No: HPFGUIDX 81894

D writes:
It would be like having a British person try to distinguish between a 
southern Texas accent and someone who comes from Mississippi.  To the 
untrained ear, they probably sound the same, but to someone from the 
South, they would know instantly where that person was from.

Now me:
It is pretty tough to distinguish the accents for American ears. I'm lucky enough to work in an industr where we speak to all different nationalities to the extend that I can distinguish several different accents from the Brit. Isles  or Middle East and I think that's pretty tough. The majority thinks Middle Easterners like Apu from the Simpsons, who's Indian. It's funny what we hear sometimes. Where I'm from there's pretty much no accent (connecticut) unless you live in eastern CT by Rhode Island. 
Anyway to get back on topic...I just pictures the Weasley's having a generic british accent, not that there is such a thing! Just my lack of imagination. lol
Lisa


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Tue Sep 30 03:17:55 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 03:17:55 -0000
Subject: Weasley accents/regional clues
In-Reply-To: <blaa93+tfuv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blasl3+kpol@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81895

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003" 
<carolynwhite2 at a...> wrote:

> 
> Comment from CW:
> 
> OTH, there is a scene where he is eating at a feast and he is 
> described as reaching for some 'black pudding' in preference to 
some 
> other 'foreign' food on offer. I can't quite remember which book 
this 
> is (maybe the feast in GoF when the Beauxbatons delegation first 
> arrive). Anyway, the point of mentioning this particular food is 
that 
> it is a highly traditional sausage from Northern England, made 
mainly 
> from fresh blood, fat and spices (I'm told its delicious, but can't 
> face trying it myself !). I think the actual origin is Manchester 
or 
> Newcastle (no doubt other listies will swoop in to correct me 
here !).
> 
> In the UK, this sausage is routinely used as a comic cliche to 
> identify people from the North. It is supposed to indicate earthy, 
> working class, unpretentious tastes, and as such in the books it 
> indicates how different Ron is in style and background to eg 
> Hermione, who having a typical middle class southern background 
knows 
> and likes French food such as bouillebaisse.
> 

   Jeff:

    Ah, very true!! I'd forgotten about the food!! I don't often pay 
attention to those details, unless it's a food that I either am 
unfamiliar with or just sounds disgusting. :) But it is true about 
the regions, just like I've always heard fish and chips used, but now 
in some novels and tv, they say fish and crisps. They also don't 
always wrap'em in newspaper anymore. Sad to see that. The greasier, 
the better. :) That was very enlightening about the sausage, as I'd 
always seen it used as a comic ploy to gross the kids out. I wish I 
could quote where all I'd seen it used, but I can't. 



> Also, on the Devon location, I've pointed out before (and so have 
> others) that it would be difficult for Muggle taxis to drive to 
Kings 
> Cross from Devon in the few hours described in GoF (they leave 
about 
> 8.30 am maybe, and get there in time for the 11am train). It would 
> take more like 4-5 hours, and that's assuming the London traffic 
was 
> not too bad (and it always is - trust me, I live in London !!).


   Jeff:

   Is it possible that they took a portkey first? Since Arthur has to 
go to work in London, wouldn't there be one nearby that would take 
him somewhere in London, then they could take a taxi to the station? 
I know he could take a broom or use floo powder, but I don't recall 
any mention of that.




  Jeff





From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Tue Sep 30 03:22:46 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 03:22:46 -0000
Subject: Weasley's accents
In-Reply-To: <blac05+6rp6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blasu6+i90r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81896

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003" 
<carolynwhite2 at a...> wrote:

> Reply from CW:
> 
> Erm...You probably mean BBC Radio 3 or 4 ! Radio One (and to some 
> extent Radio 2) is the UK pop station ! Channels 3 and 4 are the 
> upmarket classical music and 'serious' discussion channels. [Note 
to 
> US readers - you will probably be astonished that these four main 
> radio channels dominate UK airwaves to the extent that they do, 
> despite all the new competition and an infinite number of local 
> stations).

  Jeff:


  Actually no. Thanks for being so willing to correct me, but they do 
talk on Radio one, I wasn't meaning just chat. I guess I wasn't too 
clear again, my snafu. :) I guess I should've said BBC TV, but the 
annoucements on there for the next programme are too short. At least 
on the radio they do speak a bit more. :) On tv it's like " It's 
4_25, time for Grange Hill."  Not much to go on. ;)



   Jeff




From lisaeckleycocchiarale at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 29 20:32:07 2003
From: lisaeckleycocchiarale at yahoo.com (Lisa Cocchiarale)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 20:32:07 -0000
Subject: Will Draco come back?
In-Reply-To: <bl9fua+ggdo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bla4s7+9o57@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81897

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "meriaugust" <meriaugust at y...> wrote:
 
> Anyway, I was thinking, if Lucius Malfoy is in Azkaban (as stated in 
> the end of OotP) will Narcissa, probably knowing full well that it 
> was Dumbledore who was responsible for putting him there, along with 
> Harry of course, want to send Draco back to Hogwarts for sixth and 
> seventh year? Draco allready wanted to go to Durmstrang, so could 
> this little incident (ie: the Battle at the Department of Mysteries) 
> be the straw that breaks the camels back? Will we lose Draco whom we 
> all love to hate? Just a thought. Any ideas? 

I dearly hope not, but you do raise a valid point. I, however, rather believe that with 
Lucius out of commission (at least temporarily), Narcissa wil be less dominated by 
him and decide to keep Draco in the safest place possible.  On the other hand, does 
L's incarceration deprive him of control of his wealth? If not, then Narcissa may be 
bound to follow his wishes, wahtever that might mean for our dear boy Draco.

Lisa
(slavishly devoted to the notion that Draco will a) either join the light or b) write harry 
an angst filled love letter).





From bonoskite99 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 29 22:37:52 2003
From: bonoskite99 at yahoo.com (Liz S.)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 15:37:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Do you peek?
In-Reply-To: <1064831920.14813.41062.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030929223752.75546.qmail@web21001.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81898


I might be a little late on this. I'm a bit of a lurker and didn't get to check my email for a week, but I had to reply to this.

The question was about peeking to see what happens toward the end of the books, and I just thought I'd say that I never peeked. It was a very important deal my sister and I had that if one of us got to the death scene in OOP before the other that we wouldn't tell the other what happened. We both agreed that peeking, or finding out before it occurred naturally in the story would take away some magic. Luckily, we both got to the death scene and we both finished the book on the same day!

I'm telling you, though, that it was so hard not to peek!!! I wanted to find out so badly, and it was as if I couldn't read the book quickly enough. I was glad I didn't peek though, because it would definitely have taken away from the story.




" ...we are one, but we are not the same, we get to carry eachother, carry eachother..."

"...dreams begin responsibilities..."

"...who's to say where the wind will take you..."

"...and you can dream, so dream out loud..."

"...boom cha, boom cha, discotheque..."

"...I was lost, now I am found..."


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From nansense at cts.com  Tue Sep 30 03:25:41 2003
From: nansense at cts.com (zesca)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 03:25:41 -0000
Subject: Jewish Goblins?
In-Reply-To: <blaqi1+ercu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blat3l+625n@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81899

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "darrin_burnett" <bard7696 at a...> 
wrote:
> It doesn't strike me that the Goblins are meant to parallel the Jews.
> 
> Rather, I think they parallel the idea of a Swiss banker, and I use 
> canon to back me up.
...
> That indicates the Goblins are completely independent and unregulated 
> by the Wizard World, and they are completely neutral in all matters. 
...
> As for the Jewish comparison, I'm not sure it works without buying 
> into the stereotypes that feed such groups as the KKK, the Skinheads 
> and idiots like Louis Farrakhan who see Jewish conspiracies lurking 
> around every corner.

madeye:
Hey, Darrin, i like your comparison to the Swiss bankers.

What about the idea that the comparison to the status of Jewish usurers exists 
in two ways:
::a population that is discrimated against, for whom there exist a different set 
of rules 
::the Goblins, like the medieval Jews, are the only ones who manage the 
finances 
while the Swiss system provides a banking option, there are other banking 
institutions to choose from. can the same be said in the banking world?
in Medieval France the Jews were the only ones practising usury because it 
was seen by the Christians to be inherently base and unclean.

ciao, 
madeyemood who's curious about the meaning of schien froi which sounds 
suspiciously like schaudenfreude or whatever that German word is which 
means taking pleasure in the misfortunes of others.




From president0084 at yahoo.com  Mon Sep 29 18:09:52 2003
From: president0084 at yahoo.com (president0084)
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 18:09:52 -0000
Subject: House Elfs
In-Reply-To: <BAY2-F7fCHJr1Wtyi670001f156@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <bl9shg+6khj@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81900

Kreacher got out of the house in a round about way but still only 
went to Protect family, from Kreacher's point of view the Malfoys and 
Voldemort are the side of right.

Dobby left the Malfoy house to protect Harry Potter. JK has said 
nothing about Harry's family. But he must be from a pureblood family 
because Malfoy tried the make friends (on the train). He didn't want to 
ne Ron's (I know Ron is a purblood but he is poor and a joke) friend 
of Grangers but Harry's so he must be pureblood, The hat wanted to put 
Harry in Slytherin (the Malfoys always go into Slytherin).

So I think Malfoy and Potters are related.





From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au  Tue Sep 30 03:55:54 2003
From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 03:55:54 -0000
Subject: Foreign DADA Teacher?
Message-ID: <blausa+63mn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81901

Not a spoiler, just an idea.

When LV was strong and popular before the Potters were attacked, many 
Slytherin families supported and joined. Now that LV is very visible 
again, and not hiding the fact that he is back, there will be a big 
recruitment drive for the DE.

... and for the Order ...

With present OotP members getting into panic mode to stop the growth 
of DE, who can DD spare and trust to be the new Defence Against Dark 
Arts teacher at Hogwarts?

JOB OPENNING:
One option, (and this will somewhat pacify kids that are calling for 
non-Britts to be in the movie) is to import a witch or wizard from 
away from all the DE influence - from outside of Europe.

JOB REQUIREMENTS:
a) From an area where magic is ancient and established - (so if USA 
or Australia, maybe native populations).
b) Experienced with dangerous magical areas (if not fighting Dark 
wizards, then dnagerous creatures) - (Dragon colonies are in Peru and 
New Zealand)
c) a traditional Brit ally would fit in nicely (does it seem I am 
bias to Australia and New Zealand? .. lol)

JOB DESCRIPTION:
d) Being ignorant of previous DADA teachers and their reasons for 
leaving would help ... lol (killed; mental hospital; known to be a 
warewolf; kissed be dementor; run off by popular demand)
e) Thick skinned to put up with suspicion and distrust from 80% of 
staff and students.
f) It would help if he could talk with the CoMC teacher (Hagrid) 
about wierd creatures from his/her part of the world 
g) Physically, or at least, magically tough (Rugby is a tough game)
h) Adventurous and ...
i) if you could stay longer than 1 year, that would be incredible 
(but doubtful ... lol)

SUGGESTION:
allowing for a), b), c), d), e), f), g) h) and i) that sounds like a 
laid back, back packing, quidditch playing, aussie, or Kiwi. ~aussie~




From urghiggi at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 04:08:13 2003
From: urghiggi at yahoo.com (urghiggi)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 04:08:13 -0000
Subject: Death Chamber/ancient magic
In-Reply-To: <blaenf+v2ts@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blavjd+octa@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81902

Urghiggi wrote:
If this brand of magic is so ancient, fundamental, and powerful -- why 
> would LV despise it so? He seems to be of the "use any means" type, but 
the 
> nature of ancient magic seems repulsive to him, despite its power. Is it that 
he 
> WON'T use it (presumably because it's somehow love-based, the view that 
> seems to be supported by canon) or that he CAN'T use it (again, because 
it's 
> love-based)? And just because the only example given (lily's sacrifice) is 
> love-based -- does this necessarily rule out the possibility that there may be 
> other aspects of this ancient magic that are morally neutral or even dark? 


And then replied to herself:

After I wrote this I remembered another example-- though I don't think it was 
referred to specifically as "ancient" magic but rather as "magic at its deepest, 
most impenetrable" (something like that, i don't have my PoA here). This is in 
the scene at the end of PoA where Ddore is explaining to Harry the benefits of 
his having let Pettigrew go -- that this would put pettigrew forever in his debt, 
apparently via the operation of the "deep magic."  Maybe there are other 
instances I'm not remembering?

What I'm specifically NOT remembering is any description of this kind of magic 
as morally neutral (like the Star Wars "force," able to be tapped for good or ill). 
JKR's ancient magic seems to be fundamentally a power of good, which 
perhaps is why LV hates it and/or can't use it.

And now I see that I'm covering old ground anyway, since I went over to the 
Lexicon to look for references and saw that Steve has quite a nice essay 
about this over there in the "magic & magical theory" section -- again 
comparing/contrasting the Narnia-type "deep magic" with JKR's "ancient 
magic." Well worth a look.....

Urghiggi, Chgo




From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au  Tue Sep 30 04:13:25 2003
From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 04:13:25 -0000
Subject: Do you peek?
In-Reply-To: <20030929223752.75546.qmail@web21001.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <blavt5+qaqn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81903

--- "Liz S." <bonoskite99> wrote:
> I'd say that I never peeked. It was a very important deal my sister 
and I had that if one of us got to the death scene in OOP before the 
other that we wouldn't tell the other what happened. We both agreed 
that peeking, or finding out before it occurred naturally in the 
story would take away some magic. Luckily, we both got to the death 
scene and we both finished the book on the same day!

I was in another group .. and someone wrote the spoiler without 
warning ppl. I felt cheated ... that guy owes me $45Aust - the price 
of a OotP!!!




From lupinesque at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 06:19:20 2003
From: lupinesque at yahoo.com (Amy Z)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 06:19:20 -0000
Subject: How many Rons per Hermione - numerical analysis of Ron's alleged decline
In-Reply-To: <bl8rmh+mott@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blb798+9ssl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81904

Dumbledad wrote:

> I've done a little numerical analysis on 
> the texts.

The real purpose of my post is to induct Dumbledad into the League of 
Obsessed Nitpickers.  Induct, did I say?  The word doesn't capture 
the enthusiasm of this moment.  I can't remember anyone entering this 
select organization with such flair, with such breathtaking 
painstakingness, with, in short, such definitive LOONiness, since Ben 
Jones burst on the scene with the legendary "incidences of green and 
red" analysis of Ought One (messages #23407 and #23435).

Er, now I have to justify posting this to the list, so let's see what 
I can come up with.  Only that, as valuable as name-counting is, a 
character's importance does not necessarily correlate neatly with the 
frequency of his/her appearance.  At times it can be pointed up by 
his/her conspicuous *absence*: viz. Hermione during her petrified 
period in CoS, and Ron during his falling-out with Harry in GoF. 

I also wonder if the Ron/Hermione ratio is actually a bit weaker than 
it appears because it is necessary for JKR to mention his name a bit 
more often, due to male pronouns being ambiguous when Harry is around 
(as he almost invariably is).

Amy Z




From jakejensen at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 30 07:02:41 2003
From: jakejensen at hotmail.com (jakedjensen)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 07:02:41 -0000
Subject: Will Draco come back?
In-Reply-To: <bla4s7+9o57@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blb9qh+3e6v@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81905

"The dementors have left Azkaban, " said Malfoy quietly.  "Dad and 
the others'll be out in no time . . .      '
"Yeah, I expect they will," said Harry. (p. 851, OotP)

I suspect that Malfoy will return to Hogwarts.  He does still have an 
important role to play.  He is the Snape of his generation.  And, 
just like Snape, I feel sympathy for Draco.  From the moment we met 
Draco he has shown to be intelligent, athletic, clever, and a good 
leader . . . however, he is also the byproduct of a disfunctional 
home.  There is an important line in OotP that I believe applies to 
Draco.  DD, when talking about Kreacher, says, "Kreacher is what he 
has been made by wizards, Harry." (p. 832, OotP) Draco, too, is what 
he has been made by wizards (especially his father).  I think, in the 
end, Draco will go through a transformation.  Most likely, one of 
the "good" characters will make the first move (early money is on 
Hermione, but never count out Luna or Harry to throw a curveball). 
Remember, regardless of how poorly he did it, he did originally offer 
Harry friendship (PS/SS).  I think JKR will bring him around.  Don't 
believe it?  Look at Sirius (i.e., Sirius Black).

Jake  




From naama2486 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 07:41:27 2003
From: naama2486 at yahoo.com (Naama)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 07:41:27 -0000
Subject: Death Chamber/ancient magic
In-Reply-To: <blaenf+v2ts@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blbc37+fe3v@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81906

Urghiggi wrote:
 And just because the only example given (lily's sacrifice) is 
> love-based -- does this necessarily rule out the possibility that 
there may be 
> other aspects of this ancient magic that are morally neutral or 
even dark? 
> Again, we don't have enough info to know ... yet.

*Naama activates a big red WRONG! buzzer*

LV *has* already used ancient magic in a very dark way - his revival 
potion in the end of GoF (not an exact quote): "it's a piece of old 
magic, the potion that revived me tonight..." All the "bone of the 
father" etc. sounds pretty ancient to me. 

So there is ancient dark magic. As for morally neutral magic, I 
can't really see how that can work. It seems to me that ancient 
magic needs some sort of emotional or magical base, that does not 
allow the spell to stay morally neutral.

Just a thought...

--Naama




From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk  Tue Sep 30 08:42:10 2003
From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?udder=5Fpen=5Fdragon?=)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 09:42:10 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [HPforGrownups]  All series accents 
In-Reply-To: <bladcs+48pd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030930084210.39560.qmail@web60207.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81907




U_P_D

Do the HP characters have local regional accents at all?

The inhabitants of the WW generally keep themselves away from the local muggles. Therefore IMO the main variation in speech would come from mixed marriages and muggle born's. 

All the children spend 7 years living in Scotland (probably) but only MMcG appears to have a Scottish accent?

Udder pen Dragon




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. 



---------------------------------
Want to chat instantly with your online friends??Get the FREE Yahoo!Messenger

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From talisman22457 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 09:27:20 2003
From: talisman22457 at yahoo.com (Talisman)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 09:27:20 -0000
Subject: Death Chamber/ancient magic
In-Reply-To: <blaenf+v2ts@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blbi9o+bt5r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81908

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "urghiggi" <urghiggi at y...> 
wrote<snip> this kind of "deep" magic is <snip> Almost like 
the "rules" that underlie the foundation of the world in question, 
crafted by the one who created the world. <snip> If Harry's mom's 
sacrifice is an example of the "ancient magic" -- what does that say 
about D'dore's ability to manipulate it in service of his plan?> 
Urghiggi, chgo

Talisman, busily tossing gnomes over the list walls, observes: 

Alas, long after St. Vander Ark laid down the Lexiconic gospel you 
rely on, Dumbledore tells us that it was he, DUMBLEDORE, (not Lily) 
who made the "decision" that Harry would be protected by a 
certain "ancient magic" likely to slide under LV's radar.(OoP 835)

We see that it is not simply Lily's death that gives Harry what 
little protection he gets (partial days six weeks a year?) from 
this "ancient magic."  It is the "charm" Dumbledore placed on Harry. 
(OoP 836) A lovely little charm that just happens to require 
ingredients like Lily's blood and Petunia's home. Stir it around in 
a pot and Dumbledore says you've got "the strongest shield charm *I* 
[hear Dumbledore claiming credit?] could give you."  (OoP 836 my 
emphasis)

By the way, we know Lily's "sacrifice" didn't leave a physical mark 
on Harry. (SS 299) I suggest to you that the scar on Harry's head is 
indeed the defensive rune "eihwaz," (OoP 715) and a consequence of 
Dumbledore's charm.  This, of course, implies pre-meditation and 
orchestration. (Wouldn't do to have LV come knocking when Lily was 
upstairs taking a nap and Harry was bouncing on his Daddy's knee in 
the living room.) Ah, shades of Sirius Black.  

Moreover, that's not the only "ancient magic" that uses a parental 
soup base.  Recall that "old piece of Dark Magic" (GoF 656) that 
required some "Bone of the father....Flesh of the Servant... and 
Blood of the Enemy?" (GoF 641-42)  Odd fabric of creation, that. 

By the way, Dumbledore clearly anticipated LV using this 
cannibalistic little spell after the destruction of the SS.  

Dumbledore wasn't reading every Muggle newspaper in the world and he 
certainly wasn't monitoring the Little Hangleton gazette by 
coincidence. (GoF 601) He knew exactly where the "bone of the 
Father" had to be obtained (GoF 601-02) and he wasn't a bit 
surprised when LV showed up to get it.

(He had already insured that LV got his limb-chopping servant back, 
and soon fixed it so he got Harry's (gleam) blood, as well.)  

Yep, Dumbledore is quite adept at manipulating ancient magic. 

Talisman, reminding you that Muggles only see what they set out to 
see, so that their eyes slide "from the big book shop on one side to 
the record shop on the other" as if they can't see the Leaky 
Cauldron, at all.

 






From june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk  Tue Sep 30 09:56:59 2003
From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 09:56:59 -0000
Subject: Jewish Goblins?
In-Reply-To: <blat3l+625n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blbk1b+km1r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81909

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "zesca" <nansense at c...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "darrin_burnett" 
<bard7696 at a...> 
> wrote:
> > It doesn't strike me that the Goblins are meant to parallel the 
Jews.
> > 
> > Rather, I think they parallel the idea of a Swiss banker, and I 
use 
> > canon to back me up.
> ...
>> 
> madeye:
> Hey, Darrin, i like your comparison to the Swiss bankers.
> 
> What about the idea that the comparison to the status of Jewish 
usurers exists 
> in two ways:
> ::a population that is discrimated against, for whom there exist a 
different set 
> of rules 
> ::the Goblins, like the medieval Jews, are the only ones who manage 
the 
> finances 
> while the Swiss system provides a banking option, there are other 
banking 
> institutions to choose from. can the same be said in the banking 
world?
> in Medieval France the Jews were the only ones practising usury 
because it 
> was seen by the Christians to be inherently base and unclean.
> 
> ciao, 
> madeyemood who's curious about the meaning of schien froi which 
sounds 
> suspiciously like schaudenfreude or whatever that German word is 
which 
> means taking pleasure in the misfortunes of others.

Actually, in mediaeval France, florentine bankers were a major force 
until expelled by Philip IV - who also attacked the order of the 
Knights Templars.  

Historical parallel is the ancient classical system of Permutatio - 
this meant that money could be transferred by letters of credit - all 
your wealth represented on a piece of paper.  This was why state 
confiscation of assets very rarely worked in Rome because this system 
enabled money to be the most portable of assets.  A similar system is 
current among the Islamic world today and is a reason why it has been 
virtually impossible to sieze any of the assets of Al Quaeda.  

June




From deemarie1a at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 10:21:45 2003
From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 10:21:45 -0000
Subject: Geography as related to the accents
Message-ID: <blblfp+ka11@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81910

Okay, I'm not very good at finding posts about subjects.  So, if this 
has been discussed, please point me to the right thread!

All this discussion about the characters various accents got me to 
thinking about where the scenes are set.  Everyone assumes that 
Hogwarts is in Scotland, JKR has them traveling north for hours on 
the train.  I don't dispute that, but how did we come up with that 
location?

Being American, I really have no frame of reference for all these 
places.  Just where is Surrey in relation to London?  Where exactly 
in London is Kings Cross?  Where would the MoM be located?  What 
about Ottery St. Catchpole?

Point me to a really good map!

Thanks for your patience.  And to our list elves, sorry if this is 
off topic.

D




From june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk  Tue Sep 30 11:03:38 2003
From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 11:03:38 -0000
Subject: Geography as related to the accents
In-Reply-To: <blblfp+ka11@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blbnub+lqca@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81911

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Donna" <deemarie1a at y...> wrote:
> Okay, I'm not very good at finding posts about subjects.  So, if 
this 
> has been discussed, please point me to the right thread!
> 
> All this discussion about the characters various accents got me to 
> thinking about where the scenes are set.  Everyone assumes that 
> Hogwarts is in Scotland, JKR has them traveling north for hours on 
> the train.  I don't dispute that, but how did we come up with that 
> location?
> 
> Being American, I really have no frame of reference for all these 
> places.  Just where is Surrey in relation to London?  Where exactly 
> in London is Kings Cross?  Where would the MoM be located?  What 
> about Ottery St. Catchpole?
> 
> Point me to a really good map!
> 
> Thanks for your patience.  And to our list elves, sorry if this is 
> off topic.
> 

Okay - here's some straight dope in some of the Geography from a 
native.

1.  Scottish location is implied by a number of factors.  The general 
situation and Hogwarts  itself - castle, JKR's connections with 
Scotland.  Lake (lochs?), mountains, remoteness - all spell Scotland 
to the British reader.  London is served by some 8 or so "main line" 
railway stations - ie those that serve trains to other cities in the 
UK.  Kings Cross is one a trio of stations in the north/east of 
Central London and the majority of the trains that run from Kings 
Cross go to the north east of England and Eastern Scotland.  I 
suspect JKR chose this station because of her familiarity with it - 
trains from this station go to Edinburgh where she lived.  Takes 
about 5 hours to Edinburgh from Kings Cross.  As Hogwarts seems to be 
set in a much more northern part of Scotland than Edinburgh (I would 
kind of guess the more southern Highlands) I estimate a 6 - 7 hour 
train journey.

2.  Surrey.  The UK is divided into regions called counties.  Surrey 
is the county directly to the south of London.  Home counties listees 
should forgive me, but there is a kind of implication that Surrey is 
rather bourgeois and suburban - in a very particular way.  In short, 
an ideal location for people with the kind of values of the Dursleys.

3.  Ministries.  The standard place in London is Whitehall in London -
 this is very central and is quite near the Houses of Parliament.   I 
haven't got my books with me but I suspect the MoM will be somewhere 
near.  

4.  Ottery St Catchpole.  This has been picked over before to my 
knowledge.  There is a village in Devon (SW England) called Ottery St 
Mary.  Ottery St Catchpole could be anywhere - but I suspect from the 
name it is southern.  Northern names tend to owe a lot to the norse. 

OK  - this is probably far more information than you want or need.  
It would be very helpful for someone to draw up a Harry Potter map.  
I always found the maps in Tolkein so very useful in giving a sense 
of place.

Listees might know if the Lexicon has any further information - this 
is generally where I turn for help with these issues.

June






From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au  Tue Sep 30 11:34:51 2003
From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 11:34:51 -0000
Subject: Will Draco come back?
In-Reply-To: <bla4s7+9o57@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blbpor+finl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81912

--- "Lisa Cocchiarale" <lisaeckleycocchiarale> wrote: (snipped)
> --- "meriaugust" <meriaugust> wrote: (snipped)
>  
> > if Lucius Malfoy is in Azkaban (as stated in the end of OotP) 
> > will Narcissa, Harry of course, want to send Draco back to 
> > Hogwarts for sixth and seventh year? Draco allready wanted 
> > to go to Durmstrang, so could this be the straw that breaks the 
> > camels back? Will we lose Draco whom we all love to hate? 
> > Just a thought. Any ideas? 
> 
> does L's incarceration deprive him of control of his wealth? If
>  not, then Narcissa may be bound to follow his wishes, whatever 
> that might mean for our dear boy Draco.

Sirius Black had Galleons to buy Harry the Firebolt while he was an 
escapee - Sirius will not loose a Knut for being in Azkaban. 

Draco can and will return -but - 

Will Crabbe and Goyle return?

Not only did their dad's go to Azkaban, but they may have had 
problems with their OWLS in year 5.    ~aussie~




From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Tue Sep 30 12:10:09 2003
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 12:10:09 -0000
Subject: Weasley accents/regional clues
In-Reply-To: <blasl3+kpol@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blbrr2+a78i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81913

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jeffl1965" <jeffl1965 at h...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003" 
> <carolynwhite2 at a...> wrote:
> > Also, on the Devon location, I've pointed out before (and so have 
> > others) that it would be difficult for Muggle taxis to drive to 
> Kings 
> > Cross from Devon in the few hours described in GoF (they leave 
> about 
> > 8.30 am maybe, and get there in time for the 11am train). It 
would 
> > take more like 4-5 hours, and that's assuming the London traffic 
> was 
> > not too bad (and it always is - trust me, I live in London !!).
> 
> 
>    Jeff:
> 
>    Is it possible that they took a portkey first? Since Arthur has 
to 
> go to work in London, wouldn't there be one nearby that would take 
> him somewhere in London, then they could take a taxi to the 
station? 
> I know he could take a broom or use floo powder, but I don't recall 
> any mention of that.
> 
(Carolyn again):

No, not on that one occasion, which is going back to school in GoF. 
All the other times they had some sort of magic help, but this time 
Molly ordered some muggle taxis from the village to take them. Arthur 
had had to go off and sort out the little local difficulty with Moody 
and his dustbins.

Another reason for thinking they don't live so far from London as 
Devon is that the cost of hiring 3 muggle taxis from Devon to London 
would simply be prohibitively expensive, and they are a poor family. 
The cost would run into ???s. I think it would only be feasible if 
they lived say half an hour to an hour away from Kings Cross. 
Normally of course, the adults apparate to wherever, so location is 
not important (sigh, wish I could apparate........)

Because of the hills mentioned near The Burrow (eg Stoatshead Hill), 
this would indicate a location either to the north or north-west of 
London - Herts or Bucks, or maybe Hants. All of these counties have 
quite large patches of wooded, hilly and quite rural countryside, 
despite their closeness to London. However, living in these counties 
would not have given Ron much of an accent, northern or otherwise.

Also, another clue is that it seems to take them an hour or so to get 
to the Burrow from Little Whinging in Surrey when Harry is rescued in 
the flying car. This might be about right to fly north and west 
around London into say, the Chiltern hills.

Of course, JKR may not have thought this through in so much detail as 
we have, and just randomly picked a Devon-y sounding location because 
she liked it ! 




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Tue Sep 30 12:12:02 2003
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 12:12:02 -0000
Subject: Crying wolf?
In-Reply-To: <blamdu+bg4a@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blbrui+cfto@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81914

Melody quoted JKR:
> > 
> > CoS, Ch 17, Pg 311 (American Hb)
> > 
> > "...on the other hand, big, blundering Hagrid, in trouble every 
> other
> > week, trying to raise werewolf cubs under his bed..."

and Pippin cited her:

> Er, actually, we have JKR's word that this is slander, 
> 
> http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/2000/100
> 0-livechat-barnesnoble.html
> 
> backed up by Fantastic Beasts which also states that the only 
> way for someone to become a werewolf is by being bitten.

and what a strange slander it is.  If Riddle meant it seriously, he 
expects us to believe that Hagrid, at age 13, kept children under 
his bed.  5% of the time, they would be cute puppies, but, for the 
rest, they would be babies, or even children as old as Hagrid 
himself.  In a Hogwarts dorm that would be a matter for comment, to 
say the least.  The slashfic alone would require a new extension to 
Madam Pince's domain.

Perhaps Riddle deliberately put forward something palpably absurd as 
an indication of how stupid he thought Hagrid.

David




From pennylin at swbell.net  Tue Sep 30 13:19:27 2003
From: pennylin at swbell.net (Penny Linsenmayer)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 13:19:27 -0000
Subject: They are children's books (Was: the heart of it all)
In-Reply-To: <003301c386f9$e25c8a00$a658aacf@texas.net>
Message-ID: <blbvsv+dihf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81915

Hi -

> > > Amanda: They were and are not written for children. They were
> > written to express
> > > someone's vision, to tell a story.
> >
> > Golly: I'm sorry but I don't believe that one bit.  Every decent
> > children's writer aims to tell a good story and express a vision.
> > That is what being creative is about. Are children's authors less
> > creative or inferior storytellers?
> 
> Amanda:
> Well, the answer to that would be "No," and I'm really sorry you don't
> believe it, but I wasn't stating my opinion. I was stating what the
author
> herself has said. Doubt her if you will, but I choose to believe the
woman
> simply wanted to write a story and it was seized by the marketers. I
mean,
> if they made her invent a middle name so she'd have initials, they could
> decide who the "target audience" was. But Jo Rowling herself has
said she
> did not aim it at any particular age group.

Penny:

I read a good bit of children's literature myself, Golly.  And,
absolutely, yes, any decent children's author is aiming to tell a good
story.  But, the "target audience" chosen by the publisher's marketing
squad and the age of the principal protagonist do not transform these
books into the realm of children's literature.  I daresay that books
like "Oliver Twist," and "To Kill a Mockingbird" might be marketed to
children if they were published today, but that doesn't transform
*them* into children's literature either.  

Golly:

<<<<<<<The first book was perfectly suited for children 8-11
(depending on 
reading skill). I read books for that age group all the time and 
enjoy many of them. HP is hardly unsual in any respect. It is 
delightful and skillfully achieved. OOTP was probably written for 13-
15 year olds.>>>>>>>>>>>>

There is a difference between being *accessible to* and being *written
for* ... for starters.  I might, er, at this point quote Stephen
King's review of OoP, which makes my point so much more eloquently
than I would:

King (from a review of OoP in Entertainment Weekly magazine, published
July 11, 2003):

[quote] A more interesting question is when did Ms. Rowling stop
writing for children and start writing them for everyone, as Mark
Twain did when he moved from Tom Sawyer to Huckleberry Finn and Lewis
Carroll did when he moved from Alice in Wonderland to Through the
Looking Glass?  I'm guessing it was a process -- mostly subconscious
-- that began with volume 3 (Azkaban) and hit warp speed in volume 4
(Goblet of Fire).  By the time we finish The Order of the Phoenix,
with its extraordinary passages of fear and despair, the distinction
between "children's literature" and plain old "literature" has ceased
to exist.  The latest Potter adventure could be The Catcher in the
Rye, minus the dirty words and the drinking ...... or maybe just the
dirty words: Just what the hell is butterbeer, anyway?[/quote]

> Golly: > Too bad you're embarrassed to like a children's/Young Adult
book,
> but
> > I'm not.  Nor am I embarrassed to like the others that I do.
> 
> Amanda: I must say I take offense at this. I'm not embarrassed at all to
> like a "young adult" book. I have Lloyd Alexander, Susan Cooper, and
C.S.
> Lewis on my personal bookshelf as we type.
> 
> I fail to see why my crediting what an author believes about her
work, makes
> me embarrassed about an entire genre.

Penny: Yes, Golly, you do seem to be taking the notion that Rowling
isn't writing "children's literature" as an affront to the entire
genre, which is a leap in logic.  I love children's literature.  As I
say, I read a good bit of it.  I don't, however, believe that HP falls
into that genre neatly.  I agree with King: we're seeing a gradual
shift from juvenile (books 1-2) to young adult (books 3-4) to just
"literature" that defies a specific label.  

> Amanda: > > In fact, I will be interested to see how the releases of
Books 6
> > and 7 are
> > > handled; to me, at least, the frantic child-focused activity seemed
> > on the
> > > edge of inappropriate for Book 5. I think subsequent books will
> > take the
> > > story out of the realm where stuffed owls, paper wizard hats,
> > getting
> > > "sorted," and making wands are appropriate marketing tools.
> >
> > Golly: Why do you denegrate that which so many fell in love with the
> > first time around.  Rowling put in what you call "marketing tools".
> > They were a part of this creation.  They were what readers of all
> > ages enjoyed. I enjoyed the jolly sorting and the little details.  I
> > enjoyed watching Harry struggle at his lessons and learning what was
> > in a wand.
> 
> Amanda: I do not denigrate the elements of fantasy in Rowling's
world. What
> I said was that their use to promote further books to the original
age group
> they were marketed for is likely to become more and more
inappropriate as
> the themes in the books mature. I consider it to be a bit misleading.

Penny: I agree with Amanda.  I think the general reading public
probably has realized what so many of us adult fans have seen coming
since PoA: these books are no longer strictly classified as
"children's literature."  Note: this does not mean that I think
"children's literature" is less worthy of adult attention or scholarly
treatment or anything else ...... it just means that I don't think HP
qualifies as part of this genre any longer, if it ever did.  

At the "Are They Children's Book" panel at Nimbus - 2003, one member
of the audience noted that she was offended that Rowling hadn't
"warned" the public that the tone of this latest book would be so
"different."  Well, actually, she *did* warn the public in several
post-GoF interviews, but leaving that aside, this certainly emphasizes
the point that many people really do recognize that the series has
moved beyond the boundaries placed on it by Bloomsbury's original
marketing team.

> > GOLLY: Sorry but, BULL!  By saying this you denegrate all the
> > wonderful writers who say the exact same thing and are proud to admit
> > they are children's authors.  Rowling admits that HP are children's
> > books. She simply said she doesn't write from a frame of mind where
> > she writes what she thinks kids would like.  She is writing a story
> > that excited her.  As do all authors.
> 
> Amanda: Explain how this differs from what I said. You just said
what I did:
> she doesn't write for children; she's writing her vision, the story she
> wants to write.

Penny: I agree that Rowling is writing the story that's in her head. 
But, I disagree that she herself has or would say that her books are
"children's books."  

Part of the problem, and I don't think you would be guilty of this
Golly ...... but part of the problem is that people who make the
argument that the HP books are children's literature do so in the
context of limiting what Rowling will do in terms of plot, themes and
so on.  In other words, the argument goes something like: "Well,
Rowling won't do *that.*  Good grief, these are *just* children's
books after all."  I find this attitude to be far more dismissive of
children's lit as a genre than my own belief (that the HP series
doesn't fall into that genre at all).

Golly:  

<<<<<HP has a range of age groups hovering around Potter's age, 
which increases.>>>>>>>>

Yes, but this is a series of books that will eventually all be sitting
on the shelf, available to the reader.  Does the parent of the 8 year
old who wants to read Books 1 and 2 say, "Well, go ahead and plow on
the rest of the way?"  Or, does the parent say, "You can read the
first two, but you're not going to get as much enjoyment out of the
later ones until you're older?"  Or what, precisely?  Yes, the current
HP audience is aging right along with Harry.  But, er, this won't
*always* be the case.  It presents an interesting conundrum in my
mind.  And, as Amanda pointed out, staging the release parties and
such with activities targeted at 8-12 year olds was very inappropriate
in my mind.   


Penny




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Tue Sep 30 13:34:47 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 13:34:47 -0000
Subject: Geography and accents; further thoughts
In-Reply-To: <blbvsv+dihf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blc0pn+m1s3@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81916

As one of the English posters on the group, I thought I would try to 
draw together some of the  details about geography and accents which 
have been mentioned, largely for the benefit of non-UK readers.

London is difficult to define because there are historic definitions 
and modern administrative definitions.

Greater London could be considered to be largely the area within the 
M25 London Orbital motorway which would be at a radius of about 15-18 
miles from Charing Cross, the traditional point for measurement. 
Central London is actually made up of two cities, The City of 
Westminster which contains the administrative centres and shopping 
areas and the City of London which houses the financial institutions 
and places like the Tower of London and St.Pauls Cathedral.

When the railways were being developed, wealthy landowners 
and "carriage folk" opposed them coming close into the centre so that 
most of the termini form a ring perhaps a mile to a mile and a half 
out. Kings Cross is the terminus for the East Coast Main Line which 
goes from London to York, Newcastle and Edinburgh and lies at the 
north-east corner of this ring (and is directly next to St.Pancras 
station which is used for the exterior shots in the HP films). So the 
evidence for Hogwarts being in the north starts there. The flying car 
travels over purplish (heather)moors which makes me think of North 
Yorkshire and the great city (York/Edinburgh/Glasgow?). Additionally 
of course, we know that the winters are very cold with a lot of snow 
which does seem to point to Scotland. In my case, it may be movie 
contamination because I saw the films before I read the books and 
several of the rail shots are taken on the Glenfinnan viaduct which 
is on the West Highland Line west of Fort William. Again, there seems 
to be a sense of remoteness which suggests a large, sparsely 
populated area which would match the Highlands.

The UK is divided into sizeable administrative districts called 
counties. Surrey roughly occupies the south-west quadrant south of 
the Thames and outside the Greater London border up to about 35 miles 
from Charing Cross. It used to extend further into the centre but the 
changes in Greater London in 1965 took part of it away. (When I 
started teaching near Wimbledon in 1961, I was a Surrey employee. I 
became an employee of the London Borough of Merton without moving 
school). Little Whinging obviously doesn't exist but seems to fit the 
pattern of mid-Surrey in being a genteel suburban road made up of 
Pete Seegar's "little boxes"!

One or two accent points. Matthew Lewis, who plays Neville in the 
films,  certainly does not have a Liverpudlian accent. My first 
reaction, having spoken with a Lancastrian accent myself as a kid 
was "He's either Lancashire or Yorkshire". Checking the IMDB website, 
he is from Leeds in Yorkshire. Seamus is obviously Irish -  it's a 
good Irish name. Tom Felton has what appears to be a South-Eastern 
accent, possibly the "Estuary" accent I referred to yesterday. He was 
certainly born in London. Whether you project this onto Draco as a 
result or not is open to speculation.

On the question of Scots accents and pupils at the Hogwarts, bear in 
mind that the pupils and staff are in a boarding school and will be 
rather isolated from their surroundings; I  wouldn't expect them to 
develop Scots accents. 





From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Tue Sep 30 13:47:42 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 13:47:42 -0000
Subject: Will Draco come back? & Character development
In-Reply-To: <blb9qh+3e6v@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blc1hu+cbag@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81917

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jakedjensen" <jakejensen at h...> 
wrote:
<snip> 
> I suspect that Malfoy will return to Hogwarts.  He does still have 
an 
> important role to play.  He is the Snape of his generation.  And, 
> just like Snape, I feel sympathy for Draco.  From the moment we met 
> Draco he has shown to be intelligent, athletic, clever, and a good 
> leader . . . however, he is also the byproduct of a disfunctional 
> home.  There is an important line in OotP that I believe applies to 
> Draco.  DD, when talking about Kreacher, says, "Kreacher is what he 
> has been made by wizards, Harry." (p. 832, OotP) Draco, too, is 
what 
> he has been made by wizards (especially his father).  I think, in 
the 
> end, Draco will go through a transformation.  Most likely, one of 
> the "good" characters will make the first move (early money is on 
> Hermione, but never count out Luna or Harry to throw a curveball). 
> Remember, regardless of how poorly he did it, he did originally 
offer 
> Harry friendship (PS/SS).  I think JKR will bring him around.  
<snip>

Jen: 
Draco continues to be one-dimensional, seemingly influenced only by 
Lucius and his pure-blood indoctrination. Yet this character is the 
proverbial gold mine waiting to be dicovered--I want to see some 
rebellion! Draco's had other influences in his life now, seen a few 
things that hopefully give him pause, yet he's still sneering and 
attempting to thwart 'Potter'.

I guess his character may never expand beyond that. Draco reminds me 
of Vernon--they are both essentially frozen in their Book 1 
characterizations. 

For me, OOTP is about Harry beginning to view the WW less in 
black/white terms and more in shades of gray.  Institutions and 
characters are shown in a different light. Even a phrase or two tells 
us Harry is noticing people have different sides:

Petunia--"And all of a sudden, for the very first time in his life, 
Harry fully appreciated that Aunt Petunia was his mother's 
sister....All he knew was that he was not the only person in the room 
who had an inkling of what Lord Voldemort being back might mean." 
(OOTP, US, chap. 2, p. 38).

Dudley--"....despite the sense of numb dread that had settled on 
Harry since the arrival of the first owl, he felt a certain 
curiosity. Dementors caused a person to relive the worst moments of 
their life....What would spoiled, pampered, bullying Dudley have been 
forced to hear? (OOTP, US, chap. 2, p. 30).

Snape & James--"...it was that {Harry} knew how it felt to be 
humiliated in the middle of a circle of onlookers, knew exactly how 
Snape had felt as his father taunted him, and that judging from what 
he had just seen, his father had been every bit as arrogant as Snape 
had always told him." (OOTP, chap. 28, p. 650).

Harry's new insights about others go on and on--Sirius, the MOM, 
Neville, even Ron when they are by the lake and Harry notices a touch 
of arrogance in the way Ron flips his hair, so much like James used 
to do.

But not Draco. So either that's all we're going to get, or there will 
be a bang towards the end when Draco finally breaks free from 
Lucius.  I'm voting for that one!

Jen






From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Tue Sep 30 13:55:02 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (B Arrowsmith)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 14:55:02 +0100
Subject: Crying wolf?
Message-ID: <B0141262-F34D-11D7-8E21-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81918

Here we go again.
Some rapid responses from posters (that's nice!) but IMO some of them 
are in auto-mode (not so nice).

Most make the same points as objections, so I'll take the first in line 
(Fawkes970) as the exemplar.

Fawkes(me): I would like to see the canon where they say hagrid
raises werewolf cubs under his bed......


Kneasy:
OK, this has been confirmed as being in the text by Melody (81875).
But, as Pippin points out (81885) JKR said in interview that this is a 
slander. So be it; her word is law. But it would have been useful if it 
had been denied in the text. How many other statements or comments are 
similarly untrue without any textual hint that they are false? 
Something else to worry about.

 >
Fawkes: They never say he isnt effected. Of course he is effected,
and he is also a fully trained wizard who has already been a member
of the Order. You think he wouldnt know the Patronus? the patronus
is why he wasnt effected on the train, and for the scene with all
the dementors at the end of PoA: he wasnt there- he was in the woods as 
a werewolf.
 >

Kneasy:
It's the train I'm on about. (PoA pp 65-67 UK ed.) In this episode 
Lupin does not produce a patronus until late in the encounter. The 
carriage goes dark; confusion; Lupin produces a handful of flames which 
illuminate the carriage. These are still in his hand when the Dementor 
appears. Harry passes out. Lupin then steps over Harry, approaching the 
Dementor and *talks* to it. It is only when it doesn't go that he 
produces a patronus. The Dementor has no effect on him at all, 
according to the text.

 >
Fawkes: we have been over this many a time. Lupin is in his office
while the entire scene with Padfoot on the school grounds takes
place. He is looking at the map and sees Sirius' name on it. First
he wants to go and get sirius, however he notices a fifth member
with them: Peter. Without even thinking he knows what is going on
and has to get there to find out the entire story w/o peter or
sirius being hurt to the point where they cannot defend themselves.
That simple.
 >

Kneasy:Yes, this has been picked over many times, but contrary opinions 
are what this site thrives on. Additionally, I can't remember an 
occasion when the listers have managed to second-guess JKR when she 
goes into misdirection mode. I'm keeping my options open on this one.
Yes, he sees Sirius and Peter on the Marauders Map, at least while they 
are within the grounds of Hogwarts.
At that time he has no idea that Sirius had transferred his Secret 
Keeper duties to Peter (PoA p 252 UK  ed.). No one has. Yet the first 
thing he does after disarming Harry is to put the words into Sirius' 
mouth. All Sirius has to do is nod. No demands as to what's happening, 
no questions. No argument, persuasion or exposition needed; the later 
questioning of Peter is redundant. Lupin *knows*.
Just seeing the names on the map would not have given him this 
immediate grasp  of the situation. The first natural reaction would be 
a toss-up between "Sirius! Harry's in danger!" and "Peter! He's not 
dead after all! What the hell is going on?" Remember, at this stage 
Peter still is assumed to be an innocent victim. So he rushes off, from 
his office to the Shack.  Without telling anyone.
But somehow he has  all the answers, just from the map. Likely?

 >
Fawkes: almost every name given represents the character being
portrayed ast that time. Hence, lupin is given his name for being a
werewolf in the story. You are taking it way too far to suspect his
parents named him when really: JKR did so just cool it with that
one, thanks.
 >

Kneasy:
It still  bothers me. Yes, we get character hints from some names; but 
Remus Lupin isn't a hint, it's a screaming neon sign. Yet he does not 
fulfill the preconception of how a werewolf is expected  to behave.
In the original post I mention the Werewolf Register and that Remus 
should be on it. I had hoped that a poster would pick up on this, but 
no-one has. (Wake up at the back, there!) So it's up to me to annoy 
some more.
The only reason to have a WwR is to keep track of werewolves. Does 
anybody suppose that no checks are made on those listed? That in all 
the years Remus was at school no-one in the know asked where he was? 
But if he's  entered under an assumed name there would be no indication 
that he was at Hogwarts, so avoiding a fuss.
A supposition, yes, but a reasonable one.

"Just cool it" huh? No questions allowed - is that what you mean?
Sorry, can't oblige.
In five books we've been presented with a series of puzzles 
interspersed with plot twists. Now, Lupin may be good or bad; I'm not 
absolutely certain myself. But I do believe he is part of a plot twist. 
Somewhere in a future book will be a revelation. Looking for clues and 
pointers is part of the game. Sitting tight and accepting the 
prevailing consensus is boring. If you don't want to play, fair enough. 
Leave it to those who do. I'm quite happy to accept that I may be 
wrong, I've said that before. Maybe some others aren't so relaxed about 
it. Sad for them.

Kneasy

P.S. to Laura-
Trashed Sirius? In this case the trashing is in the eye of the beholder 
IMO. Sorry if you see it that way. If a dissection of a character's own 
words exposes apparent gaps and anomalies, don't blame the messenger, 
send a stiff note to JKR asking her what she's up to.






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From tim_regan82 at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 30 14:14:06 2003
From: tim_regan82 at hotmail.com (Tim Regan)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 14:14:06 -0000
Subject: How many Rons per Hermione - numerical analysis of Ron's alleged decline
In-Reply-To: <blb798+9ssl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blc33e+cc28@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81919

Hi All,

--- In HPforGrownups  "Amy Z" wrote:
> The real purpose of my post is to induct Dumbledad into the 
> League of  Obsessed Nitpickers.  

Oh how fantastic, I'm so proud, thank you Amy. Kate (my wife) felt 
that my numerical analysis of the text proved what a loony I was ? 
now it is official :-)

> Ben Jones burst on the scene with the legendary "incidences 
> of green and red" analysis of Ought One (messages #23407 
> and #23435).

Those posts are amazing; I'll embark on an update right away. I did 
the same for "wrapper" but I should have listed them in post 69520. 
I get the impression that Ben did his without any electronic aid. 
Very impressive.

> Er, now I have to justify posting this to the list, so let's see 
what 
> I can come up with.  Only that, as valuable as name-counting is, a 
> character's importance does not necessarily correlate neatly with 
the 
> frequency of his/her appearance.  At times it can be pointed up by 
> his/her conspicuous *absence*: viz. Hermione during her petrified 
> period in CoS, and Ron during his falling-out with Harry in GoF. 

Yes that's a very good point, though as far as I remember Ron is 
talked about a lot during his `absence' in GoF.

> I also wonder if the Ron/Hermione ratio is actually a bit weaker 
than 
> it appears because it is necessary for JKR to mention his name a 
bit 
> more often, due to male pronouns being ambiguous when Harry is 
around 

That's interesting, and probably true. It would imply that the word 
Hermione should get used more as Ginny and Luna appear in the story 
more. I'll test that with Book 6: Harry Potter and the Department of 
Statistics. Your comment also lead me to check the occurrence of the 
pronouns "he" and "she". Here are the results:

1) 6.98 He/Her in PS/SS
2) 5.69 He/Her in CoS
3) 5.80 He/Her in PoA
4) 4.30 He/Her in GoF
5) 3.20 He/Her in OotP

And here are the occurrences per page of the words "he" and "she"

1) 5.69 he/page, 0.82 she/page in SS
2) 4.49 he/page, 0.79 she/page in CoS
3) 4.75 he/page, 0.82 she/page in PoA
4) 5.43 he/page, 1.26 she/page in GoF
5) 5.81 he/page, 1.81 she/page in OotP

If you plot these, both show a similar absolute rate of increase 
over the last two books (i.e. he/page and she/page each grew by 0.5 
+/- 0.18 from Book 3 to Book 4 and from Book 4 to Book 5) but the 
percentage growth of she/page is amazing. The measure she/page grew 
by 54% from Book 3 to Book 4 and then by a further 44% from Book 4 
to Book 5! Perhaps JKR has been consciously responding to criticisms 
of the lack of female involvement in the books.

Cheers

Dumbledad







From yswahl at stis.net  Tue Sep 30 14:19:49 2003
From: yswahl at stis.net (samnanya)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 14:19:49 -0000
Subject: House Elfs - why DID Dobby help Harry?
In-Reply-To: <bl9shg+6khj@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blc3e5+gvub@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81920

president0084
--------------
Dobby left the Malfoy house to protect Harry Potter. JK has said 
nothing about Harry's family. But he must be from a pureblood family 
because Malfoy tried the make friends (on the train).<snip>
The hat wanted to put Harry in Slytherin (the Malfoys always go into 
Slytherin). So I think Malfoy and Potters are related.

samnanya
--------------
I dont think that proves anything about Harry being a pureblood - 
especially since his mother was a mudblood, and the whole magic 
protection charm would be null and void if Lily was not Harry's 
mother.
I think that Malfoy acted under the principle of "keep your friends 
close and your enemies closer".
That said, I never did understand why Dobby got involved with Harry in 
the first place. Winky defended Barty Crouch even though he was 
despicable just because he was her master. Why would Dobby "desert" 
the Malfoy family? 
My apologies if I am missing something obvious.....




From yswahl at stis.net  Tue Sep 30 14:37:32 2003
From: yswahl at stis.net (samnanya)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 14:37:32 -0000
Subject: Will Draco come back? & Character development
In-Reply-To: <blc1hu+cbag@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blc4fc+850l@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81921

Draco come back ? Maybe as a ferret....

JKR has given not one iota of a clue to indicate that Draco will 
change, and numerous instances showing where he has not. Nor has he 
learned from experience, still trying to blindside Harry with 
disasterous results yet again at end of OOP. Draco, Goyle and Crabble 
have not changed at all since SS. 
That said, it is LETHAL for the credibility of a story for a character 
to abruptly change without explanation or predictive plot points. That 
is what makes a story laughable, and JKR is too good to allow that to 
happen. Time is running out for Good|Draco to emerge.
Can anyone ferret out a sign of change in Malfoy?

samnanya





--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" <stevejjen at e...> 
wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jakedjensen" <jakejensen at h...
> 
> wrote:
> <snip> 
> > I suspect that Malfoy will return to Hogwarts.  He does still have 
> an 
> > important role to play.  He is the Snape of his generation.  And, 
> > just like Snape, I feel sympathy for Draco.  From the moment we 
met 
> > Draco he has shown to be intelligent, athletic, clever, and a good 
> > leader . . . however, he is also the byproduct of a disfunctional 
> > home.  There is an important line in OotP that I believe applies 
to 
> > Draco.  DD, when talking about Kreacher, says, "Kreacher is what 
he 
> > has been made by wizards, Harry." (p. 832, OotP) Draco, too, is 
> what 
> > he has been made by wizards (especially his father).  I think, in 
> the 
> > end, Draco will go through a transformation.  Most likely, one of 
> > the "good" characters will make the first move (early money is on 
> > Hermione, but never count out Luna or Harry to throw a curveball). 
> > Remember, regardless of how poorly he did it, he did originally 
> offer 
> > Harry friendship (PS/SS).  I think JKR will bring him around.  
> <snip>
> 
> Jen: 
> Draco continues to be one-dimensional, seemingly influenced only by 
> Lucius and his pure-blood indoctrination. Yet this character is the 
> proverbial gold mine waiting to be dicovered--I want to see some 
> rebellion! Draco's had other influences in his life now, seen a few 
> things that hopefully give him pause, yet he's still sneering and 
> attempting to thwart 'Potter'.
> 
> I guess his character may never expand beyond that. Draco reminds me 
> of Vernon--they are both essentially frozen in their Book 1 
> characterizations. 
> Jen




From entropymail at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 14:52:18 2003
From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 14:52:18 -0000
Subject: Crying wolf?
In-Reply-To: <B0141262-F34D-11D7-8E21-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <blc5b2+5lgt@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81922

 "...on the other hand, big, blundering Hagrid, in trouble every other
 week, trying to raise werewolf cubs under his bed..."  -- Tom Riddle.

Pippin: ... we have JKR's word that this is slander, backed up by
Fantastic Beasts which also states that the only way for someone to
become a werewolf is by being bitten. <much snipping>

and David: ...and what a strange slander it is. If Riddle meant it
seriously, he expects us to believe that Hagrid, at age 13, kept
children under his bed. 5% of the time, they would be cute puppies,
but, for the rest, they would be babies... <snippage once again>



now me, Entropy:  

Tom Riddle may very well have been slandering Hagrid when he said that
Hagrid was raising werewolf cubs, but there's probably more to it than
that (isn't there *always*?). 

Riddle is, after all, still a student at Hogwarts.  He has yet to
become the evil, bitter, and  powerful wizard we have come to know and
love.  He's still a teenager, after all.  JKR may be showing us, with
this brief glimpse into the mind of teenage!Voldemort, that Voldemort
was not born with the knowledge of the Dark which he came to embrace
later in his life.  He was not evil, nor powerful, nor
bitter...although those traits were certainly beginning to raise their
ugly heads. He was just a fallible boy who had a big chip on his
shoulder, and who still had lots to learn about the WW. Fits in nicely
with the questions raised lately about  destiny vs. free will.

and Kneasy:
... JKR said in interview that this is a slander. So be it; her word
is law. But it would have been useful if it had been denied in the
text. How many other statements or comments are similarly untrue
without any textual hint that they are false? Something else to worry
about. <snipped for your convenience>

and finally, me, Entropy, again:

In a way, Riddle's statement *is* denied in the text; it just happens
a bit later, when we meet Remus Lupin and learn a bit about his
"condition".


:: Entropy ::




From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Tue Sep 30 15:02:09 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 15:02:09 -0000
Subject: Weasley accents/regional clues
In-Reply-To: <blbrr2+a78i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blc5th+8fn7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81923

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003" 
<carolynwhite2 at a...> wrote:

<snipped>

> >    Jeff:
> > 
> >    Is it possible that they took a portkey first? Since Arthur 
has 
> to 
> > go to work in London, wouldn't there be one nearby that would 
take 
> > him somewhere in London, then they could take a taxi to the 
> station? 
> > I know he could take a broom or use floo powder, but I don't 
recall 
> > any mention of that.
> > 
> (Carolyn again):
> 
> No, not on that one occasion, which is going back to school in GoF. 
> All the other times they had some sort of magic help, but this time 
> Molly ordered some muggle taxis from the village to take them. 
Arthur 
> had had to go off and sort out the little local difficulty with 
Moody 
> and his dustbins.
> 

  Jeff:

    Ah, that's true. Me and my faulty memory. :P  Maybe they're not 
that close to Devon, but it's just used as reference?



> Another reason for thinking they don't live so far from London as 
> Devon is that the cost of hiring 3 muggle taxis from Devon to 
London 
> would simply be prohibitively expensive, and they are a poor 
family. 
> The cost would run into ???s. I think it would only be feasible if 
> they lived say half an hour to an hour away from Kings Cross. 
> Normally of course, the adults apparate to wherever, so location is 
> not important (sigh, wish I could apparate........)
> 

  Jeff:

    Yes, that's why I was thinking that maybe they meant they took 
those taxis into town, portkeyed then took other taxis, but we 
weren't told that. I know it sounds silly, but one of JKR's worst 
habits is skipping about and not giving enough details about things 
and passages of time. That's why I was suggesting that. I'm not 
totally mental, I think. ;)


> Because of the hills mentioned near The Burrow (eg Stoatshead 
Hill), 
> this would indicate a location either to the north or north-west of 
> London - Herts or Bucks, or maybe Hants. All of these counties have 
> quite large patches of wooded, hilly and quite rural countryside, 
> despite their closeness to London. However, living in these 
counties 
> would not have given Ron much of an accent, northern or otherwise.
> 

  Jeff:

    Yes, I'd forgotten about the hills. :) I had it in my mind there 
weren't that many there, I guess, and that they might've even been 
hidden from the locals, so that they wouldnt want to see what was on 
the other side, and therefore not see the Burrow. ;)
    Are you sure about the accent? I mean, during the dark years, 
could they have moved around a bit? I mean, wouldn't that also 
explain the age gap? I'm sure the land they live on has been in the 
family for generations, since it's quite large and so far away from 
the village, but I was just pondering if they moved a bit, which 
could explain the accents. Plus, since we don't know if there is a 
school for them prior to Hogwarts, there is a chance they picked up 
accents from whatever school they went to, or new village. :)



> Also, another clue is that it seems to take them an hour or so to 
get 
> to the Burrow from Little Whinging in Surrey when Harry is rescued 
in 
> the flying car. This might be about right to fly north and west 
> around London into say, the Chiltern hills.
> 
> Of course, JKR may not have thought this through in so much detail 
as 
> we have, and just randomly picked a Devon-y sounding location 
because 
> she liked it !

  Jeff:

    Intresting. Yes, I'd once again forgotten about the direction. :P 
I guess since I keep reading on so many sites that the Burrow is in 
the south, that I can't even pay attention to the few clues we 
have. ;) <sigh> Oh, woe is me. ;)



  Jeff





From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk  Tue Sep 30 15:17:15 2003
From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 15:17:15 -0000
Subject: Crying wolf?
In-Reply-To: <B0141262-F34D-11D7-8E21-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <blc6ps+8gse@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81924

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith <arrowsmithbt at b...>
wrote:

> At that time he has no idea that Sirius had transferred his Secret 
> Keeper duties to Peter (PoA p 252 UK  ed.). No one has. Yet the first 
> thing he does after disarming Harry is to put the words into Sirius' 
> mouth. All Sirius has to do is nod. No demands as to what's happening, 
> no questions. No argument, persuasion or exposition needed; the later 
> questioning of Peter is redundant. Lupin *knows*.
> Just seeing the names on the map would not have given him this 
> immediate grasp  of the situation. The first natural reaction would be 
> a toss-up between "Sirius! Harry's in danger!" and "Peter! He's not 
> dead after all! What the hell is going on?" Remember, at this stage 
> Peter still is assumed to be an innocent victim. So he rushes off, from 
> his office to the Shack.  Without telling anyone.
> But somehow he has  all the answers, just from the map. Likely?
> 

I think you're leaving out an important step of Lupin's thought
process here. 
"But then[...] why hasn't he shown himself before now? Unless [...] he
was the one...unless you switched...without telling me?"

If Peter's conscience had been clean, why would he have gone into
hiding as a rat, for twelve years? Not even telling his family and
friends that he was alive? The remaining Death Eaters would have been
far more upset about being double-crossed than about the heroic
capture of a spy.

Mme Rosmerta was commenting on how unlikely it was that Sirius would
have joined Voldemort, I wonder if other people did so too or if they
just accepted it. Did Remus?

Alshain, just wondering




From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com  Tue Sep 30 15:23:45 2003
From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 15:23:45 -0000
Subject: Geography and accents; further thoughts
In-Reply-To: <blc0pn+m1s3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blc761+tcl8@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81925

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" 
<gbannister10 at a...> wrote:

> 
> One or two accent points. Matthew Lewis, who plays Neville in the 
> films,  certainly does not have a Liverpudlian accent. My first 
> reaction, having spoken with a Lancastrian accent myself as a kid 
> was "He's either Lancashire or Yorkshire". Checking the IMDB 
website, 
> he is from Leeds in Yorkshire. Seamus is obviously Irish -  it's a 
> good Irish name. Tom Felton has what appears to be a South-Eastern 
> accent, possibly the "Estuary" accent I referred to yesterday. He 
was 
> certainly born in London. Whether you project this onto Draco as a 
> result or not is open to speculation.
> 
   Jeff:
  
      Thanks for the info on Matthew. I wasn't sure and after the 
post about his accent, it reminded me that he almost had a lilt in 
his voice at times which was confusing me. But generally, his voice 
matches the character, since I do "hear" Nev as being very quiet when 
he speaks. Having a gram as he does, I don't think he'd be able to 
speak very loudly anyway, poor lad. As for Draco, again, he seems so 
posh, that I would expect him to be very proper and to speak more or 
less as Tom does. It's just that Tom doesn't stick his nose up in the 
air as much as I think Draco would. ;)




> On the question of Scots accents and pupils at the Hogwarts, bear 
in 
> mind that the pupils and staff are in a boarding school and will be 
> rather isolated from their surroundings; I  wouldn't expect them to 
> develop Scots accents.

   That makes sense. I've noticed that while the books don't seem to 
indicate that Oliver Wood is a scot and nobody mentions this on the 
list, how do they feel that he's been cast with a scot? Not that I 
don' like the actor. I think he's done a great job. I'm mad he's been 
cut from POA as I've been wanting to see him obsess over quidditch 
practice. ;)



  Jeff




From severusbook4 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 15:37:23 2003
From: severusbook4 at yahoo.com (severusbook4)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 15:37:23 -0000
Subject: Crying wolf?
In-Reply-To: <blae7c+qkeo@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blc7vj+dqbd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81926

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Melody" <Malady579 at h...> 
wrote:
> Kneasy: 
> >>In CoS Tom Riddle sneers at Hagrid for trying to raise them under
> >>his  bed. Odd that.
> 
> Fawkes: 
> >I would like to see the canon where they say hagrid raises 
werewolf
> >cubs under his bed......
> 
> 
> Me:
> 
> CoS, Ch 17, Pg 311 (American Hb)
> 
> "...on the other hand, big, blundering Hagrid, in trouble every 
other
> week, trying to raise werewolf cubs under his bed..."
> 
> 
> So it is there, but it is from the words of Riddle.  Granted, he is
> probably telling the truth since this was used against Hagrid to 
prove
> he was the person in charge of the death of Myrtle.  > 
> 
> Melody

Severus here:

Melody, I think that is just sarcasm, but it is fitting to use while 
talking about Hagrid, because of his afinity for dangerous 
creatures.  Werewolf cubs would be children for most of the month, 
now wouldn't they.  Hagrid does mention most of the creatures he has 
raised through out the books, but he never mentions werewolf cubs.
Just my mental meanderings.

Sevvie




From nansense at cts.com  Tue Sep 30 15:58:35 2003
From: nansense at cts.com (zesca)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 15:58:35 -0000
Subject: Jewish Goblins?
In-Reply-To: <blbk1b+km1r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blc97c+t3bv@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81927

Madeyemood: 
Bla, bla, bla
 it's easy to confuse an allusion to a certain type
of prejudice as 
buying into 
that prejudice. but, imho, they simply are not the same thing.

Laura, really starting to feel rather annoyed:
Now wait a minute here. I *never* accused anyone of prejudice-not
JKR, not 
Nemi and not Matt. 

Madeye:
Laura, I haven't been following the argument superclosely; my
comment 
wasn't specifically oriented to you. It was a general statement. 

What I've learned here today
avoid making sweeping
generalizations when 
the topic is sensitive.

> madeyemood
> there are a couple of other examples that leap to mind. in star
trek: deep 
space nine there was that culture of short people with big ears who
were 
obsessed with money...you know: the Quark character, the > grand
Negus, 
etc. 

Laura:
I'm going to assume that you are not familiar with the history of
European 
anti-semitism. 

Madeye:
Just the garden variety education of Hebrew school, plus the Tuchman
book I 
read ages ago and lots of quick and dirty survey type books. Oh, and
I read 
Michener's fictionalized version
what was that
called?
about a Tel in 
Israel; he creates a story pertaining to the artifacts found at each
architectural 
layer. I think that's where I got some of my most recent
information about the 
Crusades. I like reading Jewish stuff, fiction and non-, in a casual
way.

Laura:
Suffice it to say that if someone had wanted 
to create a very ugly sterotype of a Jew according to the images
popular in 
Europe up to the middle of the last century, they couldn't have come
much 
closer than the money-handling, ugly but smart, not-exactly-human
goblin. 
Which is *exactly* why I don't think JKR intended any such thing.

madeyemood: 
I don't exactly understand your argument here. Since it fits it
can't apply? And 
yet I hear people discussing something far more subtle than JKR set
out to 
disparage the jews in her creation of the goblin character. Rather it
seems to 
me that there are similarities that come to mind.
 
I'm not thinking that JKR necessarily intended anything at all
nasty (perhaps I 
should have been more clear!). Sometimes I think it's interesting
to note how 
otherness is conveyed.

The intensity of some of the responses to this topic remind me of the
gay 
thread. Perhaps subject matter that has so much of a charge really
isn't meant 
for a list of this size, unless the poster takes on being much more
careful 
about what s/he states.




> South Park, one of whose writer's is jewish, perpetuates scandalous
ideas 
about both the jews and the people dumb enough to judge them 
for being jewish. the coen brothers also did parodies of the jewish
studio 
head in Barton Fink.
> 
Laura:
Surely you know that members of a group joking about that group is
quite a 
different thing than non-members doing the same thing. 

Madeye:
Agreed.

Laura:
If the people from South Park or the Coen brothers choose to take
their jokes 
public, that still doesn't make it okay for non-Jews to say or do the
same 
things. 

Madeye:
In general, I agree. One thinks of the Rat Pack and how they
unknowingly, 
thinking they were showing Sammy affection, built some insensitive 
denigrating "jokes" into their act. For me, there are no
rules, although there 
are guidelines. A lot of it boils down to how I feel about the intent
and 
meaning of the person: my sense of JKR is that she's a cool gal
who isn't into 
putting anyone down as far as I can see; she may have internalized
ideas of 
the Jewish culture subconsciously; and such speculation is
necessarily 
fraught with vagueness.

> madeyemood:
> anyway, it is a shame that discussing an aspect of the book so
easily 
devolves into baseless accusation. alas, that's the way with tribal
injury. a lot 
of those wounds are still sore.

Laura:
I made no accusation and I'm quite irate that you say I did. 

Madeye:
Laura, why do you think I was suggesting that this was about you in 
particular?

Laura:
I'd suggest you go back and re-read my replies to Nemi and Matt. 

madeyemood:
as I said before: mea maxima culpa. With such a subject as this I
should have 
been much more careful. I don't have the time to go back and
finetoothcomb 
the earlier emails; still not knowing why you took this as a personal
attack.

Laura:
Let me point out to you that Jews are not a tribe. That's a title
imposed from 
outside. We consider ourselves a people. 

madeyemood:
my jewish friends and family often refer to ourselves with the T
word. Are we 
being politically incorrect? Perhaps it's like gays calling
themselves queer? 
I've wondered whether it goes back to the tribes of Israel. I
never knew that 
this term was considered derogatory.

Laura:
And maybe you can understand now why "a lot of those wounds are still 
sore." 

Madeye:
I think I've always had a sense of that one. 

Junediamanti wrote:
Actually, in mediaeval France, florentine bankers were a major force
until 
expelled by Philip IV - who also attacked the order of the Knights
Templars. 

Madeye:
Does this mean that the stuff I read about usury is incorrect? Or
correct but not 
as prevalent as the above?

Junediamanti:
Historical parallel is the ancient classical system of Permutatio -
this meant 
that money could be transferred by letters of credit - all your
wealth 
represented on a piece of paper. This was why state confiscation of
assets 
very rarely worked in Rome because this system enabled money to be
the 
most portable of assets. A similar system is current among the
Islamic world 
today and is a reason why it has been virtually impossible to sieze
any of the 
assets of Al Quaeda. 

Madeye:
Oh, june, now you're making me want to read about this. Monetary
systems 
spook me out. I'm under the impression that the US is insanely
leveraged 
right now, as is a lot of the world. But as usual, I don't really
know what I'm 
talking about and I digress.

If you have any books to recommend on the subject I'd be honored
to receive 
suggestions offlist.

Best,
madeye






From sydpad at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 16:03:06 2003
From: sydpad at yahoo.com (Sydney)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 16:03:06 -0000
Subject: Will Draco come back? & Character development
In-Reply-To: <blc4fc+850l@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blc9fq+89ms@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81928

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" <yswahl at s...> wrote:

>Time is running out for Good|Draco to emerge.
> Can anyone ferret out a sign of change in Malfoy?
> 

Zip.  Zero.  Zilch.  I'm REALLY curious to know where JKR is going
with Draco.  'Redemption Draco' seems totally unlikely to me;  mostly
because amongst all his other charming qualities he's an abject
coward.  It takes courage to change your mind and I haven't seen that
kind of inner strength from Draco at all.  

On the other hand it's weird of Rowling to keep the main nemesis
totally static, as Draco has been.  It's hard to see his function in
the story.  I mean, Draco's not even dangerous, which at least could
generate suspense;  not one of his Evil Plans has ever worked out.
He's not a particularily interesting psychological study (yet,
anyways).  He's not a warning of slippery slopes of any kind;  he was
a vicious little racist at 11 just as he is at 15.  He's just kind of
a moral punching bag.

On the other hand, two things encourage a certain kind of reader (like
me, for example), to look for some sort of change to come over him. 
First is Hagrid's line, I think in CoS, that "blood will tell", and
you should just write the kid off because he's a Malfoy.  For this to
turn out to be a sound view isn't very Rowling-esque to me, in fact
it's explicitly against the whole message of the book. 

The other is what originally seemed to be the Snape=Draco thing. I've
never thought them to be particularly similar characters;  I mean
they're both mean, but their motivations just feel totally different
to me.  Draco is spoilt, while Snape seems to have been neglected (no
canon, just an impression from general life experience). So this had
never struck me as a compelling argument.  Rowling's been encouraging
us to parallel them, but I think this is misdirection (like being
encouraged to think of Pettigrew as Neville-ish). 

Now though the James/Draco thing has been brought out, which is quite
a bit more startling!  Although James was obviously far better
material than Draco, and better brought up, they were both examples of
spoiled bullies.  James seems (at least that's a common speculation)
to have snapped out of it over the Prank, when he realized what real
harm could be.  

This is a nice sort of parallel and has the advantage of being
unexpected, but it doesn't hold very well either.  Draco's SEEN real
harm-- the Basilisk stalked the halls, Cedric died, and he's just
thrilled.  There isn't a scene of him looking disconcerted and then
reasserting his asshole-hood.  He looks downright aroused;  ugh.
>

Jake wrote:  

>>There is an important line in OotP that I believe applies 
> to 
> > > Draco.  DD, when talking about Kreacher, says, "Kreacher is what 
> he 
> > > has been made by wizards, Harry." (p. 832, OotP) Draco, too, is 
> > what 
> > > he has been made by wizards (especially his father).  I think, in 
> > the 
> > > end, Draco will go through a transformation.  Most likely, one of 
> > > the "good" characters will make the first move (early money is on 
> > > Hermione, but never count out Luna or Harry to throw a curveball). 
> > > Remember, regardless of how poorly he did it, he did originally 
> > offer 
> > > Harry friendship (PS/SS).  I think JKR will bring him around.  
> > <snip>

But is that the lesson, necessarily?  Kreacher was made what he was by
his upbringing (he would have been dusting his own mother's head
mounted on a wall, for pete's sake); but that doesn't change, well,
that that was what he was.  When someone is like that, compassionate
feelings and humane treatment are a moral duty;  but this isn't done
on the basis that he will than be 'brought around'; it's done because
he's human (well, you know what I mean).  Possibly better behaviour
will follow, but possibly not.  It's still a good idea to act in order
to limit the damage they can do.  

Anyhow, kind of a rambly post, but the way I see it there's limited
range of possiblities for why Draco is around:

-- he's just a plot device to represent negative traits, throw minor
obstacles into the path of Harry, and just be a good hissable villain

-- he's been a red herring to pattern Snape's and James' relationship on

-- I'm totally insensitive to his inner strengths, and he's going jump
out and surprise me in book 7 by saving the day.

-- he'll turn out to be a sad little snot, but will avoing being an
evil, sad little snot.  He's in the story to fill a slot on the
Spectrum of Evil, somewhere between Pettigrew and Lucius: 
self-seeking and harmful, but not needing to be destroyed.  


-- or what I think is most likely, he's a test for Harry.  Can he feel
bad for the way Draco was brought up, and let go of hatred, but still
fight him effectively if necessary?

Sydney, realizing she's contradicted herself several times in this
post, but hey, I contain multitudes...






From sylviablundell at aol.com  Tue Sep 30 16:07:09 2003
From: sylviablundell at aol.com (sylviablundell2001)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 16:07:09 -0000
Subject: Weasleys' accents
Message-ID: <blc9nd+mddh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81929

I really hate to say this (and possibly things are different in WW) 
but Arthur's chances of becoming a Minister, or even rising very high 
in ministry circles, would be practically nil if he spoke with a 
thick cockney accent.  For some reason, Scottish, Yorkshire, Irish 
etc. are acceptable but speak with a cockney accent and you have no 
chance.  This does not apply to show-business circles, where phony 
cockney accents abound.
Sylvia




From dfrankiswork at netscape.net  Tue Sep 30 16:10:56 2003
From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 16:10:56 -0000
Subject: Ancient rune (was Death Chamber/ancient magic)
In-Reply-To: <blbi9o+bt5r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blc9ug+l01u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81930

Talisman wrote:

(many thought provoking dishwasher items snipped)

> By the way, we know Lily's "sacrifice" didn't leave a physical 
mark 
> on Harry. (SS 299) I suggest to you that the scar on Harry's head 
is 
> indeed the defensive rune "eihwaz," (OoP 715) and a consequence of 
> Dumbledore's charm.  

Or, better yet, the *partnership* rune (thank you, Debbie, for the 
thought), indicating the need for teamwork, starting with Lily, to 
defeat Voldemort.  This would not contradict the individualistic 
emphasis of the prophecy, which does not mention what Harry needs in 
order to win.

That would explain why the scar functions as a link, too.

David




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 16:35:22 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 16:35:22 -0000
Subject: Crying wolf?
In-Reply-To: <B0141262-F34D-11D7-8E21-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <blcbca+pj2p@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81931

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith  

In the original post I mention the Werewolf Register and that Remus 
> should be on it. I had hoped that a poster would pick up on this, 
but no-one has. 

Laura:

If the Werewolf Registry is as reliable as the one for animagi, I 
can understand why no one would bother with it.  

And I wish I'd thought of keeping my kids under the bed 28 days a 
month..<g>




From annemehr at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 17:03:31 2003
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 17:03:31 -0000
Subject: Death Chamber/ancient magic
In-Reply-To: <blbi9o+bt5r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blcd13+dv8r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81932

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Talisman" <talisman22457 at y...>
wrote:

> Alas, long after St. Vander Ark laid down the Lexiconic gospel you 
> rely on, Dumbledore tells us that it was he, DUMBLEDORE, (not Lily) 
> who made the "decision" that Harry would be protected by a 
> certain "ancient magic" likely to slide under LV's radar.(OoP 835)
> 
> We see that it is not simply Lily's death that gives Harry what 
> little protection he gets (partial days six weeks a year?) from 
> this "ancient magic."  It is the "charm" Dumbledore placed on Harry. 
> (OoP 836) A lovely little charm that just happens to require 
> ingredients like Lily's blood and Petunia's home. Stir it around in 
> a pot and Dumbledore says you've got "the strongest shield charm *I* 
> [hear Dumbledore claiming credit?] could give you."  (OoP 836 my 
> emphasis)

Annemehr is intrigued.
All right, first of all we have two things going here.  The first is
whatever saved Harry's life when Voldemort attacked him, and the
second (which follows directly from it to be sure) is Harry's
protection at number 4, Privet Drive.

The text would seem to imply that, finding (or *putting*) himself in
charge of a boy who was saved by his mother's death, Dumbledore used a
certain charm to take advantage of this situation and the fact that
the boy's mother has a sister.

You, however, state straight out that Dumbledore is responsible for
both the protection by Lily and the protection by Petunia.  To go a
bit further, I would say that your use of quotation marks above
implies that I should type "protection" in quotes also.

Talisman continues:
> 
> By the way, we know Lily's "sacrifice" didn't leave a physical mark 
> on Harry. (SS 299) I suggest to you that the scar on Harry's head is 
> indeed the defensive rune "eihwaz," (OoP 715) and a consequence of 
> Dumbledore's charm.  This, of course, implies pre-meditation and 
> orchestration. (Wouldn't do to have LV come knocking when Lily was 
> upstairs taking a nap and Harry was bouncing on his Daddy's knee in 
> the living room.) Ah, shades of Sirius Black.

Annemehr:
I'm reading from you an assertion that all this was very closely
choreographed by Dumbledore.  I have liked the theory that Harry's
scar is indeed the rune ever since I first saw it posted.  However,
when I'm playing a strategic game (all right, Pokemon card game, don't
ask), I like to lay a lot of defenses as well as planning an offensive
strategy.  How can you defend going further than saying that
Dumbledore was using the rune as one of a range of defensive moves for
Harry?  And why couldn't it be James who died for Harry if that was
how the situation played out?  Then you'd only need Harry in the
presence of either one of his parents at all times, a practice Lily
and James are likely to adhere to in any case, with their son so
threatened.

The "defensive plan" would evolve like this:  Dumbledore perceives the
threat to baby Harry who is his great hope for defeating LV.  DD
shares with James and Lily that Harry (or the whole family) is
targeted; suggests a number of things they might do.  One thing is to
place a defensive rune on Harry's head in case the worst happens: both
parents are killed and there's no one left to protect Harry.  There is
no problem in suggesting one of them would need to die defending
Harry, either, if it came down to that.  Why can't this be all DD did,
rather than arranging the deaths of James and Lily in a certain way? 

[Aside: If DD *is* choreographing things, he could have brought
Pettigrew to Voldemort's attention through his spy, Snape, and I've no
doubt he could have planted the "Pettigrew as unlikely secret-keeper"
seed with Sirius, too -- but that's not any proof.]

Now, if this "protection at Privet Drive" business was so wonderful,
you could argue that DD hoped to be able to deploy it, but as far as
we can tell from OoP, Harry needs to be in the house to take advantage
of it.  You yourself, in your second paragraph above, imply this
"protection" is not all it's claimed to be.  On the other hand, this
certainly doesn't seem to be Voldemort's understanding.  He certainly
seems to know about the protection (but how?) and believe in it, but
he seems to think it applies to the entire neighborhood; or else he's
just scared of DD's guards and is  embarrassed to admit it.  Why
wouldn't he try an alleyway attack as Delores Umbridge did? Did
Dumbledore manage to feed him some (mis)information somehow?

I'll deal with Sirius Black some other time...

Talisman:    
> 
> Moreover, that's not the only "ancient magic" that uses a parental 
> soup base.  Recall that "old piece of Dark Magic" (GoF 656) that 
> required some "Bone of the father....Flesh of the Servant... and 
> Blood of the Enemy?" (GoF 641-42)  Odd fabric of creation, that.

Annemehr:

I'm not sure this applies to anything else, but the spell is very
fortunately constructed for Voldemort.  Three people are required --
Father, Servant, and Enemy.  Pick a servant, any servant: no problem.
 Enemies are a dime a dozen for Voldemort: another easy ingredient. 
But then he needs one very particular person: his father.  Imagine if
a bit of soft tissue had been required ("EAR of the Father?" Voldemort
screeched. "How am I supposed to get EAR of the Father NOW?")  Shades
of William "Bootstraps" Turner, there.

Talisman: 
<snip>
> (He had already insured that LV got his limb-chopping servant back, 
> and soon fixed it so he got Harry's (gleam) blood, as well.)

Annemehr:
See, I can see the possibility here.  I can certainly see how DD can
be aware of these possibilities ahead of time and make plans
accordingly, but I don't yet see that DD *alone* chose and brought
about this one *particular* course of events.  Wouldn't sending Harry
to the graveyard be too much of a risk?  How did he not nearly lose
him right there?  Would a ressurection potion merely containing flesh
of a servant indebted to Harry have been enough for DD's needs,
assuming the blood came from some other enemy (who would then have
been murdered, to be sure -- only Harry had any real chance of coming
back)?

One last question.  In GoF, ch. 36, when Harry is telling everything
that happened in the graveyard to DD and Sirius, we read:
--------
"The wands connected?" [Sirius] said, looking from Harry to
Dumbledore.  "Why?"

Harry looked up at Dumbledore agian, on whose face there was an
arrested look.

"*Priori incantatem,*" he muttered.   
--------

Dumbledore appears to have forgotten all about priori incantatem until
that moment (reminds you of phoenix tears, doesn't it?).  Doesn't that
seem very unlikely for one who knew that each wand contained one of
Fawkes' feathers?  But if he had indeed forgotten, wouldn't that
suggest that Harry's trip to the graveyard was *not* planned by
Dumbledore?

Unless <evil cackle> Dumbledore did plan it, had (in a fit of
senility) forgotten PI, fully expected Voldemort to AK Harry, and  --
then what?  If he expected V's AK to be V's own destruction then, why
was he so careful to protect Harry from it in the DoM atrium one year
later?  Bah.  I have no explanation.

Anyway, I believe DD is up to something.  I know we've been told only
a fraction of the truth.  But, I'll need a lot of persuading if I'm
going to believe he's orchestrated *everything* since he heard that
danged prophecy!  In other words, I'm sailing along with you for
*now*, but may end up kicking and screaming by the end, and still
wondering just where the truth lies.

<looks forward to more from Talisman>

Annemehr
feeling like Will Turner to T's Jack Sparrow, but what the hey...






From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz  Tue Sep 30 05:27:04 2003
From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 17:27:04 +1200
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: How many Rons per Hermione - numerical
  analysis of Ron's alleged decline
In-Reply-To: <blaker+6u57@eGroups.com>
References: <bl8rmh+mott@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20030930172340.021256e0@pop3.xtra.co.nz>

No: HPFGUIDX 81933

>Robyn:
>Yes, I would definitely agree that Ron's importance to Harry
>diminished in OotP, and for many reasons.  One important
>reason, IMO, is that the plot required that Ron give way to Sirius,
>as the most important person in Harry's life.  In GoF, Ron was
>the thing that Harry would most miss, during the second task.  In
>OotP, however, it wasn't Ron that LV tricked Harry into believing
>had been taken captive, and which ultimately lured him to the
>Ministry of Magic, it was Sirius.  I think that Ron will return to a
>more prominent role in the remaining books, unless, gasp, JKR
>is preparing us for Ron's demise.

I might have it wrong here, I truly hope so, but my impression is, that if
Ron gets back his spot (importance), that will make him more of a target.
In CoS, Snape calls them the dream team in the dueling club.  guess he's
not the only one to take notice of this.  Draco could also have reported
stuff to his father.

Tanya





From sgebhardt at t-online.de  Tue Sep 30 10:13:15 2003
From: sgebhardt at t-online.de (kiel2fisch)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 10:13:15 -0000
Subject: Prophecies (was: Returning to the DoM, Was: The Death Chamber)
In-Reply-To: <blahoe+31fr@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blbkvr+st6b@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81934

Jennifer wrote:
> You bring up an excellent point. Harry destroyed countless 
> prophecies. How will their rightful owners ever have access to 
them 
> now?

- reparo! (just joking...)

I always wondered how simple it was for Harry & Co. to destroy the 
prophecies and to hear what they said (of course, because of the 
minor trouble with the DEs they didn't really pay attention...).

Please, could anybody tell me why LV didn't send a DE to simply 
destroy (not touch) his prophecy, telling him afterwards what it was 
about?

And, if it was such a big deal for LV to know the exact words of the 
prophecy, is it a hint that really nobody but DD and Trelawny should 
know about it?(Well, not even she knew, didn't she?)

All the discussion was about why DD didn't tell Harry the truth. But 
telling Harry about the meaning of the prophecy will probably turn 
out to be DD's next mistake.

Harry might better keep that secret for good, shouldn't he?

Sunnyi






From sgebhardt at t-online.de  Tue Sep 30 09:37:48 2003
From: sgebhardt at t-online.de (kiel2fisch)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 09:37:48 -0000
Subject: Hermione's growth
Message-ID: <blbitc+6uo0@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81935

Debbie (wondering if anyone made it to the end) wrote at that very 
end:

<<She [Hermione] needs to work *with* those that she cares about, 
not *for* them.  This is how I see Hermione's potential tragic flaw 
playing out. She sums it up herself, in ch. 31 of OOP:

"On Friday, Harry and Ron had a day off while Hermione sat her 
Ancient 
Runes exam . . . .They stretched and yawned beside the open window - 
when
the portrait hole opened and Hermione clambered in, looking 
thoroughly 
bad-tempered.
'How were the Runes?' said Ron, yawning and stretching.
'I mis-translated ehwaz,' said Hermione furiously. 'It means 
partnership, not defence; I mixed it
up with eihwaz.'
'Ah well,' said Ron lazily, 'that's only one mistake, isn't it, 
you'll 
still get -'
'Oh, shut up!' said Hermione angrily. 'It could be the one mistake 
that 
makes the difference
between a pass and a fail.'"

To paraphrase only slightly, for Hermione this could be the 
difference between success and tragic failure. >>



I really like your point of view, even if my thoughts about this 
scene were completely different before (and probably not that 
elaborated):
Wasn't it very amusing, how JKR was (once again) able to point out 
in one tiny, little paragraph the main *problem* in the relationship 
between the two speakers? Weren't Ron and Hermione always arguing in 
OOTP? Always trying to defend their points of view against each 
other (even if completely unnecessary)? Why?
Because not only in a Rune exam you get confused by the meaning 
of 'ehwaz' and 'eihwaz', don't you? Being at HP for Grown Ups, this 
should be recognized as a rather common fault

Just thinking if this leads me to the R/H route


Sunnyi






From augustinapeach at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 13:29:48 2003
From: augustinapeach at yahoo.com (augustinapeach)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 13:29:48 -0000
Subject: Will Draco come back?
In-Reply-To: <bla4s7+9o57@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blc0gc+pere@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81936

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lisa Cocchiarale" 
<lisaeckleycocchiarale at y...> wrote:
 
 >I, however, rather believe that with Lucius out of commission (at 
least temporarily), Narcissa wil be less dominated by him and decide 
to keep Draco in the safest place possible.  On the other hand, does 
L's incarceration deprive him of control of his wealth? If not, then 
Narcissa may be bound to follow his wishes, wahtever that might mean 
for our dear boy Draco.<

I agree that Draco will probably be back for Book 6 -- he's just too 
useful as a narrative tool to transfer to another school!  However, 
I wanted to comment on Narcissa.  I don't see her as "dominated" by 
Lucius.  She's the one who influenced Lucius -- over his intense 
disagreement with Dumbledore's philosophy -- to send Draco to 
Hogwarts in the first place.   Narcissa really seems to be a partner 
to Lucius in his evil.  After all, she's the one Kreacher went to 
when he left Grimmauld Place, and she's the one who shared the 
information Kreacher gave her about Harry's relationship with 
Sirius -- obviously she saw it as something that could be helpful in 
some way to LV.  Maybe she's not a Death-Eater, but she's definitely 
in the DE Auxiliary!

AP






From kneazle255 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 14:08:28 2003
From: kneazle255 at yahoo.com (kneazle255)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 14:08:28 -0000
Subject: Will Draco come back? & Character development
In-Reply-To: <blc1hu+cbag@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blc2os+rbod@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81937

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" <stevejjen at e...> 
wrote:
 
> Jen: 
> Draco continues to be one-dimensional, seemingly influenced only by 
> Lucius and his pure-blood indoctrination. Yet this character is the 
> proverbial gold mine waiting to be dicovered--I want to see some 
> rebellion! Draco's had other influences in his life now, seen a few 
> things that hopefully give him pause, yet he's still sneering and 
> attempting to thwart 'Potter'.
> 
> I guess his character may never expand beyond that. Draco reminds 
me of Vernon--they are both essentially frozen in their Book 1 
> characterizations. 

Kneazle:
That is a good point. Draco is frozen. 

But I think Draco is more likely the Regulus Black of his generation. 
I see nothing in the books to indicate that he is anything other than 
a petulant, spoiled, whiny, cowardly, bigoted, vicious, nasty little 
boy.

I don't think he has it in him even to make a good deatheater.







From sgebhardt at t-online.de  Tue Sep 30 14:11:11 2003
From: sgebhardt at t-online.de (kiel2fisch)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 14:11:11 -0000
Subject: Returning to the DoM (Was: The Death Chamber)
In-Reply-To: <bla9k6+78r3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blc2tv+a04u@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81938

> > Annemehr wrote:
> > And it almost seems that Harry is going to have to 
> > visit the DoM again, and probably not without his companions.  I 
> > wonder how that will be brought about?  Will it have to wait 
until later in book seven?
   
> I'm sure Harry will have to learn more about the Death Chamber, and
> then revisit it. Even more than the Death Chamber, though, the room
> with the locked door cries out for a visit.
> 


The whole Department of Mysteries, especially the Death Chamber and 
that locked room (filled with love???), are perhaps introduced by 
JKR to show us a wider variety of mortal dangers in the WW, besides 
the AK curse (and Devils Snare, of course).

As far as I can remember, there's no mentioning about if Sirius was 
killed by a Spell first before falling trough the Vail. 
I was under the impression that Sirius was killed BY or BECAUSE 
passing the Vail.

Wouldn't that be an appropriate step for Voldemort, too, facing the 
end of book seven?
Or being strangulated by some terrible memories?
Or lost in the unbearable lightness of room and space?

I cannot really imagine Harry using the AK curse in serious. I've to 
admit that he's already `improved' in OOTP, using the Cruciatus 
Curse on Bellatrix. But this was rather half-hearted and there's 
still a long way from hexing or jinxing somebody to actually killing 
a person, even if it's LV. 
And, turn it as you like, Harry would end up as a murderer when 
actively killing LV. Not a very nice attribute. Not for our hero.

Though, Harry is not a killer and the next two books are unlikely to 
change him into one, are they?

If the Dark Lord owns a little bit of decency at the end, he should 
do us all the favour of just jumping through the Vail by himself.

Yes, I know that's kind of boring, but anyway.

Sunnyi
(who likes Harry to remain literally virgin)






From kneazle255 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 14:43:15 2003
From: kneazle255 at yahoo.com (kneazle255)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 14:43:15 -0000
Subject: Crying wolf?
In-Reply-To: <B0141262-F34D-11D7-8E21-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <blc4q3+piu6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81939

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
Kneasy:
Lupin *knows*. Just seeing the names on the map would not have given 
him this immediate grasp  of the situation. The first natural 
reaction would be a toss-up between "Sirius! Harry's in danger!" 
and "Peter! He's not dead after all! What the hell is going on?" 
Remember, at this stage Peter still is assumed to be an innocent 
victim. So he rushes off, from his office to the Shack.  Without 
telling anyone. But somehow he has  all the answers, just from the 
map. Likely?

Kneazle255:
I have always assumed that Lupin, after the initial reaction you 
describe so well, quickly came to the realization that Peter must 
have had something to hide. To paraphrase Sirius, if Peter's so 
innocent, why did he hide for 12 years? Lupin's answer to that 
question was that Peter is guilty. 

It must have really struck Lupin like an epiphany. The answer would 
have dovetailed perfectly with what he knew about Peter and Sirius' 
personalities. 

He may also have considered carefully Sirius'incursion into the dorm. 
He did not kill Harry. He was after something else, Remus guesses. It 
may have put a seed of doubt in RL's mind. 

Does Remus has at least some lingering doubts about Sirius' guilt? 
Despite the danger to Harry, Remus apparently never tells anyone 
about wormtail, prongs or padfoot. 

Another possibility is that Remus was using Harry as bait so he could 
have a shot at killing Sirius himself. A totally personal vendetta. 
So he tells no one about Padfoot because he *wants* Sirius to enter 
Hogwarts and make an attempt on Harry that so that he can corner him.





From kneazle255 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 15:32:26 2003
From: kneazle255 at yahoo.com (kneazle255)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 15:32:26 -0000
Subject: House Elfs - why DID Dobby help Harry?
In-Reply-To: <blc3e5+gvub@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blc7ma+tcsh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81940

samnanya wrote:
I dont think that proves anything about Harry being a pureblood - 
especially since his mother was a mudblood, and the whole magic 
protection charm would be null and void if Lily was not Harry's 
mother. I think that Malfoy acted under the principle of "keep your 
friends close and your enemies closer".
That said, I never did understand why Dobby got involved with Harry 
in the first place. Winky defended Barty Crouch even though he was 
despicable just because he was her master. Why would Dobby "desert" 
the Malfoy family? 

Kneazle255:
Harry's a halfblood. Potters were a wizarding line. Both Ron and 
Sirius state that all the wizarding families are inter-related 
somehow. It's not such a stretch to assume that the Malfoy line and 
the Potter line intermingled at some point.

Was Dobby was a Potter elf inherited by the Malfoys because the 
Potters and the Malfoys were closely related?

i have questions about Dobby's motivations in CoS.  There is no overt 
reason why Dobby would think Harry was in any particular danger. 
Dobby knows about the diary. The diary's purpose is to kill 
muggleborns. Harry is not muggleborn. Why does he assume Harry is in 
mortal danger?

Lucius' apparent purpose is to get DD out of Hogwarts and discredit 
the Weasleys.  There is no hint that Lucius knows that the diary has 
its own will or that it is capable of bringing Riddle back. I think 
Lucius would have used the diary differently if he realized it was a 
means to bring back his Dark Lord.)

If Dobby knows what Lucius knows and no more, his motivations don't 
make sense. He has to know more than Lucius.  He WOULD know more if 
he were orginally a Potter elf.

It also makes sense that Dobby would be extremely unhappy as a Malfoy 
elf if he started life as a Potter elf.

Like Kreacher, Dobby may have been more loyal to his former masters 
than his current one. And like Kreacher, he may have acted on that 
loyalty.

Kneazle







From tobyreiner at yahoo.co.uk  Tue Sep 30 15:47:48 2003
From: tobyreiner at yahoo.co.uk (tobyreiner)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 15:47:48 -0000
Subject: Voldemort's name
Message-ID: <blc8j4+g0cu@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81941

Ok, I'm new to the forum so if this has been asked long ago, please 
forgive me. 

I've never understood why Voldemort's enemies call him "Lord 
Voldemort", when they're not calling him "He Who Must Not Be Named". 
Lord Voldemort isn't his real name, and it's bizarre that his claims 
to lordship should be so readily accepted by Dumbledore et al. 
Indeed, Dumbledore does call him Tom when they duel at the end of 
OotP, but always as Voldemort when referring to him to others. It's 
like Yoda and Obi-Wan Kenobi talking about the "Emperor" in Star 
Wars, even though they never accepted Palpatine as an Emperor of 
anything. 

Why? Just for convenience? 





From arianaseibel at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 15:54:50 2003
From: arianaseibel at yahoo.com (Ariana Seibel)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 15:54:50 -0000
Subject: House Elf Army,  WAS: House Elfs
In-Reply-To: <BAY2-F7fCHJr1Wtyi670001f156@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <blc90a+nff1@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81942

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sue Porter" <sues0101 at h...> 
wrote:
*snip*
Dobby's protection of Harry seems uncharacterisitc of a house elf and 
it will be interesting to see how he fits into the future books! The 
Hogwarts House Elf Army perhaps?

Now Ariana (me) says:
I think this will be *very* important.  I get upset when I see people 
complain about the whole house elf aspect of the HP books, I think 
some people think it's just comic relief or something like that.  
Notice how Dobby is strong enough to stop Lucius Malfoy in his tracks 
at the end of CoS when he tries to hurt Harry.  

When watching LOTR: The Two Towers on DVD a couple weeks ago I 
pointed out to my husband that it was only with cooperation between 
groups and species that they are able to come out of the end of that 
movie alive.  I think it'll be the same in the HP books, It is 
similar to the Sorting Hat saying that the houses need to unify.

Ariana -- Who mostly lurks, but sometimes must speak her mind.






From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Tue Sep 30 16:48:43 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 11:48:43 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Ancient Magics (was - Re: Dumbledore's Bridge )
References: <bl9pki+spth@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <002801c38772$b6e6b3e0$4d97aec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81943

> Jake:
> I often wonder about this myself.  A question I ponder frequently is
> why would a form of magic die out that enabled users to engage the
> Av. Kad. curse?  It would be like tossing away the cure to polio.  I
> think the old magic may have something to do with muggles (as you
> suggested) or Egypt.  We learn about Egyptian curses (and Egypt in
> general) at the start of PoA.  Now Hermione is taking runes.  Some
> have speculated that WB put a copyright on a Harry Potter book
> entitled something like "Harry Potter and the Pyrmiads of (something
> or other)."  And then you have the sneakescope (bought in Egypt),
> which may still have a secret or two to reveal.  Who knows, maybe
> Harry's scar is really a rune?  Maybe he had it on his head before VD
> attacked and it protected him? (I wish I could attach some canon to
> this post, but, like so many others, I am at the office right now)

Iggy:

I kinda agree with some of the basic thinking here... Let's take it a step
further, shall we?

(*waits for a mass reply of "Let's shall.*)

Thank you.


Many people have made comments about the fact that the prejudices and
bigotry of the WW is becoming much more apparent.  There's also been a
number of connections been noted about Goblins representing the Jews, Harry
being like Christ (hmmm... I wonder who Judas will be.  Probably someone in
his inner circle, of course...Kinda brings a new light on the possibilities
that Kneasey points out...), etc...

As Jeff has mentioned, the Ancient Magics may either stem from Muggles, or a
WW of the far past.

(Feel free to add anything I may have missed here...)

Mentionings of Egypt:

1 - Bill was a Curse Breaker for Gringott's, working in Egypt.  (Ron
mentions all the things they saw when they went with Bill into the
Pyramids.... mostly mutated skeletons.)

2 - The Pocket Sneakoscope was bought in Egypt.


Runic Connotations:

1 - Hermione is taking Runes in classes at Hogwart's.  (This fact doesn't go
into the above section, as Runes are a LOT different than Hieroglyphics,
when you get down to it.  Both also come from very different geographical
locations.)

2 - The way Harry's lightning bolt scar is usually described or depicted, it
could actually be the Viking Rune "Sowulo". (The sun with its life-giving
light and warmth can be seen as the life force. Its meaning is good fortune,
health and happiness.)  With the life he's led, I don't know how accurate
some of that would be.

3 - One wonders, as bright as Hermione is, why she hasn't seen the
possibility that the scar represents a rune rather than a lightning bolt
like everyone else assumes.  There's also the fact that the rune symbolizes
the "life force", which would be the exact opposite of the Avada Kedavra
spell... You'd think that when she read about the meaning, and say the rune
itself, a light would have gone off in her head.


Other interesting points...

1 - Ancient magics are much like the Ancient Religions... Many people know
that they existed, but few actually took the time to study them when
something they thought was better came along.  (Think of all the old faiths
that have fallen by the wayside, for the most part... the Egyptian beliefs,
the Greco / Roman, the old Babylonian, and the Norse beliefs.  Then there's
the old Druidic / Wiccan faith, which is making a comeback, although a
scattered and semi-underground one... and one that's been modernized a bit,
which loses some of the old power behind it.)

2 - The WW may periodically experience a Renaissance period, where advances
are made because of the current "age of enlightenment."   Unfortunately,
during these jumps in cultural, scientific, and religious advances, the
older ways sometimes get left behind or lost on the way... For example, many
people on this list would know how to use a lighter or a book of matches to
start a campfire, but if you had to do it with a flint and steel, or a
fire-bow, you'd be lost.  The priorities for survival and comfort change
through the ages, and with that, comes a shift in what, and how, we learn.

3 - People who exist in more modern times tend so deal more with theory,
equations, and scientific explanations of the world around them.  People of
the past dealt more with faith, instinct, and more basic and fundamental
reasons for things.  The WW is not likely to be any different.  Modern
magics seem to come from theory, specific incantations, research, and
intense study of basic theory as it can be applied to advanced concepts.
Ancient magics come from intensity of emotion, being fully in the moment,
sacrifice of one's self, and the basic knowledge of will of yourself
affecting the will of the world.  (In other words, Modern magic = formulaic,
theoretical, and alchemical magic.  Ancient magic = blood, fire, and life
magic.)


'Nuff said for now.

Comments?

Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster


"But soft, what light through yonder window breaks?
  It is the East, and Juliet is...
    AAAAAHHHHH THE SUN!!!!!!  *FOOM*

        - Vampire Theatre"

-- One of the bumper stickers in Iggy's collection








From feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca  Tue Sep 30 17:39:14 2003
From: feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca (feetmadeofclay)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 17:39:14 -0000
Subject: They are children's books (Was: the heart of it all)
In-Reply-To: <blbvsv+dihf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blcf42+8ve9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81944

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Penny Linsenmayer" 
<pennylin at s...> wrote:

> 
> > > > Amanda: They were and are not written for children. They were
> > > written to express
>But, I disagree that she herself has or would say that her books are
> "children's books."  
> 
> PENNY: Part of the problem, and I don't think you would be guilty 
of this
> Golly ...... but part of the problem is that people who make the
> argument that the HP books are children's literature do so in the
> context of limiting what Rowling will do in terms of plot, themes 
and
> so on.  In other words, the argument goes something like: "Well,
> Rowling won't do *that.*  Good grief, these are *just* children's
> books after all."  I find this attitude to be far more dismissive of
> children's lit as a genre than my own belief (that the HP series
> doesn't fall into that genre at all).
> 

Golly: Well people who want to see a limit the range of Rowling's 
themes or treatments due to its being children's literature haven't 
read Doing It by Melvin Burgess.  That book is obviously a young 
adult novel and it is not pap.  Rowling can set whatever themes she 
thinks are relevant to the story.  I have yet to see one that I felt 
was inappropriate for children.  

OOTP made that clearer than ever by continuing a focus in on Harry 
and allowing us to see very little of what the Order and other adults 
were doing. Instead she gave us details about OWLS, Quidditch, teen 
romance and teen angst.  All perfectly reasonable for a target 
audience of youngish teenagers.  I personally would have preferred to 
know what the Order did in more detail. That BTW is not a criticism 
of OOTP, just personal interest. I find the lives of HP's adults
more 
intriguing this time around than who will be named prefect and 
Quidditch captain. I realize that school life with its troubles or 
triumphs are more interesting to children than the adventures or 
daily life of Molly and Arthur. As an adult reader, I accept that 
difference in perspective is part of reading a child's series.  

 I've read excellent children's novels which discussed politics and 
prejudice.  No reason Rowling cannot do the same. We either abolish 
all categories and say no one is writing children's lit vs. adult 
literature or we accept that Rowling is writing in a well established 
genre.  

The divide in Harry Potter as a shifting series is not between 
children's lit and adult lit, but between a younger child's series 
and a young adult series. 

HP is in no way comparable to the masterful treatment of humanity 
that JD Salinger achieved with Catcher in the Rye.  If in 50 years we 
are still talking about OOTP, then I may concede I am wrong about HP 
and Rowling. Or I may simply think we have all lost our minds. That 
isn't a slam on Rowling, it is just the truth as I see it.  

I didn't like King's review.  I found it inflated.  HP is not Catcher 
in the Rye.  As soon as anyone says something so extreme and without 
very impressive support, he'll immediately loose my interest.  It 
doesn't surprise me that King is supporting Rowling.  It is in
his 
best interest to convince everyone Rowling is of Salinger's
caliber.  
Just as it is in Franzer's best interest to reject the praise of 
Oprah viewers in order to retain the impression his work is of a 
literary ilk beyond majority of America who should stick to Stephen 
King.  I take both sides of the argument with a grain of salt.


> Golly: <<<<<HP has a range of age groups hovering around Potter's 
age, 
> which increases.>>>>>>>>
> 
> Penny: Yes, but this is a series of books that will eventually all 
be sitting
> on the shelf, available to the reader.  Does the parent of the 8 
year
> old who wants to read Books 1 and 2 say, "Well, go ahead and plow on
> the rest of the way?"  Or, does the parent say, "You can read the
> first two, but you're not going to get as much enjoyment out of the
> later ones until you're older?"  Or what, precisely?  Yes, the 
current
> HP audience is aging right along with Harry.  But, er, this won't
> *always* be the case.  It presents an interesting conundrum in my
> mind.  

> Penny

GOLLY: This was pointed out in a review by Hensher after POA or GOF 
(can't remember).  But it is an experimental way to write.  A very 
impressive experiment which seems to be working for her.  Rowling 
herself said she wants the books to grow with Harry. 

But it is clear that Rowling pays attention to the abilities of her 
targeted reader.  PS is not Angelas Ashes whose prose is nowhere near 
as accessible to children.  The problem with writing for teenagers is 
that most have the ability to read more than just books that are 
targeted at them.  I think as a teenager I enjoyed Amy Tan more than 
books that were classed as YA novels. Perhaps I wasn't reading
the 
right YA novels. I may have loved OOTP at the time.  

The last book may be problematically hard for later readers blazing 
through the whole series all at once.  Even now Rowling is already 
losing some of the younger readers she picked up on the 3 year 
hiatus.  I'm sure that doesn't bother her or the publishers.
(Nor 
does it bother me so long as she writes with passion.) Now that she 
is famous and the series is famous she has more room to experiment 
without much financial risk for her publisher or herself.  Maybe 
those readers who loose interest halfway through will come back to 
the series and finish it when they are ready.  Maybe most readers 
will just find what they can to enjoy in it.  

To me, the books seem more adult because 15 year olds are more adult.
	They are transforming into the adult they are going to be.  

Penny:we're seeing a gradual
shift from juvenile (books 1-2) to young adult (books 3-4) to just
"literature" that defies a specific label. 

GOLLY: The reason I think it degrades children's literature is that 
it hides all the great children's books out there.  Books everybit as 
sophisticated as Order of the Phoenix. I still have no idea why 
people think OOTP is not a YA novel. 

Actually I would class POA as a children's book - it is darker
but it 
still is very much a children's story in tone and the way it
handles 
situations. Plus Harry's psychology is still very childish in
POA. 
GOF perhaps a YA novel for its mentioning of romance and the fact 
that many found it gory.  (I personally didn't.)  The rift
between 
Ron is more of a YA rift than the one he had with Hermione.  Perhaps 
if Rowling had written POA about Hermione, it would have seemed more 
like a YA novel.  But I think OOTP is still firmly a YA novel.  It 
may be a very good one in your opinion.  But it is too soon to tell 
whether it will be shelved with Huck and Anne.  It hasn't the 
sophistication of such treatments in my opinion.  It doesn't seem
to 
break the boundaries that Angela's Ashes does.  I have a little 
trouble expressing why I think that.  

Only time can sift the classics from everything else.  There is no 
such thing as an "instant classic", regardless of what reviewers 
say.  This is why I take reviews with a grain of salt.  Call me 
cynical but I don't believe the press is any more to be believed when 
it tells me something I want to hear.  It is always more pleasant to 
be told I am part of a revolution that I have excellent taste because 
I delight in HP.  I don't trust reviewers who feel the need flatter 
me. 

If I am to trust reviewers King, I want to know how many children's 
books he reads in a year.  Children's/Young Adult reviewers I respect 
have not said the series is now inappropriate for teens.

Amanda: GrandPre. Grand Pere is a French grandfather.

My apologies for getting it wrong.
	
			
As to Rowling's view of her own work - She hasn't said
anything that 
I haven't heard from dozens of other children's writers.
Rowling 
speaks about writing children's books much the way most
children's 
novelists speak about it.  She clearly knew her book would be of more 
interest to children's publishers.  To me that says something. I
did 
some digging and barely scraped the surface but here is what I found. 


"Article on Jo Rowling"
"[Rowling] went to the library and looked up a list of children's 
book agents"
								
	
"Jo Rowling" in her own words - 

1997
"It was extraordinary because I had never planned to write for 
children."

Golly: it is clear she means that a children's story found her.

"It's a particularly wonderful award to win from my point of
view, 
because the final judging is done by children, and they are obviously 
the people whose opinion matters to me most."

"It was planned as a seven-book series and I am half way through 
number three. I also have another children's book half-finished."

1998 " People have said the humour is very adult, but I do think
they 
underestimate children. Certainly, some of the kids I've met have got 
every joke and even if they haven't, it doesn't actually matter. It 
annoys me that people think you have to dumb down for children."
"I think it's wrong to think of adult books as 'real literature'. 
Real literature can be for people of nine and that's what I'm trying 
to write." 

I don't believe she was lying.

Golly













From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Sun Sep 28 23:28:08 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 18:28:08 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Will Success Spoil Harry Potter?  Was: Do You Peek?
References: <bl5uhv+nije@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <008701c38618$3531d060$e6ea79a5@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81945

Sandy:
> I feel kinda sorry for JKR, too, but not that way. When I read the
> part of the post-OoP interview she gave where she said she missed
> writing in cafes because it made writing less lonely and that she
> does most of her writing now in front of a computer, I just went,
> Oohhhh! A certain amount of loneliness, of aloneness with your
> eyeballs turned around backwards in your head watching, feeling,
> creation occur between your ears, is necessary. (I hang out with
> writers and scribble stuff occasionally myself; can you tell?) The
> hustle and bustle of cafe customers and staff must have been a
> wonderful anodyne. Now, not only does she not have that, but the
> warm, intimate and joyous space in her head that Harry and the WW
> sprang from has become a commodity in the world arena. Most writers
> want to be read; what has happened to JKR and Harry doesn't even fit
> into "be(ing) read" anymore.

Which kinda leads me to wonder something:

1- Harry has most of HIS anonymity taken away from him by his fame...

JKR is having the places she loved to write in taken away from her by her
fame...


2 - Harry is beginning to withdraw into himself due to the pressures put on
him...

JKR has to withdraw into her home and herself in order to write now...


3 - Harry is the subject of much speculation, both good and bad, in the
WW...

JKR is the subject of much speculation, both good and bad, in the RW...


Anyone else see a connection of progression here?  (Or am I simply reading
too much into it.)


As for the feeling of being able to write in the busy and active, yet still
gently controlled and quiet environment of a cafe or coffee shop, I know it
well too.  I used to be a writing major, and still do some writing for my
own enjoyment (and, honestly, a bit of personally implemented therapy of
sorts.. *grin*).  Back in Santa Cruz, some of my best writing was done
sitting on the patio of Cafe Pergolesi (a small coffee shop) sipping on a
vanilla coffee, enjoying a clove cigarette, and writing as I watched and
listened to the world go by.  (I'm a big fan of people watching.)

Down here in Alabama... I don't write as much anymore.  I spend my days
taking care of my daughter, but even if she were in daycare, there's no
place for me to go here to get that feeling again.  The only places to hang
out, it seems, are at diners... and the only people who hang out there are
the older folks who sit around, talking with their cronies that they've
known since the 50's.

(Anyone in the Northern Alabama area got any ideas for me?  *grin*)

Oh, and PLEASE, if you reply to me with cafe and coffee shop suggestions,
send them via' direct reply, not to the list. (After all, we want to keep
the list itself as on topic as possible.  Thanks.)


Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster


"I'll always remember the last words of my Uncle Shellwick when he said
'What dragon??'"

-- Iggy McSnurd







From tobyreiner at yahoo.co.uk  Tue Sep 30 15:28:11 2003
From: tobyreiner at yahoo.co.uk (tobyreiner)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 15:28:11 -0000
Subject: Wizarding numbers
Message-ID: <blc7eb+d6qk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81946

How many wizards are there in Harry Potter's Britain? 

I ask, because it seems to me that the population is barely adequate 
to cover the infrastructure detailed in the books. (Especially a 
Quidditch league)

According to an interview with Rowling, Hogwarts has 1,000 students; 
bearing in mind that there are only five boys in Gryffindor in 
Harry's year, this is about about three times more than I expected. 
If there were 10 per house per year, there would be 280 in the whole 
school. The discrepancy could be because Hufflepuff, as the only non-
selective house, is far bigger than the remaining three. 

Anyway, if there are 1,000 students in the school, there would 
normally be about 15,000 wizards and witches in the country, as it's 
the only school and would therefore include everyone in the 11-16 age 
range and, probably, most of the 16-18 year olds too. However, as 
wizards live longer than Muggles, maybe there are more. 

Does anyone know? 





From IAmLordCassandra at aol.com  Tue Sep 30 18:00:57 2003
From: IAmLordCassandra at aol.com (IAmLordCassandra at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 14:00:57 EDT
Subject: Narcissa and Lucius WAS: Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: Will Draco come back?
Message-ID: <34.3fb5c1a6.2cab1ed9@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81947

In a message dated 9/30/2003 10:49:55 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
augustinapeach at yahoo.com writes:

> I wanted to comment on Narcissa.  I don't see her as "dominated" by 
> Lucius.  She's the one who influenced Lucius -- over his intense 
> disagreement with Dumbledore's philosophy -- to send Draco to 
> Hogwarts in the first place. 

How do we know this?  What canon is there that Narcissa convinced Lucius to 
send Draco to Hogwarts?  Did she also convince him to become a school governer? 


No matter who decided Draco should go to Hogwarts, I don't think there was 
ever any fear of Dumbledore's philosophy/etc... rubbing off on him.   

~Cassie~ 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca  Tue Sep 30 17:57:25 2003
From: feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca (feetmadeofclay)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 17:57:25 -0000
Subject: They are children's books + Marketing 
In-Reply-To: <blbvsv+dihf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blcg65+ugtk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81948

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Penny Linsenmayer" 
<pennylin at s...> 

I daresay that books
like "Oliver Twist," and "To Kill a Mockingbird" might be marketed to
children if they were published today, but that doesn't transform
*them* into children's literature either.

I doubt it.  To Kill a Mocking Bird is a very sophisticated treatment.

But I believe Anne of Green Gables would have been. Today she would 
have been packaged as a children's heroine. She kind of is. But like 
HP she may have found a wider audience. Though I will qualify this 
with the need to say that I think Anne of Green Gables (the novel) is 
far superior to any of the HP novels.  Then it is superior to many 
books.   

The prose in Oliver Twist novels is quite advanced.  Several people I 
know read Dickens as young children, but I don't think they fully 
understood the books. Because of its difficulty, Dickens may have 
found such stories difficult to sell, but I doubt when he found a 
publisher they would have marketed his books to children.  

Catcher in the Rye is read by many teenagers, but it remains an adult 
novel. It was never marketed as a children's novel. 

Angela's Ashes was reviewed by Young Adult reviewers and stocked by 
school libraries, but it was mainly marketed and intended for an 
adult audience.  Its prose and characterization are probably the 
reasons for that.  Many (but not all) teenagers are capable of 
reading adult literature which makes writing for young adults a 
challange. But even a wonderful young adult novel will not challange 
me the way To Kill a Mocking Bird would.     

Of course there will be places where genres blend.  I don't believe 
HP is one of those places.  

Golly





From C_fax at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 30 18:11:48 2003
From: C_fax at hotmail.com (ceefax2002)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 18:11:48 -0000
Subject: Do you peek?
In-Reply-To: <blavt5+qaqn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blch14+1dmk@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81949

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Hagrid" <aussie_lol at y...> wrote:
> --- "Liz S." <bonoskite99> wrote:
> > I'd say that I never peeked. It was a very important deal my sister 
> and I had that if one of us got to the death scene in OOP before the 
> other that we wouldn't tell the other what happened. We both agreed 
> that peeking, or finding out before it occurred naturally in the 
> story would take away some magic. Luckily, we both got to the death 
> scene and we both finished the book on the same day!
> 
> I was in another group .. and someone wrote the spoiler without 
> warning ppl. I felt cheated ... that guy owes me $45Aust - the price 
> of a OotP!!!


I avoided the internet in it's entirety from the release date up until
I got to read it (I bought my housemate a copy for his birthday, on
the condition that I got to read it as soon as he was done). I knew it
was bound to come up somewhere... and while I was in the middle of
reading it, our friend who is notorious for giving away endings etc.
dropped round. The first I heard of this was my housemate chucking a
sandwich into my room and going "just stay there, I'll try and keep
her away from you..."

But I got through it spoiler free. I may even buy my own copy some
day. ^_^

And if you peek, you're not doing this whole 'reading' thing right...

Ceef.




From draco382 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 18:26:17 2003
From: draco382 at yahoo.com (draco382)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 18:26:17 -0000
Subject: Will Draco come back? & Character development
In-Reply-To: <blc9fq+89ms@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blchs9+a48i@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81950

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sydney" <sydpad at y...> wrote:

> On the other hand it's weird of Rowling to keep the main nemesis
> totally static, as Draco has been.  It's hard to see his function in
> the story.  I mean, Draco's not even dangerous, which at least could
> generate suspense;  not one of his Evil Plans has ever worked out.
> He's not a particularily interesting psychological study (yet,
> anyways).  He's not a warning of slippery slopes of any kind;  he 
was
> a vicious little racist at 11 just as he is at 15.  He's just kind 
of
> a moral punching bag.

Now me:

I've come out of lurkdom to throw in my two cents on this topic, 
which I hold very dear to my heart (erm...look at my name).  You, and 
some of the others who have posted on this topic bring out a very 
good point.  When almost all the other characters in the book have 
gone through SOME transformation (albeit minor in some cases) why has 
Draco not changed in the least?  If memory serves me, Draco is one of 
the FIRST wizards Harry ever met after being inducted into the WW by 
Hagrid that dark and stormy night.  You might even say, he's been 
there with Harry from the beginning.  IMHO, JKR has kept Draco frozen 
in time for all these long years to make a big bangy point later on --
 namely that central theme of the whole story so far -- its one's 
choices that make them who they are.  If you ask me, Draco's 
redemption is going to be one of the biggest moments in the whole 
story (besides that whole killing V'mort thingy).  Yes, Draco is very 
one-dimensional, but darn it if JKR doesn't give him a lot of screen 
time.  There must be some reason that she bothers to write him in; at 
this point, I think all of her readers have come to expect some 
shoddy "evil" plot from Draco, Crabbe and Goyle -- which ultimately 
fails at the hands of Harry, or well, one of the "good guys."  Draco 
inevitably MUST gain another dimension to his character or else 
become the coyote to Harry's roadrunner.

Sydney:
> On the other hand, two things encourage a certain kind of reader 
(like
> me, for example), to look for some sort of change to come over him. 
> First is Hagrid's line, I think in CoS, that "blood will tell", and
> you should just write the kid off because he's a Malfoy.  For this 
to
> turn out to be a sound view isn't very Rowling-esque to me, in fact
> it's explicitly against the whole message of the book. 
> 

Now Me:

Somehow I don't accept Dumbledore's argument that Kreacher was "made" 
by Wizards.  That seems kind of contradictory to his original addage 
(its one's choices that make a person who they are...").  Does that 
mean that just like Kreacher, Draco's actions are pardonable since 
wizards he knew "made" him into who he is?  Dobby certainly 
wasn't "made" into anything by the Malfoys.  And Harry himself wasn't 
made into anything by the Dursleys.  No, I think Draco (and Kreacher) 
should be held responsible for their own actions, and, in doing so, 
Draco should be given the benefit of the doubt -- he can still redeem 
himself.  
 
~draco382





From odilefalaise at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 18:50:49 2003
From: odilefalaise at yahoo.com (Odile Falaise)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 11:50:49 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Ancient rune (was Death Chamber/ancient magic)
In-Reply-To: <blc9ug+l01u@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20030930185049.58410.qmail@web13101.mail.yahoo.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81951

David, quoting Talisman, wrote:

<<< By the way, we know Lily's "sacrifice" didn't leave a physical mark on Harry. (SS 299) I suggest to you that the scar on Harry's head is indeed the defensive rune "eihwaz," (OoP 715) and a consequence of Dumbledore's charm. >>>

Then David:
<<<Or, better yet, the *partnership* rune (thank you, Debbie, for the thought), indicating the need for teamwork, starting with Lily, to defeat Voldemort.  This would not contradict the individualistic emphasis of the prophecy, which does not mention what Harry needs in order to win. That would explain why the scar functions as a link, too.>>>
 
Now Odile (that's me!):
 
As a wiccan with a strong background in the Norse tradition and runes, I had to weigh in on this one (watch your toes!)
 
In my humble opinion, the scar on Harry's forehead forms the rune "sowulo," which is a lightening bolt.  If, like me, you hold that the four houses of Hogwarts correspond to the four elements, i.e., Gryffindor (Harry) is Fire and Slytherin(Voldemort/Riddle) is Water, then the clash between fire and water (rain) is lightening - the lightening bolt on Harry's forehead.
 
Symbolically, in a word, one could interpret the rune sowulo as "enlightenment."
 
As to Eihwaz, I don't know about it being a "partnership" rune.  To me, the "partnership" rune is "mannaz," which is similar in shape to "ehwaz," the rune of the horse and power.  Eihwaz, in my view represents the yggdrasil, the great yew tree whereon one finds all the worlds... but I digress.  It's a little difficult to discuss runes without being able to see them!  If you have an interest, and if the venerable List Elves don't mind, here is a link to a page on Freya Aswynn's website (she was one of my instructors): http://www.aswynn.runeschool.org/images/futharkdefinitions.gif
 
(And no doubt Hermione would never have gotten Ehwaz and Eihwaz mixed up if she had Freya as her professor!  ^_~)
 
 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Tue Sep 30 18:52:59 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 18:52:59 -0000
Subject: Geography and accents; further thoughts
In-Reply-To: <blc761+tcl8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blcjeb+e4t7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81952

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jeffl1965" <jeffl1965 at h...> 
wrote:


Geoff:
> > On the question of Scots accents and pupils at the Hogwarts, bear 
> in 
> > mind that the pupils and staff are in a boarding school and will 
be 
> > rather isolated from their surroundings; I  wouldn't expect them 
to 
> > develop Scots accents.
> 


Jeff:
>    That makes sense. I've noticed that while the books don't seem 
to 
> indicate that Oliver Wood is a scot and nobody mentions this on the 
> list, how do they feel that he's been cast with a scot? Not that I 
> don' like the actor. I think he's done a great job. I'm mad he's 
been 
> cut from POA as I've been wanting to see him obsess over quidditch 
> practice. ;)
> 
> 


Geoff:
Two things. Practically, Sean Biggerstaff is a good actor and was 
well cast as Oliver Wood.

>From the story point of view, there's no reason why there shouldn't 
be a Scots student at a wizarding school in Scotland....




From gbannister10 at aol.com  Tue Sep 30 19:04:09 2003
From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 19:04:09 -0000
Subject: Voldemort's name
In-Reply-To: <blc8j4+g0cu@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blck39+bd1m@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81953

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tobyreiner" <tobyreiner at y...> 
wrote:

Toby:
> Ok, I'm new to the forum so if this has been asked long ago, please 
> forgive me. 
> 
> I've never understood why Voldemort's enemies call him "Lord 
> Voldemort", when they're not calling him "He Who Must Not Be 
Named". 
> Lord Voldemort isn't his real name, and it's bizarre that his 
claims 
> to lordship should be so readily accepted by Dumbledore et al. 
> Indeed, Dumbledore does call him Tom when they duel at the end of 
> OotP, but always as Voldemort when referring to him to others. It's 
> like Yoda and Obi-Wan Kenobi talking about the "Emperor" in Star 
> Wars, even though they never accepted Palpatine as an Emperor of 
> anything. 
> 
> Why? Just for convenience?


Geoff:
"Lord Voldemort", as we know was derived from an anagram of "Tom 
Marvolo Riddle".

Towards the end of COS, Dumbledore explains to the Weasleys that very 
few people know that Lord Voldemort was once Tom Riddle and had been 
at Hogwarts. Therefore, those brave enough not to say "You Know Who" 
or whatever presumably only know the title LV.




From pennylin at swbell.net  Tue Sep 30 19:21:37 2003
From: pennylin at swbell.net (Penny Linsenmayer)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 19:21:37 -0000
Subject: They are children's books (Was: the heart of it all)
In-Reply-To: <blcf42+8ve9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blcl41+mb4k@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81954

Hi --

Golly wrote: >  I've read excellent children's novels which discussed
politics and 
> prejudice.  No reason Rowling cannot do the same. We either abolish 
> all categories and say no one is writing children's lit vs. adult 
> literature or we accept that Rowling is writing in a well
established > genre.

Oh, I don't think we need go to any extremes like that.  Clearly, most
literature can be pegged as "children's lit," "young adult lit," or
"adult literature."  Perhaps there is some accepted "checklist" of
attributes or characteristics of children's literature that could be
consulted. (??  I'm asking, I don't know).  It is simply my opinion
(not a professional or scholarly judgment) that HP is *not* children's
literature.  But, my opinion was not formed because I'm ignorant about
what is encompassed within children's literature in general (I read
children's lit for my own enjoyment quite often .... as you say, it's
easy to miss out on a good bit of children's lit when you are a kid,
not to mention what is published after you reach adulthood).  My
opinion was also not formed because I'm somehow ashamed to be seen
reading or discussing a "children's series."  No, my opinion is (a)
just my *opinion* and (b) based on my overall feel for the series and
where it's ultimately going, with a foundation of a strong interest in
children's literature.

So, I'm with Amanda: you are perfectly entitled to your opinion that
HP is children's literature and may not stand the test of time to be
judged as classics in any case.  But, please don't make the assumption
that anyone who believes otherwise is ignorant of children's
literature or somehow ashamed of reading/discussing children's
literature.  In my case at least, nothing could be further from the
truth.  

> The divide in Harry Potter as a shifting series is not between 
> children's lit and adult lit, but between a younger child's series 
> and a young adult series. 

A matter of opinion ...........
> 
> HP is in no way comparable to the masterful treatment of humanity 
> that JD Salinger achieved with Catcher in the Rye.

Definitely a matter of opinion!  :--)

 If in 50 years we 
> are still talking about OOTP, then I may concede I am wrong about HP 
> and Rowling. Or I may simply think we have all lost our minds. That 
> isn't a slam on Rowling, it is just the truth as I see it.

Well, as I see it, the HP novels *are* classics (and I do mean *are,*
though I do concede that the test of time will be the only thing that
seals their fate in the minds of the scholars and even the average
reading public).  Sometimes classics are made despite wide popularity
with the masses after all.  Sometimes the masses aren't completely
off-base.    
> 
> I didn't like King's review.  I found it inflated.  HP is not Catcher 
> in the Rye.  As soon as anyone says something so extreme and without 
> very impressive support, he'll immediately loose my interest.

Oh, that's too bad.  I thoroughly enjoyed it.  I didn't find it an
extreme comparison at all (but then again, I obviously don't hold the
same high opinion of Salinger as you do).  

  It 
> doesn't surprise me that King is supporting Rowling.  It is in
> his 
> best interest to convince everyone Rowling is of Salinger's
> caliber.

Just curious, but how so?  The Franzer comment you made I understand,
but I fail to see how Rowling's place amongst the greats (or not) is
any concern to Stephen King.

> I said: we're seeing a gradual
> shift from juvenile (books 1-2) to young adult (books 3-4) to just
> "literature" that defies a specific label. 
> 
> GOLLY: The reason I think it degrades children's literature is that 
> it hides all the great children's books out there.  Books everybit
as > sophisticated as Order of the Phoenix. I still have no idea why 
> people think OOTP is not a YA novel.>>>>>>>>>>>>

Golly, I really and truly fail to see how my opinion that HP
transcends genre such that it cannot be properly classed as children's
literature can be taken to degrade children's literature in its
entirety!  I recognize that there are tons of great children's books
out there, and yes, some of them are technically speaking, just as
complex or dark or rich as HP.  None of those grab me in the same way
as HP does, but that's just a personal quirk I would imagine.  But
just because I, someone who has reasonably wide familiarity with
children's literature, believe that HP doesn't fall strictly within
the confines of that genre, doesn't mean that I'm condemning all
children's literature out there as being less worthy of acclaim or
attention.  I'm not saying HP is something other than children's lit,
as a means of *elevating* it.  I'm no expert that's for sure; this is
largely just a gut feeling along the lines of Justice Stewart and his
definition of obscenity ("I know it when I see it").   

> If I am to trust reviewers King, I want to know how many children's 
> books he reads in a year.  Children's/Young Adult reviewers I respect 
> have not said the series is now inappropriate for teens.

Well, you are making the *assumption* that King is not a regular
consumer of children's or YA literature and that's your prerogative,
but you should acknowledge that you're making a fairly large
assumption there.  I don't disagree that one should take reviewers
(and experts in general) with a grain of salt, considering their
background and qualifications to make the opinions they espouse.  But,
I also wouldn't make the logic leap to say that King, an author of
popular fiction with the masses, therefore lacks the credentials
necessary to write a credible review of OoP.  He did, after all, write
the NY Times review of GOF, so the the NY Times obviously felt he was
"qualified" to review Rowling.  As to why he didn't write the official
NY Times review this go around, well, I have my theories.......... 

Next, I (and noone else I've seen posting on this thread) is arguing
in any way that the series is *inappropriate* for teens or children
for that matter.  The series is definitely accessible to children and
very definitely accessible to teens.  However, if you read the
comments of the kids who were at various stages of completion of OoP
in a Newsweek article published not long after OoP was released last
summer, it is abundantly clear that a good many of them were missing
the message, mixing up the plot and otherwise not reading the book on
the same level as an adult reader would.  That's true, I realize, of
most children's literature.  When you re-read a favorite book of
childhood as an adult, more often than not you take away an
appreciation you simply lacked the sophistication to get as a child. 
So, the fact that kids are not getting all the nuances isn't alone an
indicator that the books are not children's lit.  It certainly isn't
an indicator that the series is now inappropriate for those readers. 
It's just that the books are now operating on different levels for
adult readers than for children readers (by and large).  But, I do
question whether the HP novels meet the overall criteria for
children's literature any longer is all.  I also *don't* think it's at
all appropriate for the public perception to be that OoP is as
appropriate for your 8-year old niece as it is for your 15-yr old
cousin.  I think the changing "target audience" and the increasing
sophistication and darker tone of the later novels needs to be
stressed to the public.    
> 			
> As to Rowling's view of her own work - She hasn't said
> anything that 
> I haven't heard from dozens of other children's writers.
> Rowling 
> speaks about writing children's books much the way most
> children's 
> novelists speak about it.  She clearly knew her book would be of more 
> interest to children's publishers.  To me that says something. I
> did 
> some digging and barely scraped the surface but here is what I
found. [snip interview excerpts]

Well, ignoring the larger question of the worthiness of authorial
intent as a concept (<g>), I can point to just as many interview
quotes where she gives off the impression that she doesn't view HP as
a strictly children's series (she didn't even view it as *fantasy*
when she was writing PS/SS!).  In any case, she has most definitely
contradicted herself in interviews and on more than this point.  I
don't think that we need to reduce it to a simplistic question of
whether she was lying or not.  I think it's more appropriate to
acknowledge that her views about her work might change over the course
of the last 6-7 years.  And, even so, of course, her *views* about her
work (her intent in other word) hold very little weight with me.    

Penny   





From slgazit at sbcglobal.net  Tue Sep 30 19:26:05 2003
From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 19:26:05 -0000
Subject: Will Draco come back? & Character development
In-Reply-To: <blc1hu+cbag@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blclcd+m8d7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81955

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" <stevejjen at e...> wrote:

> Draco continues to be one-dimensional, seemingly influenced only by 
> Lucius and his pure-blood indoctrination. Yet this character is the 
> proverbial gold mine waiting to be dicovered--I want to see some 
> rebellion!

I disagree that Draco has been frozen. He has developed into a
virtually unchallenged leader in Slytherin. Look at his campaign to
discredit Harry in GoF (Potter stinks badges) and to discredit Ron in
OoP (Weasley is our King). Sure, he is a nasty piece of work and has
always been, but this does not mean he has not changed. At the end of
OoP we definitely see a different Draco. Gone is the self confident,
sneering Draco. We see a vindictive angry one instead. As I see it,
the arrest of his father (whom he clearly admires, whether or not he
had been mistreated by him sometimes) has made Draco choose
Voldemort's side (if he hasn't already - his ending remarks in GoF
seem to indicate that he has made his choice long ago).

I expect Draco to continue in the direction of the leader of the
pro-Voldemort movement in Hogwarts. He may end up leading a "junior
DE" type organization, set in conflict with Harry's DA.

> But not Draco. So either that's all we're going to get, or there will 
> be a bang towards the end when Draco finally breaks free from 
> Lucius.  I'm voting for that one!

I don't think so. It would be so out of character, and also would make
the plot a lot less interesting in my mind. The end of OoP marked the
start of the second WW war. In a war you have two or more sides. That
war is bound to be reflected within the school. Just like the DA is
the seed of the forces of the good side within Hogwarts, I think
Umbridge's IS (Inquisitorial Squad - led by Draco) will develop into
the seed of the pro-Voldemort force. I think that leading that force
is the role that Draco is set up for.

Salit





From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Tue Sep 30 19:28:43 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 19:28:43 -0000
Subject: Crying wolf?
In-Reply-To: <blc4q3+piu6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blclhb+l6m5@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81956

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kneazle255" <kneazle255 at y...> wrote:
> 
> Kneazle255:
> I have always assumed that Lupin, after the initial reaction you 
> describe so well, quickly came to the realization that Peter must 
> have had something to hide. To paraphrase Sirius, if Peter's so 
> innocent, why did he hide for 12 years? Lupin's answer to that 
> question was that Peter is guilty. 
> 
> It must have really struck Lupin like an epiphany. The answer would 
> have dovetailed perfectly with what he knew about Peter and Sirius' 
> personalities. 
> 
> He may also have considered carefully Sirius'incursion into the dorm. 
> He did not kill Harry. He was after something else, Remus guesses. It 
> may have put a seed of doubt in RL's mind. 
> 
> Does Remus has at least some lingering doubts about Sirius' guilt? 
> Despite the danger to Harry, Remus apparently never tells anyone 
> about wormtail, prongs or padfoot. 
> 
> Another possibility is that Remus was using Harry as bait so he could 
> have a shot at killing Sirius himself. A totally personal vendetta. 
> So he tells no one about Padfoot because he *wants* Sirius to enter 
> Hogwarts and make an attempt on Harry that so that he can corner him.


Aha! Apparently I'm not alone in finding aspects that deserve further
consideration in this episode, though I've never had the thought
that Remus was using Harry as bait;  that's devious. Well done!

No, if I put myself in Remus' position, knowing just how little he
is supposed to know, I can't reach the conclusions he did.

1. Sirius is accepted as guilty by all of the murder of Peter.

2. Sirius escapes from Azkaban, believed to be after Harry.
, 
3. Sirius is expected to sniff around Hogwarts.

4. Sirius breaks into Gryffindor dorms.
    (He attacks the wrong bed (not Harry's) so far as everybody 
    is concerned. The immediate assumption would be that he 
    has made a mistake. How could he recognise Harry in the 
    dark when the last time he saw him was when Harry was 
    a year old?)

5. Remus sees Sirius *and* Peter on the map.
   ( Sirius he might expect, but Peter no. Where did he come
    from? What is he doing here? Is he after revenge too?
    Why should Remus assume that Peter has been hiding at 
    Hogwarts?)
    
6. Sirius, Peter, Ron, Harry, Uncle Tom Cobbleigh and all depart via
    the tunnel under the Whomping Willow to the Shack.
  
If Remus knows these facts and *nothing else* is his reaction, 
behaviour and immediate conviction of Sirius' innocence credible?

This is difficult to accept. Unless Remus has been given more
information from elsewhere to fill in some gaps, his actions don't
fit. 

Kneasy








From dcyasser at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 19:34:42 2003
From: dcyasser at yahoo.com (dcyasser)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 19:34:42 -0000
Subject: House Elfs - why DID Dobby help Harry?
In-Reply-To: <blc7ma+tcsh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blclsi+jgmr@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81957

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kneazle255" <kneazle255 at y...> 
wrote:
> 
> Kneazle255:
> i have questions about Dobby's motivations in CoS.  There is no 
overt reason why Dobby would think Harry was in any particular 
danger. Dobby knows about the diary. The diary's purpose is to kill 
> muggleborns. Harry is not muggleborn. Why does he assume Harry is 
in mortal danger?
> 
> Lucius' apparent purpose is to get DD out of Hogwarts and 
discredit the Weasleys.  There is no hint that Lucius knows that the 
diary has its own will or that it is capable of bringing Riddle 
back. I think Lucius would have used the diary differently if he 
realized it was a means to bring back his Dark Lord.)
> 
> If Dobby knows what Lucius knows and no more, his motivations 
don't make sense. He has to know more than Lucius.  He WOULD know 
more if he were orginally a Potter elf.
> 

Just yesterday I was reading Dobby's warning in CoS and this leapt 
out:

"Harry Potter must stay where he is safe. He is too great, too good, 
to lose." Later same page he says "Harry Potter must not put himself 
in peril. He is too important, sir!" (US hardcover p.16)
This screams to me that Dobby knows about the prophecy. Why else 
whould Harry be too important to lose? Sure he's a nice reminder of 
Voldemort's defeat, but that wouldn't make losing him now 
disasterous, only unpleasant.  Nope, I think Dobby knows it is vital 
that Harry sticks around, and that's why he risked coming to warn 
him. 
Dobby knows, from Lucius, that Tom Riddle's diary will be used to 
possess someone at Hogwarts and release the basilisk. Dobby knows 
the connection between Tom Riddle and Voldemort. Perhaps Dobby knows 
more than Lucius does about the magic in the diary, and realizes the 
Riddle could come back physically. That creates a direct threat for 
Harry.  I think this knowledge is simply a part of house elves 
having more powerful magic, and perhaps a deeper understanding of 
magic, than wizards. Let us not forget that Dobby stopped Lucius 
cold at the end of CoS twice - first when Lucius lunged at Harry, 
and a moment laterwhen Lucius pulled his wand . 

Harry, for his part, asks the same question of Dobby.
"But why are you warning *me*?" A sudden, unpleasant thought struck 
him. "Hang on - this hasn't got anything to do with Vol - sorry - 
with You-Know-Who, has it?" (US hardcover p.16) 

Harry knows at this point that Voldemort is a threat to him - he 
just doesn't know how much of a threat.  Dobby does. And Dobby will 
go to any lengths to protect Harry, and therefore the whole WW (EW?) 
from Voldemort.  

Plus, Dobby really, really, really likes Harry.    

Now, if Dobby knows, does Lucius know?

cheers
dc





From FilkMavenGB at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 30 19:36:01 2003
From: FilkMavenGB at hotmail.com (Gail Bohacek)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 15:36:01 -0400
Subject: (FILKS) Yet Another Musical Here...
Message-ID: <BAY9-F56vsGOkevWWGx00004c27@hotmail.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81958

Being the glutton for punishment that I am, I have decided to filk the 
musical "Little Shop Of Horrors".

It's probably anti-climatic to give you the ending first, but what the hey!  
We all know the story by heart anyway.

So, without further ado, may I present the Harry Potter Playhouse's 
rendition of the final scene from


The Tournament Of Horrors


This portion includes the musical numbers:

What Happened Next? (to the tune of _Sominex_)

Time To Die (to the tune of _Suppertime Reprise_)

Epilogue (to the tune of _Finale_)

Don't Tell Harry (to the tune of _Don't Feed The Plants_)
http://www.whitewater.k12.wi.us/whs/drama/horrors/lyrics.htm

Dedicated to all the folk who cheered me on while I was going through my 
funk...you know who you are.

********************************************************************************

Scene: Harry has just been Portkeyed back to the outside of the maze with 
Cedric's body.

Moody (taking Harry's arm to lead him away to his office):  It's alright 
son, I've got you.  Come on...hospital wing.

Harry: Dumbledore said stay.

Moody: You need to lie down, come on now.  What happened, Harry?

Harry (singing):

Was a Portkey
I saw Lord Voldemort
We were taken to a graveyard and then
With Dark Magic, he killed Cedric
There were D.E.s -
Moody!  A Death Eater is here!
We must go and
Tell Dumbledore
He would want to hear

Moody: I know where the D.E. is

Harry (Harry's lines are spoken):  You do?

Moody: And I know just where is he

Harry: Have you got him locked up?

Moody: He's standing awfully close

Harry: Karkaroff?

Moody: No, it ain't Igor...it's me

Harry:  Wh-what?

Moody: I'm Barty Crouch's son
The Dark Lord's faithful one

The Dark Lord will be pleased

Harry: I don't believe it!

Moody: When from me he has learned

Harry: You didn't...you couldn't!

Moody: That I've killed you for him

Harry: You put my name in the Cup?

Moody: And now he has returned

Harry: You gave me all the clues?

Moody: With me right by his side

Harry: You're mad!  You're mad!

Moody: So now it's time to die

(Moody draws his want to kill Harry but a blinding flash of red light 
explodes on stage as the door crashes open.  Moody is thrown backwards and 
is rendered unconscious.  In the doorway stand Dumbledore, Snape and 
Mcgonagall.  McGonagall goes directly to Harry.  Dumbledore and Snape 
approach Barty!Moody and Dumbledore kicks his body onto his back.  
Dumbledore then turns to the audience.)

Dumbledore:

Subsequent to the events which you have just witnessed
Barty Crouch was kissed, his soul sucked by a Dementor
On the order of the Minister of Magic
So then now he cannot give his testemony

Snape, McGonagall, Harry:

Subsequent to the events which you have just witnessed
Dumbledore told Fudge about Voldemort's return
But he refused to accept the evidence
So we expect resistance from Fudge

(Dumbledore joins in)

Thus there was a parting of the ways
But we knew that we couldn't delay
Because Voldemort's power would grow, and grow - and grow
So then there was much work to be done
We had to tell everyone
Like Lupin, Mrs. Figg
Mundungus Fletcher, the Old Crowd
Yeah, the Order!

(Enter the Order of the Phoenix Ensemble)

Sirius: Hidden at Number 12 Grimmald Place

Kingsley: We'll discuss the Wizarding World's fate

Snape: But whatever plans that we make

Dumbledore: Don't tell Harry

Lupin: At the Department of Mysteries

Tonks: We'll take turns guarding the prophecy

Mundungus: Though we'll do whatever it takes

Molly Weasley:  Don't tell Harry

OoP Ensemble:  Look out!  Here comes Voldemort!

(Enter Voldemort and the Death Eater Ensemble)

Look out!

Voldemort: My power's restored!

Lucius: Now he will conquer

Avery:  He'll rule like before

Wormtail: We'll give you what-for

OoP Ensemble:

We cannot let Lord Voldemort rule
We will all do what we have to do
We'll fight him, even if it's scary
But for Harry's happiness sake
Though it may be a big mistake
These are the words that D'dore spake
"Don't tell Harry"

Harry, Ron, Hermione:

See ya in Book Five!

Company:

Don't tell Harry!


Curtain.


-Gail B...more to come.

_________________________________________________________________
Instant message during games with MSN Messenger 6.0. Download it now FREE!  
http://msnmessenger-download.com




From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Tue Sep 30 20:22:02 2003
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 20:22:02 -0000
Subject: Will Draco come back? & Character development
In-Reply-To: <blclcd+m8d7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blcola+qb5q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81959

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "slgazit" <slgazit at s...> wrote:
> I disagree that Draco has been frozen. He has developed into a
> virtually unchallenged leader in Slytherin. Look at his campaign to
> discredit Harry in GoF (Potter stinks badges) and to discredit Ron 
in
> OoP (Weasley is our King). Sure, he is a nasty piece of work and has
> always been, but this does not mean he has not changed. 

<snip>
> I expect Draco to continue in the direction of the leader of the
> pro-Voldemort movement in Hogwarts. He may end up leading a "junior
> DE" type organization, set in conflict with Harry's DA.

 Just like the DA is
> the seed of the forces of the good side within Hogwarts, I think
> Umbridge's IS (Inquisitorial Squad - led by Draco) will develop into
> the seed of the pro-Voldemort force. I think that leading that force
> is the role that Draco is set up for.


Jen: I actually found Draco to be the most sinister in COS (US, p. 
139 US)--his "you'll be next, Mudlbloods" shout bothered me more than 
all the schoolboy pranks you mentioned above. Even his more tactical 
operation with Rita Skeeter in GOF was more of the same 'thwart' 
Potter routine. 

But you're right, we probably won't get to see Draco break from 
Lucius (too bad!). He does appear headed toward leading the 
Slytherins as a counterforce to the DA, even though he hasn't done 
anything as convincing as the DA did in the MOM. IMO the 
Inquisitorial Squad was just Draco as a lackey for Umbridge--not 
something he planned and executed, merely following orders. 

Of course there is that scene in Umbridge's office where Draco "was 
too slow to disguise the look of eagerness and greed that appeared on 
his face." (OOTP,US, p. 749) That could be evidence for more 
character development in the future, as well as the scene you pointed 
out at the end of OOTP, when Draco was furious with Harry about 
Lucius going to Azkaban. It will be interesting to see what develops.




From kkearney at students.miami.edu  Tue Sep 30 20:31:15 2003
From: kkearney at students.miami.edu (corinthum)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 20:31:15 -0000
Subject: Ancient rune (was Death Chamber/ancient magic)
In-Reply-To: <20030930185049.58410.qmail@web13101.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <blcp6j+rk1p@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81960

Talisman wrote:

> <<< By the way, we know Lily's "sacrifice" didn't leave a physical 
mark on Harry. (SS 299) I suggest to you that the scar on Harry's 
head is indeed the defensive rune "eihwaz," (OoP 715) and a 
consequence of Dumbledore's charm. >>>

Then David:

> <<<Or, better yet, the *partnership* rune (thank you, Debbie, for 
the thought), indicating the need for teamwork, starting with Lily, 
to defeat Voldemort.  This would not contradict the individualistic 
emphasis of the prophecy, which does not mention what Harry needs in 
order to win. That would explain why the scar functions as a link, 
too.>>>

  
 Now Odile:
  
> In my humble opinion, the scar on Harry's forehead forms the 
rune "sowulo," which is a lightening bolt.  If, like me, you hold 
that the four houses of Hogwarts correspond to the four elements, 
i.e., Gryffindor (Harry) is Fire and Slytherin(Voldemort/Riddle) is 
Water, then the clash between fire and water (rain) is lightening - 
the lightening bolt on Harry's forehead.
>  
> Symbolically, in a word, one could interpret the rune sowulo 
as "enlightenment."


Finally me:

Arguments could be made for a few different runes.  However, I 
strongly favor the eiwaz idea for one reason: JKR mentioned it by 
name.  Why?  As Odile commented, eiwaz and ehwaz really aren't 
similar in either shape or meaning, so logically Hermione shouldn't 
have had any problem distinguishing the two.  No, I'm certain this 
was one of those clues Rowling said she planted in OoP.

-Corinth




From talisman22457 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 21:09:50 2003
From: talisman22457 at yahoo.com (Talisman)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 21:09:50 -0000
Subject: Crying wolf?
In-Reply-To: <blclhb+l6m5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blcreu+3jsn@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81961

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kneazle255" 
<kneazle255 at y...> wrote:
> > 
> > Kneazle255:
> > It must have really struck Lupin like an epiphany. The answer 
would have dovetailed perfectly with what he knew about Peter and 
Sirius' personalities. 

Talisman, loving another look at PoA says:
 
I agree with Kneasy et al. who find Lupin's "epiphany" implausible. 
There are too many dots to connect, too many alternative scenerios 
and even if you guessed right, you'd want to hear it from Sirius, 
rather than feed him the explanation.  It smells to high heaven of 
pre-arrangement.
> >
Kneazle255: 
> > Another possibility is that Remus was using Harry as bait so he 
could have a shot at killing Sirius himself. A totally personal 
vendetta. 

Talisman: I do think Harry was bait.  Not Lupin's bait, but Fudge's 
(and of course Dumbledore's--though not for the same reasons).

I don't think imprisoned Sirius asked for the crossword, or that he 
even saw the photo with Pettigrew until Fudge gave it to him (Fudge 
knows Sirius is innocent, so does Dumbledore and by the action in 
PoA Snape and Lupin do, too.) Fudge knew the effect the photo would 
have on Sirius.  He also helped Sirius escape (Sirius's account of 
why the dementor's didn't effect him and how he escaped doesn't hold 
water.)

This explains why Fudge didn't punish Harry for blowing up Aunt 
Marge.  He had bigger fish to fry.  He expects Sirius to come 
looking for Harry and he's eager to sick a puckered-up dementor on 
him. If Harry is killed in the scuffle (like with Sirius's knife, 
maybe?), why it's two for one, isn't it?  Sirius takes the rap for 
Harry's death, gets permanently silenced about the Godric's Hollow 
incident, and when Fudge gets Sirius, he's a WW hero. 

Why act now? Not entirely clear what motivates Fudge, possibly the 
botched outcome of Malfoy's efforts in CoS. 

But whatever Fudge's immediate interest, look to the 
DD/Snape/Malfoy/Fudge link for the suggestion/instigation. Because, 
under DD's plan it's time to get Sirius off ice and "temporarily" 
into Harry's life.

Check out Fudge's dodgey manner when he's telling Harry how it's 
best for him to stay at the Leaky Cauldron, "`Don't want to lose you 
again, do we?' said Fudge with a hearty laugh.  `No, no . . .best we 
know where you are . . .I mean . . .'" (PoA 46)

 And again after declining Harry's request for permission to go to 
Hogsmeade, "`I fact I think it's best if you 
don't . . .yes. . .well, I'll be off.'" (PoA 47)  

Why can't Fudge seem to finish a sentence?  Afraid what might slip 
out, is he?

We know now it really can't be because he's so worried about Harry.  
He's worried about keeping track of his bait.
> > > 
Kneasy: 
> Aha! Apparently I'm not alone in finding aspects that deserve 
further  consideration in this episode <snip> No, if I put myself in 
Remus' position, knowing just how little he is supposed to know, I 
can't reach the conclusions he did.

Talisman: Unless you're in on the plan.
> 
>Kneasy: 1. Sirius is accepted as guilty by all of the murder of 
Peter.

Talisman: A lot of people know he's innocent: LV, Wormtail, Fudge, 
Malfoy, Dumbledore, Snape, Lupin, probably the Longbottoms, etc. 
> 
Kneasy: 2. Sirius escapes from Azkaban, believed to be after Harry.

Talisman: Only by the greater wizarding community.  All the folks 
supra know that 1)he was sprung 2)he's after Harry, but not to do 
him harm. Though one side thinks they are getting rid of potential 
problems, and the other is setting up for OoP and the LV-Repellent.
>  
>Kneasy: 3. Sirius is expected to sniff around Hogwarts.

Talisman: Oh, yeah. There's a lot of sniffing going on.
> 
> Kneasy:4. Sirius breaks into Gryffindor dorms.
>     (He attacks the wrong bed (not Harry's) so far as everybody 
>     is concerned. The immediate assumption would be that he 
>     has made a mistake. How could he recognise Harry in the 
>     dark when the last time he saw him was when Harry was 
>     a year old?)

Talisman: I'll spare you the rehash. 
> 
> Kneasy: 5. Remus sees Sirius *and* Peter on the map.
>    ( Sirius he might expect, but Peter no. Where did he come
>     from? What is he doing here? Is he after revenge too?
>     Why should Remus assume that Peter has been hiding at 
>     Hogwarts?)

Talisman: Lupin knows it's showtime.
>     
> Kneasy: 6. Sirius, Peter, Ron, Harry, Uncle Tom Cobbleigh and all 
depart via the tunnel under the Whomping Willow to the Shack.

Talisman: Let the games begin.
>   
> Kneasy:If Remus knows these facts and *nothing else* is his 
reaction,  behaviour and immediate conviction of Sirius' innocence 
credible?   This is difficult to accept. Unless Remus has been given 
more information from elsewhere to fill in some gaps, his actions 
don't  fit. 

Talisman: I'm hanging tight with the position that Lupin was very 
well informed.

You don't think it was a coincidence that he showed up to teach DADA 
this particular year, do you?  No, he was a planned part of the 
Sirius comeback tour.

Lupin is old Order, and never has a paying job unless DD gives it to 
him. He has always been available for DADA Prof.  DD brings him in 
NOW because of his special connection to Sirius.  He has a definite 
role to play, and he is fully aware of the program.

(DD didn't have to settle for Quirrell or Lockhart, he chose them 
for reasons having to do with his plan, as well.

He knows the effect of his DADA seat, he's the one who enchanted the 
position.

 Actually he could have any of the Order any year, if he wanted 
them.  He uses the old warrior Moody for LV bait/alarm in Gof, and 
he'll use Snape in 6& 7, because it specifically suits his purposes 
to do so.)


If you just relax and accept it, you'll find it all fits so easy.<g>

Talisman, who wonders what would come out if SHE sat in the DADA 
chair.
  
>




From msbeadsley at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 21:13:37 2003
From: msbeadsley at yahoo.com (msbeadsley)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 21:13:37 -0000
Subject: Whether or not they're children's books
In-Reply-To: <bl9pbn+u1kq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blcrm1+o3qd@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81962

> Amanda: They were and are not written for children. They were 
> written to express
> someone's vision, to tell a story.

> Golly: I'm sorry but I don't believe that one bit.  Every decent 
> children's writer aims to tell a good story and express a vision.  

Me: I thought JKR said that she did not write the books for children; 
she wrote a story *she* would want to read.

> Amanda: It was the marketing department of the publisher that chose 
> to market to children, and who made the (to me, ridiculous) 
> decision to have "adult" and "child" versions of the *exact same 
> story* with different covers.

> Golly: They aren't different versions.  There are different covers. 
> The reason they have adult and child covers is no different from 
> the reason the covers vary from country to country or decade to 
> decade.  

Me: They *are* different versions. They are the same story, the same 
manuscript, but the edition of the *book* is a different one, a 
different *version*. You draw the correlation between different age 
groups and different countries, and IMO you make Amanda's point for 
her. The covers are directly linked to who the *publisher* is 
targeting; I worked in publishing, and that's what covers are for. 
The Art Dept. in any profit-grubbing publishing company is at the 
mercy of the Marketing Dept.

> Amanda: It is a fact that the earlier books appealed to children. 
> But to classify the entire sequence--with two unread, even--
> as "children's books" is to place artificial measures on a 
> continuum. I have chosen to be guided by the author, who has said 
> no; she didn't write them for children (although she is delighted 
> at their response). She wrote them to tell a story.
 
> GOLLY: Sorry but, BULL!  By saying this you denegrate all the 
> wonderful writers who say the exact same thing and are proud to 
> admit they are children's authors.  Rowling admits that HP are 
> children's books. She simply said she doesn't write from a frame of 
> mind where she writes what she thinks kids would like.  She is 
> writing a story that excited her. As do all authors.  

Me: Where does JKR "admit that HP are children's books" please? 
Wait...no, go ahead, but I may know where that comes from and I think 
that was a joke, Golly. And the above is very confusing in that you 
say "all the wonderful writers who say the exact same thing and are 
proud to admit they are children's authors" in response to Amanda's 
assertion that the author stated that she did not write them for 
children. Are you contradicting yourself, or am I failing to read 
between the lines (and hair-splitting)? And I think asserting that 
JKR told the truth, that she didn't write the HP for children, is not 
at all *denigrating* to writers of children's books. I read 
EVERYTHING; I'm an omnilector. I especially like Daniel Pinkwater.

I have no shame about being a fan of children's fiction; my inner 
child loves a good book. And I don't really care if HP is a series of 
children's books or not. I think the debate gets silly fairly 
quickly, actually, in the sense that it seems to me to put the cart 
before the horse. Writing is a complex enough process without trying 
to have the story extrude itself through a lens fixed on some 
imaginary reader's silhouette. To some degree, even the writer with 
the tightest outline and most clairvoyance has the book "happen" and 
then has to look to see what resulted. (It's the same question as 
asking a fish about water; in the midst of anything, perspective is 
difficult if not impossible.) Go read Judy Blume's sentiments about 
the mad debate over whether or not the themes in her books are 
appropriate to children, and the agonizing she *still* does 
sometimes, *always after* the fact of having written the book. The 
Muse is ageless. The question is whether the books are *appropriate*--
not who the author wrote them for. Writing narrative is an art, not a 
science; it doesn't lend itself to sizing or exact dosages, or any 
dang fool <g> engineer could do it <splat! goes reference to most 
<shudder> technical writing>. 

Sandy, hoping, as she is behind on posts, that this isn't obsolete




From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Tue Sep 30 21:39:23 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 21:39:23 -0000
Subject: Wizarding numbers
In-Reply-To: <blc7eb+d6qk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blct6b+ij43@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81963

> tobyreiner wrote:
> How many wizards are there in Harry Potter's Britain? <

There were at least 100,000 wizards at the Quiddich World Cup in GOF 
(ch 7 or 8, I think). From multiple countries, of course.

Hogwarts is one of the three largest wizarding schools along with 
Beauxbatons and Durmstrang, but it was implied when Hermione first 
mentions them (also at the World Cup) that there are others.

-Remnant




From thomasmwall at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 21:48:55 2003
From: thomasmwall at yahoo.com (Tom Wall)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 21:48:55 -0000
Subject: Narcissa and Lucius WAS: Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: Will Draco come back?
In-Reply-To: <34.3fb5c1a6.2cab1ed9@aol.com>
Message-ID: <blcto7+mgn9@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81964

Cassie wrote:
How do we know this? What canon is there that Narcissa convinced 
Lucius to send Draco to Hogwarts? 

Tom: 
The information you're looking for is in Goblet of Fire.

"...Father actually considered sending me to Durmstrang rather than 
Hogwarts, you know. He knows the headmaster, you see. Well, you know 
his opinion of Dumbledore - the man's such a Mudblood-lover - and 
Durmstrang doesn't admit that sort of riffraff. But Mother didn't 
like the idea of me going to school so far away. Father says 
Durmstrang takes a far more sensible line than Hogwarts about the 
Dark Arts. Durmstrang students actually learn them, not just the 
defense rubbish we do...." (GoF, Ch.11, 165)

According to Draco (if he can be trusted) Narcissa won because 
Durmstrang was too far away. Of course, this doesn't make any sense 
to me at all, considering that the WW can use Portkeys and Floo 
Powder to traverse great distances, but hey: it's in the canon. ;-)

Cheers,
Tom




From manawydan at ntlworld.com  Tue Sep 30 21:48:47 2003
From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 22:48:47 +0100
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Wizarding numbers
References: <1064953884.8012.45937.m17@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <002c01c3879c$a0dd2000$cb516751@f3b7j4>

No: HPFGUIDX 81965

tobyreiner asked:
> How many wizards are there in Harry Potter's Britain?

A lot more than that, but possibly not quite as many as that...

> I ask, because it seems to me that the population is barely adequate
> to cover the infrastructure detailed in the books. (Especially a
> Quidditch league)

Not to mention the scope and coverage of the media (a daily paper with an
evening edition, a radio station, plus various magazines and periodicals of
verying frequencies).

Also not to mention the relatively huge size of the Ministry, with its
hundreds of employees arriving for work each day.

> According to an interview with Rowling, Hogwarts has 1,000 students;
> bearing in mind that there are only five boys in Gryffindor in
> Harry's year, this is about about three times more than I expected.
> If there were 10 per house per year, there would be 280 in the whole
> school. The discrepancy could be because Hufflepuff, as the only non-
> selective house, is far bigger than the remaining three.

Remember that Hogwarts is a school of wizardry and witchcraft.

It's often surmised on this list that those young people who wouldn't _need_
to qualify as wizards or witches likewise wouldn't _need_ to have a Hogwarts
education.

> Does anyone know?

Only JKR, and she's not telling!

Fun to speculate though. My own theory (not supported by canon, and far from
consensus on this list) is that the ratio of muggles to wizards is about
100:1, which would give a WW large enough to support the infrastructure you
highlighted

Cheers

Ffred

O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon
Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion
Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri





From yswahl at stis.net  Tue Sep 30 21:59:02 2003
From: yswahl at stis.net (samnanya)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 21:59:02 -0000
Subject: Dobby helped Harry but can he tell time ?
Message-ID: <blcub6+prjl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81966

My apologies in case this question was asked before ..

Dobby was freed by Harry from the employ of the Malfoys at the end of 
CoS which is at the end of Harry's year 2. Yet in the middle of year 4 
when Hermione has gotten Harry and Ron into the elf kitchen, dobby 
exclaims "Dobby has traveled the country for two whole years, sir, 
trying to find work!"   (GOF 378 US ed)
Hmm elf time different from Wizard time ?  
I wonder what Dobby's exact status with the Malfoys was at the time he 
helped Harry? Somehow, I DONT think that this is a flint......

Any ideas?
samnanya




From draco382 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 22:10:16 2003
From: draco382 at yahoo.com (draco382)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 22:10:16 -0000
Subject: Will Draco come back? & Character development
In-Reply-To: <blcola+qb5q@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blcv08+jgi7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81967

> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "slgazit" <slgazit at s...> 
wrote:
> > I disagree that Draco has been frozen. He has developed into a
> > virtually unchallenged leader in Slytherin. Look at his campaign 
to
> > discredit Harry in GoF (Potter stinks badges) and to discredit 
Ron 
> in
> > OoP (Weasley is our King). 

Jen Reese wrote: 
> But you're right, we probably won't get to see Draco break from 
> Lucius (too bad!). He does appear headed toward leading the 
> Slytherins as a counterforce to the DA, even though he hasn't done 
> anything as convincing as the DA did in the MOM. IMO the 
> Inquisitorial Squad was just Draco as a lackey for Umbridge--not 
> something he planned and executed, merely following orders. 
> 

now me:
Draco has shown some impressive leadership skills, and seems to be a 
self-starter of sorts, which is precisely why his break from Lucius 
is inevitable.  Which leader would be happy to take orders from 
someone else?  Taking orders is something for a Death Eater to do.  
Yeah, its possible Draco could even become a Death Eater during his 
time in Hogwarts, but I see him finding it very confining after some 
time.  You can only be an evil-overlord's lackey for so long. 

~draco382 






From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Tue Sep 30 22:11:22 2003
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (boyd_smythe)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 22:11:22 -0000
Subject: Crying wolf?
In-Reply-To: <blcreu+3jsn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blcv2a+aggf@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81968

> Talisman wrote:
> I agree with Kneasy et al. who find Lupin's "epiphany" implausible. 
> There are too many dots to connect, too many alternative scenerios 
> and even if you guessed right, you'd want to hear it from Sirius, 
> rather than feed him the explanation.  It smells to high heaven of 
> pre-arrangement. <

Another take on this is that Lupin never wanted to believe in his 
heart that his good friend was really the traitor. Even though his 
mind said not to trust Sirius, his heart told him that Sirius was one 
of his best pals. So as soon as a reasonable story comes out 
exonerating the old dog, he believes it. And the finger was the extra 
bit of evidence he needed.

He may also have used a bit of legilimency to see from Sirius or 
Pettigrew who told the truth.

Or, more realistically (cynically?), JKR needed to keep the scene 
fast-paced, since so much had to happen for her plot.

> Talisman: I do think Harry was bait.  Not Lupin's bait, but Fudge's 
> (and of course Dumbledore's--though not for the same reasons).
> 
> I don't think imprisoned Sirius asked for the crossword, or that he 
> even saw the photo with Pettigrew until Fudge gave it to him (Fudge 
> knows Sirius is innocent, so does Dumbledore and by the action in 
> PoA Snape and Lupin do, too.) Fudge knew the effect the photo would 
> have on Sirius.  He also helped Sirius escape (Sirius's account of 
> why the dementor's didn't effect him and how he escaped doesn't hold 
> water.) <

Interesting theory! But remember that Sirius was already resisting the 
effect of the dementors pretty well, and the request for his newspaper  
may have been so unexpected from an Azkaban prisoner that Fudge just 
gave it to Sirius in open-mouthed wonder. I guess I just don't want to 
give Fudge that much credit.

> This explains why Fudge didn't punish Harry for blowing up Aunt 
> Marge.  He had bigger fish to fry. <

True, but I assumed that his concern for Harry was more political. At 
that point, Harry is kind of a hero or at least a national oddity. To 
let the Boy Who Lived die at the hands of the prisoner who escaped 
under Fudge's watch would have been a political disaster for Fudgie.

<el snip muy grande>
> You don't think it was a coincidence that he showed up to teach DADA 
> this particular year, do you?  No, he was a planned part of the 
> Sirius comeback tour. <

That's one possibility. But the beauty of JKR's fiendish plotting is 
that it could as easily be that Lupin approached DD only after the 
second year began. Or DD asked Lupin before the second year, but based 
on his books thought Lockhart the better candidate.

> If you just relax and accept it, you'll find it all fits so easy.<g>

I know, I'm so darn innocent, but sometimes I want to believe that 
after five books and the intro of the OOP we'd have been told about 
all this. So many loose ends to tie up if all this magic dishwashery 
stuff is to be true!

And I just don't think DD is orchestrating everything all the time. 
What about freedom of choice?

-Remnant




From deemarie1a at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 22:26:07 2003
From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 22:26:07 -0000
Subject: Will Draco Come Back?
Message-ID: <blcvtv+k7e6@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81969

Draco will definately be back.  

OotP US Hardcover Edition Pg. 850-851

Harry had just descended the last marble step into the entrance hall 
when Malfoy, Crabbe, and Goyle emerged from a door on the right that 
Harry knew led down to the Slytherin common room.  Harry stopped 
dead; so did Malfoy and the others.  For a few moments, the only 
sounds were the shouts, laughter, and splashes drifting into the hall 
from the grounds through the open front doors.

Malfoy glanced around.  Harry knew he was checking for signs of 
teachers.  Then he looked back at Harry and said in a low 
voice, "You're dead, Potter."

And later on on page 851

"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..."

Oh, yes, Draco will be back.  Here we see some real character 
development.  Even though Draco has been pretty static in the first 4 
books, here we see him develop his revenge motivation.  Draco will be 
a pivotal character in the next two books.  Of course, that is just 
my opinion....

D
 




From mom31 at rochester.rr.com  Tue Sep 30 22:43:17 2003
From: mom31 at rochester.rr.com (mom31)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 18:43:17 -0400
Subject: [HPforGrownups] RE: Will Draco Come Back?
References: <blcvtv+k7e6@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <002001c387a4$3db78710$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>

No: HPFGUIDX 81970


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Donna 



  Draco will definately be back.  

  OotP US Hardcover Edition Pg. 850-851

  Harry had just descended the last marble step into the entrance hall 
  when Malfoy, Crabbe, and Goyle emerged from a door on the right that 
  Harry knew led down to the Slytherin common room.  Harry stopped 
  dead; so did Malfoy and the others.  For a few moments, the only 
  sounds were the shouts, laughter, and splashes drifting into the hall 
  from the grounds through the open front doors.

  Malfoy glanced around.  Harry knew he was checking for signs of 
  teachers.  Then he looked back at Harry and said in a low 
  voice, "You're dead, Potter."

  And later on on page 851

  "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..."

  Oh, yes, Draco will be back.  Here we see some real character 
  development.  Even though Draco has been pretty static in the first 4 
  books, here we see him develop his revenge motivation.  Draco will be 
  a pivotal character in the next two books.  Of course, that is just 
  my opinion....


  Joj:

  I agree!  I think Malfoy is going to do some serious harm in the next book, and I think he's going to use Hermione to do it. 
   
  I've always thought he was going to hurt Hermione, but after the way he threatened Harry at the end of OotP, I got goose bumps.

   JKR made Harry and Hermione closer in this book.  She made him depend on her more. I've been wondering why. I don't think it was for shipping reasons, at least not only for shipping reasons.  If she puts Hemione with Harry or Ron, it will be for the good of the bigger plot. With Harry and Hermione so close now, I think it would be the best way for Draco to hurt Harry.  I think he's always wanted to get Hermione anyways, but now, with his revenge rage, he might do more than hurt her.  

  Joj,  who loves hermy and hopes she's wrong!

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From shirley2allie at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 30 22:50:20 2003
From: shirley2allie at hotmail.com (Shirley)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 22:50:20 -0000
Subject: Crying wolf?
In-Reply-To: <blclhb+l6m5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bld1bc+lfok@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81971

<<much snippage>>

>> Kneasy:     
> 6. Sirius, Peter, Ron, Harry, Uncle Tom Cobbleigh and all depart via
>     the tunnel under the Whomping Willow to the Shack.
 


stupid question from Shirley:
*Who* is Uncle Tom Cobbleigh, or is this just another way of 
saying 'everybody and their dog' (meaning, lots of people, and I 
don't want to list them all right now, thanks)?

Shirley, who sort of stumbled over that part of your narrative, but 
was quite engrossed, nonetheless




From jwcpgh at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 23:29:01 2003
From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 23:29:01 -0000
Subject: Crying wolf?
In-Reply-To: <blcreu+3jsn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <bld3jt+jl5o@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81972

> Talisman: > 
> I don't think imprisoned Sirius asked for the crossword, or that he 
> even saw the photo with Pettigrew until Fudge gave it to him (Fudge 
> knows Sirius is innocent, so does Dumbledore and by the action in 
> PoA Snape and Lupin do, too.) Fudge knew the effect the photo would 
> have on Sirius.  He also helped Sirius escape (Sirius's account of 
> why the dementor's didn't effect him and how he escaped doesn't 
hold water.)
> 
> This explains why Fudge didn't punish Harry for blowing up Aunt 
> Marge.  He had bigger fish to fry.  He expects Sirius to come 
> looking for Harry and he's eager to sick a puckered-up dementor on 
> him. If Harry is killed in the scuffle (like with Sirius's knife, 
> maybe?), why it's two for one, isn't it?  Sirius takes the rap for 
> Harry's death, gets permanently silenced about the Godric's Hollow 
> incident, and when Fudge gets Sirius, he's a WW hero. 

Laura:

I think I'm being obtuse here (a common state of mind for me), but I 
don't understand (1) why Fudge would want to get rid of Harry at the 
time of PoA or (2) why Fudge would arrange for Sirius to escape only 
to manipulate him into being recaptured.  Are you suggesting that 
Fudge is a DE sypmathizer?  And since virtually everyone in the WW 
thinks Sirius killed Lily and James, why not just let him stay in 
Azkaban?  Fudge had no way of knowing that Sirius had found ways to 
stay sane, so he couldn't think of Sirius as any kind of threat.

If you really think that Remus was in on this whole convoluted plan, 
then you must be impressed with his acting skills.  That was quite a 
little scene he and Snape put on in the Shack.  Or were all the 
adults in on this scheme and they all put on their little show for 
the benefit of HRH?  I'm so confused...and I still believe in Remus!
>   
> >




From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu  Tue Sep 30 23:55:54 2003
From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 23:55:54 -0000
Subject: Will Draco Come Back?
In-Reply-To: <002001c387a4$3db78710$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w>
Message-ID: <bld56a+8ikl@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81973

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mom31" <mom31 at r...> wrote:
> 
>   >   Joj wrote:
> 
>   I agree!  I think Malfoy is going to do some serious harm in the 
next book, and I think he's going to use Hermione to do it. 
>    
>   I've always thought he was going to hurt Hermione, but after the 
way he threatened Harry at the end of OotP, I got goose bumps.
> 
>    JKR made Harry and Hermione closer in this book.  She made him 
depend on her more. I've been wondering why. I don't think it was for 
shipping reasons, at least not only for shipping reasons.  If she 
puts Hemione with Harry or Ron, it will be for the good of the bigger 
plot. With Harry and Hermione so close now, I think it would be the 
best way for Draco to hurt Harry.  I think he's always wanted to get 
Hermione anyways, but now, with his revenge rage, he might do more 
than hurt her.  
> 
>   Joj,  who loves hermy and hopes she's wrong!

Jennifer writes:
I really noticed that Harry and Hermione were thrown together at 
pivotal points, dealing with Umbridge and at the MOM and Ron was sort 
of left out. This has happened before but not to this degree. I was 
very distressed to think that it may be to make Draco's revenge much 
more poignant. I certainly hope not. She's always been able to handle 
the little ferret before. But if he's mad enough, sheer force would 
overwhelm her. I think this speculation does not bode well for a 
Hogwarts that would be "back to normal" in Book 6. Could Hogwarts be 
an even greater battlefield next book than it was in Book 5?
Jennifer
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From strikethepose_vouge at yahoo.co.uk  Tue Sep 30 16:53:12 2003
From: strikethepose_vouge at yahoo.co.uk (laura)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 16:53:12 -0000
Subject: House Elfs - why DID Dobby help Harry?
In-Reply-To: <blc3e5+gvub@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blccdo+h48q@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81974

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" <yswahl at s...> wrote:
> president0084
> --------------
> Dobby left the Malfoy house to protect Harry Potter. JK has said 
> nothing about Harry's family. But he must be from a pureblood 
family 
> because Malfoy tried the make friends (on the train).<snip>
> The hat wanted to put Harry in Slytherin (the Malfoys always go 
into 
> Slytherin). So I think Malfoy and Potters are related.
> 
> samnanya
> --------------
> I dont think that proves anything about Harry being a pureblood - 
> especially since his mother was a mudblood, and the whole magic 
> protection charm would be null and void if Lily was not Harry's 
> mother.
> I think that Malfoy acted under the principle of "keep your friends 
> close and your enemies closer".
> That said, I never did understand why Dobby got involved with Harry 
in 
> the first place. Winky defended Barty Crouch even though he was 
> despicable just because he was her master. Why would Dobby "desert" 
> the Malfoy family? 
> My apologies if I am missing something obvious.....


.......................
now me (laura)

We know that Kreacher left 12 Grimmauld Place to join the branch of 
the family more in keeping with his ideology. My theory is that the 
Malfoys and the Potters are somehow related - canon tells us that all 
the Pureblood families are interrelated via marriage.  I get the 
impression that the Potter's were a Pureblood family sometime in the 
recent past, thus would be related in some manner to the Malfoys.  
Therefore, Dobby could seek out Harry, as he would be a branch of the 
family more suited to his ideology.
sorry if i've brought something screamingly obvious up...

laura





From feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca  Tue Sep 30 18:09:59 2003
From: feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca (feetmadeofclay)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 18:09:59 -0000
Subject: How many Rons per Hermione - numerical analysis of Ron's alleged decline
In-Reply-To: <001f01c3868f$d60fa260$9aec79a5@rick>
Message-ID: <blcgtn+5hmh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81975

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Iggy McSnurd" 
<coyoteschild at p...> wrote:

> 
> 2 - Hermione was more appropriate to have more active in OotP than 
Ron was.
> Rather than strain to try and make Ron a stronger presence in the 
books, she
> went with the person who was more appropriate... Hermione.

I wouldn't agree.  Harry was miserable in this book.  It was 
traditionally Ron's role to take Harry's mind off his troubles and 
ease his pain with humour and friendliness.  I think the fact that 
Ron was either not around to do that or unable do this is 
significant.  It means their relationship is changing and so will 
Ron's role in the series.  Rowling will have to over the next book 
redefine why and how Harry and Ron are friends (if they are at all).  

Hermione was traditionally horrible at making Harry feel better and 
entertaining him.  That is changing too. 

Ron's absence in this book is not a fluke. 

GOLLY





From lynch at agere.com  Tue Sep 30 18:23:53 2003
From: lynch at agere.com (zihav)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 18:23:53 -0000
Subject: House Elfs?
Message-ID: <blchnp+gl06@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81976

Greetings:

I've been wondering, we know how to dismiss a house elf, but how does 
a wizarding family go about getting a house elf? We know that Ron 
states in CoS that it's an old wizarding family with lots of gold, 
but is that the only requirement? I think it would be pretty funny if 
Hermione ends up with a House Elf (Winky) and can't bring herself to 
dismiss her becasue she's now happy again. Ron and Harry would have 
tell her that she would treat Winky better than anyone else.

 zihav





From kneazle255 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 18:28:29 2003
From: kneazle255 at yahoo.com (kneazle255)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 18:28:29 -0000
Subject: Wizarding numbers
In-Reply-To: <blc7eb+d6qk@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blci0d+2hv4@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81977

tobyreiner wrote:

if there are 1,000 students in the school, there would 
normally be about 15,000 wizards and witches in the country, as it's 
the only school and would therefore include everyone in the 11-16 age 
range and, probably, most of the 16-18 year olds too. However, as 
wizards live longer than Muggles, maybe there are more. 
 
Does anyone know?

Kneazle:

My badly estimated guess is a UK WW population of around 60,000.

20% of families with school age kids
10% with kids younger than school age
70% with no school age kids or no kids at all (including couples, 
singles, those with older kids)






From kneazle255 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 30 18:41:44 2003
From: kneazle255 at yahoo.com (kneazle255)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 18:41:44 -0000
Subject: Will Draco come back? & Character development
In-Reply-To: <blchs9+a48i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blcip8+jr4r@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81978


draco382 wrote:
in time for all these long years to make a big bangy point later on --
namely that central theme of the whole story so far -- its one's 
choices that make them who they are.  If you ask me, Draco's 
redemption is going to be one of the biggest moments in the whole 
story 

kneazle responds:
I have not seen anything redeemable in Draco in canon. Draco makes 
the same choices over and over again, and they all evil in the same  
vicious little way.

I don't like Draco, but if you could point out one good point or 
anything worthwhile about DM I would be happy to reread it.

He's the Regulus Black of his generation. I think the big point will 
be that Harry's going to feel sorry for him after Voldemort (or 
Lucius) guts him like a fish because he's too much of a miserable 
little snit even for the Deatheaters.










From feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca  Tue Sep 30 19:06:56 2003
From: feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca (feetmadeofclay)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 19:06:56 -0000
Subject: Voldemort's name
In-Reply-To: <blck39+bd1m@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blck8g+nrvh@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81979

> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tobyreiner" 
<tobyreiner at y...> 
> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Why? Just for convenience?


Don't you know - All fantasy series have a dark lord.  It is part of 
the tour.  You'd be upset if you signed up for the full package and 
didn't have any contact with one.  

Golly





From Yahtzee63 at aol.com  Tue Sep 30 19:16:21 2003
From: Yahtzee63 at aol.com (Yahtzee63 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 15:16:21 -0400
Subject: Will Draco Come Back? 
Message-ID: <60F99BBE.4099E107.02A5D73B@aol.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81980

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" <yswahl at s...> wrote:

>Time is running out for Good|Draco to emerge.
> Can anyone ferret out a sign of change in Malfoy?

And Sydney answers: 
>>Zip. Zero. Zilch. I'm REALLY curious to know where JKR is going
with Draco. 'Redemption Draco' seems totally unlikely to me; mostly
because amongst all his other charming qualities he's an abject
coward. It takes courage to change your mind and I haven't seen that
kind of inner strength from Draco at all.<<


ITA to this. I decided, way back in CoS, that either Snape or Draco would be redeemed during the series -- but not both, and it looks like Snape's the lucky winner. 

I do, however, think Draco will be developed more as a character, but as a villain as well. As opposed to Lord Voldemort, who is just flat evil, almost devoid of any need for motivation of context, Draco will IMHO come to represent the human face of evil -- vulnerable, not without emotion and with a social context, but evil nonetheless.  Harry will ultimately have to face down not just a Big Bad Naughty Person, but somebody whom he knows and understands, even if he dislikes him. In some ways, that's harder to do. 

Sydney adds: 

>>On the other hand it's weird of Rowling to keep the main nemesis
totally static, as Draco has been. It's hard to see his function in
the story. I mean, Draco's not even dangerous, which at least could
generate suspense; not one of his Evil Plans has ever worked out.
He's not a particularily interesting psychological study (yet,
anyways). He's not a warning of slippery slopes of any kind; he was
a vicious little racist at 11 just as he is at 15. He's just kind of
a moral punching bag.<<

My personal take on OOTP is that it's about all the student-aged characters leaving the concerns of childhood and entering the adult realm. For Harry, this happens with Cedric's death at the end of GoF; much of his frustration at the beginning of the book is that he is still being treated as a child, and that Ron and Hermione are still reacting to events like kids (willing to be led, trusting their elder's judgment.) Throughout OOTP, the students are introduced to greater danger and larger risks, and they mature to the tasks at hand. 

The main exception is Draco, who remains a childhood bully -- and increasingly one with less power. In the early novels, he's taunting Ron about his Mom being fat, and this incenses Ron; by the end of OOTP, that kind of thing just doesn't matter any more. The kids all have bigger concerns on their minds than Draco's snarkiness.

But I think that, at the end of the book, when Lucius Malfoy is imprisoned, that all changes. Draco has finally, personally, been forced to suffer the consequences of his family's actions, and he now has a true grudge against Harry -- a genuine cause for the dislike he's harbored all these years. I think Draco is the last of the kids to "grow up" in that sense, but he does so at the very end. The stakes are higher for Draco now, and his behavior will change accordingly.

That said, I don't think Draco will change for the better, nor am I sure that would be the best outcome. I am a big believer in showing people's changing and improving over time, step by step. JKR has accomplished this quite beautifully with Snape, unfolding the better dimensions of his personality slowly while not losing focus on his still-strong bitterness and pettiness. I am not sure that Draco could be believably transformed from a two-dimensional baddie to a three-dimensional hero in just two books. He could, however, go from a two-dimensional baddie to a three-dimensional baddie. I think Draco will remain on the wrong side of things, but that we will see him make active choice, and even come to pity the tragedy of his making those choices, to be on the wrong side. 


JMO --

Yahtzee





From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Tue Sep 30 20:01:39 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 15:01:39 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione's idealism
References: <blacl2+bg49@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <007a01c3878d$aab2f820$4d97aec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81981

> Marianne:
> Plus, trying to unlock Squibs' magic is certainly not as easy as
> tossing a piece of clothing to an elf.  You'd think that maybe this
> task would actually appeal to Hermione more, in that she'd have to do
> all sorts of research to try to figure out a cure for squibness.


Iggy:

Mentioning this brings up a point I've pondered for a while... (Please
forgive me if it's been posted on before...)

Dobby is freed not because Harry gave him a sock, but because Lucius Malfoy
did through Harry's trick.
(He was freed not because he was given a sock by someone, but because his
EMPLOYER gave him the sock.)

The House Elves at Hogwarts, it is reasonable to assume (especially since
Dobby went to Dumbledore for his job), are employed by the Headmaster... not
by the other staff or the students.

By this merit, the only effect the caps and such that Hermione sets out
(and, indeed, it does have this effect) would be in offending the House
Elves.  Since she is not their "employer", she would have no power to let
any of them go free.  (This would be like a student at a university trying
to fire a janitor....)


Comments?

Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster

"I think, therefore I'm dangerous."

--- Yet ANOTHER one of Iggy's 72 collected bumper stickers







From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Tue Sep 30 20:30:50 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 15:30:50 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Jewish Goblins?
References: <blam5i+6cjb@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <009e01c38792$cb7f5300$4d97aec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 81982



> >
> Matt:
>
> > Again, __no__one__said__there__was__any__caricature.  <snip>
>
>Laura:
> The caricature would be in the nature of the goblins-smart, uniquely
> able to handle money, ugly, not "like us".  I'm glad you find this
> to be an unconvincing portrait of Jews-so do I.  But there are still
> people in the world who see us this way.  So Nemi's suggestion that
> these characters suggest Jews, even if in a historical sense, is
> unworthy of JKR.
>

Hmmm... I always saw it not that the Goblins were uniquely qualified to
handle money, rather that they were uniquely qualified to PROTECT the money.
(That, and they don't really care who's money they're protecting... In that
case, they must be part Swiss as well... *grin*)

I can also see them as being stereotypical bankers... this coming from
someone who was in the banking industry for 4 years...  You know, they
protect the money, they don't care about who's money they have in their
vaults so long as they get paid, relentless in getting people to pay off
their loans or other debts...

In a case like this, they'd be less like the Jews, and more like the
supposedly heartless American big businessman... or possibly the old English
moneylender a-la Ebineezer Scrooge.


IMHO, and I may be completely wrong... The prejudice isn't based on them
being like Jews... rather on them being of a different race, and/or having a
different set of values.  (Both of which combined, covers a LOT of prejudice
range here...)

> Laura:
>
> I don't purport to speak for all Jews, just this one.  I hope that
> if this discussion continues, we can do it politely and
> respectfully.  You may be surprised to know that I know what an
> allegory is-thanks, though.
>

An allegory... Isn't that an animal related to a crocodile?


Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster

" ESCHEW OBFUSCATION!"

-- Yet another one of Iggy's bumper stickers








From feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca  Tue Sep 30 21:12:25 2003
From: feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca (feetmadeofclay)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 21:12:25 -0000
Subject: They are children's books (Was: the heart of it all)
In-Reply-To: <blcl41+mb4k@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blcrjp+qpht@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81983

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Penny Linsenmayer" 
<pennylin at s...> wrote:

Penny:  I didn't find it an
> extreme comparison at all (but then again, I obviously don't hold 
the
> same high opinion of Salinger as you do). 

There are no such things as "instant classics" in my opinion.  Time 
and distance are necessary watch fate sift out titles that have 
enduring appeal.  I do like Salinger a great deal, but there are 
other classics I don't enjoy or didn't understand. I try to respect 
the application of the title based on the fact that decades or 
centuries of criticism and study have not dampened an enthusiasm 
these books. Whenever a new book is said to be a classic or said to 
be better than an established classic, that makes me wary.  

I think that it is too soon to call the HP series anything  

I'm not sure how future generations will react to HP.  I'm waiting to 
see. 
 
PENNY:
> Just curious, but how so?  The Franzer comment you made I 
understand,
> but I fail to see how Rowling's place amongst the greats (or not) is
> any concern to Stephen King.

King and Rowling have each had criticism from the same corner.  The 
so called Ivory Tower.  The difference is that from the start, being 
popular has earned Rowling much praise.  Kids are obviously better 
judges of literature than the average adult.  

I think that this is all part of a general trend to make populist 
tastes seem more respectable.  There is a growing trend towards 
accepting that popularity equals quality. Not a crazy theory since 
King just won National Book Foundation's annual award for 
distinguished contribution to literature. 

I personally don't think Bloom is entirely off when he says that a 
good chunk (ok he says all - but I take that as blustering extremism) 
of Rowling's readers may grow up to read Stephen King over Hardy. A 
good chunk of all readers grow up and never read classics after they 
leave high school.

Though perhaps reasonable, I don't fully trust Bloom's taste either.  
I think some of his recommended adult picks are horrendous. 

I think when HP is talked about as a classic before Rowling's even 
finished with the series and before we can even judge whether her 
experiment is a success or whether she stands the test of time, that 
is the kind of talk that defends populist reading as a whole. It is 
in King's best interest to praise it.  Which makes me skeptical of 
his reviews in general.  Especially when the prose of the latest is 
so weak he feels the need to excuse it.  

I'm waiting until Rowling is done and her series has 25-50 years 
behind it.  

I want to see what future generations make of it.  


> 
> PENNY: Well, you are making the *assumption* that King is not a 
regular
> consumer of children's or YA literature and that's your prerogative,
> but you should acknowledge that you're making a fairly large
> assumption there.  


GOLLY: Granted he could, but he doesn't often review children's 
literature. His review didn't feel like it was written by a person 
who is passionate about children's literature.  

I'd rather stick those that read 200 new childrens books a year. That 
is what they do.  I generally find their comments more insightful.  

>He did, after all, write
> the NY Times review of GOF, so the the NY Times obviously felt he 
was
> "qualified" to review Rowling.  As to why he didn't write the 
official
> NY Times review this go around, well, I have my theories.......... 

And they are....  

His review of GOF was ok...  

The NY times felt that Byatt was qualified to review Rowling and many 
amongst this fanbase disagreed.  The Wallstreet Journal thought Bloom 
was qualified to review Rowling.  I felt his discussion was a bit off 
point.  He had a few good points, but some of it is too strident for 
children's books. (Remember he reviewed PS) Many children, especially 
younger or reluctant readers need books that are thrilling yet 
simple. These books may not have beautiful prose, but they are easy 
to read and encourage enthusiasm.  Wind in the Willows, though great, 
is a particular type of children's book. Breezy, well written and 
witty but literary.  Bloom's collection of children's stories is a 
little difficult for many of the readers that Rowling attracted to 
her early books. 

Rowling is definitely to be praised for challanging certain reluctant 
readers. Bloom never acknowledges this.  That bugs me.    

Bloom is, like King, a bit of a media ham.  He likes to be 
sensational and extreme.  He's not a children's literature 
professor.  It isn't his field.  

Though even within fields there is never consensus.  I once met a 
children's literature professor who practically spat when he talked 
about Winnie the Pooh.  He hated it with a passion.  I could see his 
points but I can also see the other side.  Winnie is charming, 
lovable and whimsical.  


> PENNY: It's just that the books are now operating on different 
levels for
> adult readers than for children readers (by and large).  But, I do
> question whether the HP novels meet the overall criteria for
> children's literature any longer is all.  I also *don't* think it's 
at
> all appropriate for the public perception to be that OoP is as
> appropriate for your 8-year old niece as it is for your 15-yr old
> cousin.  I think the changing "target audience" and the increasing
> sophistication and darker tone of the later novels needs to be
> stressed to the public.

GOLLY: You may be right about fair marketing.

But I really don't think OOTP operates on a level beyond many YA 
novels.  In fact I was dissapointed that OOTP's depiction on politics 
and racial prejudice was not more sophisticated and more 
challanging.  I wanted to see more evidence of the general prejudice 
against muggle bornes and the painful effect that has on muggle borne 
characters.  Not much seem to have the painful import of a war - 
except Mrs. Weasley's Woes.  That was very well done.

The rest seemed like ramped up teen angst played against a setting of 
charicature and sensationalism.     

Even the death did not really scare me or horrify me. It didn't 
change the way I feel about the story.  It doesn't worry or chill 
me.  It I figure Sirius was expendible plotwise. It wasn't like he 
was Dumbledore or Hermione. Just more yanking on my heartstrings.

The tone is definitely different from POA but I think it isn't more 
sophisticated than the average edgy YA novel.  Many of which are very 
angry and dark.  Stay tuned to watch our hero triumph and die - same 
bat-time, same bat-channel.    

But I guess if you see it, I should think about this some more...
		

PENNY: And, even so, of course, her *views* about her
> work (her intent in other word) hold very little weight with me.

Well yes I would agree with that.  Authors aren't always the best 
judges of their own work. 

I really meant the comment in response to another poster...

Realistically if HP 7 is meant for a 17 year old, it will be an adult 
novel. That is perhaps the weirdest thing about the series.   I will 
be interested to see how that plays out. I figure I have at least a 
decade to wait.   
    
Golly





From feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca  Tue Sep 30 21:15:40 2003
From: feetmadeofclay at yahoo.ca (feetmadeofclay)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 21:15:40 -0000
Subject: House Elf Army,  WAS: House Elfs
In-Reply-To: <blc90a+nff1@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <blcrps+5qa7@eGroups.com>

No: HPFGUIDX 81984

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ariana Seibel" 
<arianaseibel at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sue Porter" <sues0101 at h...> 
> wrote:
> *snip*
> Dobby's protection of Harry seems uncharacterisitc of a house elf 
and 
> it will be interesting to see how he fits into the future books! 
The 
> Hogwarts House Elf Army perhaps?
> 
> Now Ariana (me) says:
> I think this will be *very* important.  


Seems obvious to me that in the grand attempt to gain allies, house 
elves have been overlooked.  Giants and Centaurs seem out.  But the 
house elves may join up for freedom. And Hogwarts apparently has a 
great number of them.

We know they have their own powerful magic.  It is a perfect fit 
against DE and the dementors. I think it will be rather useful that 
they can apparate around Hogwarts.  (or however they manage to appear 
and disappear at will) 

I think they will be Dumbledore's Army - or at least have their own 
regiment. 

Golly 





From KagomeShikonSeeker at BonBon.net  Tue Sep 30 23:46:08 2003
From: KagomeShikonSeeker at BonBon.net (Kagome Shikon Seeker)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 16:46:08 -0700
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Whether or not they're children's books
In-Reply-To: <blcrm1+o3qd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <OPEILPBJNFMDFHCDPHMLCEALCAAA.KagomeShikonSeeker@BonBon.net>

No: HPFGUIDX 81985

I've been lurking, and following this debate for a while, and just have one
thing to say.  This is from an interview of JKR given in Newsweek (not sure
which issue) that I happen to use as my bookmark for OoP.

QUOTE:

And yes, the plot gets darker in "Phoenix," a point Rowling thinks is so
obvious by now it's hardly worth mentioning.  "I'm surprised that people are
surprised that the series is getting darker, because the first book started
with a murder.  And although you didn't see the murder happen, that for me
was an announcement that these things would continue within the series."
But she's not blind to the fact that very young children will want to read
the books, and that they will be disturbed: "I was always ambivalent when
people told me that they'd read the first book to their 6-year-old, because
I knew what was coming.  And I have to say even with the first book, that is
a scary ending."

/QUOTE

Now, based on this statement alone - and it's direct from JKR's mouth - I'd
say that HER intent is not a "children's book".  Hence any labeling of
"children's book" was done after the fact, by the marketers and publishers.
NOT by her.

The label is just a label.  Get over it, and stop thinking of it as "adult"
or "children".  The truth is, this is one of those rare books (or series)
that transcends the label, and is enjoyable by anyone, no matter their age.
Giving it a label at all is pointless, foolish, and a waste of time.

Actually, giving this series ANY label is pointless.  For instance, each
book in this series could fit under the genres of Child, Young Adult,
Mystery, Suspense, Supernatural, Occult, Fantasy, Science Fiction, Drama, or
any of a number of labels.  The only labels I can't see this falling under
are Western and Romance.  (And even the latter may change later - we have no
way of knowing.)  And because she has so many elements in it - and blends
them all so well - she pulls in people who normally have completely
different tastes, and gets them to love it.  For instance, my mother
normally only reads Mysteries - she loves Harry Potter because of the
element of "figuring it out" throughout each book.  My sister loves fantasy;
she loves the little spells and items they have throughout the books.  I
love fantasy dramas; I love the interactions between the characters, and how
their classes work and all that.  I also love the 'darkness' of some of it,
which is why my favorite characters are Moody and Sirius Black.

The fact is, there is something for almost everyone in these books.  That's
why they're so popular.  JKR having the gift of storytelling is all well and
good, but that alone wouldn't make these books sell so well.  It's the fact
that no matter what your interests, no matter what your age group, you will
most likely find something in these books that appeals to you.

But trying to label it, to fix it into a category and say "This is what it
is," is foolish.  There's no point to it, because no matter where you try to
put it, you will find things that will fit, and things that will not fit.
These books aren't books that can be pigeonholed that way, and the further
she gets into the series, the more obvious it's becoming.












From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com  Tue Sep 30 19:15:35 2003
From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 14:15:35 -0500
Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: They are children's books (Was: the heart of it all)
References: <bl9pbn+u1kq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <006201c38789$0c431ca0$4d97aec7@rick>

No: HPFGUIDX 82110

> Golly:
> The first book was perfectly suited for children 8-11 (depending on
> reading skill).  I read books for that age group all the time and
> enjoy many of them. HP is hardly unsual in any respect.  It is
> delightful and skillfully achieved. OOTP was probably written for 13-
> 15 year olds.

Iggy:

An interesting point to bring up here... If you notice it, the books tend to
be suited for those readers who are approximately Harry's age in that given
book.  (Harry was 11 in PS/SS, and it's more suited for kids around that age
range.  In OotP, Harry is 15, and that is about the age range the book is
targeted for, apparently.)

This may actually be a plan of JKR's... To have the books grow in age
targetting as the readers grow as well.  If this is the case, IMHO, it's a
great and fairly innovative technique.  It makes the readers feel like their
own progression in life is more mirrored by the progression of Harry and his
friends and draws the reader more fully into the HP world.

> Golly:
>
> Rowling's recent offering certainly does not have the emotional or
> literary sophistication of Orwell or Kafka or even Atwood, which
> would probably be beyond the reading abilities of many (but not all)
> of that age group.

Iggy:

I think that it all depends on your definition of "literary sophistication."
There are a lot of writers who are praised by "students of literature" as
being some of the ultimate writers.  Hemmingway, Orwell, and Steinbeck, for
example.  Personally, I like Animal Farm as a cool analogy for the ideas
that "power corrupts," and "the victors in a revolution often become the
same as those they overthrew."  Other than that, I detested having to read
Hemmingway and Steinbeck in Lit classes.  I found them very dry and boring.
For poetry, I prefer Lewis Carrol and e.e. cummings to Browning, or Frost...
for example.  (Although Frost was a good poet, IMHO...)

'Nuff said about that.


> Golly:
> Many children's writers write stories that are just as challanging
> and just as dark, if not more so. (Though one is certainly free to
> think Rowling does it better.)
>
> If you don't think so, then you aren't reading the same children's
> books I do.  If all that you see are those books you haven't read
> since you were 11 and Mary Kate and Ashley books or Goosebumps, then
> you don't see the range of children's literature out there.

Iggy:

I haven't read them, but I hear the Eoin Collier (sp?) books about Artemis
Fowl are along the same lines... then there's the series (I can't remember
the name of the set that's still being written...) about two orphaned
children who's lives are VERY dark and gloomy as they are beset by a
multitude of maladies.  (In fact, I think A Multitude of Maladies is either
the series' name, or that of one of the books...)


> Golly:
> But to paraphrase Neil Gaiman - Rowling isn't revolutionizing the
> genre. Perhaps she is changing the way people look at the genre.  But
> apparently not, since many adults still refuse to admit they are
> reading children's novel.

Iggy:

Then, you also get into the fact that a lot of hard-core (read:
"close-minded and semi-rabid") Christians still oppose the Harry Potter
books and you also have another advantage of the new covers:  Those
Christians who are in a more hard-core area / congregation, but are able to
keep in touch with reality enough to accept that they're just books, and
good reading at that, can read them with the less recognizable cover and it
helps them avoid the frustrating (and almost inevitable) confrontations with
their fellow congregation members.

(One of my aunts was this kind of close-minded Christian and refused to let
her kids read the books.  It took another one of my aunts, a devout Catholic
actually, to convince her that it was ok for them to read, and that they
were actually good books.)

>
> Too bad you're embarrassed to like a children's/Young Adult book, but
> I'm not.  Nor am I embarrassed to like the others that I do.
>

*grin* I have no problem reading the HP books in public.  I've also been
known to read comic books, graphic novels, RPG resource books, and "the
Phatom Tollbooth" (IMHO, one of the gratest kids books of all time) in
public as an adult.


> Golly: They aren't different versions.  There are different covers.
> The reason they have adult and child covers is no different from the
> reason the covers vary from country to country or decade to decade.
> Different groups like different images.  It is all about marketing.
> The books have not changed.  The only English textual differences are
> between the American and British versions.  The adult covers are for
> image conscious adults who were too embarrassed to read a children's
> book in public. (Or those who just think they are nicer - which I
> won't disagree with.  Had I been sure the adult cover was the British
> version I would probably have bought that.)

Iggy:

Then there's the fact that different publishing houses may buy out the
rights to a book and decide to update the covers.  You also have it as a
basic tool for making the covers more modern when compared to earlier
editions.  (I still have my dad's old boxed set of LOTR... which I will
never read because they're so fragile... that he was given as a gift in the
early 1960's... The covers look a LOT different than the ones from the set I
bought about 3 years ago.)  Publishers usually also make a "movie edition"
cover for a book when it's made into a movie in order to get people to be
more attracted to reading the book since they can associate the photographic
picture on the cover with the images of the movies.  (Again, LOTR is a
perfect example of this...)

Tacking on to this the fact that what may not be considered offensive in one
country may be so in another, and you have a lot of variables as to why book
covers may change.  (As an example of this, the regulations on images of
violence are more strict in Europe when compared to the American
regulations.  In the US, the regulations are a lot stricter with regard to
sexual images.  Even looking at television commercials is a great example of
this.  The only times we see the nude commercials and game shows in England
over here in the US are on late night HBO tv shows like "Shock Video" and
such... and yes, I will freely admit to watching shows like that.  *grin*  I
used to be a psych major studying "human sexuality"...)

> But I do admit to liking the paperback adult Potter covers better.
> The photographs are nice. That may only be because I think Grand Pere
> is such a terrible illustrator.

That's interesting.  I think Grand Pre' does some decent artwork... well,
she's been getting better at it.  I like the cover of OotP a LOT better than
PoA, for example.  I think she may be growing as an artist.

The funniest thing I see about her covers is that, before I moved here to
Alabama, the female housemate I had could have been the model for Harry,
they looked so much alike.

> Golly: Why do you denegrate that which so many fell in love with the
> first time around.  Rowling put in what you call "marketing tools".
> They were a part of this creation.  They were what readers of all
> ages enjoyed. I enjoyed the jolly sorting and the little details.  I
> enjoyed watching Harry struggle at his lessons and learning what was
> in a wand.

Iggy:

IMHO, JKR didn't put those things in as marketing tools.  Only an
advertising exec (or... or RPG designer) goes into the writing arena with
intent to specifically create or utelize "marketing tools."

The people who created and designed those "marketing tools" are the ones in
the marketing department of the publishing companies, and the marketing
departments of the bookstores, since it's their job to market and sell their
product in their particular market arena.

(Am I the only one here who detects an important semantic here?  Hmmm...
marketing tools... marketing department... )

> Golly:
> It is only natural that as Harry grows to know his world that it will
> seem less fantastical to the reader and Harry and that Harry's
> understanding of his surroundings would deepen.

Iggy:

<See my earlier comments about Harry growing as his readers grow...>

> Golly: Now that the publishing company understands adults like HP, of
> course it will be marketed to them.  Adults also love Toy Story,
> Little Nemo.  They are still meant for children.

Iggy:

I'd also like to point out a few things that a lot of people either don't
know, or tend to overlook...

1 - Disney, Pixar, Dearmworks, etc.. are ALL famous for putting adult based
comments, jokes, references and (in some cases) "hidden" images into their
movies.  (There are a few that caused some widely known controversies around
the Rescuers, Who Framed Roger Rabbit, and The Little Mermaid, to name a
few... the latter of which had at lead 3 different ones, as I recall... even
requiring a recall of an entire set of videos in one case.)

2 - People assume that the Loony Tunes cartoons are kid's cartoons.  Most
people don't know that they were actually targeted at adults, with a lot of
adult references, and (in some case) commentary on modern political and
economic events.  Disney was this way quite often as well.  They were
TARGETED at adults, but done so in a way that kids could enjoy them as well.
(Do you REALLY think kids wanted to see cartoons about what life was like in
the military, or food rationing, or the importance of women working
infactories to support the war effort?  They didn't understand the events
themselves, much less understand the jokes about them.)

3 - The only types of books, tv shows, or movies I have seen targeted at
kids are ones designed either to educate (ie: Dora the Explorer, Blue's
Clues, Ruby and Max, the Wiggles, etc...) about either morality, values, or
more concrete educational facets... Or those that were specifically designed
to sell a toy or video to kids in a set age range.  (These would be exampled
by the ENTIRE Land Before Time series... I think they're up to the 37th
movie?  "Littlefoot and the Retirement Caves" or something... the Hot Wheels
videos or anything else based on toys like GI Joe, He-Man, Care Bears, or
Legos... that type of thing.)

> Golly:
> Some writers always write for children while others write for both
> adults and children.  There is nothing weak or less serious or less
> interesting about writing for children. It is a real skill.

Iggy:

In support of this statement, I would challenge each of you out there to
write an actuall "children's story", and then write a "non-targeted" story
for any age, and see which is harder.

When you write a children's story, you need to keep MUCH more restrictive
sets of rules on your writing than you otherwise would.  Language, morality,
imagery, vocabulary levels, and comprehension ALL have to be considered a
lot more.  Anyone who can write an interesting and proper story for a five
year old (to pick a random kid age..) with all the added restrictions on
them is a genius, IMHO, and should have their talents applauded.  ESPECIALLY
if it's something that doesn't bore an adult to death.  (As a stay-at-home
father who tries to make sure that my daughter watches educational kids
shows as well as the Disney movies she likes, I would personally like to
commend the writers of Dora the Explorer, Oswald, Blue's Clues, Ruby and
Max, Sesame Street, Out of the Box, and Gulla Gulla Island, Bear in the Big
Blue House, and the Wiggles for the wonderful job they do in this incredibly
difficult field.  These are all shows that I feel have some educational
benefit from my daughter, don't insult her intelligence... even as a 2 year
old... and are interesting enough to me that not only do I not want to run
screaming from the room when they come on, but I also participate with her
in the shows and enjoy myself doing it.)

> Golly:
> Her books are for children as each one comes out it is set for the
> age Harry is.  Harry is no longer a little child.  He is older.

Iggy:

Ok... I'm going to say something that may sound trite and cliche' to some,
but I feel it bears stating:

IMHO, her books are lightly oriented towards children, not specifically.
She writes from Harry's point of view... while he is a child, and while he
is a teenager.  That's the only specific "writing goal" for age that I think
she has.

Here's the slightly sappy part now...  In order to appreciate and love her
books, I think you have to still be a kid insiide... at least partly...
because her books are designed not only to appeal to the kids some of her
readers ARE, but for the kids us older readers WERE.. (and, for some of us,
still are most of the time... *grin*)

>
> They certainly aren't adult novels. Sometimes there are children's
> books that are popular with kids that adults won't ever really like.
> But HP is not Captain Underpants.  I don't enjoy Captain Underpants.
> But I understand why kids do.  HP was always more traditional and
> more accessable.  A good story remains a good story.
>
> Golly
>

Iggy:

Yeah... that, and Harry doesn't run around in his underwear with a towel
tied to his neck...  (Boy, now THAT would make for an odd image.  Harry
running through a graveyard with his home-made cape flowing out behind
him... wearing nothing else but his tighty-whiteys and brandishing his wand
at Voldemort... who's wearing nothing but a beat up pair of boxers and an
old terrycloth bathrobe.  Makes for a MUCH more bizarre set of events,
doesn't it?)


Iggy McSnurd
the Prankster


"Hi!  I'm the Dread Pirate Roberts (tm) #72377.
    <Ask about franchise opportunities in your area.>"

--- Another one of Iggy's bumper stickers